Posted on 03/22/2017 6:44:03 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Yes I don’t think there is going to be many dog fights with U.S. Pilots on future wars.
The best aircraft award goes to the aircraft flying now we do not know anything about.
They also now have f15 silent eagles we could use too. Smaller radar signature.
F-16 is not an air superiority fighter.
“quality control issues”
Quality control issues? Yeah, I guess a design that was only supposed to last 15 years, now pushing 40 YEARS, has quality control issues... NOT.
We are allowing the politicians to FLY the wings off of aircraft far in excess of their planned service life so that they can give handouts to their money bag supporters and the shiny new toy mob in the pentagon.
What is the F-15 longeron issue?
This is news to me.
The F-15 has shot down 102 enemy aircraft without a single loss in air to air combat.
I was the superintendent of the F-15 Pilot Training School at Tyndall AFB from 1992-1996. It's an awesome airplane. There were very few aircraft that equal it and the pilots were the best the AF had. One of my co-workers was a pilot. He was the number one graduate from the AF Academy that year. He was the number one graduate of his undergraduate flying program. He was the number one graduate of the Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals program. And he was a top graduate of the AF Fighter Weapon's School.
Some of the big advantages that the F-15 had over the F-16 were the two engines versus one for the F-16. The redundancy helped get many F-15's home in situations where an F-16 would have been lost. The F-15 had a more powerful radar, allowing it to see farther and they could be attacking an F-16 before the F-16 ever saw them.
I'm sure that off platform radar and better weapons may have leveled the playing field a little, but the F-15 is still pretty awesome.
The F-22 line had been mothballed long before 2009.
“As nearly as I can tell (and I’m open to debate)the F22 SHOULD have been the heir apparent but for political reasons got shelved.”
That is correct. The F-22 was originally intended to replace all the F-15s. The total number shrank below that ‘full replacement’ soon after the cold war ended and long before we built any production F-22s.
One of the things I didn’t emphasize in my entry was the word cheaper. I, also, believe that part of the F-16 was a major factor in it’s being used in lieu of the F-15. But it’s typical of the bottom line being such an important point in their selection for them to keep a job.
I didn’t think I had to, also, emphasize the Eagle’s record in air to air combat. You don’t get any better than 100 to 0. And it’s use in Iraq was outstandiung as they came in on the original sorties and clobbered Al Qaeda and Taliban encampments without any problem. The F-15 was an air superiority aircraft in lieu of the Falcon being a fighter aircraft. And the Eagle proved its ground superiority later in it’s career with the changes in armament.
But the feds decided to make it a cash cow and have sold more than a number of different designs to foreign countries. Bottom line strikes again.
red
“The best aircraft award goes to the aircraft flying now we do not know anything about.”
The Best Aircraft award goes to the 737.
‘Best’ is not a linear scale. Comparing F-16s and F-15 and A-10, etc are largely apples and oranges. We have a diverse mix of missions and requirements.
The structural issue where they had an F-15 break up in flight. Old airplanes have structural issues. Just a fact of life. Depending on the type of construction, those issues can be easy or hard to fix. Longerons are big pieces, but usually easier to fix than more modern structural techniques.
Possibly the Aurora, I suppose. But when you consider the SR-71 was produced in the ‘50’s, it’s a feat unequaled by any other bird.
Wings are more of a Lockheed problem. As I recall, this plane is known for the fuselage breaking in half during flight. Due to parts that didn't meet standards, but who cares about that when there is money to be made.
Your quite correct, senior moment, it wasn’t Boeing it was Lockheed. look it up, the original premise is unchanged India is interested and Lockheed is more than willing.
You know when the Government decided to go fascist and push the merger of most of the aircraft companies it got a little confusing...
I know exactly what you mean. I worked for General Dynamics, Hughes, Ratheon and British Aerospace all in two years without changing my desk or work phone number.
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.