Posted on 03/15/2007 4:35:28 PM PDT by IonImplantGuru
Can you show me where that is? The only thing I found was:
Lt. Col. Dirk Smith, commander of the 94th FS, said that these aircraft losses stemmed from the aggressiveness of pilots, which was a good thing.
“They wanted to fly to the merge, they wanted to show” what such a fighter package can do “when you’re highly outnumbered.” Such exercises are “the perfect place to learn that kind of lesson ... so that, when it comes to real bullets flying, they’ve learned that.”
From the link:
http://www.afa.org/magazine/feb2007/0207raptor.html
That was following my previous excerpt. All this discussion was about the F-22's, not a different aircraft.
That's a stat that is 'true' until the day that it is no longer 'true'.
Perhaps someone who has access to this source could confirm if it is correct. I do not. This is a copy of someone elses copy; I cannot confirm its validity.
ONE F-22 LOSS AT RED FLAG ATTRIBUTED TO BAD TACTICS: The U.S. Air Force says that its F-22 fighter's debut in a Red Flag aerial combat training exercise with coalition forces underscored the known attributes of the stealthy jet, though the demonstration did not include trials of its most exotic electronic attack capabilities. Employment of electronic attack tactics, which are inherently offered by the F-22's Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, was not included in the exercise that took place this month. The friendly "blue" force lost one F-22 during the exercise, Col. Tom Bergeson, who was the air expeditionary wing commander for the Red Flag, says. He attributes the loss to a confusing "mulligan," whereby an enemy "red" fighter regenerated or re-entered the fight unbeknownst to the blue forces. "We made some tactical mistakes and one slipped through," Bergeson said. Bergeson also praised software developers for a quick turnaround after the four lead F-22s of a 12-ship deployment to Kadena Air Base, Japan, recently encountered navigation computer problems upon crossing the International Date Line. "It wasn't anything catastrophic," Bergeson said, though the computers would not have been able to provide accurate navigation data to divert locations without the fix. But the decision was made to send the aircraft back to Hawaii as a "better-safe-than-sorry approach." (Aerospace Daily & Defense Report)
500 miles.
What height do the GPS satellites sit at?
About 11,000 miles.
However we hit the moon accurately which is much farther away. The key is that even though the satellites are moving they are a "fixed" target in that we know where they will be at any given time.
"Two slapped together with 30 year old spare parts F-14s and a dozen 40 year old F-4s hardly constitute an Air Force ;-)"
I didn't know their air force was that advanced. I thought it was a bunch of martyrs (homicide bombers) strapped with suicide belts flying ultralights
To confront the F-22-led “Blue Air” collection, the joint force mustered its best “Red Air” threat—front-line F-15s, F-16s, and Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets. The F-22’s team blitzed the opposition with a favorable 241-to-two kill ratio. What’s more, the two lost aircraft were F-15Cs, not F-22s. The Raptors came through the engagements untouched
Thank you, since I quoted above and below that line, I sure feel foolish in missing it.
Don't, I had to read it three times to catch it. Like I said sloppy article.
Negative on 'movable engines', pirate. What the Raptor DOES have is movable exhaust nozzles. The proper terminology is 'thrust vectoring.'
Click on the link for detailed info.
This is a crazy story without a good base of information to support it. As a former A-10 pilot and someone who worked on the C-5B program....the GPS technology is negligible when it comes to true ability to get your aircraft in the proper position at the proper time. Worst comes to worst, the pilot can use simple ADM (using AM radio signals) to guide his craft in the proper direction without fear of jamming or FMM (foreign means of manipulation).
This story REEKS of anti AF propaganda, and should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm sure if I drove my Lexus across the IDL the NAvCom would fail as well.
I would bet that this whole story was based on a 'beta' flight used to gather data for friction/response to the contractor. The F-22 is so far beyond anything the aviation world has ever seen I expect to see MANY postings like this in the future.
ping
They just DID IT a week or so ago in one of their "Tests".
That's the technology that bothers me.
We depend on satellites for a whole lot more than GPS. GPS is small potatoes when you stack it up against everything else that depends on those 'birds'.
Don't let it bother you TOO much. And this is 2nd hand info because I'm no longer active.....but there are a few other 'redundant' systems out there that are, um, "unique" to the USAF to provide the info that you are so concerned about.
Remember that everything that is happening in Iraq has nothing to do with this.
Hey, now. Americans ARE perfect. I oughta know, IR1.
;^D
Yes. Also have worked in the defense industry, A pilot, was In Naval Air.
Have you seen an F-14?
See that big tube under the nose. Know what it’s for and why it’s there?
Air Farce Hype
Read between the lines to see how it’s rigged.
And with warning of those shots, we'd damn well *better* nuke some of the launch sites.
Cheers!
Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force (COMOPTEVFOR) was stood up by the Navy in 1943 in direct response to the torpedo problem and the magnetic fuses they used. Each of the other services also stood up their own Operational Test Agency (OTA) and the Department of Defense has the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) to coordinate and provide oversight on key weapons systems.
From time immemorial, no program manager has ever had sufficient budget and schedule to produce what is required. We all want the capabilities of our magnificent weapons systems, we just don't want to acknowledge what the really require in terms of resources.
As a result, testing is the last thing scheduled, and the first thing cut in any program plan. Rather than use aggressive testing as a tool to manage risk from day one, our procurement system rewards program managers for the active pursuit of risk avoidance and delaying any testing until the last possible moment.
As in the commercial software and IT worlds, the users become the testers.
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.