I think you are correct in your assumptions: it looks like as if it was some kind of unusual recovery. But it might be some kind of training also.
The image of the Canadian PM also seems to be from before he became a PM, back in 2015 when he was campaigning against the F-35.
Unusual recovery is most likely the correct wording, not necessarily connected to an emergency situation. What can also be seen: Perfect visual conditions / calm sea.
Even a CH-53K couldn't have lifted it out of the water. Assuming they could manage to hook it up before it sank, it might be able to keep it from sinking (assuming buoyancy cooperated enough) while they did. . .something (I doubt they have air bladders handy to strap to an aircraft to keep it from sinking.)
You do realize aircraft have been skating off decks, and being recovered, for half a century, right?
'We've always done it this way'.......
So the carrier deck landing video has been leaked. A ramp strike took off the gear, the aircraft skidded along the deck, caught fire and went over the side.Possible footage of the deck strike. View: https://twitter.com/raz_liu/status/1486913025999208452?t=0YWigko0GFploX7nViQPWw&s=19
May have originated on Instagram though..
Login • Instagram
Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.www.instagram.com
I'm not familiar with standard procedures for carrier landings. However, in this video it appears the aircraft was lined up with the flightdeck very late. Was it an emergency? Another observation: Apparently the carrier made a rather sharp turn short before the accident happened.
Any recovery from the ocean's surface assumes that the airframe floats for a long enough time that some kind of rapid reaction unit could stabilize it there. I suspect that is a very rare occurrence. In terms of cost, I doubt F-35s are dramatically more expensive than their forbearers when adjusted for inflation. A quick wiki of the F-14 would imply it was just as expensive in its day.
99% of the time there are good reasons for "we've always done it this way" that's WHY "we've always done it this way".
Lastly, I wasn't even SAYING current procedure was good or not. All I was saying is planes have been going in the drink forever. People are acting like this is some new thing that's never happened before.
I know one rumour going around (though completely unsubstantiated at this stage, so take it with a ton of salt; there's a number of other possibilities) is that the aviator was attempting a "shit-hot break" which is when they approach the rear of the carrier at high speed and then perform one big 360 degree turn to burn off their energy, deploy gears / hook and land (here's a video of an example). These aren't done too often (it's often said they're done for clout, though there's some obvious military utility to landing ASAP rather than doing a full circuit pattern) as they're unnecessarily risky due to the significantly reduced time the pilot has to configure the jet for landing, go through their checklists, and to settle into the appropriate approach airspeed, angle and glideslope.
news.usni.org
Very interesting. Just the type of thoughtful feedback one can expect from this forum. Thanks guys!Also, there's flying, and there's flying.I don't know the exact numbers but looking at the fact that the Swiss put 50,000 flying hrs on their Hornet fleet in about 10yrs, one is looking at something in the vicinity of 5000hrs/yr for the main fighter fleet (excluding the F-5s).
The Swiss Picked the F-35 on Price. The Pentagon Should Listen
After a three-year competition between the UK/German Eurofighter, the French Rafale, Boeing’s F/A-18E/F, and Lockheed Martin’s F-35A, the Swiss government has selected the Joint Strike Fighter to replace their aging F/A-18s. The Swiss determined the F-35A was the most capable of the three...www.heritage.org
Interesting to note author does not include expected annual flight hours. I mean, it's the Swiss. How much can they be flying each year? The country is over 2.5 times smaller than Ohio.
I've understood that US military jets spend a lot of time just cruising along: going from point A to point B. Not sure about Swiss flight profiles but the Finnish ones tend to have you manoevring soon after take off. You don't necessarily need long distances to fly lots of hours and pull lots of Gs.
Well, technically, that's what they've been doing for the last two decades by not financing maintenance. Just sayin'...
www.defensenews.com
www.defensenews.com
From the report...Not sure where to put this, moderators feel free to move the comment to a correct section.
US Air Force fleet’s mission-capable rates are stagnating. Here’s the plan to change that.
The Air Force has spent the past four years making a concerted push to ready its planes for war. It’s gained almost no ground.
View attachment 674228
Great report : Hydraulic components give the stealth aircraft the lift it needs to glide through the sky.From the report...Not sure where to put this, moderators feel free to move the comment to a correct section.
US Air Force fleet’s mission-capable rates are stagnating. Here’s the plan to change that.
The Air Force has spent the past four years making a concerted push to ready its planes for war. It’s gained almost no ground.
View attachment 674228
"Most notably, a serious shortage of fully functional F135 engines — felt most acutely in the Air Force’s F-35A fleet — and a lack of depot capacity worsened the fighter’s availability."
Shortage of engines and depot capabilities in inexcusable. Does anyone have any insight into this engine issue?
* never mind about this question. I found some answers re the engine issues.
Do maintainers actually "fix" engines or are they pulled and sent to depots for repair? What level of repair are maintainers able to complete? For instance, would they be able to switch out the problem blades if available?
What's the possibility of engineering these engines to greater than 2000 hrs between overhauls? Or identifying components that can be swapped out in the field to increase the time between overhauls to something like 2500 hours?
news.usni.org
And that's a problem because. . .? Planes crash. This isn't the first and it won't be the last. Cost of doing business.Any word on the F-35 in the SCS?
New article from the USNI mirroring the defensenews.com article above. Seems to ignore any details about the incident or the pilot responsible. The Carl Vinson is back in San Diego.
Carl Vinson Deployment Was Navy's Test Case for 5th-Gen Aviation, Pacific Carrier Operations - USNI News
ABOARD AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS CARL VINSON, OFF THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA – USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) pulled into its homeport of San Diego, Calif., on Monday after a six-and-a-half month deployment that saw the carrier operating exclusively in the Indo-Pacific region. With the first deployment of the...
In fact, in the Defense News report, there is a slight note to the extensive training that occurred for rapid change in carrier trajectory... Something that we witnessed in the crash video.Any word on the F-35 in the SCS?
New article from the USNI mirroring the defensenews.com article above. Seems to ignore any details about the incident or the pilot responsible. The Carl Vinson is back in San Diego.
Carl Vinson Deployment Was Navy's Test Case for 5th-Gen Aviation, Pacific Carrier Operations - USNI News
ABOARD AIRCRAFT CARRIER USS CARL VINSON, OFF THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA – USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) pulled into its homeport of San Diego, Calif., on Monday after a six-and-a-half month deployment that saw the carrier operating exclusively in the Indo-Pacific region. With the first deployment of the...
There are already many many articles out there about it.
If you don't pay the money to keep your fighters flying they won't fly. Who'd have guessed?
Go NAVY!View: https://twitter.com/1stMAW_Marines/status/1493732016025526274
Carrier Carl Vinson was back in fighting condition within 45 minutes of F-35C crash, leaders say
After a dangerous F-35C ramp strike, flight deck crew began firefighting efforts within seconds, and the ship was ready to launch and land aircraft again within 45 minutes.www.defensenews.com
From the above linked article:
!!
(nice read by the way)
I'd imagine if that was the case, then only 1 fod plod would have been done, string one cable, and land the damn planes. Better to try, and save 50% than lose them all. They had another CV, and they had a bit of time. Good training exercise, out of a problem.From the above linked article:
!!
(nice read by the way)
Interesting that despite rushing to clear the deck so they could launch the alert tanker, they still had to recover aircraft to another deck instead. If this had happened during single-carrier blue-water operations, that's a lot of aircraft potentially going in the drink.
