Another cutting-edge F-35 fighter jet fell out of the sky. Here's what to know.
The crash of an F-35 stealth fighter jet in California this week joins a list of accidents in recent years that have highlighted controversy surrounding the aircraft.
The U.S. Navy said on July 30 that the jet crashed near Naval Air Station Lemoore in central California, and its pilot safely ejected from the aircraft. The cause of the crash was still under investigation and no further details were provided.
The crash is one of a dozen such F-35 accidents since 2018, most of which involved U.S.-operated jets, and comes at a time of heightened scrutiny of the entire aviation industry following a series of commercial, military and small aircraft disasters in 2025, said Blake Stringer, director of the Center for Aviation Studies, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at The Ohio State University.
"That should be an unacceptable number of crashes," Stringer said. "It's an opportunity for experts to analyze data, look for the trends and statistical patterns and determine what recommended course of actions (is) needed to increase the safety."
F-35s, stealth fighter jets known for being the military's most expensive weapon system and credited with revolutionizing modern American warfare, are still a relatively new program for the U.S. military, Stringer said. They were created with affordability in mind, so that different branches of the military could all use a standardized airframe with the ability to satisfy the varying requirements of the branches, Stringer said.
The affordability piece hasn't exactly panned out. Since 2015 when the jets were deemed mission-ready, growing governmental and civilian concerns about the costs of the F-35 program have clouded their reputation as among the most technically advanced aircraft in the U.S. arsenal. Before becoming president, Donald Trump tweeted in 2016 that the F-35 program's 'cost is out of control."
Each F-35 costs tens of millions of dollars to build, and the Defense Department had about 620 of them in 2024, according to a Congressional Budget Office report released in June 2025.
"F-35s' operating and support costs exceeded $5 billion in 2023," the report found.
Why do the fighter jets keep crashing?
The crash this week was not the first in the U.S. in 2025: In January, an F-35plummeted to the ground in Alaska, causing a fiery explosion at an Air Force base that was captured in dramatic video footage. In that crash, officials said the pilot, who safely ejected, experienced an "in-flight malfunction."
In May 2024, a pilot in New Mexico was seriously injured after he ejected from an F-35 before the fighter jet crashed near an airfield in Albuquerque. In September 2023, a pilot ejected from an F-35 and parachuted into a backyard in Charleston, South Carolina. The jet flew unmanned for several minutes before it crashed into a field about 60 miles away.
Reports of downed F-35s draw national headlines and fresh waves of concern over the aircraft's safety and reliability. While it's still too early to say what caused this week's crash or whether it's part of a pattern, it should prompt a closer look at the data, Stringer said. Safety failures, workplace shortages, infrastructure decay and other factors are impacting military aviation and the commercial industry, he said.
Government reports: F-35s are costly, underused
The F-35 program cost is estimated to top at least $2 trillion over the coming decades with plans to buy about 1,800 more by the mid-2040s, the U.S. Government Accountability Office said in a report last year.
The fleet suffers from shortfalls in availability, the rate at which jets are mission-ready at any given time, government reports including the GAO and the Congressional Budget Office have found. In the last few years, availability has ranged from 50% to 60% of the U.S. fleet, which is under the program's target of 65%, the CBO said.
Crashes and any other malfunctions of the costly jets can add to that issue, Stringer said.
"It's important to acknowledge, yes, these are costly, but the cost comes with the capabilities that these systems bring," he said.
In May 2023, the Government Accountability Office said the jet program was more than a decade behind schedule and $183 billion over original estimates. Costs to maintain the fleet have increased 44%, from $1.1 trillion in 2018 to $1.58 trillion in 2023, the agency said.
