I doubt it. Salt water has seeped into every box by now. Let’s be real. These aren’t SR-71s in the early 60s. Iran and other regional actors, through both imitation and homegrown genius, are already at a technological sophistication that exceeds their ability to build on a deployable economic scale. Also, can there be anything on an F-18 that China, Russia and probably Iran don’t know already? Let Nemo enjoy his new home in a few years.
2 Likes
there was an episode of JAG that sums this up clearly,
Operational Fatigue…
2 Likes
I am a long time retired CPO. I can only guess that there’s most likely several reasons that could factor into the causes. I’ve read comments about suspected DEI, etc… which is of course possible. I think a lack of training also quite probable. There was no mention of a “brake rider” being in the cockpit of the jet that went overboard with the tractor. Unless things have changed, there should have a been a sailor in the cockpit, ready to apply brakes upon the direction of the hangar deck director.
1 Like
What do you mean by this?
I’ll point out that Truman deployed in September and has been in constant combat operations since they reached the Red Sea a few weeks later. They’re tired and worn out. The ship took a hard, unexpected turn avoiding a Houthi drone and the brake rider jumped out of the cockpit before the Rhino went off the elevator and was injured in the process.
Speaking as a former carrier sailor who’s friends and former shipmates with the current CHENG aboard Truman.
6 Likes
That seems to be the goto theory for everything that goes bad, in some circles… 
The funny thing is that DEI can’t be the reason for accidents because that would imply putting people in jobs they aren’t qualified to do. That’s not how DEI works.
DEI removes the race, ethnicity, religious and gender elements out of the equation, when it comes to hiring personell. Any new hire will still have to meet the minimum requirement for the position and they are still required to meet the course standard for their training and then also meet the same performance evaluations as anybody else. DEI has never forced anyone to hire persons that didn’t meed the standard, nor letting graduates through the exams on fail grades. It is a convenient minority to blame though…
Oh, and reports state that they were towing in the hangar bay, when they lost control. Somebody who knows: wouldn’t this mean that they pulled a rather tight maneuver, with the hangar bay doors open…?
6 Likes
This.
It can’t be emphasized enough.
4 Likes
China, probably, but the rest I’m not so sure. These birds are constantly updated.
Just look at the lengths Russia has to go to, just to get to the RCS of a Super Hornet:
1 Like
Is that true? Because I’ve not heard that. I wouldn’t be surprised, but it seems like it surely should be better than that
Yeah…amazing how many people making comments about that have never served a day in their life. The other half are those that haven’t worn a uniform in years and are completely out of touch with what’s actually going on.
Please don’t spread misinformation here.
A far more likely cause has to do with, as mentioned, high OPSTEMPO in an extremely complex environment. Throw in a couple deployment extensions and it’s certainly setting the stage for mishaps.
Yes, there should have been - and almost certainly was - a brake rider. Yes, you would expect them to stand on the brakes once it started rolling. But, keep in mind, there was a reason this jet was in the hangar. What was the maintenance? Was it something HYD related? Did they have pressure when they hit the pedals?
These are the questions that go through my head, not political garbage about DEI. I thought I had seen an article that suggested the one injury was the brake rider bailing onto the deck from the cockpit but I can’t find that reference at the moment.
We averaged about one mishap a month while moving aircraft on the boat so, no, I’m not particularly surprised we lost one like this.
6 Likes
With the air intakes so exposed? I wouldn’t be surprised…
1 Like
When I search Kagi for “PAK-FA RCS” and “Super Hornet RCS” I find various sources claiming clean Super Hornet, clean Gripen, Sukhoi T-50 PAK FA and Sukhoi Su-57 all have RCS in the 0.1 to 1 m2 range. None of them authoritative or official of course, but it seems to be widely estimated in that range (which is much higher than F-35’s frontal RCS)
1 Like
Comparing it to F-35, J-20 etc is an apples and oranges thing. They share different design philosopies, the Su-57 was never intended to be ‘primarily’ a low observable platform. Instead it is optimised for super-cruise and supersonic performance, but with stealth characteristics. (it almost perfectly matches the ideal Sears-Haack body).
e.g. if you get a view straight down the intakes you will see that the S - duct doesn’t completey hide the compressor face, which is the biggest killer of stealth, from the front.
It conforms to the typical Soviet/Russian tactic of using an interceptor. Which to get in fast (really fast in this case) and close enough so that by the time it is detected it can launch long range AAMs, then bug out equally as fast.
2 Likes
It’s probably just a simple mixup of reply buttons. Using the one in the end of a post instead of the one at the end of the thread. You may have noticed that you’re not the one quoted… 
7 Likes
Happens to me all the time, so yeah, probably that.
1 Like