8 seconds is a little slow...... should have been 5 seconds ;) . but seriously.... EVERYONE on that boat is trained to fight fires better than most "civilian" fire fighters the navy takes fires VERY VERY VERY VERY seriously

Like you, I was impressed by their quick response, but I was also left wondering. The deck crews had seen a lot of landings. I wonder if they spotted that this one was in trouble several seconds before it smashed into the deck. Even a few seconds additional warning can make a big difference in our response.

Yeah but add some inclement weather under combat conditions and hopefully the JSF can handle the rigors like a Hornet.

That was very impressive.

@@kainhall 0

@@bastogne315 To be fair, Volvos have crumple zones, meant to sacrifice themselves for your well-being. Jets do not. Also, Volvos don't need to stand up to supersonic airspeeds 😅

(Retired AF) airframes dont typically break up on hard landing or ground impacts of this type. A C-17 was belly landed in Afghanistan and was fixed and flown out, three cargo A/C that I know of were hit by MANPADs in Iraq and flew out. Aircraft disintegrating is a Hollywood thing.

@JZ's Best Friend 100MPH tape and 550 cord can do wonders

what i was thinking one tough plane

@JZ's Best Friend Needs some bond-o, too.

The way of the future... Unmanned drones (e.g. Boeing MQ-25 T1 Stingray and Northrop X-47 ) can do all jobs better, safer and more accurate without loss of human life 🤔

well said. You're exactly right. Lemme take it a step further: We have to give credit to the folks on _and behind_ the flight line who keep things moving. Bootcamps and butterbars through goats, birds, and stars: It's a huge team effort. Kudos to all who kept on task without worrying about getting a pop on their social media stats.

Steely eyed missile man?

@@tredog884 so to speak

@@tredog884 it's a line from a movie

Entitled generation demands it, nothing more. Chain of Command with identity politics hires gives them whatever they want. Can’t have nobody without a trophy. Those types of kids are now all in senior leadership positions. The question is, had this been a fatality, would the leaks still have been released?

my guess is that the Vinson has them. The only issue I can think of is that these guys were likely off-duty sailors, and only those who are on-duty are required to turn their phones in. Heck, it's most likely that the two external media we have were likely taken by guys out smoking. The PLAT leak was likely done by someone who had access to that office and quickly booted it up, fired up his phone and pressed record before anyone could come back in and stop them

Since the incident was first reported I've been wondering if it might have been contractors or visitors on the ship that did the recording and leaking. Seems like they might be less disciplined than sailors.

How exactly would they enforce such a rule on a flight deck spanning the length of a ship with 5,000 people on it?

@@touristguy87 The same way they enforce most rules. With the threat of severe punishment. A few years ago a sailor broke a rule by taking a photo on a sub because he wanted to show his kid where he worked. They enforced that rule by putting him in federal prison. 2 years later Trump gave him a pardon.

You may recall the B-52 that crashed at Fairchild AFB in 1994; it was filmed by something like 30 different individuals who were watching the airshow practice. IDK whether the video was confiscated, or was voluntarily turned over, but the AIB reviewed them all (a bunch were from basically the same location). What I don't recall is how long it was before the footage hit the news media. I suppose a big difference is that at Fairchild everyone was taking their own footage; with the Vinson someone made and released a surreptitious copy of the official PLAT footage.

they should ban those recording devises as there is only one required for a naval ship they work for us the United States Of America and I demand confiscation of all video recording and transmitting devices before puting out to sea they may have it back at liberty calls. only!!!!!

As it should’ve been done in this case, instead of leaking the footage for the purpose of pointless discussions of non-evident “facts”. The “judges” seem to have been activated quicker than the fire-fighting team aboard the carrier.

@@stevephlyer my point if the pilot died video of his death should not be released the fod on deck must have been enormous what a mess now news video at six

At the facility I worked at and aboard the ships I worked on - cameras were forbidden ... at least ... for people who weren't VIP's ... . .

Yep, this video would never have been seen by the public funding these mishaps in the USSR or North Korea or Nazi Germany. They knew how to always present happy outcomes to the stupid public. My favorite takeaway is all these plebs in the chat talking about muh OpSec when the USA government is already riddled with Chinese spies. Your Despot President colludes with China, chinese military hardware is built on stolen USA tech. But heaven forbid the American public see a plane crash. I know those types of morons, i argued with them 20 years ago over muh Iraqi WMD. Jingoism is easily manipulated it seems.

