41 ms·

F-35: What The Pilots Say

242 points by ChuckMcM 8y ago

ChuckMcM 8y ago
This article was in the latest issue of Air & Space. There have been a number of articles that have ridiculed the F35 as a waste of time and money, but it is interesting to hear what the pilots think about the plane now that they are flying them.
- Someone 8y ago
  Are you sure this is what the pilots think? For me, the overall message is so flattering for the airplane that it sounds more as the result of lots of press training or at least as pilots being very careful in what they say because publicly critiquing this airplane is not good for one’s career prospects.
  - ChuckMcM 8y ago
    Clearly, reading product reviews is a science :-) but I think there is some good information there. It's not all puff and PR :-). And my experience with the journalism at Air & Space has been positive, I have read both highly critical and very insightful articles from their journalists over the years. That experience gives me some trust in them which I could understand would not come on first exposure. I think it would also be useful for them to find 8 pilots who have both flown the new plane and are critical of it versus other aircraft designed for a similar role. That will have to wait I think until there are more flight hours on it in more situations. What I find most interesting about these types of systems are the differences between the AA-1 version (first article) and the one they consider 'first release.' In new systems there are lots of things that change during the initial testing and evaluation. This is true of software just as much as it is hardware, although hardware takes a lot more documentation.
  - Macross8299 8y ago
    Seems entirely possible that the F-35 has grown into a solid piece of engineering and is great to fly from a pilot's perspective without that necessarily invalidating cost-related and overrun-related criticisms of the project.
    - rhizome 8y ago
      If it had grown into a solid piece of engineering we would be hearing about it from all angles and seeing it at every airshow. There is nothing the military would rather do than demonstrate that this zillion-dollar albatross is not only still alive, but it's also not developmentally disabled.
    - campers 8y ago
      One of the pilots comments seemed to indicate that: "In the two years since [the 388th’s] last Red Flag exercise, the airplane itself has had some pretty significant advancements. A couple of months before the 2017 Red Flag, the Air Force declared that the squadron was what we call “initial operational capable.” So the jet still had some operating limitations—altitude, airspeed, Gs, things like that. The software on the aircraft, though very capable, still had some limitations in terms of some of the systems and some of the weapons it could control. Fast forward two years, and we’re operating with what’s referred to as full warfighting capability software. It’s a more advanced F-35 than it was two years ago."
  - philwelch 8y ago
    It's also the time of year that federal budgets are being drawn up. But it's entirely possible that the plane is fine. Keep in mind that a lot of the criticism of the F-35 is also PR from competing defense contractors.
- ArtWomb 8y ago
  Good read, thnx for posting ;)
- AlexCoventry 8y ago
  I'm not inclined to take this article at face value. The pilots could have been cherry picked and bribed, and Lockheed-Martin is a major donor to the Air & Space Museum, the parent organization of the publisher [0]. [0] https://airandspace.si.edu/theater-type/lockheed-martin-imax-theater https://airandspace.si.edu/theater-type/lockheed-martin-imax...
- Theodores 8y ago
  Planes aren't just for dropping bombs on people, the PR value of them is part of their power. You have to have the domestic population thinking they have the best planes. Sadly the F-35 is failing in this latter role. At a recent air show in the UK it was the elderly Ukrainian Sukhoi machines that got the gasps of oohs and aahs from the crowd. The crowd were not what you might call communist, they just know what planes put on the best show. There are no figures bandied around regarding the PR value of the F-35. Facts don't come into it when emotions are involved and the F-35 is fundamentally not loved or held in awe. Plenty of times the USAF have had planes that amaze everyone's inner 9 year old, the F-35 just doesn't cut it. Meanwhile, in Russia, lots of people take pride in their war planes and believe them to be the best in the world. It could be argued with fact things that their planes are rubbish but facts have nothing to do with belief. Ultimately it comes down to the air show, not what the pilots say, whether they are paid shills or not. And nope, there is no use for a 'Cobra manoeuvre' but the crowds lap it up, think their pilots are aces and let their kids join the armed forces on that basis.
  - jazzyjackson 8y ago
    Interesting point about talent acquisition... if you want the best pilots you have to put on a good show for them when they're kids xD
  - Bendingo 8y ago
    > could be argued with fact things that their planes are rubbish This is the first time I've heard that Russian war planes are rubbish. Please share some of these fact things.
    - Macross8299 8y ago
      https://migflug.com/jetflights/the-combat-statistics-for-all-the-aircraft-currently-in-use/ https://migflug.com/jetflights/the-combat-statistics-for-all... Not a definitive combat record of all modern jets by any means and one could argue that many of the losses of MiGs from export client states were due to poor training, poor maintenance, outdated/inferior export models or having to fight Israelis constantly ;) But then again, when Russian and Israeli pilots went head to head [1] the Russian fighter planes did not really hold their own there either. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20
- Phrodo_00 8y ago
  Given that one of the main motivations for the plane's existence is support roles, I'm more interested in hearing from the people getting supported by the aircraft.
- SteveCoast 8y ago
  I'm sure it's all completely unbiased.
Jerry2 8y ago
Many of those pilots are literally paid to love it.
kreitje 8y ago
They have their demo team debut this weekend in FL. https://airandspaceshow.com/f-35-demo/ https://airandspaceshow.com/f-35-demo/
- SteveNuts 8y ago
  I saw the F-35 takeoff and a couple of maneuvers at an airshow in 2017, do you know what the difference between that demonstration and the one in FL will be?
  - alanbernstein 8y ago
    The article says "North American debut".
    - SteveNuts 8y ago
      Right, but it's already flown at at least one North American airshow (since I've seen it fly), so this must be different in some way than the ones that have already been flying. So I'm curious what will be different.
      - Sebguer 8y ago
        Difference between doing fly-by and basic maneuvers, and a full-on all-performance show by effectively a stunt team, as best I can tell. This news article supports that: https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2018/12/28/f-35-lightning-ii-demo-team-make-north-american-debut-melbourne-air-space-show/2434258002/ https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2018/12/28/f-35-ligh...
        SteveNuts 8y ago
        Awesome! I saw the F-35 in Duluth MN and it was the most impressive takeoff I've ever seen, so I'd be really excited to see it again now. Thanks for the info.
carnagii 8y ago
> to penetrate sophisticated enemy air defenses and find and disable threats—requires what the fifth-generation jet offers: stealth and a stunning array of passive and active sensors > U.S. forces first took these capabilities into combat last September, when Marine F-35Bs struck the Taliban in Afghanistan against disorganized rebel forces less well armed than the average suburban American, with no air force and no surface to air missiles. and the U.S. still can't win that war.
