i remember in highschool, some of the guys would show up in camo hunting gear or whatever. i'm not totally sure why. but we used to pretend like they weren't there. and it was one of my favorite things.
@karstendoerr5378 it has a much higher survivability. The A-10 was worse than. The F-111, F-15E and F-16C in every way when it came to CAS. Look at the GW After Action report for details. The A-10 is a flying tin can. I don't think people realize just how pathetic that bad ass gun of a plane actually is. The F-16 was the primary CAS platform for the USAF in the fighter role during recent conflicts especially in the Gulf War. Do people even know how limited the avionics in an A-10 are? The pilots still have to use eye pieces / binoculars to ID crap a lot of the time. Meanwhile the F-16 is flying angels 20 and at near Mach, delivers payload at a bullseye. And it's gun goes BRRRRT to just like the Avenger. The A-10 was built to strafe Russain armor if it rolled over western Europe thru the Fualda Gap, purely because we thought the Russains at the time ore 70s didn't have proper close ranged mechanized AAA - when they actually did. Meaning even if we used the A-10 for what it was made for? When it was brand new? They would've been shredded and marked a horrible waste of resources.
@@Nurhaal Here in Germany, they also want the Gepard anti-aircraft tank back because it is so successful in Ukraine. In times of air-to-ground missiles, however, it is actually outdated because the range of the missiles is far greater than that of the Gepard. This means that an enemy pilot doesn't even have to fly into the effective range.
@@karstendoerr5378 exactly, meaning the A-10 is useless and a waste of time whenever the F-16, 15, Typhoon? Ect, all can drop those same munitions from high altitude and at mach speeds. Flying faster and higher than the A-10 could even sniff means not just your missiles, but even your bombs go farther, increasing range. The A-10 is a hazard to fly in airspace that isn't secured. That's why in the Gulf War, A-10s were never used in Wild Weasel type roles. Yes they did have sorties vs SAMs but it was rare. F-16s, even the venerable and ancient F-4 Phantoms, were far better suited for deploying HARMs against triple A because they were faster and could fly higher when running. The A-10 has good loitering when in the AO, it's good for morale vs troop movements, that's the only reason why we kept it. But the F-16 outperformed the A-10 even in troop CAS. The F-35 is even better since it's sensors and stealth make it even MORE survivable than the F-16 is. I love the A-10, but it's gotta be the most overrated aircraft in the USAFs arsenal. There's a reason why we are retiring them.
@@QWERDQ_ Lot 14 F-35Bs are only $101.3m each, which is not much in today's fighter business. UAE F-16E/F were $200m each. Rafale contract to India was $168m unit flyaway, $216m unit program cost. F-35A is $77.9m now, but will go up to $83m in Block 4.
Our local ‘news’ normally has at least 2 “quotes” from X (Twitter) or facebook per every ‘story’...that way you don’t have to go out and do any actual ‘reporting’...
The critics whining about the reporting on this story are wasting theirs and everyone else's time by not explaining what specifically they found wrong with the report.
You guys are far to uppidy over this. You need to take history into account. Example: According to records, approximately 164 F-14 Tomcats were lost in non-combat incidents. This includes various types of accidents such as those occurring during training missions, operational flights, and other peacetime activities. Chill out. It happens.
On it's first combat cruise which saw the F-14A flying air cover during the US evacuation from Saigon, the 2 F-14 squadrons were able to keep every single F-14 ready for combat with a mission readiness rate of 95-100%. Their mission was air to air combat and the pilots flew A2A training flights almost every single day from the time they left harbor to the time they arrived on station off Vietnam. The F-35 in it's entire history has never reached that mission readiness state for that length of time.
@@HotDawgzzzzzF-14 Mishaps were a mix of FLCS failures (hydraulic leaks/fires), pilot error, engine blades coming loose and blowing through the fuselage and fuel cells, compressor stalls, falling off carrier decks, ocean spray/high wave splashes while canopy was open, and lost at sea/unknown status of aircrews/disappeared in wx. Took 40-60 wrench hours per flight hr to maintain. Hangar queen
@@pogo1140There's a great interview that dropped recently of an early F-14A pilot from that deployment. He said the pilots were even helping the maintainers trying to fix them it was so bad, most of the combat systems didn't even work, and the F-4Js were in much better shape operationally. Not sure where you read those mythical readiness rates, but they're fiction.