@@TheBelrick There are plenty of videos that were released by the Navy regarding aircraft mishaps onboard ships, but they are released AFTER the Navy finishes their accident investigation hearings. The F-35 being as classified as it is, as new as it is, as expensive as it is, onboard a floating target thats in an adversaries theatre..HEY! Great Idea, lets watch their tic tok videos and we can find out how much of their air wing is down right now! Sorry, but releasing the video this early after the accident without it going through the proper channels is just screaming to the world that our security is weak. But I agree with you on everything else.

Great comment. In and before we were in WWII we had to resolve peacetime senior leaders. Feels similar to where we are now.

You flew Crusaders? That’s insane. Would love to hear more about the Gator. Did you fly RF-8G or other variants? From everything I’ve seen and read about the Crusader, it was very difficult to bring back to the boat. Beautiful plane though. That variable incidence wing seemed like a big band-aid.

@@LRRPFco52 The variable incidence wing was not a "band-aid. Rather it was a good design feature because it allowed good viability over the nose and very short and strong landing gear. However, the flatter attitude of the fuselage meant that thrust adjustments had a decreased influence on rate of descent when compared with aircraft which came aboard with a higher angle of fuselage incidence; i.e. the F-8 thrust vector was more horizontal so power changes had a smaller direct effect on glide path. The drag vs angle-of-attack curve in the landing configuration was relatively flat on the bottom meaning that the aircraft could fly over a wider range of speeds at a relatively steady angle of attack. So you could be showing down without either the pilot or LSO receiving strong cues that the airplane was flying without sufficient power as it gradually decelerated. Remember, we're only talking about a couple of knots here, but in carrier aviation, speed control within a few knots is mandatory. Then, when the aircraft started to sag below glide path, unless the pilot responded immediately and with lots of power, the aircraft would quickly go low and things could get out of hand. With luck, you might get a "taxi-to-one-wire" grade in the LSO book. Or, you might "tickle the ramp with your hook". Unfortunately, this situation sometimes resulted in a ramp strike which would ruin your day (or night) and might even result in death. In spite of the best Naval Aviators competing to be assigned to F-8's, the accident rate around the ship was higher than any other type. On the other hand, we had the highest kill rate of any type in Vietnam and a kill-rate-per-engagement 7 times higher than the F-4 community. Plus we had bigger wrist watches and the trashy women hanging on our arm at happy hour were the best looking.

@@Roberto-oi7lm Did you try to ride the top of the glideslope and then drop it in, or just stay on ball? Thanks

@@Roberto-oi7lm I don't think I'm alone in saying that I'd really enjoy an interview with you and Ward.

Roger that, Sharky.

Agree

Is Howdy code for Rowdy?

A lawer talking about the legal aspect, an HR type to talk about the morale aspect and whoever would be an expert in operational security. Those are the three elements that need to be balenced.

@@AA-xo9uw my guess is that a modern day phone automatically changes Rowdy to Howdy if you have that word stored.. The wonders of autocorrect.

If God was there this would not have Happened

@@Karl-Benny Could you just not please. You denigrate yourself more than making a valid statement.

@@greg_mid_tn3150There's no god, just science and facts.

I remember those days well myself as a Powerplants Troubleshooter for VAQ-138 aboard JFK 80-82. Saw some crazy stuff up there, and assisted fire teams when it went wrong. I hope the injured sailors made a complete recovery. We will take away what comes of the AMB and roll with it. Flight Ops will go on.

@@canlib Agreed!

"Royal Navy F35b" Actually RAF 617 Squadron.

I think it’s how people cope with a shock or surprise.

Makes me think there's something wrong with the plane, and the sailors aren't happy about how the navy is handling it. That's just a shot in the dark though.

@@92HazelMocha I know what you mean - an indicator of low morale - they don’t care if caught because they’re fed up and have no trust in leadership.

I think it's just modern society leaking shit is just more common in general. Probably posted to a private group and then a 3rd person shared it somewhere else.

@@cabobs2000 Social media generation, clout chasing and also nothing is considered private anymore.

Mid 80s or mid 90s? That mid 80s internet was vaporware for most folks.