- umvi 8y ago
  That's because it's like being a doctor trying to eradicate cancer that is spread throughout the patient's body in minute amounts. You can do a precision strike against one small area, but how do you eradicate all the cancer without killing healthy cells (also in this analogy killing any healthy cells makes you a murderer). The only way to win is to convince the patient's immune system (the host country's civilians) to kill its own cancer.
- remarkEon 8y ago
  Is the F-35 meant to be a true replacement for the A-10?
  - kjs3 8y ago
    Regrettably, that's exactly one of the use cases.
  - hermitdev 8y ago
    I think that was the hope, but reality has set in and the lifetime of the A-10 has been extended. I mean, why not? There is no current or planned plane as capable or as survivable as the A-10. F-35? Single engine, inline. Take that out and instant eject. Warthog was designed to lose an engine, even let it burn off and make it home. Control surfaces have mechanical backups. Not to mention the titanium tub protecting the pilot. And the cannon? Oh, the cannon. Can an F-35 take out a T-72 or T-80 on cannons alone? Doubtful. A-10 is one of my favorite warplanes. Design was basically: here's this cannon, build a plane around it.
thisistrashair 8y ago
The Smithsonian Institution is administered by the US federal government. The grain of salt you should take with this is mountain-sized. Even if it weren't direct propaganda (which it likely is), these pilots would be ill-advised to say anything bad about the F-35 in a government-run publication.
- gandhium 8y ago
  Israel is not complaining AFAIK and their pilots are pretty much experienced since they're flying real missions right now.
dmoy 8y ago
It should probably be highlighted at the top of the article that three of those pilots are employees of lockmart.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- nabla9 8y ago
  And none of the pilots are in the position to give fair assessment. You are not allowed to give fair assessment for a fighter even you are retired.
etaioinshrdlu 8y ago
We should keep our minds open to the possibility that this isn't the worst plane ever made. I think the real crime is the ridiculous cost, and putting all our eggs in the F35 basket.
icanhackit 8y ago
The most interesting (fun?) one to read for me was Squadron Leader Andy Edgell, Royal Air Force. > “Yeah, Test, you didn’t put the right rudder in.” I said, “Yeah, I know. I couldn’t lift my leg up.” > [...] > Legalized hooliganism! All in the pursuit of data and good test points, of course. > [...] > I did, for a moment, stare through the windows of the bridge. And you think to yourself, “This is a view that no one really gets.”
hyeonwho4 8y ago
This seems like a PR piece. Too positive, a lot of discussions of pilot's smiles. Given the very high program costs and the need by Lockheed Martin to convince US allies to buy the plane despite the high price tag, I think HN readers would be well served by skepticism. To put it another way, it the F35 was really as good as the F22, as the article seems to claim, then it would not be available for export.
- canada_dry 8y ago
  > This seems like a PR piece No kidding... it comes across more like a late night Ronco ad rather than real opinions.
- threeseed 8y ago
  The word smile was mentioned once in the article. And the F35 was always going to be shared with allies for cost and geopolitical reasons so not sure how that can be considered a negative. The US structured the F35 program to specifically avoid the F22 failures.
  - lotsofpulp 8y ago
    Sharing with allies for cost and geopolitical reasons is good for the contractors designing and building th plane. You spread around the tax dollars spent on jobs between many different US states and counties, and voila, immunity from politicians. Kick that up to a nation scale, and you really have something good going. Taking advantage of people’s interest in only their immediate future and their immediate surroundings, and people’s willingness to ignore long term and worldwide costs is a path to success and a downside of “democracy”.
    - et2o 8y ago
      A strategy to advance the geopolitical stability of America and its Allies is about the opposite of taking a short-term view.
      - 8y ago
autokad 8y ago
its hard to take the opinions of the pilots that fly them with complete confidence. they have a vested interest, their career is over if the f35 is over. On the low end, the f35 costs about as much as 5 f16s, which also have twice the range over an f35. the f35 is the bf109 of the modern era. military brass keeps wanting all purpose aircraft, and 100 years of military aircraft experience has shown that never works.
- threeseed 8y ago
  (a) Pilots rarely specialise in just one aircraft. (b) F35 at this point in its lifecycle is always going to be much more expensive more than a last generation model.
- Godel_unicode 8y ago
  > ...wanting all purpose aircraft, and 100 years of military aircraft experience has shown that never works. Other than the p51, the f18, the f15...
- crimsonalucard 8y ago
  Pilots can switch planes like programmers can switch programming languages so "protecting career" is unlikely. "Obeying my boss" is what is most likely happening here. I get the sense that they are literally instructed not to give bad PR about the plane. Or even worse, this entire article is scripted.
  - rbanffy 8y ago
    > Pilots can switch planes like programmers can switch programming languages so "protecting career" is unlikely. Except that military pilots have one single possible employer.
    - crimsonalucard 8y ago
      What military pilots can't change to civilian pilots when they leave the military?
vertline3 8y ago
Plane seems like a really good fit for it's role. Would be pretty cool to meet the engineers that designed it.
adictator 8y ago
How does the F-35 stack up against the Rafale?
victor106 8y ago
$406 billion!!! Just imagine how many humans you can bring out of poverty with that kind of money? I understand the world we live in but if you spend one tenth the amount they spent on this educating/helping the very people this plane would be eventually targeted at, I think it would cause more of an impact. I was reading a book by Steven Pinker and in it he lays out the case for how modern society has essentially made war illegal. And in Sapiens the author (Yuval Harari) makes the case that modern society is no longer based on static wealth that can be conquered and consumed like Gold, Silver etc., Its made of human skill and mind that create wealth that does not exist. So say China occupies the US it sure can take all the wealth that is static but it cannot force people to use their minds to create a Google or an Apple or FB(i know..i know..).. If you believe the above you have to ask yourself:- "So then what is the benefit of spending so much money?"
- solipsism 8y ago
  Your analysis doesn't consider defense. Actors on the international stage aren't always rational, so you need to consider defending yourself against others, however irrational. I'm not saying that tips the argument one way or another. But you can't not talk about it.
- astazangasta 8y ago
