Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Good stuff. Perhaps the Brits can buy this one on a refurb discount to replace the F-35B they dropped into the Levantine Sea. That one was recovered and scrapped or otherwise permanently out of service, I believe.IMO it looks repairable.
Typo on my part. Not any should have been not many.FlyboyJ: It's repairable, but at what cost. What worries me is both the impact stress imparted and the bending moments in the areas well ahead of the cockpit aft bulkhead and lift fan bay structure. I'm not versed in how the fuselage sits in the mate fixture, but to repair it, may require a one off fixture build, or a complete forward fuselage strip out. Cockpit wise, quickest estimate, is when the seat goes off, everything in the cockpit gets toasted, other than the heavy structure. The numbers add up quickly..
Warspiter: Current count of known lost airframes is 4 A models, 3 B models and 1 C model, out of a combined delivery count of around 800 airframes. Add to that, the damaged B model airframe in Japan and yesterday's incident, and you are still under 1% loss rate.
Thanks for your input, I know you're there on the front line and probably know more about current events than anyone on here.FlyboyJ: It's repairable, but at what cost. What worries me is both the impact stress imparted and the bending moments in the areas well ahead of the cockpit aft bulkhead and lift fan bay structure. I'm not versed in how the fuselage sits in the mate fixture, but to repair it, may require a one off fixture build, or a complete forward fuselage strip out. Cockpit wise, quickest estimate, is when the seat goes off, everything in the cockpit gets toasted, other than the heavy structure. The numbers add up quickly..
Doubtful - right now this asset belongs to the US Government and there would be many hoops to jump through. It's not as simple as "Lend Lease!"Good stuff. Perhaps the Brits can buy this one on a refurb discount to replace the F-35B they dropped into the Levantine Sea. That one was recovered and scrapped or otherwise permanently out of service, I believe.
Too bad for the American taxpayer. Had the incident occurred before handover to the US Government the good shareholders of Lockheed-Martin would be on the hook.Doubtful - right now this asset belongs to the US Government
If this was a production test flight, the bird still belongs to LMCO in a sense. There's a document called a DD250 that officially transfers the asset to the government. Lockheed is basically handling government property during the build process and is officially paid for the asset when the DD250 is signed.Too bad for the American taxpayer. Had the incident occurred before handover to the US Government the good shareholders of Lockheed-Martin would be on the hook.
There will be an accident investigation team sent in. It may take months before we know wat went wrongWith it being military will the cause be disclosed. Obviously, something went wrong, but what?
It should be repairable - i know that the RAAF Super Hornet that had the double ejection on takeoff a few years ago has been repaired and returned to service:IMO it looks repairable. An ejection can do some damage to an airframe, I'm sure that there are repair procedures in the aircraft's MMs for ejection events.
I remember an event at Lockheed Burbank where the crew of an S-3 ejected during a production test flight. IIRC on of the crew perished when his chute didn't deploy properly. The aircraft was salvaged.
Memories of the Cornfield Bomber.It should be repairable - i know that the RAAF Super Hornet that had the double ejection on takeoff a few years ago has been repaired and returned to service:
Although I agree with your basic assessment, we're talking two very different airframes manufactured by two very different companies and developed under two very different design specifications.It should be repairable - i know that the RAAF Super Hornet that had the double ejection on takeoff a few years ago has been repaired and returned to service:
Wasn't the engine still running when they found it?
It says in the link, they phoned to ask what to do, and were told to let it run out of fuel, which it did about 1hr 45 minutes later lolWasn't the engine still running when they found it?
Walking away from the landing is what makes it difficult, ejecting after landing makes it a special category. Will he qualify for the caterpillar club?And some guys here make it seem like landing is difficult.
I am not commenting upon what other damage may have been done to the airframe and systems not he f-35 . Rather I was referring to the fact that just the ejection isn't necessary enough to mean it can't be repaired.Although I agree with your basic assessment, we're talking two very different airframes manufactured by two very different companies and developed under two very different design specifications.