F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[BON PLAN]

Accidents[edit]

• On 6 December 2007, a French Air Force twin-seat Rafale crashed during a training flight. The pilot, who suffered from spatial disorientation, was killed in the accident.[263]
• On 24 September 2009, after unarmed test flights, two French Navy Rafales returning to the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, collided in mid-air about 30 kilometres (19 mi) from the town of Perpignan in southwest France. One test pilot, identified as François Duflot, was killed in the accident, while the other was rescued.[264]
• On 28 November 2010, a Rafale from the carrier Charles de Gaulle crashed in the Arabian Sea. This aircraft was supporting Allied operations in Afghanistan. The pilot ejected safely and was recovered by a rescue helicopter from the carrier. Later reports said the engine stopped after being starved of fuel due to confusion by the pilot in switching fuel tanks.[265]
• On 2 July 2012, during a joint exercise, a Rafale from the carrier Charles de Gaulle plunged into the Mediterranean Sea. The pilot ejected safely and was recovered by an American search and rescue helicopter from the carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower.[266]

So wait as per Dassault 180 + Rafales have logged 235,000 flight hours and there have been 5 crashes

https://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/group/about-us/civil-and-military-aircraft/

So far 300 F-35s have been delivered and over 140,000 hours logged as of mid 2018 and they just had their 1st crash.

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/business/aviation/article213019144.html

Let's not compare attrition rates, the Rafale has much worse track record with 2 pilots killed. It also seems more pilots crash the Rafale in confusion, may be it's not a easy aircraft to fly.

OK but the situations are differents :

Rafale first accident (no failure : a pilot disorientation during a rainy night) occured 5 years after being "combat proven" and fully FOC since years.
No Rafale lost on technical issue.

F35 accident came the same week it became "combat proven" (but what did it destroy?) and it is even not FOC.
We can say at 95% it is a failure (pilot is alive).

And in april another F35 was very near a crash. Add also the plane destroyed by an engine fire.

The real life of F35 only start. And it start badly.

 

[Immanuel]

OK but the situations are differents :

Rafale first accident (no failure : a pilot disorientation during a rainy night) occured 5 years after being "combat proven" and fully FOC since years.
No Rafale lost on technical issue.

F35 accident came the same week it became "combat proven" (but what did it destroy?) and it is even not FOC.
We can say at 95% it is a failure (pilot is alive).

And in april another F35 was very near a crash. Add also the plane destroyed by an engine fire.

The real life of F35 only start. And it start badly.

You can blame the 5 crashes on pilots but if very skilled pilots seem to crash an supposed sophisticated so called 5th gen aircraft because of confusion, disorientation then as far as I am concerned the aircraft probably has below average ergonomics, confusing layouts and is probably difficult to fly which in itself is a design fault.

I wonder why the last Rafale plunged into the sea, no crash reason given for that, may be the Naval version just wanted to swim thinking it was too 5th gen to stay on hard surface? Wonder why such a sophisticated aircraft that can see 360 degrees and is supposedly 'God's gift to aviation' ended up colliding with another sibling. That too flown by Test pilots, to me it appears the Rafale while demonstrating great flying qualities, is probably a very demanding aircraft to fly with a confusing layout.

F-35 as per Israeli's have been busy in missions already earlier this year. Eitherway, let's not go into crash records, they prove little. The F-35 is a new aircraft and accidents happen, the F-16 started out with a crash history but it's still one of the safest aircraft when one takes into account hours flown over the worldwide fleet size.

 

[BON PLAN]

I wonder why the last Rafale plunged into the sea, no crash reason given for that, may be the Naval version just wanted to swim thinking it was too 5th gen to stay on hard surface? Wonder why such a sophisticated aircraft that can see 360 degrees and is supposedly 'God's gift to aviation' ended up colliding with another sibling. That too flown by Test pilots, to me it appears the Rafale while demonstrating great flying qualities, is probably a very demanding aircraft to fly with a confusing layout.

This last crash (2012... 6 years from now !) occured during a hard dog fight with a F18 or SH18 : the Rafale was too close and very near the sea level, and the engines blasts of the F18 disturbed the anemometric probes of the rafale. The plane became foul a small moment, but the pilot dicided to eject because too low.

The 2 destroyed by mid air collision was piloted by test pilots. Probably too confident in their skill. And the planes was full of ordnances, and not dry as I've read.

Let's see what happen with F35C (the naval variant, same as rafale M) after 8 or 9 years of FOC....

 

[BON PLAN]

Not FOC and already an upgrade plan....

https://www.defensenews.com/air/201...-approval-from-top-pentagon-acquisition-exec/

 

[StealthFlanker]

Why do you want me to answer to posts that wasen't sent to me ?

No, the issue is you always use internet tabloid as your source and those sources are often badly wrong. So it doesn't support your claim of being an Dassault engineer, because an engineer should know better.

You just are a shorlarly monkey that use military manual. :blah::blah::blah:
The PESA/AESA episod illustrate it so well.

Illustrate what? that you don't understand the internal different between AESA and PESA?

OK but the situations are differents :

Rafale first accident (no failure : a pilot disorientation during a rainy night) occured 5 years after being "combat proven" and fully FOC since years.
No Rafale lost on technical issue.

F35 accident came the same week it became "combat proven" (but what did it destroy?) and it is even not FOC.
We can say at 95% it is a failure (pilot is alive).
The real life of F35 only start. And it start badly.