  The idea that this has anything to do with fighting a war is absurd. The wars are also not about any specific goals. Does the F-35 have any relevance in a fight against the Taliban? I'd be surprised if the Taliban had even one plane, or heck even a radar. The reason this plane was built was: to spend so much money. It was to support a high-tech industry that needs a guaranteed buyer to develop expensive sensors, joysticks, and so on. You might ask yourself: but why this use? Surely all of that engineering talent can be put to good use building more useful, non-destructive technologies? The answer, I think, is only a historical accident: after World War II the military became a money faucet to industry, and that tap proved difficult to control or turn off. The Department of Defense has been resisting an audit for the last 30 years; it is a paragon of profligacy. It pumps half a trillion dollars into the economy every year, and for the most part Americans are oblivious or approving. There is no great public outcry to reduce the military budget; but there are a great number of industries eager to keep the money flowing. Thus, we get this kind of pointless waste of everyone's time.
antiviral 8y ago
Let's say all the claims in this article are correct. What happens when one gets shot down (as it inevitably will), and the enemy reverse-engineers the stealth tech to either copy or find weaknesses in its capabilities? If they can reverse-engineer faster than we can improve our stealth tech, which seems reasonable, whatever claimed advantages this plane has will be temporary. Or is there another way of looking at this?
- CapricornNoble 8y ago
  They don't even need to shoot it down. The Chinese already stole the designs, evaluated them, and have been working on their own less-risky copy for years. They have a proven ability to copy and adapt weapon systems at a faster rate than anyone gives them credit for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_FC-31 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_FC-31 The J-31 is basically a twin-engine F-35, minus the sensor fusion capabilities. The Chinese are still very poor at making fighter jet engines, so they went with 2 smaller engines probably for redundancy and because they can't build one gigantic reliable engine anyway. The jet is probably still underpowered.
  - crimsonalucard 8y ago
    Do you think it will save costs if the united states moved F-35 manufacturing to China? Quality will be lower but Apple was able to do it with the iPhone without compromising quality.
    - CapricornNoble 8y ago
      Sure it would "save costs".....until we get in a shooting war with China and they stop sending us spare parts. Or given concerns about backdoors in Huawei gear, you can be damned sure they would put hardware-level backdoors in fighter jet control systems. So the cost-benefit analysis needs to take into account the degradation of your security posture that comes from having your greatest adversary supplying your equipment.
      - 8y ago
ambicapter 8y ago
> For tests in departure resistance, we truly had to trick the system. We would disengage all the self-protect mechanisms to put it into an out-of-control regime. And then we would allow the controller to wake up. It would recognize the situation it was in, and then it would get itself out of the situation. Absolutely fascinating. It will null all of the pitch rates, yaw rates, and roll rates to the extent that you can get it out the attitude that you’ve got it into. > When it comes to true departure resistance, we allowed the system to be 100 percent engaged, and we would [fly like] a very badly trained pilot. So everything that I have been taught not to do as a pilot since the age of—crikey, when did I first start flying? Maybe 13—I was being asked to do. I would love to read about the people who code these sort of controls systems.
- tlrobinson 8y ago
  > I would love to read about the people who code these sort of controls systems. I feel like Falcon 9's control systems (for example) would be a weekend hobby project for them.
- cushychicken 8y ago
  Those test conditions are absurd. I would never want to be in a position where firmware I wrote had to cold boot, detect position, and correct the plant at 10,000 feet/5Gs!
  - golergka 8y ago
    That really puts previous reports about bugs in F-35 software under different perspective. Of course they spent so much time to debug this, the requirements seem to basically be a fully autonomous and capable auto-pilot!
ec109685 8y ago
This is so unfortunate in the modern age, with the globe hyper connected, we still need these planes to go to possibly war against other civilized countries.
dpifke 8y ago
Chuck Yaeger still thinks the F-35 is a waste of money: https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/status/1111111449835909120 https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/status/111111144983590912...
RantyDave 8y ago
Ten years from now all the cellphones/radars/powerlines/whatever in the US are going to go dead and the Iranian government will start making demands. Your fancy airplane will not help one bit. The military are always fighting the last war :(
nabla9 8y ago
All pilots, retired or not, have tight limits to what they can say about new fighter early in the production. The end result is just PR piece. It's OK to enjoy military porn from glossy magazines, but HN should not be place for it. It has no information.
- degenerate 8y ago
  > It's OK to enjoy military porn from glossy magazines Even when I do this, it's for the kid in me. Show me big guns, fast jets, and give me some astounding numbers. This article has none of that!
  - rbanffy 8y ago
    The unit price is a quite astounding number ;-)
a3n 8y ago
That'll sell some planes.
zrav 8y ago
Meanwhile, the F-35's fully mission capable rate remains miserable. https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2019/03/f-35-far-from-ready-to-face-current-or-future-threats/ https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2019/03/f-35-far-from-rea...
bunderbunder 8y ago
This seems to me a bit like a kid begging their parents for a Neo Geo. The parents don't want to, of course, because it's horribly expensive, and not that useful, and their kid already has a Super Nintendo and a Turbografx 16, and doesn't actually need any more video game systems, and probably shouldn't even be playing so many video games in the first place. And the kid's mode of argument is to just keep reminding them, increasingly loudly, how awesome the Neo Geo is. Obviously, it's not a perfect analogy. One difference is that, in this case, everyone involved is a grown-up.
- mrweasel 8y ago
  That's my criticism of the F-35 as well. I don't know anything about fighter planes, but as a taxpayer it just seems way to expensive. Denmark is buying 27 F-35. That not nearly enough to do anything meaningful against an enemy like Russia. Buying a plane, like the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen, would have allowed the Danish Airforce to do basically the same operations, for much much less money. The Danish airforce isn't going to intercept Russian fighters. The missions are patrol and bombings for NATO. For a country like the US, sure, maybe the F-35 is something they need for the type of missions they fly. I just can see any country do anything with 27 planes. 27 is less planes than an aircraft carrier has.
  - et2o 8y ago
    F-35 is far more capable than the Gripen and only costs around twice as much. In a war with Russia, there is no amount of fighter planes that would keep Denmark safe. Russia has nuclear weapons. Denmark is just too small to do it without the rest of NATO. Buying the F-35 maybe helps coordination with other NATO countries?
  - koube 8y ago
    The cost for an F18 is about 70 million in 2017[0]. The cost for a F35 is about 85 million in 2020[1], probably more than that because future estimates are always low. That's ignoring how much more useful an F35 is. Once economies of scale kick in, it doesn't seem that much more expensive. There was supposed to be a more comprehensive review of the F35 vs older platforms, I'd love for someone more knowledgeable to chime in with an apples to apples comparison. [0]: https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-updated-f18-comparable-f35-advanced-super-hornet-2017-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-updated-f18-comparabl... [1]: https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/feb/07/donald-trump/trump-overstates-credit-700-million-savings-f-35s/ https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/feb/07/do...
ben7799 8y ago
These guys are test pilots and engineers who have thousands and thousands of hours of flight time and have actually flown the F-35. They can't possibly know what they're talking about, so this must just be a PR piece to cover up how horrible this aircraft is. It would be so much more credible if they just interviewed a non-pilot/non-engineer tech journalist who can tell us the truth. /sarcasm
- ungerik 8y ago
  True, but when have you heard a test pilot criticising his employer while still having an active career?
- ufmace 8y ago
  That's the trouble with this stuff. It's really tough to find someone who has both the skillset and experience to offer meaningful criticism, and who also has the political and economic freedom to be allowed to publish it widely, plus the credibility to be believed when they do.
impostir 8y ago
The f-35 is a great example of the practically pathological need for the US military to appear to ne the most technologically advanced military in the world. To be clear, it is, but finally China is making significant improvements. This cold-war hold-over means that instead of making a boring solution for an actual problem, the US made a trillion dollar jack of all trades. The f-35 is worse at each of the individual task than the specialized frames it is supposed to replace. I can't find the link, but I remember an article where f-16 s won every mock dogfight with f-35s.
- alexnewman 8y ago
  this article addresses that. i had the same opinion up until read the article
- BatFastard 8y ago
  I think horses beat the f-35 in jousts. Dogfights are WWII style of fighting. Modern fighting is done from 50 miles away with missiles, where the f-35 had significant advantages. I still think the plane is an example of design by committee.
mensetmanusman 8y ago
The iPhone would be more expensive then this aircraft if we only built 100. Just shows the value of scale. There should be an alternative military group that tries to leverage the existing supply chain to build robust defensive weapons. The spacex approach.
theNJR 8y ago
There’s plenty of reason to be critical of the F-35, but wow I loved reading this article. The two things that really stood out to me: 1. The F-35s top feature is situational awareness, essentially the way in which it processes and displays information to a pilot. Information is becoming a critical piece of war, and the advances made here will trickle down to us civilians in the years to come. Imagine what their HUDs are capable of? Add to that its ability to essentially fly itself, I have to imagine there are some features of autonomy that will be useful to us down the line. 2. Speaking of information, from a metatextual perspective, this article is also a great application of the human domain of warfare (1) this article itself being a weapon. The anti-F35 articles used to concern me from this perspective, but I wonder if even those were part of a larger information campaign (The enemy thinks the jet is bad, thus under estimating it). The first 2019 Redflag was just a few weeks ago, I wish I would have made the drive out to the desert to watch. 1)https://mailchi.mp/digitalfuture/dff4-316401 https://mailchi.mp/digitalfuture/dff4-316401 (scroll down to the animated gif of a machine gun)
theNJR 8y ago
The first interview mentions the Paris air show as a critical public demonstration. You can watch it here https://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI https://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI
- theNJR 8y ago
  Oh, and more impressive to me is the footage out of the Jedi Transition: https://youtu.be/d9HqVXGRJL0 https://youtu.be/d9HqVXGRJL0 For those who don’t know, about 3.5 hours from Los Angeles you can go see a ton of amazing jet fighters coming back or going to training exercises. There’s no way to know when you’ll see something, or what you’ll see, but the area is a scene of jet geeks. I keep meaning to go (Should have gone after the recent Redflag).
fetbaffe 8y ago
The thing with fighter aircraft is that you don't need the latest and the greatest at production day, what you need is a extendable platform for the future & and good training platform for the pilots. These platforms need to live for about 40 years with constant updates & training (F-16 introduced in 1978). F-35 is neither. Because of design decision of marrying three different military branches requirements (air force, navy, marines) with three different fighter roles (intercept, ground support, reconnaissance) a lot of the extendability is already gone. Cost of flying F-35 is one of the highest yet for a fighter aircraft (except maybe for F-22), this means that the pilots will not get sufficient training. Sure, with modern on the ground simulation you can get quite far, but you need the real deal, especially when training in formation & against real adversaries, like other countries. Which fighter aircraft will win the dogfight? The one in the air with a skilled pilot and not the empty one on the ground for maintenance. And of course, future development of highly advanced UAV:s & future radar & missile technology will make the case for expensive fighter aircraft even tougher.
blueboo 8y ago
A staggering, epic waste of talent, money, and time. Its advocates have harmed the US and its future prospects.
bparsons 8y ago
Amazing that employees of Lockheed say nice things about the F-35.
mcguire 8y ago
"You are telling the airplane to go up or down, speed up or slow down, go left or right. And the computers figure out what’s the best way to do that, and they’re going to move the flight controls to do it. And the interesting thing is, they may not do it the same way twice. So let’s say the airplane gets damaged, and one of the flight controls is no longer available. A legacy airplane would still try to use that surface because it doesn’t know any better. The F-35 digital flight control systems will say, “That surface isn’t doing much for me anymore, so I’m going to have to compensate by using some other things. Maybe I’ll have to move them a little bit more to get the same effect because the pilot still wants to turn left.”" Anyone have the details on how it does that? A while back, I read a report about an experimental aircraft that would attempt to determine the effectiveness of its control surfaces by moving all of them in a short period of time. The impression I got was that it would have a few seconds of rough flight, after which it would return to flying normally even if it had lost the use of a major control surface.
Albert500 8y ago
I’m Albert a hacker who has built a very good reputation and undeniably one of the best hackers you can come across.i have got access to hack into any account and also get to generate passwords for accounts like Facebook,Instagram,Twitter,gmail,yahoo mail,whats-app,we-chat,etc.Retrieving hacked social media accounts,clearing criminal records,increase credit scores,CC hack,hack bank accounts for transfers and credit card top ups,application hacking.We do custom software and web development in php, java, asp.net etc.hacking computer systems,Website hack,Catch hacker scammers,Phishing emails, that's to mention a few.You can contact me on. Email ... Theredhackergroup@gmail.com Whatsapp...+17867089974 or TEXT:571 318 9498 Best Online hacker with 100% guarantee and money back return policy for 48hours.

