F-35 fighter jet crashes in South Carolina, pilot ejects

[rooster59]

F-35 fighter jet crashes in South Carolina, pilot ejects

(Reuters) - A U.S. military F-35B fighter jet crashed near the Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort in South Carolina on Friday, for reasons that are under investigation, local law officials and the U.S. military said.

 

The pilot, the only person aboard the craft, ejected safely and was being checked for injuries, said a Pentagon spokesman, adding that there were no other injuries.

 

The jet crashed just before noon local time (1600 GMT). It was a Lockheed Martin F-35B, a short take-off/vertical landing version of the F-35, said a U.S. military official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

 

It was the first crash of an F-35 fighter jet since they became operational in 2006, said another military official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity. Friday's incident also marked the first time a pilot had ejected from an F-35B, the official said.

 

Neither military nor local officials immediately offered a cause for the crash. Military officials said the crash was under investigation.

 

Lockheed referred Reuters to the military for comment on the incident.

 

The F-35B stealth fighter jet was used by the United States in combat this week for the first time, against the Taliban in Afghanistan, after taking off from an amphibious assault ship in the Arabian Sea.

 

Israel in May was the first country to use the F-35 stealth fighter in combat.

 

The crash came on the same day that the Pentagon announced an $11.5 billion contract for 141 F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed, which lowers the price for the most common version of the stealthy jet by 5.4 percent.

 

The plane in the South Carolina crash was one of 245 F-35 fighter jets in the U.S. military, a Pentagon official said, and one of a total of 320 F-35 jets being flown around the world.

 

Under the new contract signed on Friday, the next deliveries of F-35B jets will cost about $115 million each, military officials told Reuters.

 

The F-35B is the most expensive of three variants of the F-35, which also include the F-35A conventional take-off and landing version, and the F-35C, used aboard aircraft carriers.

 

Lockheed is the No. 1 U.S. defense contractor.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-09-30

[than]

100 million dollars in the trash

[blackhorse]

100 million dollars in the trash

Already factored in.

[Morch]

Unless mistaken the F-35B was rolled out a couple of years later than the initial model, but still a good run in terms of safety - as far as fighter planes go. There was a previous incident, though, maybe 4 years back where an F-35A engine caught fire during takeoff. Plane didn't crush though, and no casualties, but planes were grounded for about a month.

[pegman]

A country that won't provide adequate health care to all its people are spending $11b on these tin cans. That place is messed up beyond repair. 

[blackhorse]

A country that won't provide adequate health care to all its people are spending $11b on these tin cans. That place is messed up beyond repair. 

Outside of the USA You would probably be living under sharia law or giving a nazi salute by now without those tin cans

[Sir Swagman]

Stealthy fighters. Not really what was envisaged when the boffins were hailing the radar signature of a large fighter being similar to that of a golf ball. It didn’t take long for those being attacked to realise that the cosmos produces background radiation. Tune to receive this and where it isn’t - being blocked by an airframe - there’s your ‘stealthy’ aircraft, literally making a ‘hole in the sky’. Back to electronic countermeasures.......This particular airframe made a very expensive hole somewhere, but in the ground.

[oldrunner]

So many no-nothings have so much to say about which they no-nothing.

[bristolboy]

39 minutes ago, oldrunner said:

So many no-nothings have so much to say about which they no-nothing.

And we'll take your word for that because...?

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, oldrunner said:

So many no-nothings have so much to say about which they no-nothing.

This is a forum for people's OPINIONS, is it not? If posters were only allowed to comment if having proven expertise in the subject there would be few if any responses to most of the threads.

[bristolboy]

27 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

This is a forum for people's OPINIONS, is it not? If posters were only allowed to comment if having proven expertise in the subject there would be few if any responses to most of the threads.

Of course anyone has a right to post an opinion including an ill-informed one. One problem is some posters make a habit of posting falsehoods as facts. That's their right but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be challenged.

In the case of oldrunner he just made an assertion without any evidence to support it.

[Justgrazing]

8 hours ago, Morch said:

Unless mistaken the F-35B was rolled out a couple of years later than the initial model, but still a good run in terms of safety - as far as fighter planes go. There was a previous incident, though, maybe 4 years back where an F-35A engine caught fire during takeoff. Plane didn't crush though, and no casualties, but planes were grounded for about a month.

Correct Sir .. Though maiden flight of AA1 the first 35A prototype was 2006 and 35B in 2008 in didn't enter service until 2015 when the USMC's 35B's went operational , the Air Forces 35A's a year later and the Navy's 35C's expected to be in service by the end of the year .. And as you rightly say a 35A suffered an engine fire prepping for take off 2014 which resulted in all of them being grounded for a month until the cause was determined .. The new Brit Aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth was recently off the east coast of U S  practicing with and shaking down some of their their own recently delivered 35's .. 

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Of course anyone has a right to post an opinion including an ill-informed one. One problem is some posters make a habit of posting falsehoods as facts. That's their right but it doesn't mean they shouldn't be challenged.

In the case of oldrunner he just made an assertion without any evidence to support it.

I think you are being too nit picky about what is posted. This is just a forum, not the UN general assembly. 

By all means challenge away, but don't expect to change any opinions by it.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Justgrazing said:

Correct Sir .. Though maiden flight of AA1 the first 35A prototype was 2006 and 35B in 2008 in didn't enter service until 2015 when the USMC's 35B's went operational , the Air Forces 35A's a year later and the Navy's 35C's expected to be in service by the end of the year .. And as you rightly say a 35A suffered an engine fire prepping for take off 2014 which resulted in all of them being grounded for a month until the cause was determined .. The new Brit Aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth was recently off the east coast of U S  practicing with and shaking down some of their their own recently delivered 35's .. 

Remember when the UK made planes the US bought? Now the UK defence industry has been so destroyed that the UK has to buy this overpriced lemon. Sad days indeed for the once great Britain.

[Enoon]

8 hours ago, Justgrazing said:

The new Brit Aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth was recently off the east coast of U S  practicing with and shaking down some of their their own recently delivered 35's .. 

 

The aircraft in question are from a joint "pool" of machines being used for practice and familiarisation by US and UK.

 

Not actually any of Britains "own" machines.

 

(They are being polished at Marham)

 

"American F-35B Lightning II aircraft flown by British pilots, Royal Navy Commander Nathan Gray and RAF Squadron Leader Andy Edgell, were the first to land on board the carrier.

British jets will land on deck when HMS Queen Elizabeth returns to the UK"

https://www.forces.net/news/f-35b-aircraft-land-hms-queen-elizabeth-first-time

 

 

 

 

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think you are being too nit picky about what is posted. This is just a forum, not the UN general assembly. 

By all means challenge away, but don't expect to change any opinions by it.

It's true that lots of people are resistant to evidence no matter how overwhelming and continue to make false claims despite that. But there are those who as yet haven't formed an opinion or have a weakly held one. And of course, it might just be the case that some of us don't care if we change opinions or not.