F-117 due to retire

Just doesn't have the legs of the B-52.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123030185

[JSLTIGER]

That's OK...we have the F-22 to replace it.

[Syxx_Killer]

That's surprising. It doesn't even seem that old. Look at the A-10. That old bird is still flying strong. Anytime I read or hear something about the F-117, I can't help but think of the old Microprose flight sim F-117 Nighthawk (I think that was the name). What a cool game that was. That is what first got me interested in this sort of thing.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Syxx_Killer

That's surprising. It doesn't even seem that old. Look at the A-10. That old bird is still flying strong. Anytime I read or hear something about the F-117, I can't help but think of the old Microprose flight sim F-117 Nighthawk (I think that was the name). What a cool game that was. That is what first got me interested in this sort of thing.

Started off as Microprose F-19!! Am I dating myself again? :p The F-22 is faster and just as stealthy, so this old bird that isn't that old is being replaced. I think it is still useful, but I have no idea what the upkeep on this aircraft is and I suspect it is rather expensive to keep up if it is already being retired.

Besides, aren't more modern radars capable of spotting or burning through the F-117's stealth at short range now? Maybe not, but it does use old stealth technology that is probably not as effective anymore.

-S

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Besides, aren't more modern radars capable of spotting or burning through the F-117's stealth at short range now? Maybe not, but it does use old stealth technology that is probably not as effective anymore.

-S

That was my understanding. Also, I have heard that the 117's are expensive and time-consuming when it comes to maintainance.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

That was my understanding. Also, I have heard that the 117's are expensive and time-consuming when it comes to maintainance.

Thats what I thought. Takes a pretty good sized team to keep them flying, dealing with RAM coatings, etc.

-S

[Ducimus]

AF' does alot of weird, unfathomable stuff. If i were to make a guess, i think the real reason is they have to cut funds somwhere so the fighter mafia can have its new toy.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

AF' does alot of weird, unfathomable stuff. If i were to make a guess, i think the real reason is they have to cut funds somwhere so the fighter mafia can have its new toy.

Well, we needed that new fighter. I am not so sure we need F-35 as much as we need F-22, but that is another debate.

The F-117's stealth is even compromised by wet weather, so you can see why they don't care too much about it. Even in Kosovo when one finially was shot down, the US didn't even waste a sortie on it to blow up the crash site! That shows you they have no care for it anymore and it is no longer a high value asset. They even knew RUssian engineers were on the way to analyze it and they still didn't even bother to blow up the crash site.

My thoughts - F-22 + Switchblade are the current front line tech. If anyone is wondering what switchblade is, Lockheed filed a patent back around 2000 for a fighter design that can change shape from a Delta wing, to a 45 degree forward sweep, to a straight wing design. Last time I checked, you had to have a working prototype to get a patent! This is probably the famed Aurora though.

-S

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Well, we needed that new fighter.

Not meaning to argue, but ive always wondered about the validity of it's "need". The state of conflicts these days are primarly low intensity conflicts. Insurgents, terrorts, or village goat pokers don't exactly have a radar network to defeat. Most technological advances wont do us much good in those scenerio's. I honestly don't see the need Unless we go to war with North Korea or china.

Now that said, i really do miss the SR-71 :rotfl: Seeing that plane hit the mothballs pained me, but the case for retiring that one was far more clear cut.

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Not meaning to argue, but ive always wondered about the validity of it's "need". The state of conflicts these days are primarly low intensity conflicts. Insurgents, terrorts, or village goat pokers don't exactly have a radar network to defeat. Most technological advances wont do us much good in those scenerio's. I honestly don't see the need Unless we go to war with North Korea or china.

Now that said, i really do miss the SR-71 :rotfl: Seeing that plane hit the mothballs pained me, but the case for retiring that one was far more clear cut.

Just because the US isn't currently invovled in an overt threat from advanced, technologically savy provacatours is not a reason to unilaterally cripple ousrselves. Technology marches on and if the US as the 'big dog' doesn't continue to move forward militarily and technologically then the non-overt threats will walk into your back yard. When I say your back yard I mean the Ducimus back yard.

I'm not one for big gov't, but the one thing it should do without fail is protect its citizens.

[tycho102]

The F-117 is a bomber. The only thing is has over the B-2 is an even smaller radar signature, and I would guess the Pentagon has finally realized that the B-2's signature is already so small, there's just not much of a need for the 117's.

The F-22 is far from a "replacement".

The SR-71 has been replaced by the Aurora. It's a pulsejet running on methane, and goes faster and higher. I think the only reason it's not in active service right now is because of the refueling issue. Methane is exotic in comparison to JP-5 or JP-8 -- which can both be pumped from the same equipment. A specialized XKC-135 would have to be outfitted, and that thing would probably have to have it's own internal refrigeration system.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Not meaning to argue, but ive always wondered about the validity of it's "need". The state of conflicts these days are primarly low intensity conflicts. Insurgents, terrorts, or village goat pokers don't exactly have a radar network to defeat. Most technological advances wont do us much good in those scenerio's. I honestly don't see the need Unless we go to war with North Korea or china.

Now that said, i really do miss the SR-71 :rotfl: Seeing that plane hit the mothballs pained me, but the case for retiring that one was far more clear cut.

Nope - everyone is not looking at who we will end up at war with, with a 100% gurantee that it will happen - China.

China currently fields SU-30K's that will decimate our F-15'a and F-16's. THis is why F-22 exists.