242 points by ChuckMcM 8y ago

This article was in the latest issue of Air & Space. There have been a number of articles that have ridiculed the F35 as a waste of time and money, but it is interesting to hear what the pilots think about the plane now that they are flying them.

Someone 8y ago
Are you sure this is what the pilots think? For me, the overall message is so flattering for the airplane that it sounds more as the result of lots of press training or at least as pilots being very careful in what they say because publicly critiquing this airplane is not good for one’s career prospects.
- ChuckMcM 8y ago
  Clearly, reading product reviews is a science :-) but I think there is some good information there. It's not all puff and PR :-). And my experience with the journalism at Air & Space has been positive, I have read both highly critical and very insightful articles from their journalists over the years. That experience gives me some trust in them which I could understand would not come on first exposure. I think it would also be useful for them to find 8 pilots who have both flown the new plane and are critical of it versus other aircraft designed for a similar role. That will have to wait I think until there are more flight hours on it in more situations. What I find most interesting about these types of systems are the differences between the AA-1 version (first article) and the one they consider 'first release.' In new systems there are lots of things that change during the initial testing and evaluation. This is true of software just as much as it is hardware, although hardware takes a lot more documentation.
- Macross8299 8y ago
  Seems entirely possible that the F-35 has grown into a solid piece of engineering and is great to fly from a pilot's perspective without that necessarily invalidating cost-related and overrun-related criticisms of the project.
  - rhizome 8y ago
    If it had grown into a solid piece of engineering we would be hearing about it from all angles and seeing it at every airshow. There is nothing the military would rather do than demonstrate that this zillion-dollar albatross is not only still alive, but it's also not developmentally disabled.
  - campers 8y ago
    One of the pilots comments seemed to indicate that: "In the two years since [the 388th’s] last Red Flag exercise, the airplane itself has had some pretty significant advancements. A couple of months before the 2017 Red Flag, the Air Force declared that the squadron was what we call “initial operational capable.” So the jet still had some operating limitations—altitude, airspeed, Gs, things like that. The software on the aircraft, though very capable, still had some limitations in terms of some of the systems and some of the weapons it could control. Fast forward two years, and we’re operating with what’s referred to as full warfighting capability software. It’s a more advanced F-35 than it was two years ago."
- philwelch 8y ago
  It's also the time of year that federal budgets are being drawn up. But it's entirely possible that the plane is fine. Keep in mind that a lot of the criticism of the F-35 is also PR from competing defense contractors.
ArtWomb 8y ago
Good read, thnx for posting ;)
AlexCoventry 8y ago
I'm not inclined to take this article at face value. The pilots could have been cherry picked and bribed, and Lockheed-Martin is a major donor to the Air & Space Museum, the parent organization of the publisher [0]. [0] https://airandspace.si.edu/theater-type/lockheed-martin-imax-theater https://airandspace.si.edu/theater-type/lockheed-martin-imax...
Theodores 8y ago
Planes aren't just for dropping bombs on people, the PR value of them is part of their power. You have to have the domestic population thinking they have the best planes. Sadly the F-35 is failing in this latter role. At a recent air show in the UK it was the elderly Ukrainian Sukhoi machines that got the gasps of oohs and aahs from the crowd. The crowd were not what you might call communist, they just know what planes put on the best show. There are no figures bandied around regarding the PR value of the F-35. Facts don't come into it when emotions are involved and the F-35 is fundamentally not loved or held in awe. Plenty of times the USAF have had planes that amaze everyone's inner 9 year old, the F-35 just doesn't cut it. Meanwhile, in Russia, lots of people take pride in their war planes and believe them to be the best in the world. It could be argued with fact things that their planes are rubbish but facts have nothing to do with belief. Ultimately it comes down to the air show, not what the pilots say, whether they are paid shills or not. And nope, there is no use for a 'Cobra manoeuvre' but the crowds lap it up, think their pilots are aces and let their kids join the armed forces on that basis.
- jazzyjackson 8y ago
  Interesting point about talent acquisition... if you want the best pilots you have to put on a good show for them when they're kids xD
- Bendingo 8y ago
  > could be argued with fact things that their planes are rubbish This is the first time I've heard that Russian war planes are rubbish. Please share some of these fact things.
  - Macross8299 8y ago
    https://migflug.com/jetflights/the-combat-statistics-for-all-the-aircraft-currently-in-use/ https://migflug.com/jetflights/the-combat-statistics-for-all... Not a definitive combat record of all modern jets by any means and one could argue that many of the losses of MiGs from export client states were due to poor training, poor maintenance, outdated/inferior export models or having to fight Israelis constantly ;) But then again, when Russian and Israeli pilots went head to head [1] the Russian fighter planes did not really hold their own there either. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20
Phrodo_00 8y ago
Given that one of the main motivations for the plane's existence is support roles, I'm more interested in hearing from the people getting supported by the aircraft.
SteveCoast 8y ago
I'm sure it's all completely unbiased.

Jerry2 8y ago

Many of those pilots are literally paid to love it.

kreitje 8y ago

They have their demo team debut this weekend in FL. https://airandspaceshow.com/f-35-demo/ https://airandspaceshow.com/f-35-demo/

SteveNuts 8y ago
I saw the F-35 takeoff and a couple of maneuvers at an airshow in 2017, do you know what the difference between that demonstration and the one in FL will be?
- alanbernstein 8y ago
  The article says "North American debut".
  - SteveNuts 8y ago
    Right, but it's already flown at at least one North American airshow (since I've seen it fly), so this must be different in some way than the ones that have already been flying. So I'm curious what will be different.
    - Sebguer 8y ago
      Difference between doing fly-by and basic maneuvers, and a full-on all-performance show by effectively a stunt team, as best I can tell. This news article supports that: https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2018/12/28/f-35-lightning-ii-demo-team-make-north-american-debut-melbourne-air-space-show/2434258002/ https://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2018/12/28/f-35-ligh...
      - SteveNuts 8y ago
        Awesome! I saw the F-35 in Duluth MN and it was the most impressive takeoff I've ever seen, so I'd be really excited to see it again now. Thanks for the info.

