F35-B Lost in crash.

[Tikka]

The Royal Navy has lost an F35B that was flying from HMS Queen Elizabeth in the Mediterranean.

Most importantly, the Pilot ejected and is safe and well.

A very expensive Aircraft that is fitted with very classified technology is now at the bottom of the sea. I wonder if the Russians will try make a grab for it.

 

[Mainia]

The Royal Navy has lost an F35B that was flying from HMS Queen Elizabeth in the Mediterranean.

Most importantly, the Pilot ejected and is safe and well.

A very expensive Aircraft that is fitted with very classified technology is now at the bottom of the sea. I wonder if the Russians will try make a grab for it.

Why, they have the blue prints already. They were on a server.

 

[y_p_w]

I'm pretty sure that the area is being monitored. It's almost impossible to reverse engineer the electronics and software just from what can be recovered from salt water. The engine might be interesting, but it's impossible to reverse engineer the metallurgy.

This certainly isn't the first F-35 to be lost in the water. Wasn't there one where the apparent cause was spatial disorientation? The majority of the wreckage hasn't been found yet.

Wreckage of crashed Japanese F-35 fighter jet found

Rescue teams are continuing their search for the pilot of the plane who is still missing.

www.bbc.com

Remains Of Japanese F-35 Pilot Found As Search Is Called Off For Crashed Aircraft

The majority of the doomed F-35 is still unrecovered and foreign adversaries would love to get their hands on any of it.

www.thedrive.com

 

[wpod]

The Royal Navy has lost an F35B that was flying from HMS Queen Elizabeth in the Mediterranean.

Most importantly, the Pilot ejected and is safe and well.

A very expensive Aircraft that is fitted with very classified technology is now at the bottom of the sea. I wonder if the Russians will try make a grab for it.

Most likely some one in the U.S has already sold the info.

 

[BusyLittleShop]

You can identify an Russian F35 copy by the rust...

 

[Tikka]

I take it that you guys do not have a lot of confidence in the security at Lockheed Martin and its supply chain?

The latest reports here state that the UK has asked the U.S. to help in locating and recovering the F35. The U.S. has said it will do that.

MSN

It is a very quick way to loose $100 million. But as i said earlier, the main concern was the safety of the pilot.

Nothing has been said about the cause of the crash. Sources have said it was shortly after take off. If it was engine failure do you guys think a single engine Naval aircraft is a good idea?

 

[y_p_w]

Nothing has been said about the cause of the crash. Sources have said it was shortly after take off. If it was engine failure do you guys think a single engine Naval aircraft is a good idea?

There were various iterations of the Harrier. The A-7 was successful enough that the US Air Force used it. The A-4 did pretty well too.

I guess most ship-based helicopters are twin-engined though.

 

[Tikka]

Some Video showing the accident. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/moment-f35-crashed-into-mediterranean/vi-AARgNR5?ocid=msedgntp

Engine failure?

Sources say that the Pilot's 'chute caught up on the bow of the ship.

 

[Tikka]

More reports of engine failure due to ingestion of a 'rain cover' whatever that means.

 

[Astro14]

That's a complete loss of thrust as the airplane heads up the ski jump. It should be going around 60 knots, and looks like it's doing about 15.

Engine failure would be my guess, and a catastrophic one at that.

 

[Tikka]

There were various iterations of the Harrier. The A-7 was successful enough that the US Air Force used it. The A-4 did pretty well too.

I guess most ship-based helicopters are twin-engined though.

Hi.
You make a fair point when you list those jets. The Harrier served very well and under some arduous conditions, as did the Skyhawk.

 

[Tikka]

That's a complete loss of thrust as the airplane heads up the ski jump. It should be going around 60 knots, and looks like it's doing about 15.

Engine failure would be my guess, and a catastrophic one at that.

Hi Astro.
Do you have any opinions on the security issues resulting in the loss of the Aircraft? A few posters have indicated that even if the Russians recovered it, it would be of little use. My unqualified opinion is that the Russians would love to get a complete F35B.
Just wondered if you had any thoughts.