I served on the Carl Vinson 1981-1985. There was no internet. Our cruises lasted 8 months and we did survive just fine without the internet. It ‘s called talking with your shipmates. 😉

I served on USS South Carolina from 76-81. 6 to 8 month cruises with no internet or cell phones. Stand in line at port calls for 3 or 4 hours for a 5 minute call to loved ones at "phone exchanges". No fun.

I was on the CVN-71 Theodore Roosevelt 91-92 and paid $125 for a 5 min satellite phone call to my girlfriend for her birthday.

Holy smokes, I served aboard the Enterprise 1974-76. We had paper stationary, pencils, and envelopes and frick’n survived just fine. Granted.., porn was harder to find, lol. But seriously, what kinda weak-assed statement from an naval officer was that? I did one 4-year hitch and a two year extension and left as a PO1. I’d be ashamed of my division officer or a department head from my ship making a public statement like that concerning the violation of navy regulations. When I served, 999 out of a thousand guys did ok without these instant-everything telephones. Don’t hold me to that statistic, I pulled it out of the air, but my point nevertheless is, things worked out fine during long deployments. Maybe personal communication devices shouldn’t be allowed aboard ship Period. We seemed to function very well without cell phones and instant internet access in my day. Poor babies, deployed without the internet, my god, give a break! I remember there was always “no personal photography” areas aboard ship! Have they done away with that ? I served during the Cold War, you could really get your you-know-what in a ringer running around taking pictures in many ship spaces when I served.

Um, that's not serious security. If it was serious they wouldn't let you into the facility. You wouldn't even get past the gate on the drive to the facility.

In this case the concern is not so much to keep something under wraps, thats more the PR Guys. But you need to conduct investigations and you need uncontaminated witnesses and evidence to find out what happened and why. Thats pretty hard because Lokheed also has PR guys concerned with keeping things under wraps and they have also see this video. The Pilot may be able to watch the videos before investigators can have a talk with him or her and also this might spoil memory or enable keeping things under wraps.

Underwrap for swept under the rug that does not serve good but it's likely in almost all cases serves evil history replete with examples proselytize transparency honesty etcetera but reality does Not Shake Hands with the propaganda

@@nadineblachetta3202 what can be used for good could also be twisted abused manipulated used for evil

Frequently can't take a cellphone "on the floor" when going in to do service at a data center.

HI Paul, same for me - as for auto-throttles, the CO's did not want us to use them because of their reliability and especially to maintain our proficiency. I could not dream of getting "OK-3" passes consistently! By the same token, being an "old guy", I cannot but miss the actual feedback that ol' rods, wires, controls, radio static, engine vibrations, and airframe "imperfections" that the aircraft would give me flying. Peace be with you, Ciao, L

Do you guys believe that the average competency of pilots has decreased over time, in large part due to these technologies, or not?

You can be sure that Chinese and Russian military observers would watch all the US carriers the whole time from space. US carriers have signal jammers on board, once shit is going to hit the fan.

Deployments were so much more secure in the 1980's. No cellphones, no emails, no social media. Your only correspondence was via snail mail or a landline when you reached a liberty port.

Well think at this moment it is wanted to be seen. Dunno if this has something to do with use of personal phones, and this can also been recorded with military phone? Dunno as Finnish how US Navy is pulling rules / different modes with rules in carriers. Heck my hometown is size of an US carrier here in Finland :D WSJ is showing also interesting data at the moment publicly from eastern Ukraine! (Paths of surveillance planes and other interesting stuff..) It has been taken care now that force is really been shown to possible offensive.

Dont still mean video is wanted to be seen ofc.. :) Also think that China has some clue what is happening in southern sea anyways.. Weird thing still that in that position you can shoot films there. So that really is strange.

dude this is a carrier task force with more EM emissions than the sun plus it has these things called "jet aircraft" flying around it, you may have heard of the concept I wouldn't be surprised if there's a website that tracks its location

Enlisted NAVY on CVN's and the CVN's themselves are like giant Cruise ships on holiday compared to the Vietnam era CV boats i served on. 24/7 ship to shore phones/smart phones/Satellite TV/Internet access/email .... yada yada. Near impossible to keep a lid on 6000 crew behaviors. At best i had USPS mail call and a chance to call home collect once every 3 to 4 months from a Foreign land on a year deployment.

@@Bat21bravo it’s extremely interesting to hear. I would have never thought that ! Thank you

@@Bat21bravo Yeah with smart phones it's hard to keep a lid on things. I served on the Enterprise in the 90's. We really didn't have internet (though I think you could email from the library, not that I had anyone to email), it was snail mail for us.

Same thing happened when a British F-35B recently crashed on take-off from HMS Queen Elizabeth. The sailor who leaked footage of the crash was quickly taken back to shore and arrested by military police.

@@dannyboyy31 OHHH??? Hmmm… one is a incident… two is a trend ( power issues in the automated area??? ) but as far as the “Leak” of this last video, I can imagine that after any more incidents at sea…. There will be a total blackout of personal ship to shore Comms…. IMO

14 killed - all 3 aboard the Prowler and 11 on the flight deck.

I went through photo school in 78, and coed barracks

Im thinking that accident started the drug testing

You’re right.

I agree with that 100%. For someone to think this was ok to release when their fellow Crew members got hurt is not cool at all. I hope they are dealt with accordingly.

Honestly....How would you ever imagine this could be stopped. Impossible.

⚓️ Thanks JT 😎 guys deployed don’t get to have a cell phone… that simple 🥸 the iPhone/Android is too much a breach. Even a laptop is questionable. 😬

Rumint is that the pilot was despised by the crew and the sailors in the hospital are 'stable' but maimed for life. It might not be some clout chasing zoomer. It might be somebody making sure the navy does the right thing for once. Tell me, when's the last time you trusted a staff or flag officer to do the right thing in the face of politics?

@@ChipMIK Yup, it's like whack-a-mole.....but you don't stop 'whacking'. This is military security not pricing decisions at your corner gas station.

I believe the C means "Clear Deck" and once the 35 came down on the deck the F for "Fouled Deck" is displayed.

Clear deck to foul deck.

How are the "three leaks detrimental to the investigation"?

So, could this presumed cell phone recording been taken via monitor from another part of the carrier away from the main PLAT screen? I mentioned in another comment, but I also believe when these things happen, there will be many playbacks immediately to see what happened - and at those moments where everyone in the room is staring at the playback screens, no one sees the sailor with the covert-recording cell phone pointed at said monitor!!!

This ^^ 100%!

One day they will lose an aircraft carrier. It has happened already... Micro dissection of the obvious and cover ups will pave the way. There have been so many close calls in the vicinity of nuclear materials... "That guy" that crashed the bomber has not made the impact. Cheers 🍻

@@andykerr3803 do tell which aircraft carrier was lost post WW2 or anytime by accident...

@@Argosh I wish I could remember the name, it was in Vietnam, not a total loss perhaps but a serious disaster. They redid all safety protocol after as it was from an accident, not enemy fire. People don't realize the complexity of a carrier, just to manage the crew is a colossal task. It was a fire... I'll Google the basics, maybe it will pop up, maybe not. The military bury risk factors.

@@Argosh Took my time on this one. It is in fact July 29, 1967 involving fire and explosions to the Forrestal carrier. In today's dollar it would have been nearly half a billion dollars damage, that does not include the cost of 21 jets slso lost. 134 sailors died, another 161 were badly injured. Luckily the fire was brought under control by the nearby destroyer Rupertus. The fires were still reigniting when it arrived to port. You might find the different investigations interesting... There was a false report issued by NASA that said an incoming jet 'accidentally' fired a missile due to some freak electrical anomaly, that is not possible. The final report said it was parked but someone pulled a safety pin, and again it mysteriously fired itself into.... wait for it!!!

@Ari GSD I'm not nearly qualified to make that kind of judgement, but mishaps do often involve a string of mistakes that isn't limited to one individual. Honestly we're all just guessing which isn't the best thing to do, and until the review is completed we won't know for sure what all went wrong. All I can say is that my ears hear a jet that is dangerously low clawing long and hard for power that just couldn't come on fast enough to correct the situation.

My gut says the same. Also intentional leaks like this lead me to believe it's the plane.

Misjudgement @ final turn? You think 3 feet altitude is accurately flown and can`t be adjusted from the final turn in?

@@REDMAN298 Ordinarily no, that's why it looks so puzzling and why I'm not inclined to blame the pilot.

@@conradgittins4476 pilot error is the cause of most airplane crashes

...well there's the fact that it was in the air approaching the flight deck...

I'm not part of winged aviation or ship maintenance. However, I have helped assemble many iterations of the largest rocket ever produced. Phones were allowed for the most part, just don't take photos unless strictly necessary for work proposes. Which in that role they proved very useful. As for distractions that was never really a problem. If anything it was a benefit to be able to look anything up that I needed to know or remember. Be it types of fittings, material properties, cost, torque specs, manuf. part numbers, what kind of lube or seal went with certain parts, or even fundamentals of rocketry that might be pertinent to the job. let alone the communications factor or being able to just call anyone in the company for anything you might need or need to know.

@@loxachi1291 I understand in some situations out side the military but onboard ship or at a base with aircraft, with systems fully fielded there are specific instructions on what exactly is to be done and how. In the Air Force the are called Tech Orders and they have to be followed explicitly along with all safety and security policies. Innovation has a place but not unless you are talking wartime, lives on the line situations. Clearly the videos here show a person either blatantly ignoring security and policy and/or out to catch some video to get attention. Hopefully the attention he gets he/she will never forget. From what we know, there appears to possibly more than one person doing this and that's a bad sign for the future security of everyone. Imagine a conflict and they are trying to be radio silent and keep their electronic signature to a minimum. Anyone thinking the rules don't apply to them, literally could endanger the entire crew of over 6,000 people. Not diminishing what you say can be done with a phone but there is also a risk when policies and security is compromised or ignored.

@@loxachi1291 Agree, besides the potential safety liabilities, modern phones are so incredibly useful. Looking up a tolerance or material characteristic on the fly, sending a colleague the exact picture of the part or just quickly getting a photo of calipers still on the measurement in question saves so much time.

I thought the Thunderbird crash was due to starting the maneuver too low?

I doubt cellphone notifications would be a problem out in the ocean, you have to be within 4 miles or so of a tower to get a signal. And I'd hope the Navy has a "no phones while on watch" policy, we had that when I was a cashier at a grocery store, we weren't allowed to have our phone on us when working the register, we had to put it in a locker in the breakroom (in theory -- in practice it was really more "if management or a customer sees you looking at your phone you get written up," but you get the idea). It looks like at least the person on the fantail was off-duty and just getting video of the jets coming in, but IDK if you can hang out in the place where the TV is when you're not on watch. Again with the grocery store analogy, we weren't allowed in the cash office unless it was our shift there, I'd assume the sensitive spaces on ships would be the same. But yeah, I'd bet that everybody that leaked it got knocked down a pay grade or three at captain's mast, if JAG isn't waiting to get their hands on 'em.

It’s a pretty huge leap to consider the possibility of an enemy penetrating a carrier strike group with directed energy weapons.

@Indrid Cold No... No it is not a huge leap if you know science and historical operational events in the reason. Electronic Warefare takes on a quite a number of forms, I guess in a way it is directed energy of some sort in a way, but one with cyber, or jamming, or EMI type effects rather than destructive energy like laser/maser effects. Plus range of those types of effects are many many km.

I would like to address number 1. You can sign non-disclosures and give orders to obtain or say no unauthorized electronic devices, but it is up to the first line supervisors to enforce this. Also on top of that, the chain of command to provide a reason to prohibit, or confiscate cell phones (service members still have rights). Leaks like this are going to happen in our military, and frankly I support it to an extent, because it keeps our military leaders accountable to what is happening inside our military.

May not be an internet access thing. Someone could've recorded it on their phone and saved it to an SD card, then mailed the SD card out and had a stateside friend upload it. Last I heard, snail mail to and from the carrier is still a thing.

This is the new Armed Forces, apparently security and protocols have become extremely lax, this leak came out quickly, as did the follow up leak, some heads definitely need to roll and some remedial training must occur ASAP!

As more technology arises, the more incompetent humans get a chance to be. We will always figure out a way to mess things up. From the attitude of those above who lack trust on the people risking their lives and rather rely on technology and business deals with other people's money (taxes) to the irresponsible children on deck taking video and posting it on the internet for the enemy to gather even more intelligence. This truly is an information war.

That is a textbook trajectory of a low-aspect ratio aircraft getting into the backside of the power curve.