I can't stand the negativity. This pilot is a hero, waiting to eject where it was the safest and not over homes or malls. He risked his life once again for the ungrateful. Don't defund the police, defund the media. Why hasn't there been too many used in war? Because we have the tech to keep our country safe. We see what open boarders do without protection. This military, these planes, these branches of service are risking their lives, gave their lives so these reporters can trash publicly in the media. People need to understand, with this military we have protection. With these officers the citizens have more protection than if their wasn't any officers. It takes the best vehicles, training and programs to keep the officers safe so the citizens are protected. The same goes with our military. It's because of the F22, F35, F15, A10 and all others we are feared and protected. Stop bashing on those we depend on, and praise that pilot he waited to bail where it was the safest and not over houses. He's a hero and risked his life once again for the ungrateful.
Just a note. Sincer the USMC and USAF declared that their F-35 squadrons were fully combat ready and had deployed them over seas. The USAF and US Navy have sent A-10's, F-16's and F/A-18E's into Syria to engage in combat including shooting down Syrian aircraft and potentially engaging the latest Russian Sukhoi fighters including the SU-57 that the Russians had deployed. In the most recent action in the Red Sea and over Iraq, not one F-35 is even in the theater while F-16 and F/A-18 pilots farm xp and prep for war against Iran
@@pogo1140 The F-22 has flown to our Northern boarder when aircraft that wasn't cleared entered our airspace to deter. Two F-22's flow support for one of our drones getting bullied. Two F4's came in to shoot down the drone again. But this time the two F-22's undetected verified weapons, then scared off the two F4's with that ever famous sentence, "You really ought to go home". Because we spend billions or trillions on planes that don't see a battle doesn't mean they aren't used as a scare tactic. If we flew F4's to scare off a SU-57, or maybe a SU-27, SU-30, do you think other countries would shy away? But a pair of F-22's and 5 F-35's with 15 F-15EX's and nearly every country will think twice. Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
@@danielh1708 I seriously doubt not a single light came on and he had not control. He would have bailed as soon as it was out of control and not feet off the ground. I'll bet especially as late as he waited and how low before it went down, by the direction and location, he fought to the end to make sure that plane didn't hit anything or as little as possible. All pilots are trained to do everything they can to avoid crowded areas. That pilot fought and did his exactly as he was trained. All the way to the end. That plane has the most advanced engine, capable of sending failing information to ground crews before the pilot even knows it's failing or in need of repairs. That pilot did his job all the way to the very end. It's his training no one had more than minor issues and only 2 people
F-35B seat ejection is automated. A military that follows a corrupt grand strategy - like preserving a British Empire in covert - is a liability. A corrupt procurement leaves the military helpless - like the border that will replace the population until the end of the century, restoring traditions that aren't Transatlantic.
She said the F-35B cost $145M. One of the reasons the F-35 was researched and built was its lower cost. Initially coming in around $80M, versus the F-22 at $170M. You have to wonder how the cost of an F-35 skyrocketed, as this high cost would negate one of the better reasons it was chosen.
Last year alone there were 500 cars that burned simply because of mechanical failure. That doesn't include electric vehicles (far fewer of which burned).
@@will7itsNo Chinese components are allowed in it. They found one of the subcontractors slipped in some Chinese-sourced metal for a landing gear strut, and it caused a whole backlash and investigation, extreme scrutiny and monitoring of the contractor, with penalties just for raw material. The chips come from exclusive DoD suppliers in the US, and it has a lot of them. China isn't even remotely capable of making the semiconductors that populate the electronic subsystems in JSF.
@ilovemylife878 all I know is that the people who are trying to figure out why the f35 does things it's not programmed to do don't know why it happens. 🤔
No its not, you goofs. It isn't prompting questions of the whole F-35 program. It questions one plane crash. Geez, stop trying hype every sngle thing that happens.
um yes it does... one in a few years mqybe not, but two or more within months?! absolutely, any other jet or vehicle would be grounded and picked apart. until they found something wrong and fixed it.
@@pazsion900,000 flight hours, 1000 airframes, 9 crashes of all 3 models in 17 years. I'll put it into perspective: From 2013-2023, we lost 67 F-16s with 38 fatalities. The F-16 has more deficiencies than F-35s do. In the first 10 years of F-16 service from 1978-1988, we lost 143 birds with 71 fatalities. That was the safest single engine fighter in USAF history at the time.
@@shellysmith1037Yup. First 10 years of F-14 service was 73 crashes 19 fatalities. F-16 was 143 total losses, 71 fatalities. F/A-18 was 97 crashes, 27 fatalities its first 10 years. In the past 17 years of F-35 flights, a total of 6 F-35Bs, 3 F-35As, and 1 F-35C have crashed with 1 fatality in Japanese forces, pilot physiological episode. These are the safest fighters ever designed and built in history.