Contributing: Christopher Cann, USA TODAY; Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Lawmakers push efforts to ban ICE from wearing masks at Boston legislative summit
ICE officials say agents have been wearing masks to avoid publicly exposing their identities and personal information. Advertisement In a statement to the Globe, a senior official with the Department of Homeland Security said that ICE officers are facing an 830 percent increase in the number of assaults against them, and condemned efforts to prohibit officers from wearing masks. 'These are repulsive messaging bills that stoke dangerous anti-ICE rhetoric for cheap political points and fundraising emails,' the official said. 'Sanctuary politicians are trying to outlaw officers wearing masks to protect themselves from being doxxed and targeted.' In early July, Advertisement 'With transparency, identification, and reason there should be no need for disguises when performing their duties to the communities they serve,' Hawkins said on Tuesday. Lawmakers said such legislation is meant to promote accountability for all law enforcement, and would also reduce the chances of law enforcement officers being impersonated. New York State Senator Patricia Fahy, a Democrat who is sponsoring a similar legislation in New York, said the practice of federal immigration agents arresting and detaining people while wearing masks, plainclothes, and using unmarked cars 'should shock the collective conscience.' 'A dangerous line is being crossed here,' Fahy said. 'Immigration enforcement is really turning into more of a paramilitary type secret police.' A number of Republican lawmakers 'It's meant for the intimidation of the officer and their families,' said Representative Scott Sharp, a Kentucky Republican and retired law enforcement officer. 'I can't see any other reason to do it.' Representative Bob Lewis, a Kansas Republican, echoed the sentiment. '[ICE agents] are acting in an official capacity, not personal,' Lewis said. 'They are doing their jobs.' Amy Carnevale, the chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party said in a statement that the Massachusetts bill put immigration officers' lives at risk. Advertisement 'Far-left activists have doxxed and assaulted ICE officials and agents in the field,' she said. In Massachusetts, mask-wearing ICE officers provoked public outcry earlier this year, when agents wearing face coverings whisked Tufts student Rümeysa Öztürk off a Somerville street in broad daylight in March — 'I didn't think that they were the police because I had never seen police approach and take someone away like this,' Öztürk wrote. Federal officials have said in various public statements that immigration agents When DHS officers conduct operations, they 'clearly identify themselves as law enforcement, while wearing masks to protect themselves' from gangs like Tren de Aragua and MS-13, the DHS official said, as well as from others who have committed crimes. 'The men and women of ICE put their lives on the line every day to arrest violent criminal illegal aliens to protect and defend the lives of American citizens,' the statement said. ICE's acting director, Todd Lyons, has strongly 'I'm sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks, but I'm not going to let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line and their family on the line because people don't like what immigration enforcement is,' Lyons said during a June press conference in Boston, where the agency announced that federal officials Advertisement During a trial last month in Boston federal court regarding a lawsuit brought by higher education organizations over the Trump administration's policies of arresting and detaining noncitizen students and pro-Palestinian activists, Patrick Cunningham, an assistant special agent in charge at the Homeland Security Investigations office in Boston, which is part of ICE, told the court there was no specific policy on masking that he was aware of within the agency. He said it was up to the 'personal choice' of each agents as to whether or not they want to wear face coverings. 'They might wear them because they want to protect their identity,' Cunningham said, particularly in the 'age of camera phones, and the ability of people to identify those agents.' Giulia McDonnell Nieto del Rio can be reached at
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Rwanda agrees to take deportees from the US
The State Department said the US 'works with Rwanda on a range of mutual priorities' but wouldn't comment on details of the deportation deal and what it called diplomatic conversations with other governments. Advertisement The US sent 13 men it described as dangerous criminals who were in the US illegally to South Sudan and Eswatini in Africa last month and has said it is seeking more agreements with African nations. It said those deportees' home countries refused to take them back. The US has also deported hundreds of Venezuelans and others to Costa Rica, Panama, and El Salvador under President Donald Trump's plans to expel people who he says entered the US illegally. In March, using an 18th-century wartime law, the US deported more than 200 Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador, where they were immediately transferred to a mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, which was built to hold alleged gang members. Human rights groups have documented hundreds of deaths as well as cases of torture inside its walls. Advertisement Rwanda attracted international attention and some outrage when it struck a deal in 