That's an interesting perspective. A counter perspective is that there shouldn't be any equipment that is authorized for use in a hazardous environment full of people scurrying around at random is that you don't allow any equipment that might explode or malfunction if exposed to a random radio signal. Or a fire. Or shock & vibration. One, because you don't know what radio signals or other stimuli will be present, and two, because of the hazard to the ship & crew. It's like saying that we're not going to allow any 5G equipment on or near an airfield. Well, it's kind of hard to control that. Second you can guarantee that if such equipment is banned from the vicinity of an airfield that some idiot will bring it there. People bring unauthorized weapons into airports knowing full well that to even get inside the terminal not to mention get their luggage and carry-on items onto a plane they have to go through some sort of screening. There's no bigger magnet for stupidity than a hazardous situation.

"So I'm surprised at the lack of control and discipline over these phones displayed on this carrier." That lack of control and discipline has infected the Royal Navy as well what with the leak of the video from the QE last November.

@@touristguy87 Its like with phones on planes, in theory (and practice) planes are hardened against electromagnetic radiation. The problem is once you state X,Y or Z is OK to use during flight, you (either as the individual engineer or at least as the company) take responsibility for every possible combination of devices and signals now and for the lifetime of your product, which might be in excess of 40 years. No one ever tested the B-52 for compatibility with even just normal mobile phones and yet it is highly relevant because these planes, that are at least 60 years old, are still in active service.

On that note, maybe there was a 5G ultra signal that interfered with the JPALS or landing system - just by chance - at random - even though it is not supposed to be possible. I realize the South China Sea is an unlikely place for 5G. On a more deliberate note, I am wondering if it’s “possible” for an enemy (China, in this case) to disrupt the anti-jammable equipment designed to safely recover jets…Maybe they tried it to see if it worked…like a disrupter or weaponized interference signal…I realize I am out on the peripheral here…

@@danmurphy9173 why wouldn't they try it? The ship and its planes aren't supposed to be there in the first place...

not to mention how many grunts had their faces blown off or killed with jammed weapon when the m-16 was put in the field. not sure I'd be so cavalier about ironing out a weapon's problems with my butt on the bucket. besides, this plane has had some 15 years of development.

They have had 22 years to "fix" the F-35, it first flew in 2000. If a $100,000 warplane can't be fixed in almost a quarter of a century, it makes you wonder.

@@tbolt2948 the technology demonstrator is not the production item, and while the first pre-production A model flew in 2005, the C model which has a number of significant structural differences from the A model, is only just now being introduced. This aircraft family has had a remarkably low mishap rate especially given that it's a relatively new platform.

@@tbolt2948 it wasn’t in production until well after 2000. It’s relatively new to carriers. It’ll be fine. Same kinds of issues when F16 and F15 and probably every other type of aircraft. I remember when 60 Minutes did an “expose” on the F15 in early 80’s and how terrible it was. Now it is deservedly lauded.

Any complex system with multiple possible points of failure WILL have problems. And that complex system includes the human. Most are foreseen and addressed beforehand, based on the history of similar systems, but some are only seen after they occur. The Space Shuttle flew 136 times before Challenger, itself having flown 10 missions. It was thoroughly inspected and repaired before each flight. So, a unique set of environmental conditions caused an issue with O-rings.. an issue known and warned about, but politics got in the way of safety. Procedure changes after the fact changed those priorities. Columbia flew 27 times before falling ice damaged some tiles. With all those flights and pre-flight inspections, it was safe to assume the system was safe. But, the unforeseen are, by definition, just that. Engineering has often been described as the art of fixing failures. Safety procedures are usually written in blood. We won't know if this F35 event was a one off caused by some unforeseen equipment failure, pilot error or a combination... at least not for a while. As our 3 experts said, it could be something as simple as lackadaisical procedure... maybe even flipping the wrong switch. There's a saying that if you hear hoof beats outside your door, don't go looking for zebras. Equipment does fail, but the majority of civil/commercial air accidents are the result of pilot error and/or disorientation. We'll know more because the prime witness in this event survived basically unscathed. That's a big plus. The airplane is at the bottom of the ocean.. that's a big minus. But, since the SH-60 crash from the TR-71 was recovered, there's at least a decent chance this airplane will also be recovered. Like I said, the cause of this event will eventually be determined and mitigated. IMHO...

I once read a great analogy of how hard it is, something along the lines of "put a postage stamp on the floor in the middle of your living room, jump off the back of the sofa, and lick the stamp."

@@DeliveryMcGee And the stamp is running away from you as fast as it can.

You can do it!

The plane is moving, the carrier is moving, the carrier deck is moving, and that plane has maybe three arresting wires to hit within about 15ft of deck at a fairly specific speed.