
Pilot lands faulty fighter jet on a stool at sea [video] - jackgavigan
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28065288
======
grimman
A purpose-built tool that LOOKS like a stool. Ie. the title is misleading.

~~~
fletchowns
I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. Even if it's
purpose built, it still fits the definition of a stool.

~~~
tantalor
A stool is something I sit on, not something an aircraft lands on.

~~~
catshirt
Schrodinger's stool? the stool is not until it's sat on?

------
stcredzero
Someone should make a purpose-built remote-controlled vehicle for this! On my
street, there are workmen who are using a remote-controlled vehicle to tamp
down dirt during street repair.

[http://gamka.com/index.php/construction-equipment-
rentals/wa...](http://gamka.com/index.php/construction-equipment-
rentals/wacker-neuson-construction-equipment/wacker-neuson-soil-asphalt-
compaction-equipment/wacker-neuson-rt82-trench-roller/)

------
turnip1979
Reminded me of those trust exercises where you have to fall back hoping
someone would catch you :) Cool video though.

------
mVChr
Nice propaganda piece from whoever's trying to justify the horrible decision
to put VTOL on the F-35.

~~~
rbanffy
The Harrier still is a pretty impressive fighter. The F-35 is, also, quite
impressive, but not quite for the same reasons. Or the right ones, I should
say.

Unfortunately, in this world that considers low observability so important,
the Harrier is the opposite of stealth.

~~~
thrill
Low observability is crucial in a world where a $100,000 missile can bring
down a $100,000,000 fighter.

~~~
rbanffy
There are two ways out of this - make fighters cheaper or make them
stealthier.

There is probably a $200K unit that can already track and take down an F-35.
Or, in 10 years, there will be. Multi-mission fighters are usually easy
targets.

~~~
HarryHirsch
I hope to live long enough to see declassified reports of Autonomous
Underwater Vehicles that can take out an entire _aircraft carrier_. I also
hope not to see them in action.

------
dkulchenko
What would've happened had the "stool" not been there?

It seemed (though perhaps the footage was slowed) that the plane descended
vertically pretty slowly, so it would've banged the nose on the carrier at
touchdown, but would that have been severe?

~~~
jackgavigan
It would certainly have grounded the aircraft until it could be
inspected/repaired back on land and it would probably have destroyed the radar
housed in the aircraft's nose.

~~~
dwd
You can see the airframe flex a bit as he hits the stool so you'd likely break
the frame if it hit too hard.

The point where it's flexing is where the front gear would normally be.

------
hiharryhere
This is amazing, Harriers are notoriously hard to control in vertical
ascent/descent.

~~~
rbanffy
I keep hearing managing the transition between normal flight and VTOL flight
is the trickiest part, and that the VTOL mode is very automated, with reaction
jets on the wings controlled with the stick the way you would expect them to
be.

------
jusben1369
I liked how he made it very clear just how nervous/scared he was. No fake
bravado.

~~~
mtdewcmu
No need when you've got video.

------
Gustomaximus
What if a traditional landing jet had the nose gear fail? Do the belly land,
eject or other?

~~~
neurotech1
There is a video on Youtube of a Marine F/A-18 with a nose gear problem using
the emergency barricade on the carrier.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_mUwzpUs4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_mUwzpUs4)

The jet was reportedly flown off the carrier a few months later after being
repaired.

Some F/A-18 pilots with nosegear problems have used field arresting cable to
stop and the empty center fuel tank to take the landing impact. With pilot
skill and some luck, This results in almost no damage to the actual airframe.

------
doubleshadow
This wasn't very cool. I think I could do this.

~~~
nsxwolf
Nothing you can do is cool then? That's sad.

------
jonsen
The solution was obvious immediately when the gear failed, "Oh shit!".

