US F-35 Fighter Jet missing

[berkeman]

I can only conclude that you have a pretty good idea who it is, otherwise I can't fathom how you surmise - from 911 audio - his rank, pending promotion and the number of supersonic jets he's flown (something in the timber of his voice??)

It's prob in the news stories somewhere. Off with you to find it!

 

[Vanadium 50]

I can only conclude that you have a pretty good idea who it is, otherwise I can't fathom how you surmise

I can, with >50% confidence, name him.

But it works the other way. His age gives you a very good idea of his time in the service, and that in turn gives you a very good idea of his rank.

If he's flying the F-35, he's flown the F/A-18 before, and the T-38 before that. Plus a subsonic trainer. Maybe more. He would have started to fly just about the time F-4's and A-4's were being replaced.

If he made lieutenant or full colonel, he has spent thousands of hours in the air, and did not avoid combat. Unfortunately, there have been many opportunities. Flying officers who don't fly don't get promoted. Neither do ones who could have fought but didn't.

If you work backwards from that, there aren't many possibilities.

 

[Baluncore]

If you work backwards from that, there aren't many possibilities.

My analysis from that, is that the USA requires warfare in order to promote senior officers.

Australia seems to join the USA in any available conflict, only because it needs to promote another rank of stagnating officers.

There must be such a thing as "non-destructive promotion", to explain how the most senior officers are promoted in the Swedish air force.

 

[Vanadium 50]

USA requires warfare in order to promote senior officers.

No. And be thankful that it doesn't - you wouldn't want to apply it to, say, ballistic missile submarines.

However, it is generally considered A Bad Thing to promote people who have managed to avoid combat over those who did not.

 

[Vanadium 50]

This is the same Marine Air Wing that lost an F/A-18 a month ago in Miramar. I suspect there may be a new commanding general sooner rather than later.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The Navy just announced that the cleanup of the crash site has been cleaned up. They mentioned "soil contaminants" which I assume means "unburned fuel"

 

[berkeman]

It doesn't look like they've published anything about what the "mishap" was and what prompted the pilot to eject. Has anybody seen anything yet?

 

[Flyboy]

It doesn't look like they've published anything about what the "mishap" was and what prompted the pilot to eject. Has anybody seen anything yet?

Not yet, and I'm not surprised. I'm expecting something in the next couple weeks, though.

 

[DaveC426913]

^{"There was a spider."}

 

[Baluncore]

"There was a spider."

I remember a scifi short story, “Tales of Pirx the Pilot”, by Stanislaw Lem, of Solaris fame, in which two student space-pilots must pass their final solo practical exam, with separate flights around the Moon. They each find a bee in their cockpit and are distracted. One manages to ignore the bee, to land back on Earth, the other over-reacts, and crashes into the Moon.

As the successful student leaves the cockpit after the flight, he sees the (failed) student, being carried on a stretcher from the other spacecraft. The failed student could not ignore the bee, so crashed into the moon, and suffered the psychological trauma of, what later turned out to be, simulated flights, with simulated bees.

Was the spider in the F35 pilot's helmet real, or simulated?

 

[berkeman]

It's been over a month now with no updates that I can find about the "mishap". Has anybody seen anything?

I did find this info about a previous "mishap" and resulting crash:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...rbulence-caused-air-force-f-35-crash-in-utah/

The accident unfolded just after 6 p.m. local time on Oct. 19, 2022, as a quartet of F-35As returned to Hill from an “uneventful” training sortie, the report said. The jet that crashed, assigned to Hill’s 421st Fighter Squadron, was approaching the base as the third aircraft in the four-ship formation.

As they prepared to land, the pilot felt a “slight rumbling” of turbulence from the wake of the aircraft in front of him, the report said. The bumpy air caused the F-35′s flight controls to register incorrect flight data, and the jet stopped responding to the pilot’s attempts at manual control.

The pilot tried to abort the landing and try again, but the jet responded by sharply banking to the left. Further attempts to right the aircraft failed, and the pilot safely ejected north of the base. His F-35 crashed near a runway at Hill.

Does anybody know if the jet that crashed last month was lead or wingman in their two-ship?

 

[Vanadium 50]

It's a little early for the accident report.

One might look at the web site for the various units involved and compare the leadership staff today with those before the mishap. If there are changes, it might indicate that people in the chain of command have been reassigned because of "loss of confidence".

This is something the Navy does when they don't think you've done anything illegal (requiring a court martial) but they also don't want you doing it again. There are plenty of other people out there who could do the job but haven't lost their airframe.