I may well have to go to your F14 thread and ask, if you have any first hand knowledge you are at liberty to share with us, about some pretty hair raising moments you must had had in your career.

 

[Astro14]

Even an airplane that’s been damaged in a crash can yield useful information to an adversary.

The Russians (or Chinese) would LOVE to get their hands on an actual F-35 airplane.

I’ve talked about a few events in my F-14 thread. Got lots of stories.

Cheers

 

[Bjornviken]

You can identify an Russian F35 copy by the rust...

hmmm... funny how many underestimates the Russias... history tells that too. Meanwhile they have 100k troops ready to attack Ukraina. Just saying...

 

[Tikka]

hmmm... funny how many underestimates the Russias... history tells that too. Meanwhile they have 100k troops ready to attack Ukraina. Just saying...

Hi.
I agree. Do not underestimate Russia.

I do wonder if their latest hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles will make the big fleet carriers obsolete. Similar to how the big gun battleships were made obsolete by aircraft in the 1930s and 40s.

 

[john_pifer]

Hi.
I agree. Do not underestimate Russia.

I do wonder if their latest hypersonic cruise and ballistic missiles will make the big fleet carriers obsolete. Similar to how the big gun battleships were made obsolete by aircraft in the 1930s and 40s.

Why would hypersonic missiles only now make aircraft carriers obsolete? Ballistic missiles have been around for decades.

I imagine that the capability to target aircraft carriers with ballistic missiles has been around for a long time.

I get that hypersonic technology allows for an attack with less warning. But in a major war with a near-peer adversary who is equipped with ballistic missiles (WWIII scenario), I imagine they’d just rain down multiple nukes on the area, and even with ballistic missile early warning systems, the carrier wouldn’t be able to get far enough out of the area to avoid being destroyed (depending on how far away the ballistic missile is being launched from).

 

[Jetronic]

The issue was that ballistic missiles went ballistic so they couldn't manoeuvre to hit a target that moved while they were in flight.

Neither side wants to use nuclear weapons as it's like opening pandoras box, there's no winners when that happens.

 

[UncleDave]

I take it that you guys do not have a lot of confidence in the security at Lockheed Martin and its supply chain?

The latest reports here state that the UK has asked the U.S. to help in locating and recovering the F35. The U.S. has said it will do that.

MSN

It is a very quick way to loose $100 million. But as i said earlier, the main concern was the safety of the pilot.

Nothing has been said about the cause of the crash. Sources have said it was shortly after take off. If it was engine failure do you guys think a single engine Naval aircraft is a good idea?

Can any twin engine carrier based fighter make it off a deck loaded with an engine failure?

Seems certain a ramp carrier rig would fail, no sure if a catobar rig slings it hard enough to overcome an engine out on launch?

 

[mk378]

It looks like the pilot was on the brakes trying to reject takeoff, then realized it was going off the end of the deck anyway and ejected at the last second.

Doesn't most of the really secret equipment have self-destruct charges?

 

[Tikka]

Why would hypersonic missiles only now make aircraft carriers obsolete? Ballistic missiles have been around for decades.

I imagine that the capability to target aircraft carriers with ballistic missiles has been around for a long time.

I get that hypersonic technology allows for an attack with less warning. But in a major war with a near-peer adversary who is equipped with ballistic missiles (WWIII scenario), I imagine they’d just rain down multiple nukes on the area, and even with ballistic missile early warning systems, the carrier wouldn’t be able to get far enough out of the area to avoid being destroyed (depending on how far away the ballistic missile is being launched from).

Hi John.
Ballistic missiles have indeed been around for 70 years or so. Only recently though has the technology - allegedly - been there to allow one to reliably hit a relatively small target like a carrier. This using a conventional warhead too. The Russians and Chinese seem to have the jump on us with this and hypersonic missile weapons.

I do not think a peer conflict would go nuclear immediately. Let's hope we never find out.