Posted on 12/22/2007 4:21:30 AM PST by xsrdx
Air Force inspectors have discovered major structural flaws in eight older-model F-15 fighters, sparking a new round of examinations that could ground all of the older jets into January or beyond, senior Air Force and defense officials said.
The Air Force's 442 F-15A through F-15D planes, the mainstay of the nation's air-to-air combat force for 30 years, have been grounded since November, shortly after one of the airplanes broke into large chunks and crashed in rural Missouri. Since then, Air Force officials have found cracks in the main support beams behind the cockpits of eight other F-15s, and they fear that similar problems could exist in others.
Current and former Air Force officials said that the grounding of the F-15s -- on average 25 years old -- is the longest that U.S. fighter jets have ever been kept out of the air. Even if the jets are cleared for flight, they add, it could take six months to get the pilots and aircraft back to their normal status.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
“I rather have the Government spend money on F-22 rather than Social programs..... Most of the money should go towards the military anyway...”
That’s not an option, as you well know. So, we fix F-15’s and keep them flying. Maybe even install some of the avionics marvels that ride on the F-22 - they will be every bit as survivable as the F-22 in the proper mission.
They will be much cheaper, too.
True, but see how much money we saved by avoiding replacing them. Look what we now have...no air defense and the jerks on this forum can just badmouth the Air Force and blame all the generals. It is a win-win.
I hope there isn't a need for a sarcasm tag here.
I say, Get your head out of rectal deflade!
Let's give the credit where it is due. The bastards in Congress have been screwing with military procurement for years, putting off acquisitions and siphoning off the money for worthless social programs to buy votes.
The bill has finally come due. They squeezed the life out of these airframes and we don't have anything to replace them.
It kind of reminds me of "Atlas Shrugged".
I hate subs, I hate flying and if I'm going to fight, I want to do it from about a 5-6 ft platform. .... on the ground.
I have to admit after listening to the pilots on History Channel they are always close to the edge when flying in combat and somehow sound pretty calm. In an analytical sort of way. I wonder if that's the temperament that it takes to be a jet jockey or if it's the training.
Sorry this nation should not be defended cheap. In order for this nation to be supreme in the air is that we have to upgrade and have humans as pilots.
What’s wrong with you, did you get a drone stuck in your rectal defilade(sp).
Agreed. Changing longerons can't be easy, and I suspect that what's left will be heavier, weaker, looser, or crooked.
And, you just cant' go digging out the skeleton without screwing something else up.
I like the idea of new F22s. (Just take the money from social programs that don't work or are for illegal aliens.)
You don't expect that anymore. Usually it is the other way around.
“Sorry this nation should not be defended cheap. In order for this nation to be supreme in the air is that we have to upgrade and have humans as pilots.”
I respectfully object to the entire premise of this statement.
You presume that “more expensive” is always better. You also presume that previous generation fighters are not capable of reigning supreme in the air. You also presume that humans in the cockpit is better under all forseeable circumstances.
I believe you to be incorrect on all of these points for reasons that I have explained in previous posts.
I would be interested in you defending your position on the three points I brought up above.
“Drones are not that effective.. Especially if the satellite connection cut off”
Point 1: Drones/UAV’s, whatever (we’re not distinguishing at this point, and probably should) can be effective autonomously, depending on the mission
Point 2: Satellite connections/other data links, etc. can be quite survivable, and can be undetectable to our enemies.
You can make the same argument in point #2 with the F22 - if you shut down its data links, it’s not going to be as effective as it is with them, and depending on the mission, might even be considered ineffective. That said - it is not an easy thing to do - shut down combat-capable data links, be the platform manned or unmanned.
Its probably the Weiand version of a 4-71 jimmy blower, it is a small block, big blocks work well with the 6-71.
The F-15E is the fix. The airframe was changed to address these defects.
You would need to modify the airframe & intakes for new engines-same applies for adapting a radar.All those modifications would make the new F-15 costs go up by a factor of around 1.5 times on average.An export customer maybe willing to gobble it up,but what about the USAF??
I would say, "It's a bargain! How soon can I have delivery of 1000 units?" (After all I am a REPUBLICAN, not a spinless weenie democRAT!)
I believe that research tests of an enhanced F-15 with canards & thrust vectoring nozzles were done years ago(probably by NASA-not sure).The Mig-35 is a Mig-29 on steriods.It will still be hobbled by it’s range,weaker radar capacity as well as poorer supersonic performance vis-a-vis it’s new European rivals.You can’t expect a boosted F-15 to do much better.
Not necessarily. The F-14 was re-engined without major airframe or intake changes. It really depends on the size of the new engine and whether it is developed specifically for the use or is in existence. The radar has already been changed on the F-15 more than once. Again it comes down to space available versus required. As the F-22 radar is fixed array and the nose section is not larger than the F-15, installation may not require any major airframe changes at all.
The F-15K is very different from the F-15C, but is not 1.5 times the cost. Adjusted for inflation, it is about the same.
I could see the addition of vectored thrust creating a significant R&D charge, but then again maybe not, as it has already been done with the F-15 Active Program.
Again my point would not be to replace the F-22, but to flesh out the force with a Cat 4+ Strike-Attack aircraft that would be equal or better than the SU-30 and Eurofighter.
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.