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

51–60 of 508 posts

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

#51

Post by Merad »

synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

That's not correct. He decided that the aircraft was out of control because his primary displays went out at low altitude - the manual says eject if out of control below 6000 ft. But in fact the plane was still flying and responding to controls just fine.

A big factor in this seems to be his overall lack of experience in the F-35 and not flying enough hours to really stay proficient. Highly recommend this analysis by two former naval aviators: https://www.youtube.com/live/g8PBA7k6vP8?si=o2DDBX1XqmM_x1gR

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

#52

Post by [deleted] »

talldayo wrote: post #3

> “How in the hell do you lose an F-35?” Mace posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. “How is there not a tracking device and we’re asking the public to what, find a jet and turn it in?” This sounds like a potent critique of 5th generation fighters but it's quite not. The F-35 is meant to be lost - it can't even use standard Link 16 because it reveals too much of it's presence to enemy fighters. The idea of it lackin…

[deleted]

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

#53

Post by jtbayly »

Manuel_D wrote: post #18
synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

> Del Pizzo’s F-35B malfunctioned and its primary displays and communications cut out as Del Pizzo was attempting to land through rain at Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. However, the report said its standby flight display and backup communication system “remained basically functional.” > The report said Del Pizzo followed the F-35B manual’s recommendations for ejecting from an out-of-control jet but also criti…

The radios did not work. One was out, the other was “basically functional.” At 2000 feet, while in VTOL mode, how long do you have to figure out if your backup radio is “basically functional”? And to evaluate whether the standby flight display was working properly? And to figure out whether the plane is accelerating up and out of VTOL mode like you told it to or heading toward the ground?

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

#54

Post by jtbayly »

jasonlotito wrote: post #26
synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

FTA: VMX-1 is in charge of assessing the Corps’ aircraft and helping develop and refine tactics, techniques and procedures to fly them in combat successfully. He was the commander of VMX-1. They effectively write the book. "And the pilot should've figured that out?" Yes. That's the job.

That was his job later.

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

#55

Post by jtbayly »

elif wrote: post #25
krunck wrote: post #16

The pilot had a justifiable lack of faith in the aircraft and didn't care to be the next pilot victim.

64 miles the school bus sized rocket flew before crashing into some suburb. Imagine if someone accidentally fired a tomahawk missile in South Carolina for some reason by procedure. The operator had 10 minutes to cancel but instead acted prematurely.

It takes 10 minutes to fall 2000 feet? Then why do the instructions say eject if you’re below 6k?

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

#56

Post by jtbayly »

dragonwriter wrote: post #17
synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

He was, and was fired from his role as, commander of Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron 1 (VMX-1), which exists largely to validate and update “the book” for the rest of Corps. So, if there is any position where simply “following the book” isn’t adequate to keep one’s job, it kind of makes sense that his was that position.

He didn’t have that job until a year later.

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

#57

Post by ics »

Brief summary and my understanding of why this occurred:

    - Pilot ejects, survives while losing very expensive plane
    - The crash is Marine's third in several weeks, the other two having fatalities; leads to a safety stand down across the entire corps
    - Investigation concludes that ejection was unnecessary and so fault of the crash is on the pilot, however adding that the procedures written were overly broad
    - Pilot is offered to lead VMX-1 after all this; key part of the responsibility is improving procedures
Reading between the lines, it appears that somewhere in the leadership was a belief that putting the pilot in charge of VMX-1 was an opportunity for both; let the guy who made a mistake move forward as they'll be least likely to make it twice kind of thing. General Eric disagreed and ordered him out; it's not stated whether that was based on his own judgement only or if others in VMX-1 lost confidence and that factored in. Nobody disagrees that they have the ability to fire him for what happened.

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

#59

Post by dialup_sounds »

jasonlotito wrote: post #26
synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

FTA: VMX-1 is in charge of assessing the Corps’ aircraft and helping develop and refine tactics, techniques and procedures to fly them in combat successfully. He was the commander of VMX-1. They effectively write the book. "And the pilot should've figured that out?" Yes. That's the job.

The timeline is kind of awkward: he was selected for the position in 2022, the crash happened in 2023, and he assumed command in 2024.

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

#60

Post by tzs »

dragonwriter wrote: post #17
synapsomorphy wrote: post #7

The report criticizes the pilot for ejecting, but also says he did everything by the book (F35 manual), but the book was wrong. And the pilot should've figured that out? Feels like they just need someone to blame for losing the plane.

He was, and was fired from his role as, commander of Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron 1 (VMX-1), which exists largely to validate and update “the book” for the rest of Corps. So, if there is any position where simply “following the book” isn’t adequate to keep one’s job, it kind of makes sense that his was that position.

The ejection was months before he got the role at VMX-1.

Even if it had been after he got the role I'm not sure it should matter. I'd expect validating and updating "the book" to be a carefully planned and methodical activity, with alternate approaches tested during simulated failure or failures induced under controlled conditions.

Would they really expect a pilot who encounters a failure not under such conditions to decide it is a great opportunity to try out non-book approaches to see how the work?

Post reply on HN