Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

marinecorpstimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 508 posts

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#361

Post by rightbyte »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #356
whizzter wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It fits perfectly if you look at it from a "balls" standpoint, this pilot ejected for whatever by-the-book reason when his electronics were bad and yet the airplane continued for 11 minutes just on autopilot. How would you expect a pilot that gives up so "easily" to lead other men into a high risk-high reward operation when he gives up himself so easily? Yes, maybe he was at low altitude during the descent and found…

> It fits perfectly if you look at it from a "balls" standpoint, this pilot ejected for whatever by-the-book reason when his electronics were bad and yet the airplane continued for 11 minutes just on autopilot. > How would you expect a pilot that gives up so "easily" to lead other men into a high risk-high reward operation when he gives up himself so easily? If you use an ejection seat, there is also a given high pro…

> So, the only explanation that I have is that the military wants to bully around and show macho behavior.

Ye that goes without saying.

With attrition trench warfare being in fashion again I expect this to get worse.

Soldiers need to feel they are perpetrators, not victims.

It 'takes balls' to wait out shell after shell for the one with your name on it. A conservative risk reward analysis would suggest bailing. People that don't understand the odds of waiting or fragging are preferrable.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#362

Post by FrustratedMonky »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #263
acyou wrote: post #228

If you're familiar with USA military history, the Americans are (were) famous for not doing things by the book for the right reasons, and letting common sense prevail, as well as incentivizing good outcomes. “A serious problem in planning against American doctrine is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine.” “The reason that the American Navy does so well…

US pilots havent really been engaged in a war against a peer since ww2. It might be true. But we probably shouldnt extrapolate from bombing terrorists in the desert to actually fighting against say China.

Maybe that is more what is happening.

We've been at 'peace' for too long.

This is making an example for the rest of the team to get ready for things to 'get real'.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#363

Post by chipdart »

stainablesteel wrote: post #360
gambiting wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would such a person be anywhere near the front line?

because their family has been doing it for generations and they keep winning

> (...) and they keep winning

That's the textbook definition of survivorship bias. It's like a lottery winner boasting about his winning strategy that everyone else is just not able to learn.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#364

Post by HPsquared »

Hilift wrote: post #295
acyou wrote: post #228

If you're familiar with USA military history, the Americans are (were) famous for not doing things by the book for the right reasons, and letting common sense prevail, as well as incentivizing good outcomes. “A serious problem in planning against American doctrine is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine.” “The reason that the American Navy does so well…

That quote was Russian observations on their securing valuable technical information, but lamenting on their inability to overcome their capability gap through spying due to changes in tactics of their "main adversary". In WW2, a major factor for the US Naval success in the Pacific was a change in attack doctrine. Aircraft would attack relentlessly from multiple directions, overwhelming the Japanese defenses. In the…

It's probably also in contrast to their previous adversary, the Germans.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#365

Post by themaninthedark »

rightbyte wrote: post #357
whizzter wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It fits perfectly if you look at it from a "balls" standpoint, this pilot ejected for whatever by-the-book reason when his electronics were bad and yet the airplane continued for 11 minutes just on autopilot. How would you expect a pilot that gives up so "easily" to lead other men into a high risk-high reward operation when he gives up himself so easily? Yes, maybe he was at low altitude during the descent and found…

It cuts both ways. Personally I wouldn't want to be led by someone that rather hit the ground in a ball of fire than risk the embarrassment of ejecting. A pilot that eject has at least shown that he has the balls to lose... Fighter jets fall out of the sky quite often. I don't get why it suddenly is such a big deal with F35. It seems like some hardware fanboyism.

That is from your point of view.

Perhaps the military point of view is they would rather have a leader who takes more risky action and attempts to win the fight for the team rather than one who only prioritizes their personal survival.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#366

Post by HPsquared »

sofixa wrote: post #301
victorbjorklund wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US pilots havent really been engaged in a war against a peer since ww2. It might be true. But we probably shouldnt extrapolate from bombing terrorists in the desert to actually fighting against say China.

> US pilots havent really been engaged in a war against a peer since ww2 Maybe Korea, where there were Chinese and Russian-trained and sourced jets?

Still, Korea was >70 years ago.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#367

Post by pjc50 »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #356
whizzter wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It fits perfectly if you look at it from a "balls" standpoint, this pilot ejected for whatever by-the-book reason when his electronics were bad and yet the airplane continued for 11 minutes just on autopilot. How would you expect a pilot that gives up so "easily" to lead other men into a high risk-high reward operation when he gives up himself so easily? Yes, maybe he was at low altitude during the descent and found…

> It fits perfectly if you look at it from a "balls" standpoint, this pilot ejected for whatever by-the-book reason when his electronics were bad and yet the airplane continued for 11 minutes just on autopilot. > How would you expect a pilot that gives up so "easily" to lead other men into a high risk-high reward operation when he gives up himself so easily? If you use an ejection seat, there is also a given high pro…

> Also, the pilot did not "give up", but decided that it is smarter to retreat and save lives instead of going to death.

The thing is, millennia of military culture is devoted to training people out of simply avoiding fighting by running away, or even fear of death, because otherwise it can't function and those who run away endanger others by doing so.

I'm reminded of Admiral Byng being court-martialled (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Byng) and the famous line "in this country, it is good to kill an admiral from time to time pour encourager les autres"; the phrase "pour encourager les autres" has entered English to refer to any punishment which is intended to have a strong behavioral effect on the non-punished members of the same class. There will definitely be an element of that here. This guy is being punished conspicuously to remind other pilots that ejecting is a last resort.

> In a a high risk-high reward situation, I strongly prefer hyperrational risk calculators (in opposite to risk avoiders - the common person in society) over hypermasculine risk takers - but I'm a nerd.

There are no such "hyperrational risk calculators", you just mean "someone who would make the same decision as me in this situation".

> the military wants to bully around and show macho behavior

Well, yes, that's kind of intrinsic to the nature of an organization which exists to project force.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#368

Post by pjc50 »

Prbeek wrote: post #340
cdot2 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US air force fought significant enemy air forces in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and in the Balkans. Their doctrine has not remained untested since 1945.

Take Vietnam for instance where the Soviets supplied the Vietcongs with AD systems and at times manned them The Americans lost over 10,000 aircrafts over a 10 year period which is an average of 3 per day. The US airforce cannot survive the attrition rate that a war with Russia or China would bring.

> The US airforce cannot survive the attrition rate that a war with Russia or China would bring.

Nuclear exchange by ICBM would destroy most aircraft, their crews, their maintenance crews, and the factories for the replacement. There will be no dogfights.

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#369

Post by HPsquared »

fragmede wrote: post #350
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the report, the jet flew for at least 11 more minutes. No one flies fighter jets at max speed unless absolutely necessary.

That's still a decent ground speed of 350 mph! Never gotten my bike to go quite that fast

I assume you also don't go max speed on your bike 99.9% of the time. (EDIT: this depends what kind of bike we're talking about I suppose)

Re: Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying

#370

Post by gambiting »

stainablesteel wrote: post #360
gambiting wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would such a person be anywhere near the front line?

because their family has been doing it for generations and they keep winning

No I mean more like....

1) why would someone who calls themselves libertarian even join any kind of formalized armed force

2) even if they did, how would the command not realize that clearly such a person is unfit for duty and at best should be confined to some work far away from actual combat

Post reply on HN