carnagii 8y ago

> to penetrate sophisticated enemy air defenses and find and disable threats—requires what the fifth-generation jet offers: stealth and a stunning array of passive and active sensors > U.S. forces first took these capabilities into combat last September, when Marine F-35Bs struck the Taliban in Afghanistan against disorganized rebel forces less well armed than the average suburban American, with no air force and no surface to air missiles. and the U.S. still can't win that war.

umvi 8y ago
That's because it's like being a doctor trying to eradicate cancer that is spread throughout the patient's body in minute amounts. You can do a precision strike against one small area, but how do you eradicate all the cancer without killing healthy cells (also in this analogy killing any healthy cells makes you a murderer). The only way to win is to convince the patient's immune system (the host country's civilians) to kill its own cancer.
remarkEon 8y ago
Is the F-35 meant to be a true replacement for the A-10?
- kjs3 8y ago
  Regrettably, that's exactly one of the use cases.
- hermitdev 8y ago
  I think that was the hope, but reality has set in and the lifetime of the A-10 has been extended. I mean, why not? There is no current or planned plane as capable or as survivable as the A-10. F-35? Single engine, inline. Take that out and instant eject. Warthog was designed to lose an engine, even let it burn off and make it home. Control surfaces have mechanical backups. Not to mention the titanium tub protecting the pilot. And the cannon? Oh, the cannon. Can an F-35 take out a T-72 or T-80 on cannons alone? Doubtful. A-10 is one of my favorite warplanes. Design was basically: here's this cannon, build a plane around it.

thisistrashair 8y ago

The Smithsonian Institution is administered by the US federal government. The grain of salt you should take with this is mountain-sized. Even if it weren't direct propaganda (which it likely is), these pilots would be ill-advised to say anything bad about the F-35 in a government-run publication.

gandhium 8y ago
Israel is not complaining AFAIK and their pilots are pretty much experienced since they're flying real missions right now.

dmoy 8y ago

It should probably be highlighted at the top of the article that three of those pilots are employees of lockmart.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
nabla9 8y ago
And none of the pilots are in the position to give fair assessment. You are not allowed to give fair assessment for a fighter even you are retired.

etaioinshrdlu 8y ago

We should keep our minds open to the possibility that this isn't the worst plane ever made. I think the real crime is the ridiculous cost, and putting all our eggs in the F35 basket.

icanhackit 8y ago

The most interesting (fun?) one to read for me was Squadron Leader Andy Edgell, Royal Air Force. > “Yeah, Test, you didn’t put the right rudder in.” I said, “Yeah, I know. I couldn’t lift my leg up.” > [...] > Legalized hooliganism! All in the pursuit of data and good test points, of course. > [...] > I did, for a moment, stare through the windows of the bridge. And you think to yourself, “This is a view that no one really gets.”

hyeonwho4 8y ago

This seems like a PR piece. Too positive, a lot of discussions of pilot's smiles. Given the very high program costs and the need by Lockheed Martin to convince US allies to buy the plane despite the high price tag, I think HN readers would be well served by skepticism. To put it another way, it the F35 was really as good as the F22, as the article seems to claim, then it would not be available for export.

canada_dry 8y ago
> This seems like a PR piece No kidding... it comes across more like a late night Ronco ad rather than real opinions.
threeseed 8y ago
The word smile was mentioned once in the article. And the F35 was always going to be shared with allies for cost and geopolitical reasons so not sure how that can be considered a negative. The US structured the F35 program to specifically avoid the F22 failures.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Sharing with allies for cost and geopolitical reasons is good for the contractors designing and building th plane. You spread around the tax dollars spent on jobs between many different US states and counties, and voila, immunity from politicians. Kick that up to a nation scale, and you really have something good going. Taking advantage of people’s interest in only their immediate future and their immediate surroundings, and people’s willingness to ignore long term and worldwide costs is a path to success and a downside of “democracy”.
  - et2o 8y ago
    A strategy to advance the geopolitical stability of America and its Allies is about the opposite of taking a short-term view.
    - 8y ago

autokad 8y ago

its hard to take the opinions of the pilots that fly them with complete confidence. they have a vested interest, their career is over if the f35 is over. On the low end, the f35 costs about as much as 5 f16s, which also have twice the range over an f35. the f35 is the bf109 of the modern era. military brass keeps wanting all purpose aircraft, and 100 years of military aircraft experience has shown that never works.

threeseed 8y ago
(a) Pilots rarely specialise in just one aircraft. (b) F35 at this point in its lifecycle is always going to be much more expensive more than a last generation model.
Godel_unicode 8y ago
> ...wanting all purpose aircraft, and 100 years of military aircraft experience has shown that never works. Other than the p51, the f18, the f15...
crimsonalucard 8y ago
Pilots can switch planes like programmers can switch programming languages so "protecting career" is unlikely. "Obeying my boss" is what is most likely happening here. I get the sense that they are literally instructed not to give bad PR about the plane. Or even worse, this entire article is scripted.
- rbanffy 8y ago
  > Pilots can switch planes like programmers can switch programming languages so "protecting career" is unlikely. Except that military pilots have one single possible employer.
  - crimsonalucard 8y ago
    What military pilots can't change to civilian pilots when they leave the military?

vertline3 8y ago

Plane seems like a really good fit for it's role. Would be pretty cool to meet the engineers that designed it.

adictator 8y ago

How does the F-35 stack up against the Rafale?

victor106 8y ago

$406 billion!!! Just imagine how many humans you can bring out of poverty with that kind of money? I understand the world we live in but if you spend one tenth the amount they spent on this educating/helping the very people this plane would be eventually targeted at, I think it would cause more of an impact. I was reading a book by Steven Pinker and in it he lays out the case for how modern society has essentially made war illegal. And in Sapiens the author (Yuval Harari) makes the case that modern society is no longer based on static wealth that can be conquered and consumed like Gold, Silver etc., Its made of human skill and mind that create wealth that does not exist. So say China occupies the US it sure can take all the wealth that is static but it cannot force people to use their minds to create a Google or an Apple or FB(i know..i know..).. If you believe the above you have to ask yourself:- "So then what is the benefit of spending so much money?"