Outrageous claims without evidence as usual

 

[BON PLAN]

Outrageous claims without evidence as usual

Xhat is your problem Bro ?
For Rafale is all clear : all is in the public domain.
For F35, as the pilot is alive, what other explanation that a technical (or software) failure ? Don't you find strange that there is no news ? Something to hide by LM & the US lobby?

 

[BON PLAN]

Illustrate what? that you don't understand the internal different between AESA and PESA?

Only antenna (with its TOP emitter in the PESA case, and integrated T/R in the AESA case).
The power unit, and calculator may be the same if studied for that from the beginning.
It's so easy that it's suspicious you don't understand.

 

[Immanuel]

This last crash (2012... 6 years from now !) occured during a hard dog fight with a F18 or SH18 : the Rafale was too close and very near the sea level, and the engines blasts of the F18 disturbed the anemometric probes of the rafale. The plane became foul a small moment, but the pilot dicided to eject because too low.

The 2 destroyed by mid air collision was piloted by test pilots. Probably too confident in their skill. And the planes was full of ordnances, and not dry as I've read.

Let's see what happen with F35C (the naval variant, same as rafale M) after 8 or 9 years of FOC....

So you mean to say, the SH didn't even need a gun or WVR missile to kill the Rafale in a dogfight? The thrust of the SH was apparently more than enough for the Rafale & the pilot to go apeshit

 

[Immanuel]

This last crash (2012... 6 years from now !) occured during a hard dog fight with a F18 or SH18 : the Rafale was too close and very near the sea level, and the engines blasts of the F18 disturbed the anemometric probes of the rafale. The plane became foul a small moment, but the pilot dicided to eject because too low.

The 2 destroyed by mid air collision was piloted by test pilots. Probably too confident in their skill. And the planes was full of ordnances, and not dry as I've read.

Let's see what happen with F35C (the naval variant, same as rafale M) after 8 or 9 years of FOC....

So you mean to say, the SH didn't even need a gun or WVR missile to kill the Rafale in a dogfight? The thrust of the SH was apparently more than enough for the Rafale & the pilot to go apeshit

While I can understand test pilots being too confident, I also believe they are the best pilots in any damn AF. So to belittle them is silly, perhaps the aircraft behaves a lot different than at air shows flying clean.

 

[BON PLAN]

So you mean to say, the SH didn't even need a gun or WVR missile to kill the Rafale in a dogfight? The thrust of the SH was apparently more than enough for the Rafale & the pilot to go apeshit

Absolutely ! but Rafale won the dogfight, because it was behind the F18.

 

[BON PLAN]

So to belittle them is silly, perhaps the aircraft behaves a lot different than at air shows flying clean.

If a plane can be tuned to perfectly fly in aero show, why using other settings for other flights?

How many Gripen crashed in the hands of test pilots ?

 

[Immanuel]

If a plane can be tuned to perfectly fly in aero show, why using other settings for other flights?

How many Gripen crashed in the hands of test pilots ?

Because basic physics teaches us that when you add stores or additional weight, an object has different behavior.

No idea how many Gripens crashed in the hands of test pilots, feel free to tell me.

 

[Immanuel]

Absolutely ! but Rafale won the dogfight, because it was behind the F18.

so you tell me it was a hard dogfight and that the Rafale won but the pilot was way below safe low flight levels and then had to bail ditching the bird. From this it appears this 'victory' was only because the French pilot in all certainty broke the rules of engagement of the exercise and thus crashed, dude forgot it was an exercise.

 

[asianobserve]

Marines F-35B connects with HIMARS rocket to fire shot for first time

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ne...-35-jet-to-himars-rocket-shot-for-first-time/

 

[StealthFlanker]

Xhat is your problem Bro ?
For Rafale is all clear : all is in the public domain.
For F35, as the pilot is alive, what other explanation that a technical (or software) failure ? Don't you find strange that there is no news ? Something to hide by LM & the US lobby?

Lol what?, so because the pilots is alive it couldn't be his fault? Have you never meet a driver who survived car accidents? Do you seriously believe that the driver have no fault if he survived??
And there is no evidence that Dassault didn't try to hide anything while LM did either.

Only antenna (with its TOP emitter in the PESA case, and integrated T/R in the AESA case).
The power unit, and calculator may be the same if studied for that from the beginning.
It's so easy that it's suspicious you don't understand.

Again, no not just the antenna.
TwT, HPA, LNA, Duplexer aren't the same between AESA and PESA

 

[BON PLAN]

this 'victory' was only because the French pilot in all certainty broke the rules of engagement of the exercise and thus crashed

It was the main cause.
A lot of F16 and F18 were losts in the same situation.

 

[Immanuel]

It was the main cause.
A lot of F16 and F18 were losts in the same situation.

Can't really call it a victory, when you had to bail out due to breaking of exercise ROE.

 

[asianobserve]

How many times do I have to say this but in the real World dogfight is now passe? The only reason major NATO air forces still do dissimilar training is to have an insurance policy just in case by sheer unluckiness their pilots end up in the sights of an enemy fighter. But in WVR it's not agility that will determine the winner but the ability to lock and fire LOAL HOBS IR missile. After all it's almost impossible for human pilots to outmaneuver these modern missiles.

 

[asianobserve]

Lockheed's F-35 Wins Pentagon Approval for Full Combat Testing

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ins-pentagon-approval-for-full-combat-testing

 

[BON PLAN]

Can't really call it a victory, when you had to bail out due to breaking of exercise ROE.

Who said it's a victory? no, it's a mistake.