3 ms·
The "kill switch" story is probably false: https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/10/f-35-kill-switch-myth/ https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/10/f-35-kill-switch-m
by invalidname 2y ago
The "kill switch" story is probably false: https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/10/f-35-kill-switch-myth/ https://theaviationist.com/2025/03/10/f-35-kill-switch-myth/
If it existed there it would mean remote connection in some way. These planes aren't connected to the internet. For this to work you would need hardware.
- xethos 2y agoThe kill switch seems to stem from the lack of updates to radar-jamming for the F-16 [0]. Lack of software support also, to me, suggests dropping hardware support (and the spare parts required) sooner rather than later. Even if it remains "only software", itself a hell of a phrase for this site, that software needs updates as Russia updates it's radar frequencies. The plane is potentially a hell of a lot less useful without the jamming capabilities they were sold with [0] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2025/03/07/france-to-the-rescue-french-made-mirage-2000-jets-could-become-ukraines-most-important-aerial-radar-jammers/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2025/03/07/france-to-t...
- invalidname 2y agoYes. That is probably true and probably just as bad. Because F35 parts are manufactured all over the world a single country could theoretically ground your planes if they don't like your policies.
- bigfatkitten 2y agoNot a new thing. In the 1980s, Australia cracked NCTR on the AN/APG-65 radar on the classic Hornet so that they could extend it to identify hostile aircraft in the region. They did this because Uncle Sam refused to assist. https://www.smh.com.au/national/beazley-tells-of-us-code-crack-20070920-zzh.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/beazley-tells-of-us-code-cra...