2022 with the UK to accept migrants who had arrived in the UK to seek asylum. Under that proposed deal, their claims would have been processed in Rwanda and, if successful, they would have stayed there. The contentious agreement was criticized by rights groups and others as being unethical and unworkable and was ultimately scrapped when Britain's new Labour government took over. Britain's Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that the deal was unlawful because Rwanda was not a safe third country for migrants. The Trump administration has come under scrutiny for the African countries it has entered into secretive deals with to take deportees. It sent eight men from South Sudan, Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, and Vietnam to South Sudan in early July after a US Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for their deportations. They were held for weeks in a converted shipping container at an American military base in Djibouti as the legal battle over their deportations played out. South Sudan, which is tipping toward civil war, has declined to say where the men are being held or what their fate is. The US also deported five men who are citizens of Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen, and Laos to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini, where the government said they will be held in solitary confinement in prison for an undetermined period. A human rights lawyer in Eswatini said the men are being denied access to legal representation there and has taken the authorities to court. Eswatini is Africa's last absolute monarchy, and the king rules over the government, and political parties are effectively banned. Advertisement Both South Sudan and Eswatini have declined to give details of their agreements with the US. Rwanda, a relatively small country of some 15 million people, has long stood out on the continent for its recovery from a genocide that killed over 800,000 people in 1994. It has promoted itself under longtime President Paul Kagame as an example of stability and development, but human rights groups allege there are also deadly crackdowns on any perceived dissent against Kagame, who has been president for 25 years. Government spokesperson Makolo said the agreement with the US was Rwanda doing its part to help with international migration issues because 'our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation.' 'Those approved [for resettlement in Rwanda] will be provided with workforce training, healthcare, and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade,' she said. There were no details about whether Rwanda had received anything in return for taking the deportees. Gonzaga Muganwa, a Rwandan political analyst, said, 'appeasing President Trump pays.'
Atlantic
3 hours ago
- Atlantic
What, Exactly, Is the ‘Russia Hoax'?
Trump's use of pardons may have induced some of his confederates—including Stone and Manafort—to not cooperate with prosecutors, or to only partly cooperate, thus depriving the public of a chance at receiving a full accounting. This was a kind of legalized obstruction of justice. Plenty of authorities have pointed out that Trump's claim of a hoax is nonsense. In 2017, PolitiFact named that its lie of the year. In 2018, The Washington Post reported: 'Trump's Russia 'Hoax' Turns Out to Be Real.' In 2019, a report by the Justice Department's inspector general concluded that, as my colleague Adam Serwer put it, 'the 'Russia hoax' defense is itself a hoax, and a highly successful one, aimed at reassuring Trump supporters who might otherwise be troubled by the president's behavior.' Still, the idea that the whole thing was a chimera has taken hold even within some precincts of the mainstream press, where the whole thing is treated as a weird passing obsession. The journalist Ben Smith, who made the decision to publish the Steele dossier, now contends, vaguely and in passive voice, that ' Trump was in retrospect treated unfairly.' Meanwhile, Trump world continues to cook up new iterations of the hoax claim. The most recent ones are driven by CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who has a history of weaponizing intelligence, to use a term he's a fan of, and Gabbard, who has for years repeated Kremlin talking points. Last month, Ratcliffe alleged that in 2016, three of the nation's top intelligence officials 'manipulated intelligence and silenced career professionals—all to get Trump,' but as my colleague Shane Harris reported, he didn't have evidence to back that up. Gabbard has released a dribble of documents intended to bolster it, but still nothing that matches the claims. In recent days, MAGA allies have pushed a new and shocking allegation: that emails show Clinton actually approved a plan to smear Trump by claiming he was colluding with Russia. The problem is that, once again, investigations have debunked it. A special counsel appointed by Barr during Trump's first term, with the goal of ferreting out political skulduggery in the Russia investigation, found that messages about Clinton being treated as a smoking gun were, in fact, likely concocted by the Russians. As The New York Times reported, 'The special counsel, John H. Durham, went to great lengths to try to prove that several of the emails were real, only to ultimately conclude otherwise.' Durham's finding of a Russian forgery is ironic: Someone has finally turned up a real Russia hoax. Rather than working to fight it, however, Trump's aides are once more colluding with Russia to mislead the American people and further Trump's political fortunes.
