F-35 Crash, New Video (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Not any F-35's lost in the last decade or so too accidents. It has a good record compared to other types.
 
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.
 
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.
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..
Thanks for your input, I know you're there on the front line and probably know more about current events than anyone on here.
 
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.
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!"
 
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.
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.

They have insurance....
 
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.
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:

 
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.
 
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.
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.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back