solipsism 8y ago
Your analysis doesn't consider defense. Actors on the international stage aren't always rational, so you need to consider defending yourself against others, however irrational. I'm not saying that tips the argument one way or another. But you can't not talk about it.
astazangasta 8y ago
The idea that this has anything to do with fighting a war is absurd. The wars are also not about any specific goals. Does the F-35 have any relevance in a fight against the Taliban? I'd be surprised if the Taliban had even one plane, or heck even a radar. The reason this plane was built was: to spend so much money. It was to support a high-tech industry that needs a guaranteed buyer to develop expensive sensors, joysticks, and so on. You might ask yourself: but why this use? Surely all of that engineering talent can be put to good use building more useful, non-destructive technologies? The answer, I think, is only a historical accident: after World War II the military became a money faucet to industry, and that tap proved difficult to control or turn off. The Department of Defense has been resisting an audit for the last 30 years; it is a paragon of profligacy. It pumps half a trillion dollars into the economy every year, and for the most part Americans are oblivious or approving. There is no great public outcry to reduce the military budget; but there are a great number of industries eager to keep the money flowing. Thus, we get this kind of pointless waste of everyone's time.

antiviral 8y ago

Let's say all the claims in this article are correct. What happens when one gets shot down (as it inevitably will), and the enemy reverse-engineers the stealth tech to either copy or find weaknesses in its capabilities? If they can reverse-engineer faster than we can improve our stealth tech, which seems reasonable, whatever claimed advantages this plane has will be temporary. Or is there another way of looking at this?

CapricornNoble 8y ago
They don't even need to shoot it down. The Chinese already stole the designs, evaluated them, and have been working on their own less-risky copy for years. They have a proven ability to copy and adapt weapon systems at a faster rate than anyone gives them credit for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_FC-31 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_FC-31 The J-31 is basically a twin-engine F-35, minus the sensor fusion capabilities. The Chinese are still very poor at making fighter jet engines, so they went with 2 smaller engines probably for redundancy and because they can't build one gigantic reliable engine anyway. The jet is probably still underpowered.
- crimsonalucard 8y ago
  Do you think it will save costs if the united states moved F-35 manufacturing to China? Quality will be lower but Apple was able to do it with the iPhone without compromising quality.
  - CapricornNoble 8y ago
    Sure it would "save costs".....until we get in a shooting war with China and they stop sending us spare parts. Or given concerns about backdoors in Huawei gear, you can be damned sure they would put hardware-level backdoors in fighter jet control systems. So the cost-benefit analysis needs to take into account the degradation of your security posture that comes from having your greatest adversary supplying your equipment.
    - 8y ago

ambicapter 8y ago

> For tests in departure resistance, we truly had to trick the system. We would disengage all the self-protect mechanisms to put it into an out-of-control regime. And then we would allow the controller to wake up. It would recognize the situation it was in, and then it would get itself out of the situation. Absolutely fascinating. It will null all of the pitch rates, yaw rates, and roll rates to the extent that you can get it out the attitude that you’ve got it into. > When it comes to true departure resistance, we allowed the system to be 100 percent engaged, and we would [fly like] a very badly trained pilot. So everything that I have been taught not to do as a pilot since the age of—crikey, when did I first start flying? Maybe 13—I was being asked to do. I would love to read about the people who code these sort of controls systems.

tlrobinson 8y ago
> I would love to read about the people who code these sort of controls systems. I feel like Falcon 9's control systems (for example) would be a weekend hobby project for them.
cushychicken 8y ago
Those test conditions are absurd. I would never want to be in a position where firmware I wrote had to cold boot, detect position, and correct the plant at 10,000 feet/5Gs!
- golergka 8y ago
  That really puts previous reports about bugs in F-35 software under different perspective. Of course they spent so much time to debug this, the requirements seem to basically be a fully autonomous and capable auto-pilot!

ec109685 8y ago

This is so unfortunate in the modern age, with the globe hyper connected, we still need these planes to go to possibly war against other civilized countries.

dpifke 8y ago

Chuck Yaeger still thinks the F-35 is a waste of money: https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/status/1111111449835909120 https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/status/111111144983590912...

RantyDave 8y ago

Ten years from now all the cellphones/radars/powerlines/whatever in the US are going to go dead and the Iranian government will start making demands. Your fancy airplane will not help one bit. The military are always fighting the last war :(

nabla9 8y ago

All pilots, retired or not, have tight limits to what they can say about new fighter early in the production. The end result is just PR piece. It's OK to enjoy military porn from glossy magazines, but HN should not be place for it. It has no information.

degenerate 8y ago
> It's OK to enjoy military porn from glossy magazines Even when I do this, it's for the kid in me. Show me big guns, fast jets, and give me some astounding numbers. This article has none of that!
- rbanffy 8y ago
  The unit price is a quite astounding number ;-)

a3n 8y ago

That'll sell some planes.

zrav 8y ago

Meanwhile, the F-35's fully mission capable rate remains miserable. https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2019/03/f-35-far-from-ready-to-face-current-or-future-threats/ https://www.pogo.org/investigation/2019/03/f-35-far-from-rea...

bunderbunder 8y ago

This seems to me a bit like a kid begging their parents for a Neo Geo. The parents don't want to, of course, because it's horribly expensive, and not that useful, and their kid already has a Super Nintendo and a Turbografx 16, and doesn't actually need any more video game systems, and probably shouldn't even be playing so many video games in the first place. And the kid's mode of argument is to just keep reminding them, increasingly loudly, how awesome the Neo Geo is. Obviously, it's not a perfect analogy. One difference is that, in this case, everyone involved is a grown-up.

mrweasel 8y ago
That's my criticism of the F-35 as well. I don't know anything about fighter planes, but as a taxpayer it just seems way to expensive. Denmark is buying 27 F-35. That not nearly enough to do anything meaningful against an enemy like Russia. Buying a plane, like the SAAB JAS 39 Gripen, would have allowed the Danish Airforce to do basically the same operations, for much much less money. The Danish airforce isn't going to intercept Russian fighters. The missions are patrol and bombings for NATO. For a country like the US, sure, maybe the F-35 is something they need for the type of missions they fly. I just can see any country do anything with 27 planes. 27 is less planes than an aircraft carrier has.
- et2o 8y ago
  F-35 is far more capable than the Gripen and only costs around twice as much. In a war with Russia, there is no amount of fighter planes that would keep Denmark safe. Russia has nuclear weapons. Denmark is just too small to do it without the rest of NATO. Buying the F-35 maybe helps coordination with other NATO countries?
- koube 8y ago
  The cost for an F18 is about 70 million in 2017[0]. The cost for a F35 is about 85 million in 2020[1], probably more than that because future estimates are always low. That's ignoring how much more useful an F35 is. Once economies of scale kick in, it doesn't seem that much more expensive. There was supposed to be a more comprehensive review of the F35 vs older platforms, I'd love for someone more knowledgeable to chime in with an apples to apples comparison. [0]: https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-updated-f18-comparable-f35-advanced-super-hornet-2017-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-updated-f18-comparabl... [1]: https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/feb/07/donald-trump/trump-overstates-credit-700-million-savings-f-35s/ https://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/feb/07/do...