Only 29% of the fleet is even ready to fly ... the rest is grounded and the Airforce is currently no longer accepting any new F35s from the manufacturer.
The DoD made a HUGE mistake putting all our eggs in one basket. They should have went with both the X32 and F23 alongside the F22 & F35 and be diversified. One aircraft type for all branches is just negligent and leaves us vulnerable.
The benefit of F-35 progam is the USAF could cut the cost and save their money for maintenance, spare parts and pilot training, it will be different story when they have to maintenance several type of fighter jet. F-35 still considering to be the most advanced fighter jet in the world
Ok, so you are saying let's add 2 more very expensive weapon systems to our already ridiculously high debt??? Since your so smart go ahead and create that budget and find where that money will come from...
I’m sorry but you don’t seem to understand logistics and supply at all. Limiting the number and variety of equipment a military uses is a necessity. When you have to provide parts and weapons and ammunition on a foreign base or battlefield it is much easier and more efficient to supply these thing for a fewer number of aircraft and than a greater number. Also, the per unit cost of equipment is much higher when you make a smaller number than when you make a much greater number. The per unit cost of F-22 was much higher because they only made 195 of them as compared to thousands of F-35’s. Also the supply chain for F-22, in terms of spare parts is far more limited and is why the Air Force wants to retire nearly a quarter of the flee after only 20 years. They cut off production early and now parts have to be manufactured from scratch at a much higher cost. If we did what you suggest and had multiple smaller runs of aircraft we would be multiplying this extra expense 5 fold or worse.
More aircraft types for a single role makes logistics a nightmare. There have been plenty of documented cases of a forward maintenance facility getting a shipment of parts that were for aircraft (or ground vehicles) that were not being used by that unit. During wartime the result of that is two units (at a minimum) of combat vehicles being without the ability to be repaired.
Exactly how many flights result in crashes (3/1000? 2/100000?) and how does that compare with other models? Tired of being hyped up with questions, and only half decent journalistic answers. Journalism school used to teach "report the facts with out bias. Answer who, what, when, where, how, and whenever possible, why. If you can't answer 4 of the 6, dig deeper until you find the answers." My journalism teacher from high school wouldn't have allowed me to publish most of the stories making the news today on our weekly closed circuit news program. H/T to Curry Leslie, an old timer who believed anything worth doing was worth doing right. Especially the news.
People just have no idea how good the F-35 aircraft is and how it operates in a hostile environment. So much is secret and has to be but how this aircraft operates with other aircraft as a networked unit is incredibly efficient in battle or its other missions. Like one pilot responded to a Vietnam era pilot, "you just don't understand how we fight with the F-35 & F-22." Then added it's nothing like you have ever imagined.
False, the F-35 fleet average is about 55% But that figure needs to put in perspective, across our military airframe inventory readiness averages ~40% to 70% Sophisticated aircraft means that for every hour flown they require a great many man-hours to maintain, test, inspect, etc
@@virgilhilts3924 Exactly. Even WW2 aircraft had a significant amount of downtime for maintenance and inspections. Very few people in the U.S. bother to really learn about something before reaching conclusions about it.
@@virgilhilts3924 50% is less than the F-14's fleet average during a time when the US Navy had stopped buying spare parts and the mentainers were hammering metal to make repairs.
@@pogo1140Operational squadrons are 70-80% typically, which is what we see with F-35A/B/C. Training, flight test, weapons test, and aggressor F-35As don't have to maintain FMC levels like in an operational squadron because they aren't going feet-wet. So we don't need all the capabilities in them fully-up. Nobody cares if the Laser Designator is working in an aggressor, but it's a major gig in an operational squadron on paper (still doesn't matter if you're dropping JDAMs and SDBs for strike, unneeded for A2A). Doesn't matter, all those things get counted for the entire fleet rates when reporting to bean-counters who don't know the tip from the tail.
@@dirtworxphotography245F16 and F15 crush were 10 times worse. Idk why people are so arrogant. This is normal. Even Soviets and China suffered this stuffs
@@fridaynight3181 I think all aviation crashes are bad. My cousin flys f15s currently and I'm sure he would agree it don't matter what the aircraft is, you don't want to see it crash
I saw this F-35, coming toooo fast for a landing as I was leaving the VA outside by the flagpole. I saw the fins on the tail, no markings on the plane. Completely black... there's no way he could have landed going that fast. Too low. Just saw what I seen.
