Skip to comments.
Stealth jet quietly slips into history
Toronto Star ^
| Thu. Nov. 2, 2006
| Bill Taylor
Posted on 11/02/2006 4:16:00 PM PST by NucSubs
Stealth jet quietly slips into history F-117A fighter retired after 25 years Cutting-edge design cloaked in mystery Nov. 2, 2006. 12:54 PM BILL TAYLOR FEATURE WRITER
Almost as furtively as it flew above war zones from Bosnia to Baghdad, America's F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter has retired from active duty.
The years had snuck up on it. Though it remained cutting-edge contemporary in many people's minds, the Nighthawk had hit the quarter-century mark. At a discreet "Silver Stealth" ceremony at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico this week, some of the people who built, serviced and flew the plane marked the end of its 25-year career.
Much of the F-117A's innermost workings remain top-secret but it was outstripped by newer, even more space-age technology. All that remained was its public image. Its successor, the F-22 Raptor, appeared on the last day of the Canadian International Air Show in Toronto in September, its first foray outside the United States. The Raptor looks more like a conventional jet than the F-117A and didn't cause much excitement, other than among hard-core aviation buffs. When the Nighthawk made its Toronto debut in 1993, as it whispered over Ontario Place the crowd went crazy, pointing and yelling, "Stealth! Stealth!"
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: f117; f117a; history; military; nighthawk; stealthfighter; stealthjet
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
To: ASOC
" I had heard the F117 HAD to travel in company with a EF-111 jammer platform, as the -117 stuck out like a sore thumb on low band radar..... "
I didn't write that line.
But, anyway, yes, the F-22 is a better plane... is it more stealthy than the F-117 ?
To: Prophet in the wilderness
Yes, and faster, better sensor suite and so on.
I would not bet the -22 is any more expensive than the 117.
I was at Nellis when they did the roll out. Quite the party.
82
posted on
11/02/2006 9:45:33 PM PST
by
ASOC
(The phrase "What if" or "If only" are for children.)
To: FreedomProtector; Hillarys Gate Cult
Actually, it was the B-2 stealth bomber that Carter spilled the beans on. It was a rationalization on why he canceled the B-1, since the B-2 was in the pipeline.
To: taildragger
F18 compared to the F14: Range - less Payload - less Speed - less.
84
posted on
11/02/2006 9:53:51 PM PST
by
185JHP
( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
To: BurbankKarl
Bullsh*t! Golden BB got it.
85
posted on
11/02/2006 10:11:40 PM PST
by
HANG THE EXPENSE
(Defeat liberalism, its the right thing to do for America.)
To: Prophet in the wilderness
An experienced operator on an high grade radar system could track one, but it wasn't easy. It barely showed up on the screen when they did. Stealth isn't supposed to be invisible, but difficult to track.
86
posted on
11/02/2006 10:29:05 PM PST
by
Hillarys Gate Cult
(The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
To: Ben Mugged
I always thought it was hard to tell the difference between the F-117 and B-2. But these pics make it clear.
87
posted on
11/02/2006 10:33:42 PM PST
by
phantomworker
(If you travel far enough, one day you will recognize yourself coming down the road to meet yourself.)
To: SoCal Pubbie
Carter brought the Stealth program up during the 1980 campaign. The B-2 didn't start development until 1981. The F-117 was well underway during his Presidency and was first classified as a bomber.
88
posted on
11/02/2006 10:49:15 PM PST
by
Hillarys Gate Cult
(The man who said "there's no such thing as a stupid question" has never talked to Helen Thomas.)
To: BurbankKarl
By chance. The AA missile battery commander admitted he just fired his missiles into the flight path that NATO aircraft had been using.
To: Hillarys Gate Cult
Nope. the B 2 was in the planning stages in the 1970's. I remember it well. So do others:
"The development of the B-2 bomber, for example, was a closely-guarded, black world program back in the 1970s until President Carter decided to discuss it in a speech, as proof that he wasn't weak on national defense. In the matter of a few sentences, the B-2 moved from the black world into the white world, with an official budget "line," public relations hand-outs and all the other trappings of an "official" program. "
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2006/02/mr-libbys-leak.html
"A handful of officials were aware of another factor in the bomber equation, one that would not be publicly known for several years to come. Carter, after his election, had been told of the Air Forces supersecret Advanced Technology Bomber project, which in time would lead to the operational B-2 stealth aircraft that would be invisible to radar. It was an intriguing idea, but Brown always held that the prospect of acquiring the B-2 was not a factor in Carters cancellation of the B-1....
...It was at this delicate momentin late summer of 1980that word about the previously deep-black stealth aircraft project was leaked to the press. Snippets of information dribbled into print on several different occasions but without overly dramatic effect.
What came next, however, threw gasoline on the fire.
On Aug. 22, 1980, top DOD officials went public with explicit confirmation of the stealth aircraft program. Brown, at a nationally televised Pentagon briefing, maintained, Stealth technology enables the United States to build manned and unmanned aircraft that cannot be successfully intercepted with existing air defense systems. He went on to say, We have demonstrated to our satisfaction that the technology works."
http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2006/0706bombers.asp
BTW, the stealth aspects of flying wing designs were known way back in the late 1940's when Northrop developed its original flying wing jet bomber, the YB-49.
To: GreyFriar
Thanks for the ping. It did its job, and well, but it was for sure one of the ugliest aircraft ever built.
91
posted on
11/02/2006 11:56:14 PM PST
by
zot
(GWB -- the most slandered man of this decade)
To: NucSubs
the crowd went crazy, pointing and yelling, "Stealth! Stealth!"I don't know, but this just strikes me as really funny...
Mark
92
posted on
11/03/2006 3:58:54 AM PST
by
MarkL
(When Kaylee says "No power in the `verse can stop me," it's cute. When River says it, it's scary!)
To: Prophet in the wilderness
I was attempting to have fun because I liked your login name and wholeheartly agree w/ you and I Cor...the history of posts by FreedomProtector is evidence.
To: BurbankKarl
I heard there was an F22 test result where they could drop bombs on target from outside the range of any SAM known to the military. Just to yank your chain, the old Bomarc B (retired in 1971) had a range of 400 miles.
94
posted on
11/03/2006 4:18:34 AM PST
by
Grut
To: Paleo Conservative
The F-117 is too much of a niche aircraft.Range is about average,bare minimum warload & no air to air capability.
To: pabianice
96
posted on
11/03/2006 5:16:45 AM PST
by
Toby06
(Happy camper.)
To: NucSubs
The retirement is not surprising. The only advantage was stealth. Despite its designation it was used as a bomber, not a fighter, and it was strictly subsonic.
97
posted on
11/03/2006 6:26:39 AM PST
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: FreedomProtector
The F-117 has been detectable by low band search radar since day one; a fact well known to those of us in the EW community. The Brits were tracking them from the Persian Gulf during Desert Shield/Storm.
To: A.A. Cunningham
Interesting. Thanks for post. Assuming EW = electronic warfare.
To: Ronaldus Magnus
On paper, the Nighthawk had the ability to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder. However, for all intents and purposes it was never a fighter.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson