Marine pilot loses command after ejecting from F-35B that kept flying
A U.S. Marine Corps F‑35B pilot who ejected during a storm after avionics failures — only for the jet to keep flying for over 10 minutes and crash 64 miles away — has been removed from his test squadron command, despite investigators saying he followed the flight manual. Commenters weigh whether a commander in an elite test and evaluation role should be expected to go beyond “the book” and rely on backup instruments, or whether ejecting was a reasonable call given partial electrical failure, bad weather, recent fatal crashes and the risks of modern fly‑by‑wire fighters. The exchange also probes broader issues: the lack of reliable tracking and fail‑safe landing systems on stealth aircraft, the immense cost of F‑35 losses versus the value of highly trained pilots, and how militaries balance accountability, safety culture and public perception.
Aircraft tracking, stealth, and beacons
- Commenters note the jet does have a transponder, but it failed with the electrical malfunction.
- Some argue a peacetime “Find My Jet”–style beacon or stronger tracking would be reasonable; others counter that active beacons are a liability in wartime, aiding enemy recovery and reverse‑engineering.
- Pilot-rescue beacons exist, but are intentionally pilot‑controlled so as not to give away location to adversaries.
What actually failed and was still working
- Reported failures: primary radios, TACAN, ILS, helmet display, and main panoramic cockpit display, following a lightning strike and mode changes near approach in heavy rain.
- Reported as still working: standby flight display and a “basically functional” backup radio, plus intact fly‑by‑wire controls.
- Several argue these were sufficient to maintain controlled flight, climb, coordinate with tower/wingman, and attempt a landing.
Ejection decision and the flight manual
- Manual said to eject if the jet is “out of control” below a certain altitude; investigators later judged this definition too broad.
- Supportive voices say: low altitude, IMC, repeated display glitches, known F‑35 electrical issues, and recent fatal mishaps make ejecting a rational life‑preserving choice.
- Critics say: he didn’t sufficiently troubleshoot, didn’t exploit backup instruments or radio, and bailed from a flyable aircraft that went on to fly ~64 miles and ~11 minutes.
VMX‑1 role and loss of command
- VMX‑1’s mission is to validate and refine tactics and procedures; its commander is expected to go beyond “just follow the book.”
- Many see removal from command (but not flying duties) as consistent with that higher bar for judgment.
- Others see him as a scapegoat after multiple Marine Class A mishaps and note the decision may deter future pilots from ejecting when they should.
Risk, cost, and values
- Debate over whether a ~$100M jet is “worth more” than a pilot: some unequivocally say yes; others stress pilots are harder to replace and that doctrine historically prioritizes lives.
- Concern that an uncrewed F‑35 wandering over populated areas posed major public‑safety and political risk.
Broader F‑35 and automation debate
- Thread revisits long‑running F‑35 criticisms: cost overruns, complexity, UI design (PCD, radio controls), and reliability.
- Defenders say issues are typical for 5th‑gen fighters and the jet is now operationally successful for many allies.
- Some propose more autonomy or all‑drone fleets; others reply that current reality still requires manned fighters, especially in high‑EW, high‑threat environments.