@@storminnormin01j47 None, instead we have a functioning Healthcare system, free universities and zero homeless people 😂😂😂And the United States pays 90% of our defence budget 💪💪💪
What a joke for one reason compared to other aircraft around the world in a program of this size 10 or 11 crashed in this time is an amazing achievement for a program with so many different types for different people
Military aircraft crash and I observed one myself while I was in and it was an A6 Intruder (a tested frame at the time) which barely missed the base fuel reserves. The F-35 is still a new platform so the bugs are still being ironed out. A lot of miliary aircraft have had bugs that needed to be ironed out over time before they were stellar platforms. In fact, I watched early days of the F-35 before the major bug scrub and the F-35 barely could do basic fighter maneuvers, now after, it can use those large wing surfaces to perform great fighter maneuvers for an aircraft that isn't vector thrusting like the F-22. The real rub with this aircraft compared to the rest is price per unit and probably over priced which should require some sort of investigation or scrutiny but will probably never happen.
I'm familiar with the area. It appears the pilot ejected while still over the runway (or shortly after that). It flew to the base under its own power, then refueled (on its way west). That calls for speculation that the fuel may be at fault. Of course, it is unlikely that we will ever learn the true answer...
Military investigations are pretty good and fuel is an easy one to verify. The refueling truck was likely impounded within 20 minutes of this crash. Reported engine problems/loss of thrust could be fuel related. Hopefully they'll give us an interim report in 30 days.
Everyone in the Fighter Aircraft business understands full well if other Jets of its kind are not grounded within 48 hours, it's pilots' error. all the data ( CSMU) survived to tell the tale.
It’s not fair to price this as 1 aircraft. It’s 3. To say 2 Trillion went into one isn’t fair. It has 3 variations that offer multiple branches of military what they need.
The $2 Trillion is also the entire program costs including retiring them and sending them to the boneyard after 50+ years. Have you noticed we never hear the 50 year program costs for anything else? What's the F-22 program cost projections? I've never seen them. How about Medicaid over 50 years?
@@ItsEricAZ people mention the b-29 program costing more than the manhattan project, but it only costs as much when put into a similar vein as this f-35 program, thats the only plane i can recall where people mention lifetime program costs from beginning to end
Yeah this really isn’t major news. The accident rate for F-35s, is unremarkable. Especially, when you take its complexity into account, and its iterative development-which forces it into service early, by design-to stay on the cutting edge. Moreover, a single F-35 is about as expensive as buying a single new F-15EX (economies of scale). So while the program is the most expensive ever in total, per plane, it is far from it.
Why do you have to sacrifice an F-35 just to test an ejection seat. Depending on the version, the bird costs between 110 and 135 million dollars. Don't the Americans have older aircraft with similarly unsafe flight characteristics that are sufficient to test ejection seats?
What is the cost of Freedom? If the US is not strong, the US will fall!!! If you like freedom thank the military! Even though the US government is very corrupt, the US is still alive!
Hmm, many foreign air forces use it regularly and it's been flying combat missions daily. The numbers built already are nearing 1000. Fighter jets crash...ain't nothing new. Very glad it wasn't worse. Now finding out the 'why' is most important: pilot error, computer failure, mechanical, structural, maintenance, nature(fod)?
Just a reminder, most of those foreign air forces are not flying the plane as often as they should so you don't crash if you don't fly. Also the USAF's F-35 pilots are about 3 hours/year from being under NATO's minimum number of NATO flight hours.
I do not have the exact numbers, but in my opinion most accidents we hear about, seems to be with the B version. This VTOL version is much more technically complicated, conpared to the A version, that needs a normal runway. Happy that we have the A type here in the Netherlands.
The F-35B has had 6 crashes, out of about 300 built. F-35A has had 3 crashes with about 600 built so far. Most of the 900,000 flight hours are from As of course. Causes of the B model crashes have mostly been human error. The first one was a mechanical failure with an improper fuel tube installation unique to the B. F-35B is a lot safer than the F-16 though. In the last 10 years, we had 68 F-16 crashes and 37 fatalities.
@@cemo3292 Yes, those are total fleet numbers. There aren't any fighters with half the JSF production numbers with safety records this good. Typhoon comes really close but doesn't have anywhere near F-35 airframe count or fleet flight hours, and Typhoon is over 20 years older than F-35. We (my family and coworkers) were working on ECA/Future Fighter 1990 already with the West Germans from 1980-1982 before they even had a demonstrator. Typhoon has 10 write-offs, 9 fatalities. F-22A is probably the closest to F-35 series in safety, but only 195 built. Rafale has a good safety record too, but nowhere near the production numbers, sorries, or fleet flight hours even with decades head start.
