F-35 Ooops?

Discuss all things 'aviation' that do not fit into a more appropriate forum
User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:17 am
Contact:

F-35 Ooops?

Post by Spiny Norman »

Can this report really be true about a rain cover causing the loss of the only British F-35 lost so far?

Reds Rolling
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu 12 Sep 2013, 10:50 am

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Reds Rolling »

Spiny Norman wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 9:47 am
Can this report really be true about a rain cover causing the loss of the only British F-35 lost so far?
What report? I see no report. Is it a stealth report? Will the report appear if it rains? :laughing:

Orion
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed 22 Jul 2009, 9:34 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Orion »

David Mylchreest

Reds Rolling
Posts: 643
Joined: Thu 12 Sep 2013, 10:50 am

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Reds Rolling »

Ahh there's a report, but it's the Daily Mail, so in true UKAR fashion I have to dismiss it entirely until someone posts a Guardian link. :rofl:

User avatar
iainpeden
Posts: 2835
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 7:01 pm
Location: Great Oakley, Corby, Northants

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by iainpeden »

If true the Vulcan silicon bag episode pails into insignificance.
(Mark Twain: There are lies, there are damn lies and then there are statistics)

User avatar
boff180
UKAR Staff
Posts: 9051
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 2:28 pm
Location: Solihull
Contact:

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by boff180 »

UK Defence Journal are also covering the news.... but they tend to be as accurate as the Daily Mail when reporting so take it with a pinch of salt.

cg_341
Posts: 1880
Joined: Sun 09 Aug 2015, 1:39 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by cg_341 »

It's been rumoured to be the cause since about 2 hours after it happened, just the DM are very slow to find information apparently.

User avatar
starbuck
Posts: 946
Joined: Tue 28 Mar 2017, 9:35 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by starbuck »

Anecdotally during my 2 and a bit years on the Invincible we lost 2 Harriers to ditching, both in the Med.

Just saying.

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:17 am
Contact:

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Spiny Norman »

starbuck wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 1:27 pm
Anecdotally during my 2 and a bit years on the Invincible we lost 2 Harriers to ditching, both in the Med.

Just saying.
Not enough Spanish cargo ships passing by?!

User avatar
NAM Updater
Posts: 2849
Joined: Mon 01 Sep 2008, 7:06 am
Location: Notts / Lincs border
Contact:

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by NAM Updater »

We managed to save that Sea Harrier in the end and ZA176 is now displayed safe in Hangar 2! :innocent:
Howard Heeley - Newark Air Museum Trustee
http://newarkairmuseum.org

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 5891
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Tommy »

A powerful piece of evidence to Whitehall that just ordering 48 examples is insufficient (that number being pulled out of the arse and informed by it being the maximum of 24 on each carrier at “surge” capacity).

And that’s to say nothing of maintenance rotations, storage, training requirements, exercises, and everything else. Attrition and all those other requirements need to be built into the procurement process.

FarnboroJohn
Posts: 2375
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by FarnboroJohn »

Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 4:43 pm
A powerful piece of evidence to Whitehall that just ordering 48 examples is insufficient (that number being pulled out of the arse and informed by it being the maximum of 24 on each carrier at “surge” capacity).

And that’s to say nothing of maintenance rotations, storage, training requirements, exercises, and everything else. Attrition and all those other requirements need to be built into the procurement process.
I'm sure they were in the original 148 or whatever it was. But our current politicians make Churchill's 10 year rule look like plain common sense compared to their dicing with Defence policy and the safety of the nation.

User avatar
ted633
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun 14 Jun 2015, 2:01 am

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by ted633 »

By rain cover, do they mean the intake blanks? As it was referenced up thread, the silica gel incident on the Vulcan was understandable to a degree, but I really fail to see how a bright red intake blank can be failed to be removed!

verreli
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun 12 Mar 2017, 6:05 pm
Location: Lake District

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by verreli »

ted633 wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 5:38 pm
By rain cover, do they mean the intake blanks? As it was referenced up thread, the silica gel incident on the Vulcan was understandable to a degree, but I really fail to see how a bright red intake blank can be failed to be removed!
I agree. I would hope the crew would notice something like that on pre flight, not to mention all the ground crew right up to take off. The main reason though is that as soon as the engine was spooled up, before it had even taxied, it would have been sucked in, chewed up and spat out i.e. there wouldn't have been much left to float in the med following a trip through the engine.

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 5891
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Tommy »

It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.

User avatar
DerekF
Posts: 4793
Joined: Sun 07 Sep 2008, 7:54 am
Location: Handforth, Cheshire, UK

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by DerekF »

Good grief no. We must guess, speculate and show off how little we actually know.

I'm surprised the MoD bother with their accident investigation branch. A simple look through the internet will give them all the answers they need.

