• 30p87@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I believe a F-35 would win. It has, in stark contrast to the AirTag, Raytheon AIM-120C AMRAAM missiles. It also isn’t as overpriced as Apple.

      • nudny ekscentryk@szmer.info
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I can see the point for Airtags which work with most modern iPhones, or a hypothetical Google equivalent which could work with all Google Services-enabled Android devices. Is there enough Tile users around for it to make sense?

        edit: also it seems Tiles now cost exactly the same as Airtags

      • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Where I live there is almost no tile users.

        Tile is the same concept as Airtag with the exception that you probably won’t recover what you have lost because it’s incredibly unlikely it will be pinged by a tile user.

        I say that owning multiple tiles. I’m just saying these locators things are only as useful as their network. And the tile Network is mostly very weak.

        What sucks is that Apple and Samsung are both restricting the use of their network. Nothing is interoperable as usual. And so the consumer is the one literally losing.

        • Rinox@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think Apple opened its network to tiles and similar, but you need to buy a specific one made for the Apple network (which costs more, probably because of apple tax)

          Iirc Google will be doing the same with its new network

          • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s interesting!

            I’ll look into it.

            The big players here are Apple and Samsung. If both open their network it would be absolutely amazing…

        • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Really? I’ve had good luck with the network, and I live in a small city. Lost a set of keys at a truck stop in rural NM and they pinged correctly

  • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t black boxes have beacons of some kind?

    I’d also imagine an airtag is useless in this scenario as if it crashed and no one knows about it, it’s likely not near someone’s Bluetooth enabled phone either.

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Uhhh…

      F35 is a stealth aircraft. Beacons are literally against the point of the damn thing.

      People are asking ‘How could you lose your invisible car? Why didn’t you just put a tracking device on it?’

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’d imagine it’s something that can be turned on and off, just like it’s stealth technology.

        Edit: to further expand on this, finding the downed plane is a lot more important than it sounds. This could technically be classified as spillage considering there is classified tech in an F35. Foreign agents would benefit if they found it first. I’m pretty sure there are recon teams trained to recover downed aircraft in military zones. Considering they still are equipped with radio for communication, I’d imagine even just an encrypted message at time of impact could be useful.

        Losing a plane over friendly zones shouldn’t have to worry about having a beacon that’s always on. I fail to understand why it would be silly to believe one could be useful in a jet fighter, stealth or not. I’d imagine it’s likely even present but just defunct for whatever reason in this scenario and details can’t be revealed about that, as again, it still contains classified technology.

          • FlowVoid@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Sure, but the point is they have transponders. And pilots generally use them (because it’s safer) unless they have a good reason not to.

          • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Why can everything else can be turned off when needed but not this? Surely “the pilot ejected” would be a good moment to start knowing what’s going on with the plane

            • dragontamer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Because putting a beacon on a stealth aircraft is like installing a flashlight onto an invisible car.

              Even if people can’t see the rest of the invisible car, they’ll see the flashlight and track that instead. At a minimum, such a feature would be ‘default off’, and never default on.

              A stealth aircrafts literal design is to be invisible to enemy radio waves. The last thing you wanna do is you know… Emit a radio beacon.

              • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                I agree, buf why is it not “default off but in the case the pilot is doing impromptu skydiving and the plane currently on the way to becoming acquainted with the ground, give us a little update”

                • dragontamer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You know most aircraft, when shot down, were traveling over enemy territory right?

                  Airplanes don’t get shot down over friendly territory.

              • FlowVoid@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Stealth aircraft spend a lot more time flying training missions over friendly territory than combat missions over enemy territory. They use transponders on training missions, such as this one, because they want to be easily visible to other military and civilian pilots.

      • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        They still have them but because of course they do. They can be turned off easily enough. I’m not sure what sorts of modes they have when ejecting. I could prolly find an AF tech and ask.

    • Dept@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      i feel like a beacon on a military jet would be counterproductive if the jet were to fall on enemy land

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do they not put beacons on their seats either? How did they find the pilot? I’d imagine if it were an issue, it could be deactivated in wartime or over enemy lines.

      • Jay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even on home turf it’s not great if the enemy/terrorists can find out where your equipment is. Pearl Harbor was on US soil.

        Obviously it would be nice in this specific scenario, but how often would that really be useful in comparison to the potential security issues that comes along with it?

    • Aganim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Can you tell that to my Android phone that nagged me for 4 days straight about the AirTag hidden in the rental van I used for a trip through France? Was fun trying to drain the battery by making it bleep throughout the trip though.

      • deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Depending on the application you used to alert you of the AirTag, it’s possible that your phone did not send location data back to Apple.

        Apple can track AirTags, because iPhones are programmed to listen for them over Bluetooth Low Energy, and send the ID of the AirTag and location data of the device to Apple.

        If your Android phone has an application to listen for BLE devices in the background, keeping track (locally) of which devices it saw in what locations, that application can tell you if you’re travelling with an AirTag (or similar device). It might even be able to interact with the AirTag, such as making it beep or reading its ID. If that application doesn’t send your location to Apple, the AirTag was not able to use your phone to make its location known to the owner.

        Therefore, to the owner, AirTags are useless unless an iPhone (or other device that sends its location to Apple) is around.