How many is this now? 3?

How many is this now? 3?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Our of what, like 700? Don't look up Harrier crash rates if you think 3 out of 700 is bad.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      the PT Cruiser is a good car because the Ford Pinto is worse

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        In that case you can only count the f35B's

        See

        This marks the seventh crash of F-35s around the world, and the ninth hull loss (seven crashes, two mishaps that didn't result in crashes). In April of this year the program surpassed 500,000 flight hours. No other aircraft in history has flown that many hours, with that few losses. The F-16, considered one of the better fighters ever built, lost 9 aircraft in less than 40,000 flight hours. The F-15 lost 15 aircraft by the first 136,000 flight hours.

        As for any other reports about it, there are lots of reports from people that don't have a clue how the F-35 changes aerial warfare talking about how bad it is.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. The PT cruiser is a significantly better car than the Ford pinto. Especially in performance, efficiency and safety

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Looks cooler too. It has a nice, autistic, charm.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Unequivocally yes. I don't see how that is some kind of own.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        considering how things are relative that statement is technically true; the best kind.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          fuck off reddit

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If the winner of a race between a PT and a pinto got to keep all the streets, then yes, the PT is a good car. All it has to do is shit all over pintos. This is its sole function. At this, it excels.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Ford Pinto
        More like Moskvitch-408, but otherwise, da, comrade.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      In that case you can only count the f35B's

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Grippen bros, we won.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This marks the seventh crash of F-35s around the world, and the ninth hull loss (seven crashes, two mishaps that didn't result in crashes). In April of this year the program surpassed 500,000 flight hours. No other aircraft in history has flown that many hours, with that few losses. The F-16, considered one of the better fighters ever built, lost 9 aircraft in less than 40,000 flight hours. The F-15 lost 15 aircraft by the first 136,000 flight hours.

    As for any other reports about it, there are lots of reports from people that don't have a clue how the F-35 changes aerial warfare talking about how bad it is.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Protip, you'll see more and more crashes and failures of military hardware the more advanced it gets. The sheer increasing complexity of the computers, hardware & electrical systems of newer aircraft means more and more failure points. It's why in most cases I don't blame the country a new or prototype plane crashes in because that's just the nature of the future.

      God help us all if we ever start getting actual AI and shit to fly or at least assist in piloting fighter aircraft and not simple autopilots.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      nooo nooo i'm supposed to be demoralized and write my congressman to defund the military and give more money to tyrone stop making sense REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      To be absolutely fair the early F-16 wasn't great to begin with, its reputation is more off the back of more advanced variants. The "No other aircraft in history has flown that many hours, with that few losses" claim is also BS as far as I'm aware. Just to give an example, the C-17:
      https://www.safety.af.mil/Portals/71/documents/Aviation/Aircraft%20Statistics/C-17.pdf
      In the US Air Force served 521,948 hours with only 6 Class A mishaps. I don't know about if the RAF had any mishaps during that period but they were the only other operator as far as I'm aware during that period.
      That being said, the mishap rate of the F-35 is pretty low regardless, one can look at the stats on this page:
      https://www.safety.af.mil/Divisions/Aviation-Safety-Division/Aviation-Statistics/
      and see that the F-35's are very low. And while I'm not the biggest fan of the F-35, it's done a good job so far.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >cargo planes and jet fighters are just as dangerous to fly, so comparing their crash rates is completely fair
        t. Retard

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >7 F-35 crashes in 500k flight hours
      >No other aircraft in history has flown that many hours, with that few losses.
      >F-15 lost 15 in 136k flight hours
      Not to take away from the impressive record, but that's a severe contradiction in the same paragraph. F-35 has one crash every 71k hours while the F-15 had one every 90k hours at the point you specified.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >F-15 had one every 90k hours
        More like 9067, or 9K hours

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Oh holy shit I am clinically retarded

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            mathlet

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Please recall that the F-16, when it came out, was the first production fighter aircraft with relaxed static stability coupled with full-authority fly-by-wire. Compared to the F-35, the core flight systems were *extremely* experimental for their time (and vastly more advanced compared to its contemporary peers than the F-35's compared to fighters of today). The F-35 leans on decades of experience and incremental improvements made to digital fly-by-wire systems, which today are highly mature and well-undestood technology.

      Additionally, the sheer length of the development program has left time for uncovering the (numerous!) issues of the F-35; the F-16 went from RFP (1972) to maiden flight of production aircraft (late 1976) in the same amount of time that the F-35 program spent trying to fit adequately sized weapon bays onto the aircraft. Personally I think it's preferable that they didn't rush the F-35 into production; given the sheer cost of the aircraft, easily hundreds of millions worth of airframes would likely have been lost by now, if the development program had been comparable to the F-16s in length (as in relative to the complexity of the aircraft. It would be physically impossible to get something so complex fully off the ground in four years).