FarnboroJohn
Posts: 2375
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by FarnboroJohn »

Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:18 pm
It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.
Once something official comes out the fun goes out of speculating! :laughing:

verreli
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun 12 Mar 2017, 6:05 pm
Location: Lake District

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by verreli »

FarnboroJohn wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:38 pm
Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:18 pm
It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.
Once something official comes out the fun goes out of speculating! :laughing:
Exactly, what's the harm? I'm willing to wager that if something went through the engine it wasn't recognisable on exit, rain cover or not. I'm also surprised nobody has mentioned that the pilot got caught on the edge of the boat. Sounds like he was very lucky.

User avatar
Tommy
UKAR Staff
Posts: 5891
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2011, 11:39 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Tommy »

verreli wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 8:09 pm
FarnboroJohn wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:38 pm
Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:18 pm
It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.
Once something official comes out the fun goes out of speculating! :laughing:
Exactly, what's the harm?

In this instance? Probably not much, but if it becomes second nature or a habit of all of us to speculate on any and every accident, particularly in other cases when there are either fatalities or no confirmation of crew safety, there is often plenty of harm, or risk of harm.

As for this case, you may very well ask “what’s the harm?” but in the same vein I also wonder “what’s the value?” But there we are.

FWIW, there’s a news article out - it’s stupid of me to say “don’t talk about it” because, well, you all will, (I could have just deleted your posts) so just remember that there isn’t any official confirmation yet, not to take everything as written, and that we all know how (in)accurate the Mail (and other rags) can be about aviation.

stonojnr
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun 19 Jul 2009, 7:08 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by stonojnr »

well the report in the Telegraph says that the Sun says, a classic way newspapers use to report other newspapers stories so it doesnt seem like they themselves can be called speculating ;) that crew on board saw a red cover floating in the sea afterwards...which doesnt seem that likely really if it was ingested, when surely the simplest way of proving whether any remove before flight covers turned in to FOD is you just count how many covers youve still got on board ship, because if theres suddenly one missing, it wont have vanished by itself.

User avatar
Pen Pusher
Posts: 6718
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 6:34 pm
Location: St Ives, Cambs
Contact:

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Pen Pusher »

stonojnr wrote:
Thu 25 Nov 2021, 12:28 am
that crew on board saw a red cover floating in the sea afterwards...which doesnt seem that likely really if it was ingested,
Speculating again but maybe the cover was taken off the aircraft but not secured properly and was blown off the deck and had nothing to do with the crash so we'll just have to wait until the accident report comes.
The Future Of Photography Is Mirrorless

DUXFORDfotoGALLERY
DfG on Facebook

User avatar
starbuck
Posts: 946
Joined: Tue 28 Mar 2017, 9:35 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by starbuck »

verreli wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 8:09 pm
FarnboroJohn wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:38 pm
Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:18 pm
It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.
Once something official comes out the fun goes out of speculating! :laughing:
I'm also surprised nobody has mentioned that the pilot got caught on the edge of the boat. Sounds like he was very lucky.
If that's true that must have been just as scary as the initial ejection. It says he was picked up by helicopter so I assume he did end up in the oggin. That's a long way down even if it was the edge of the flight deck you were caught on. You've then got to swim clear of the ship for the helicopter to be able to pick you up.

FarnboroJohn
Posts: 2375
Joined: Tue 28 Aug 2012, 6:57 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by FarnboroJohn »

Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 10:39 pm
verreli wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 8:09 pm
FarnboroJohn wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:38 pm
Tommy wrote:
Wed 24 Nov 2021, 6:18 pm
It’s probably worth waiting until something official comes out before speculating.
Once something official comes out the fun goes out of speculating! :laughing:
Exactly, what's the harm?

In this instance? Probably not much, but if it becomes second nature or a habit of all of us to speculate on any and every accident, particularly in other cases when there are either fatalities or no confirmation of crew safety, there is often plenty of harm, or risk of harm.

As for this case, you may very well ask “what’s the harm?” but in the same vein I also wonder “what’s the value?” But there we are.

FWIW, there’s a news article out - it’s stupid of me to say “don’t talk about it” because, well, you all will, (I could have just deleted your posts) so just remember that there isn’t any official confirmation yet, not to take everything as written, and that we all know how (in)accurate the Mail (and other rags) can be about aviation.
Well, I kind of agree with this and my comment was obviously tongue in cheek. I hope we are adult enough to think about what the consequences of an accident were before speculating but when, as in this case, the loss is limited to a hundred million quid of aeroplane, a bit of speculation isn't harmful?

Orion
Posts: 583
Joined: Wed 22 Jul 2009, 9:34 pm

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Orion »

David Mylchreest

User avatar
Spiny Norman
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun 31 Aug 2008, 10:17 am
Contact:

Re: F-35 Ooops?

Post by Spiny Norman »

A well-known aviation aircrew site was hinting at what happened the day after. The fact the type continued flying suggested something not affecting the whole fleet.

From the Telegraph. "A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: “It is too soon to comment on the potential causes of this accident and speculation is not helpful. The Defence Accident Investigation Branch will report back their preliminary findings in due course.”

Of course, the civil service/government are much quicker to respond to other events but we'll just have to wait and see what transpires.

Post Reply