ben7799 8y ago

These guys are test pilots and engineers who have thousands and thousands of hours of flight time and have actually flown the F-35. They can't possibly know what they're talking about, so this must just be a PR piece to cover up how horrible this aircraft is. It would be so much more credible if they just interviewed a non-pilot/non-engineer tech journalist who can tell us the truth. /sarcasm

ungerik 8y ago
True, but when have you heard a test pilot criticising his employer while still having an active career?
ufmace 8y ago
That's the trouble with this stuff. It's really tough to find someone who has both the skillset and experience to offer meaningful criticism, and who also has the political and economic freedom to be allowed to publish it widely, plus the credibility to be believed when they do.

impostir 8y ago

The f-35 is a great example of the practically pathological need for the US military to appear to ne the most technologically advanced military in the world. To be clear, it is, but finally China is making significant improvements. This cold-war hold-over means that instead of making a boring solution for an actual problem, the US made a trillion dollar jack of all trades. The f-35 is worse at each of the individual task than the specialized frames it is supposed to replace. I can't find the link, but I remember an article where f-16 s won every mock dogfight with f-35s.

alexnewman 8y ago
this article addresses that. i had the same opinion up until read the article
BatFastard 8y ago
I think horses beat the f-35 in jousts. Dogfights are WWII style of fighting. Modern fighting is done from 50 miles away with missiles, where the f-35 had significant advantages. I still think the plane is an example of design by committee.

mensetmanusman 8y ago

The iPhone would be more expensive then this aircraft if we only built 100. Just shows the value of scale. There should be an alternative military group that tries to leverage the existing supply chain to build robust defensive weapons. The spacex approach.

theNJR 8y ago

There’s plenty of reason to be critical of the F-35, but wow I loved reading this article. The two things that really stood out to me: 1. The F-35s top feature is situational awareness, essentially the way in which it processes and displays information to a pilot. Information is becoming a critical piece of war, and the advances made here will trickle down to us civilians in the years to come. Imagine what their HUDs are capable of? Add to that its ability to essentially fly itself, I have to imagine there are some features of autonomy that will be useful to us down the line. 2. Speaking of information, from a metatextual perspective, this article is also a great application of the human domain of warfare (1) this article itself being a weapon. The anti-F35 articles used to concern me from this perspective, but I wonder if even those were part of a larger information campaign (The enemy thinks the jet is bad, thus under estimating it). The first 2019 Redflag was just a few weeks ago, I wish I would have made the drive out to the desert to watch. 1)https://mailchi.mp/digitalfuture/dff4-316401 https://mailchi.mp/digitalfuture/dff4-316401 (scroll down to the animated gif of a machine gun)

theNJR 8y ago

The first interview mentions the Paris air show as a critical public demonstration. You can watch it here https://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI https://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI

theNJR 8y ago
Oh, and more impressive to me is the footage out of the Jedi Transition: https://youtu.be/d9HqVXGRJL0 https://youtu.be/d9HqVXGRJL0 For those who don’t know, about 3.5 hours from Los Angeles you can go see a ton of amazing jet fighters coming back or going to training exercises. There’s no way to know when you’ll see something, or what you’ll see, but the area is a scene of jet geeks. I keep meaning to go (Should have gone after the recent Redflag).

fetbaffe 8y ago

The thing with fighter aircraft is that you don't need the latest and the greatest at production day, what you need is a extendable platform for the future & and good training platform for the pilots. These platforms need to live for about 40 years with constant updates & training (F-16 introduced in 1978). F-35 is neither. Because of design decision of marrying three different military branches requirements (air force, navy, marines) with three different fighter roles (intercept, ground support, reconnaissance) a lot of the extendability is already gone. Cost of flying F-35 is one of the highest yet for a fighter aircraft (except maybe for F-22), this means that the pilots will not get sufficient training. Sure, with modern on the ground simulation you can get quite far, but you need the real deal, especially when training in formation & against real adversaries, like other countries. Which fighter aircraft will win the dogfight? The one in the air with a skilled pilot and not the empty one on the ground for maintenance. And of course, future development of highly advanced UAV:s & future radar & missile technology will make the case for expensive fighter aircraft even tougher.

blueboo 8y ago

A staggering, epic waste of talent, money, and time. Its advocates have harmed the US and its future prospects.

bparsons 8y ago

Amazing that employees of Lockheed say nice things about the F-35.

mcguire 8y ago

"You are telling the airplane to go up or down, speed up or slow down, go left or right. And the computers figure out what’s the best way to do that, and they’re going to move the flight controls to do it. And the interesting thing is, they may not do it the same way twice. So let’s say the airplane gets damaged, and one of the flight controls is no longer available. A legacy airplane would still try to use that surface because it doesn’t know any better. The F-35 digital flight control systems will say, “That surface isn’t doing much for me anymore, so I’m going to have to compensate by using some other things. Maybe I’ll have to move them a little bit more to get the same effect because the pilot still wants to turn left.”" Anyone have the details on how it does that? A while back, I read a report about an experimental aircraft that would attempt to determine the effectiveness of its control surfaces by moving all of them in a short period of time. The impression I got was that it would have a few seconds of rough flight, after which it would return to flying normally even if it had lost the use of a major control surface.

Albert500 8y ago

I’m Albert a hacker who has built a very good reputation and undeniably one of the best hackers you can come across.i have got access to hack into any account and also get to generate passwords for accounts like Facebook,Instagram,Twitter,gmail,yahoo mail,whats-app,we-chat,etc.Retrieving hacked social media accounts,clearing criminal records,increase credit scores,CC hack,hack bank accounts for transfers and credit card top ups,application hacking.We do custom software and web development in php, java, asp.net etc.hacking computer systems,Website hack,Catch hacker scammers,Phishing emails, that's to mention a few.You can contact me on. Email ... Theredhackergroup@gmail.com Whatsapp...+17867089974 or TEXT:571 318 9498 Best Online hacker with 100% guarantee and money back return policy for 48hours.