Skip to comments.
Officials stand down F-15 A-D models until further notice
Air Force Link ^
| 12/5/2007
| AFPN and ACC staff
Posted on 12/07/2007 1:53:02 PM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
I'll bet there are many mechanics working many hours to turn this around.
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
I guess the USAF needs to start ordering F/A-18s?
2
posted on
12/07/2007 1:54:23 PM PST
by
Little Ray
(Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
To: Little Ray
The 18 has other issues.
No, the 15 is getting old and needs to be replaced - and Congress keeps dicking around with the funding for the replacement F-22.
3
posted on
12/07/2007 1:56:41 PM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: All
News came out on 11/28 that F-15 A thru D models would be grounded for inspections, but the announcement this week is much more serious. They won’t be returned to flight status after inspection and serious structural repair instructions are coming.
To: Little Ray
F-18 has issues of its own. Turns out, the jet only has 1/2 the fatigue life that the Navy thought it did. Surprise surprise, the contractor fudged the results in their reporting to the Navy.
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity; Spktyr
Like it or not, the F22 is going to be slow in production and Congress is not going to buy enough of them fast enough. The F-35 is having some teething problems and will be a bit longer in development before it can be deployed.
The F/A-18, if deployed with he USAF, won’t be as hard used as it would be with the USN - no catapault shots or “controlled crashes” on to a moving deck. Hopefully, it will last a bit longer.
Best of all, its in production, NOW.
Of course, we could always buy some SU-30s...
6
posted on
12/07/2007 2:07:40 PM PST
by
Little Ray
(Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Good news that the F-15E is not included in this investigation any longer and is free to bomb targets when needed.
7
posted on
12/07/2007 2:10:08 PM PST
by
OCC
To: OCC
"Good news that the F-15E is not included in this investigation any longer and is free to bomb targets when needed."OCC,
Do you remember the $&!+ that was given to X-41 as that was being produced? And then it kicked butt in Gulf War I.
I am so tired of weenies in congress slamming good product in the pipeline and also standing behind "toads" that should be canned.
They keep talking about a new bomber, Upgrade the B-1's with new avionic and the engines from the F119 and Upgrade the F-15E's with the F-119 engines as well. Good stop gap measure IMHO.
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
F-18 has issues of its own. Turns out, the jet only has 1/2 the fatigue life that the Navy thought it did. Surprise surprise, the contractor fudged the results in their reporting to the Navy.Some flow control and vibration issues on the wing unless I am mistaken. Watch the lack of vertical pull-ups up vs. the F-16's standing on their tails at airshows. What does that tell you...
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
10
posted on
12/07/2007 2:21:43 PM PST
by
Red6
(Come and take it.)
To: taildragger
I agree with you. Sometimes evolutionary is better than revolutionary! I had the honor of delivering AMMO to the 336th FS, one of the first to get the F-15E.
11
posted on
12/07/2007 2:23:12 PM PST
by
OCC
To: Little Ray
I guess the USAF needs to start ordering F/A-18s?
No, they need to accelerate procurement of the F-22. Let's face it, the F-15 is about a 35 year old aircraft. It's time for replacement. The Navy has retired the F-14, which is similar in age, for much the same reasons: it was getting too difficult to maintain aircraft that old.
12
posted on
12/07/2007 2:28:20 PM PST
by
JamesP81
("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
To: Little Ray
The F-35 is having some teething problems and will be a bit longer in development before it can be deployed.
The F-35 really isn't an air superiority fighter, either. It will never be the air to air combat aircraft of the F-22. Hell, the only thing that makes it superior to the F-15 is its stealth capability. Other than that it's just a really fast Harrier.
13
posted on
12/07/2007 2:30:12 PM PST
by
JamesP81
("I am against "zero tolerance" policies. It is a crutch for idiots." --FReeper Tenacious 1)
To: JamesP81
No, they need to accelerate procurement of the F-22.We can fund it with a tax cut.
14
posted on
12/07/2007 2:37:08 PM PST
by
Doe Eyes
To: taildragger
You are mistaken. Go watch the Blues flying A models for starters.
To: A.A. Cunningham
I somehow doubt that the Blue Angels are flying the current F/A 18 E-F version. I’m not sure which version is supposed to have the fatigue issues, but ... it’s something to consider.
16
posted on
12/07/2007 3:51:17 PM PST
by
Kommodor
(Terrorist, Journalist or Democrat? I can't tell the difference.)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Doesn't Venezuela fly F-15s?
17
posted on
12/07/2007 4:12:25 PM PST
by
IllumiNaughtyByNature
(Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
My Bad.
F-16's ( a few)
Venezuela Air Force
Combat aircraft
18 CF-5
18 OV-10
12 Mirage 50, (to be retired)
21 F-16, (10 of them operational)
24 Su-30MKV (similar with MK2 variant) - 14 commissioned (the remaining 10 are scheduled to arrive in 2008)[4]
18
posted on
12/07/2007 4:15:53 PM PST
by
IllumiNaughtyByNature
(Tagline: optional, printed after your name on post)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
F-18 has issues of its own. Turns out, the jet only has 1/2 the fatigue life that the Navy thought it did.Yeah but Navy fatigue is different, no? Carrier landings have a heckuva lot more shock & salt air creates more corrosion problems. I would think land-based F-18's would have much longer lifespans. Plus I think we'd be talking about F18-E/F models which are essentially a different aircraft from the F/A-18 A thru C.
19
posted on
12/07/2007 4:37:20 PM PST
by
Tallguy
(Climate is what you plan for, weather is what you get.)
To: Tallguy
It depends. Yes, the load conditions are different for the landing gear and arresting hook for land vs. carrier landings. But pulling 9g in a dogfight is no different for carrier or land-based jets, those cycles add up no matter where you’re landing.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 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