      Spending money up front on making solid work usually pays off in lower losses over service life. Though in F-35's case this is completely incidental, as pork-barrel spending, scope and mission creep teamed up with good old fashioned greed have caused the program to bloat to unimaginable size. It's a mixed bag; I believe the F-35 could have entered service well before it did, at lower cost, with the same or better level of reliability that it has now, if only it hadn't tried to do everything all at once, and fixing major issues hadn't been put off.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      F(ourth)pbp

      >7 F-35 crashes in 500k flight hours
      >No other aircraft in history has flown that many hours, with that few losses.
      >F-15 lost 15 in 136k flight hours
      Not to take away from the impressive record, but that's a severe contradiction in the same paragraph. F-35 has one crash every 71k hours while the F-15 had one every 90k hours at the point you specified.

      >quickmaffs

      https://i.imgur.com/A8Wjwtq.jpg

      Please recall that the F-16, when it came out, was the first production fighter aircraft with relaxed static stability coupled with full-authority fly-by-wire. Compared to the F-35, the core flight systems were *extremely* experimental for their time (and vastly more advanced compared to its contemporary peers than the F-35's compared to fighters of today). The F-35 leans on decades of experience and incremental improvements made to digital fly-by-wire systems, which today are highly mature and well-undestood technology.

      Additionally, the sheer length of the development program has left time for uncovering the (numerous!) issues of the F-35; the F-16 went from RFP (1972) to maiden flight of production aircraft (late 1976) in the same amount of time that the F-35 program spent trying to fit adequately sized weapon bays onto the aircraft. Personally I think it's preferable that they didn't rush the F-35 into production; given the sheer cost of the aircraft, easily hundreds of millions worth of airframes would likely have been lost by now, if the development program had been comparable to the F-16s in length (as in relative to the complexity of the aircraft. It would be physically impossible to get something so complex fully off the ground in four years).

      Spending money up front on making solid work usually pays off in lower losses over service life. Though in F-35's case this is completely incidental, as pork-barrel spending, scope and mission creep teamed up with good old fashioned greed have caused the program to bloat to unimaginable size. It's a mixed bag; I believe the F-35 could have entered service well before it did, at lower cost, with the same or better level of reliability that it has now, if only it hadn't tried to do everything all at once, and fixing major issues hadn't been put off.

      >yeah well I still think it coulda been better because
      The post

      The excuses you're making for F-16 is very near cope

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    3 out of 900

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Notice how the media won't report on how many people died in the densely packet city area his plane crashed into.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's Utah. I'm not saying they deserved it but I will say that Mormonism is abject heresy and that God's wrath is real.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Have you ever been to Utah?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >densely packet [sic] city area
      >“An F-35 from the 388th crashed at the north end of the runway @HAFB"

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Hill Archers Club

        What if they shot it down...

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Archer of kyiiiuef

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      yes! I am agreeing 100% yes to this assessment, lying globohomo media will obfuscate this truths. this is also why I am not believing such stories of so called Ukrainian winning war. It is I Zacharih Smith of Heber City Utah oblast.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/gzkuckC.jpg

        >densely packet [sic] city area
        >“An F-35 from the 388th crashed at the north end of the runway @HAFB"

        Yes. Deaths are covered up by USA journalism as usual. If only people would click on stories about tragic deaths, maybe the journalist could resist the corrupt orders of Joe Biden!

        thank you for your service

        dipshit

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. Deaths are covered up by USA journalism as usual. If only people would click on stories about tragic deaths, maybe the journalist could resist the corrupt orders of Joe Biden!

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What gender was the pilot?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The pilot identified as an F-35 himself.
      Had he died it would have meant two F-35s would have been lost.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vatniks can't comprehend crashing your plane without hitting a building.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      So what relevance does that have to the thread? Other than proving how mentally retarded and obsessed you are?

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    bump

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Gripen chads unite. The Americucks can't explain their Way out of this one kekw
    Why are you so bad America?
    Is it that hard to make a decent aircraft? We don't think so.
    Sad.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    jeez hope that guy was insured. those things are pricey and i'd hate to be on the hook for one.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just out of interest, how many of these crashed planes were being flown by women?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Remember how Russians tried to gaslight people that f-35 that crashed in China Sea was flown by first female f-35 pilot in the navy? During her first flight?
      And they actually managed to convince bunch of 4chanchud dumbasses and ignorant normies it was true ?
      Despite using pics and story of USAF F-35 pilot from 7 years ago? One that flew for like two decades and retired to cushy lockmart flight instructor job (without crashing), and never was a naval aviator

      https://fishki.net/4072810-zhenwina-pilot-f-35-utopila-istrebitely-pri-pervoj-zhe-posadke-na-avianosec.html
      https://avia-pro.net/news/pervaya-v-mire-zhenshchina-pilot-istrebitelya-f-35-razbila-samolyot-v-pervom-zhe-polyote

      /k/epperidge farm remembers, and will not let you forget

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Forgot pic

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *