Forum menu
think that video previously will be the USS Wasp trials back in the good old trials day.
The one with the Fleet Air Arm Merlin and the ship's pennant number starting R0 clearly visible?
My fault, didn't look at the video, just thought it was the first ship landing for F35 which was over a decade ago on USS Wasp.
Are we talking about my video? Yeah, definitely not Wasp
Edit: hadnt seen post above when looking for the onboard video
Isn’t a zero-zero landing when you pull the yellow and black handle and earn yourself a Martin Baker tie?
And a shorter neck to wear it round 😬😬😬
It was only the early seats that did that, I thought?
Your neck might be the same length but it's a bit lower down the mirror than it was before.
Some misconceptions about QEC going around in this thread.
Nuclear propulsion is great for endurance and allowing greater quantities of aviation fuel to be stored onboard, but it's INCREDIBLY expensive to build and maintain, especially in the nuclear infrastructure required to dock the vessel. For a fleet of two it's simply not worth it and the submarine infrastructure is way too small for QEC.
Nuclear ships are also banned from several parts of the world and the royal fleet auxiliary has 4 modern oilers for replenishment at sea operations.
Yes they're large but steel is cheap in relative terms - the cost differences aren't as large as you'd think and the extra space supports rolling landing and future drone ops, as well as growth for the inevitable upgrades over the 50 year lifespan of the platform.
As described above, the F-35B is a incredibly capable aircraft and the accident on QE is attributed to a human factors error so a bit unjust to call the plane unreliable. Of course nothing is known about the US navy crash atm.
That said there the programme isn't perfect, currently there's only 48 F-35B's on order, and at surge capability each carrier can apparently have 40+ onboard. With training, maintenance and attrition (already 47!) the lack of F-35B numbers are apparent, even with the plans to up the order to 70-80 eventually. The slow pace of UK weapons integration also means the UK's F-35B's can't carry many of the weapons used on Typhoons.
Apparently the crash is being described as a ‘ramp strike’, basically the plane seems to have come in a bit too low and impacted the rear flight deck, which is how the other crew members were injured; the jet would have up-ended and slid onto the flight-deck. There’s lots of WW2 footage of fighters coming in and suffering a ramp-strike.
I wondered when the MB Twitter feed was going to catch up:
https://twitter.com/MB_EjectEject/status/1486701838355288065?s=20
Do martin baker also list how many they have killed?
The reason MB went into developing ejection seats was as a response to Baker being killed in a flying accident. There have been deaths directly attributable to seat malfunctions (or ejecting 'out of envelope') but how would you tell which other incidents were unsurvivable even if the seat had worked as planned?
I would prefer to have one of their ejector seats over none for sure.
Infact when i was a little kid dreaming of being a pilot i wanted to be a fighter pilot as i was scared of the idea of flying an airliner due to not having one.
Wow! That footage looks pretty conclusive regarding the actual impact, what it doesn’t explain is; was it an aircraft malf, ie engine losing power on approach, or pilot error, ie coming in too low with too little throttle. Hell of an impact though, and amazing there were relatively few injuries.
What the heck was that unintelligible screaming on the video
That was the air traffic controller seeing he was coming in way too steep and below the horizon, hence screaming wave off and crash a few times, they'll know the reason long ago, they'll have the flight data, ATC data and each landing is graded, so all that will be logged.
was it an aircraft malf, ie engine losing power on approach, or pilot error, ie coming in too low with too little throttle.
Could have been a PLM (precision landing mode) failure and a pilot not reacting to it quickly enough.
Not pleasant to watch that.😟
Does anyone know if the injured crew/pilot are doing ok?
UK pilots developed and tested it as it allows you to land without having to dump all your stores in the sea
Thats probably not the only thing the pilot dumps when the entire operation goes tits up 😆
My guess would be that the pilot had too little speed to land, tried to power-up and was expecting to have a faster thrust response from the engine, but the F35s engine (like a commercial aircraft) is a single large higher bypass turbofan and doesn’t respond like a pair of low bypass turbofans like on the F18. He realised he couldn’t make it and popped the hatch with the plane smashing into the fantail/deck.
Nailed it on page 1! Well, almost. I don’t see a certain ejection…maybe half way down the flight deck? Really late to eject.
Control surfaces can be seen going absolutely bonkers trying to keep that thing in the air there. Almost looks likes its on the verge of stalling, which would kinda tie-in with another analysis video I saw after the first footage (phone footage from the stern) which was pointing out that he had a very short final and the ship was (or just had) changing course so he likely didn't have the latest info about conditions on deck. I could see the pilot getting it in the neck for this one
yeah the ejection happens around halfway down the deck. You can see a small flash and a black thing shoot off up and left
Isn’t a zero-zero landing when you pull the yellow and black handle and earn yourself a Martin Baker tie?
Zero-zero refers to ejection seat capability:
Rated for use on the ground (zero feet) and at zero airspeed. The combination of explosive charge and rocket pack firing allows the seat to be propelled upwards sufficiently to inflate the parachute on descent.
That compares to the last ejection seat I used (Mk8) which was a Zero-70. You needed 70 knots to hope for survival after a ground level ejection. That was because it had 2 explosive cartridges but no rocket packs.
You get the tie after a successful ejection. I'm glad I don't have a tie!
That compares to the last ejection seat I used (Mk8) which was a Zero-70. You needed 70 knots to hope for survival after a ground level ejection.
If you were only doing 65, would flapping your arms help?
I think the quickly wheel out a treadmill in that situation don't they?
Control surfaces can be seen going absolutely bonkers trying to keep that thing in the air there.
Presume that’s the computer too, not the pilot??
scuttler
Full Member
Presume that’s the computer too, not the pilot??
Yeah very much so, looked like they were moving faster (and in a more complex way) than a human ever did. I saw a brilliant Russian demo recent where you could see the same thing. Not sure if I'll be able to find it but I'll have a look
Ward Carroll, ex F14 RIO has been covering this. As he says repeatedly, wait for the inquiry results.
It's a brilliant example of how truly genius the angled flight deck is.
Ward Carroll, ex F14 RIO has been covering this. As he says repeatedly, wait for the inquiry results.
Jesus, that's a 70 minute video. What's the brief summary?
Ward Carroll, ex F14 RIO has been covering this. As he says repeatedly, wait for the inquiry results.
This. There are an incalculable number of things that can go wrong when trying to bring down a twenty-five ton, $100m jet fighter onto the deck of an aircraft carrier.
It’s a brilliant example of how truly genius the angled flight deck is.
Also this.
Have the US Navy managed to retrieve their jet yet?
Murray
Full Member
As he says repeatedly, wait for the inquiry results.
Pass. This isn't the house of commons, nothing wrong with armchair discussion and guesswork
Jesus, that’s a 70 minute video. What’s the brief summary?
ooft, ok maybe it is the house of commons if its 70mins of "wait for the investigation"
This reminds me of one of my most painful bike crashes - walking pace, minor pedal strike, every attempt at recovery just escalated things until I was lying on the ground with my bike on top of me with badly bruised ribs and a hole punched down to my kneecap.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1603487717253603328
Unfortunately stuff happens. You only have to look at the very long list of Harrier/Sea Harrier/Harrier II crashes to see that complex single-engine aircraft go wrong (and occasionally the pilots do too), but the west kept using the aircraft for 60 years
Linked, but not, I do wonder how long it'll be before the west stops developing incredibly complex and slow to produce aircraft. Many are years old before they even leave the drawing board and then need more modern systems fitting in.
We're already considering the future viability of the aircraft carrier and the Ukraine war has been fought with a relative absence of conventional air power
Ukraine war has been fought with a relative absence of conventional air power
🤷🏻♂️ is that lack of F35s and wotnot related to the desire to help Ukrainian forces but not precipitate an all out NATO-Russian federation conflict?
But Russian hasn’t swamped Ukraine with it’s on paper much greater air power, not sure why but there was probably enough early losses from relatively cheap ground to air defences to make it unsustainable.
I'm surprised the generation just starting development now are manned, surely by 2035+ tech will have developed enough for unmanned + AI (in case of jamming etc.) for frontline combat aircraft. I guess maybe it's easier to retrofit unmanned into a manned design than the other way around but I'd have thought you'd be able to make some fundamental design choices if you don't need to worry about a pilot
Like the V22 , the F35 has a bad rep for crashing that's mostly undeserved. Observation bias probably pays more of a part of this than not. Compared with the jets of the 50's and 60's - F-102, F-106, Sea Vixen, etc etc these aircraft are incredibly safe; but it's military flying, there's going to be crashes. That's pretty much baked in.
I think the USAF "mishap/100,000 flight hours" for the F35 is very low (comparable to the F18) is 4 or so, compared to the F-102 which was something like 13
@fuzzyWuzzy I think the US DOD and USAF this year has said that their next generation aircraft (6th Gen fighters) will be manned, so I think for at least a few decades that's not going to be the majority. I think UAV's have been in operation since the late '00, and they certainly have their place, but there's some drawbacks that are hard to overcome without a pilot in the seat. I think even if we get to situation where computers are doing most of the flying decisions, there's still going to be a man in the aircraft to make the weapons decisions.
An F35B has also had an issue on landing. The video is here.
Here too:
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/another-f-35-crash/page/2/
Like the V22 , the F35 has a bad rep for crashing that’s mostly undeserved.
Also, the rate will be higher when a new aircraft is introduced and will drop after problems are discovered and resolved. The F35 in the video was fresh out of the factory and was undergoing flight tests, quite likely a manufacturing fault that isn't fundamental to the aircraft design.
Vertical landing aircraft will always have a higher accident rate because any problem during the hovering stage is almost guaranteed to result in a crash.
That would negate almost all the advantages of a pilotless vehicle though! You can still have a guy on the ground in a nice air-conditioned office making the decisions remotely. I actually think making an AI flying death-machine is a lot less of an ask than, say, a safe self-driving car for public roads.I think even if we get to situation where computers are doing most of the flying decisions, there’s still going to be a man in the aircraft to make the weapons decisions.
Also,
yeah, they are definitely going to announce all their plans to everyone and keep the whole internet up-to-speed with what they have in development 😂I think the US DOD and USAF this year has said that their next generation aircraft (6th Gen fighters) will be manned