Are F-35 Lightnings already permitted to fly to operate within 25 miles from thunderstorm or other atmospheric electrical activity?
> The investigation concluded that the mishap occurred due to pilot error. The pilot incorrectly diagnosed an out-of-controlled flight emergency and ejected from a flyable aircraft, albeit during a heavy rainstorm compounded with aircraft electrical and display malfunctions.
> Contributing factors to the mishap included an electrical event during flight, which induced failures of both primary radios, the transponder, the tactical air navigation system, and the instrument landing system; and the probability that the helmet-mounted display and panoramic cockpit display were not operational for at least three distinct periods. This caused the pilot to become disoriented in challenging instrument and meteorological conditions. This electrical malfunction was not related to any maintenance activities.
SO... Assuming that the pilot is not both Neil Armstrong* and the F-35's lead avionics systems engineer...how is it reasonable to expect him to stick with a fly-by-wire plane that is that badly - so far as he can tell - FUBAR'ed? Adding his corpse to the wreck would not improve the situation.
*And recall the even Neil bailed out of the LLRV, leaving it to crash, under conditions far less bad than this F-35 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Landing_Research_Vehicle
A comparison to the LLRV is not a good idea, since that was an experimental craft with radically different characteristics than a normal airplane. It was barely flyable on the best of days.
F-35As were just cleared for all weather flight this April. The crash occured in 2023 but was the B model. Not sure what that might mean or not mean.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/f-35-lightning-ii-fig...