Why do people always act shocked when these things happen? No matter how state of the art a plane is a piece of machinery. Machines fail, all the time. Crashes are going to happen.
@@GG_RAUL If a Chinese jet crashes it is quickly swept under the rug and no one is told why it crashed and any news outlet that did report about it takes it down.
@@povertyspec9651 Um, no. First off, the F-35Bs run about $110M per plane. A new F-16 runs about $70M with no STOVL capability. It's not that crazy expensive vs other civilian jets.
Every advanced military jet program goes through 20 years of news media "questions about the program." They are good for enhancing revenue, as people are interested in crashes, but they aren't news per se, they are misinformation that viewers come away believing.
How did that camera know to focus in that direction right as it crashes, now theres no goddam way in hell on any ordinary day that someone could pull out their camera before they realised a jet was about to crash
This is the F-35B that features vertical lift so I assume that there is a lot more mechanics, thus a lot more that can go wrong than a typical F-35. Shit happens, it's not uncommon. The military loses aircraft quite often.
He was 1st flown in 2006 and came in mass production this year. You dont need advanced flying computer designed for modern conventional war with china to fly over poor people on the middle east with AK-47 at best. it would be a waste of resources. For such tasks are old planes like A-10, F-16 etc.
@Fartuchowaty Have you seen what China has? Have you not heard of the J20 or SA15?? You are very behind on what our adversaries have... And Afghanistan had russian equipment that is able to shoot down a A10 or F16. You need to do your research bud. China will be at your doorstep without the F35 acting as a deterrence
Our interest rate on our deficit has exceeded our military budget, so talking about replacing the f-35, is like being bankrupt and shopping for a Ferrari after you Lamborghini breaks down.
@@derikuk2967 we are Murica we can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time. dont know if you have family that have served or know folks that served but if you do ask them your self but most deaths in military last 20 years yes even when we were at war was by vehicle plane or ground deaths through accidents
We're used to seeing the F-35 plummet from the sky here in SC. Most ridiculously over budget fighter program ever. So the station calls in a mouthpiece for the program to defend the indefensible. And the real story gets buried. A journalist is now defined as someone who can read a press release reasonably well on camera.
How is the program ridiculously over budget when we've already paid the expenses for the infrastructure, maintenance, and aircraft to operate for most of this century?
@@storminnormin01j47 Thanks for asking Norm. Budget has bloated to nearly double estimates, while the 10 year old program has a dismal 52 percent flight ready status for the F-35A. To offset these failures, the Pentagon bought more of them and lowered their flight time expectations to compensate for their miserable effectiveness. But all three version fall far short of their mission capable rates. Which is military speak for "they look good sitting still, but you'd better take the F-22 to take down that Chinese balloon." Also, they're falling out of the skies over SC and NM on routine peacetime flights. Otherwise, the F-35 program continues to be money well spent. 🤣😜
@@marlinweekley51 You can literally blow up an artillery shell and have enough information to track down the exact factory it was produced in, so yeah it needs to be cleaned up
"Lockheed Marrrr.... in" ? Silly me, I always thought it was Lockheed Martin. You know, with a "T". Bogus accusation of "criticism of cost & efficiency is the hilarious icing on the cake.
LOL how old are you? WWII was like 100 years ago bro. One report noted that out of the approximately 15,586 P-51s produced, hundreds were lost due to accidents and non-combat-related issues. A common estimate is that around 10-15% of all aircraft losses during WWII were due to non-combat incidents. Not impressed. Ill take the F35 all day long.
And the The Kruger P-52 Merlin is not even REAL. Its a video game fighter. Jesus. You either got the plane way wrong or your just spouting fictional works.
"Not having details" isn't an excuse. People are sick and tired of being lied to and deceived, then treated like *we* are the traitors. Accountability. We all have accountability. Just because it's an election year and our current admin has edged us towards WWIII does not justify making ordinary citizens the bad guys for pointing this out. You're the Fourth Estate. Start acting like it instead of falling in line, like this is East Berlin.
Not just relatively safe, the safest 3 fighter designs in history. F-35As have been flying for 17.5yrs, only 3 crashes, 1 fatality in Japanese forces. F-35B has been flying for 15.5yrs, 6 crashes, zero fatalities. F-35C has been flying for 14 years, 1 crash, zero fatalities. No other fighter that has been produced has these kinds of numbers.
This guy is a big liar! He said based on a number of how many they are buil. The answer is simple. How many? How many crashes so far worldwide? Compared to F16 or F15, including the life span of both airplanes. Obviously he is paid to lie!