Next in line is SAM systems are advancing at a pace that will completely deny US air assets such as the F-15 and F-16 from any hope of enemy airspace penetration in the near future, so stealth is becoming a mandatory asset if you plan to have any hope of enemy airspace penetration.

China is also preparing its citizens for the near future conflict with America as you can see here:

Asian Times
AMERICA'S ACUPUNCTURE POINTS
PART 1: Striking the US where it hurts:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HJ19Ad01.html

PART 2: The assassin's mace:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HJ20Ad01.html



Here is a PDF on the subject on why we will go to war with China:
http://ftp.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/...e/97-0601I.pdf

How the US will fight China:
http://pekingduck.org/archives/How%2...ht%20China.pdf

More on why we will go to war with China:
http://www.d-n-i.net/lind/lind_5_18_05.htm

A Washington Post article on the subject:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/speci...2138-1088r.htm

Some recent examples of Chinese hostility has even included forced landing of a P-3 so that it can be stripped for its technology and an understanding of what its capabilities are. Laser based attacks and tests to understand how to blind US satilites. Need I go on? We need F-22 more than ever. We also need our space based satilites upgraded so we can see - right now we are running adequated sats too! Without, we will be Chinese duck soup and our casulty rate will be enormous!

-S

PS. Don't think for a second that SR-71 wasn't replaced.

[Ducimus]

I just think the funds would be better spent ELSEWHERE within the military. The service misappropriates things all the time. The United States Air Force, is awesome at this. I spent 7 years in it so i hae a little bit of a clue, but to this end i admit i have a biased poitn of view.

Theres two USAF's. Yes two. You have the Flying Air force, and the non flying air force. What the flying AF wants, the flying AF gets. Everyone else gets the short bus. Pilots are generally pedigreed and pampered. Nothing quite a disgrunteling as being on a deployment, and seeing the flyboys in an airconditioned temper tent while everyone else is billited in GP medium tents that have probably been in the inventory longer then most anyone who's sleeping in the have been alive on this planet.

On the bigger picture, each branch is allocated a certain alotment of money. If they do not speed that entirely allotment, they get a smaller alotment the next fiscal year. That means when the end of the fiscal year comes near, they go on a spending spree. This big picture, works the exact same way all the way down to the smallest duty section. So you'll have guys walking around with their own private collection of undocumented leathermans or gerbers (i was an engineer), courtesy of our friend the taxpayer.

Despite all that, you never really have the stuff you really NEED, because they've spent all their money elsewhere so they can keep their money allotment status quo. The AF spends its money on primarly two things that im aware of. Base beautification, and planes. More pratical things like tools you need in order to do your job, is an after thought. So you have steath fighters designed for a cold war era conflict, and 300 feet of fencing which cost the taxpayers 350,000 dollars.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

I just think the funds would be better spent ELSEWHERE within the military. The service misappropriates things all the time. The United States Air Force, is awesome at this. I spent 7 years in it so i hae a little bit of a clue, but to this end i admit i have a biased poitn of view.

Theres two USAF's. Yes two. You have the Flying Air force, and the non flying air force. What the flying AF wants, the flying AF gets. Everyone else gets the short bus. Pilots are generally pedigreed and pampered. Nothing quite a disgrunteling as being on a deployment, and seeing the flyboys in an airconditioned temper tent while everyone else is billited in GP medium tents that have probably been in the inventory longer then most anyone who's sleeping in the have been alive on this planet.

On the bigger picture, each branch is allocated a certain alotment of money. If they do not speed that entirely allotment, they get a smaller alotment the next fiscal year. That means when the end of the fiscal year comes near, they go on a spending spree. This big picture, works the exact same way all the way down to the smallest duty section. So you'll have guys walking around with their own private collection of undocumented leathermans or gerbers (i was an engineer), courtesy of our friend the taxpayer.

Despite all that, you never really have the stuff you really NEED, because they've spent all their money elsewhere so they can keep their money allotment status quo. The AF spends its money on primarly two things that im aware of. Base beautification, and planes. More pratical things like tools you need in order to do your job, is an after thought. So you have steath fighters designed for a cold war era conflict, and 300 feet of fencing which cost the taxpayers 350,000 dollars.

I hear ya, but we are going back into a Cold War and it will likely turn hot this time. From what it sounds like, they need more money. Plain and simple. THe F-22 will allieviate some of the tool problems you describe too since it is currently costing what? 10% to 20% the maintenance as required by an F-15? I can see why they will pay the higher up front initial costs since the cost of onership will eventually pay for itself along with the added capability.

Sorry to hear your plight about being stuck in the heat, etc. I can understand why it is like that too since you want your flyboys as crisp and sharp as possible for when they climb into that cockpit to do their job, and I can also see the jelousy that would arise from their 'extra' treatment in that regard.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by tycho102

The F-117 is a bomber. The only thing is has over the B-2 is an even smaller radar signature, and I would guess the Pentagon has finally realized that the B-2's signature is already so small, there's just not much of a need for the 117's.

The F-22 is far from a "replacement".

The SR-71 has been replaced by the Aurora. It's a pulsejet running on methane, and goes faster and higher. I think the only reason it's not in active service right now is because of the refueling issue. Methane is exotic in comparison to JP-5 or JP-8 -- which can both be pumped from the same equipment. A specialized XKC-135 would have to be outfitted, and that thing would probably have to have it's own internal refrigeration system.

Quite the opposite - the B-2 has an even 'smaller radar sig' that the F-117!