F-117: 2 Year Life Expectancy

[HawkerF/O]

>>That's going to happen regardless. Whoever is next is going to have to raise taxes to pay off this massive federal debt, just like Bush1 and Clinton had to do to clean up Reagan's mess. IT'S SIMPLE MATH, STUPID!!!!<<

Congress, not the Executive Branch, enacts budgets. If there is a budget deficit, Congress is to blame, not the President. Stupid is as stupid does, sir.

And just where does that budget come from? Tell me again why Clinton won? BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET DEFICIT! At the time, congress was Democrat controlled, but still, the people wanted to blame the president. The deficit was so large Clinton could not enact the middle class tax cut his campaign had promised. When they got in office and discovered how big it really was (Bush admin as not straight with them or anyone else for that matter), Clinton had to get on TV and renig on his promise. Now, tell me again about stupid................

 

[Weasel Keeper]

Sheesh, I pointed out that an airframe was being retired in 2 years...not a political discussion by any means...

 

[Deuce130]

And just where does that budget come from? Tell me again why Clinton won? BECAUSE OF THE BUDGET DEFICIT! At the time, congress was Democrat controlled, but still, the people wanted to blame the president. The deficit was so large Clinton could not enact the middle class tax cut his campaign had promised. When they got in office and discovered how big it really was (Bush admin as not straight with them or anyone else for that matter), Clinton had to get on TV and renig on his promise. Now, tell me again about stupid................

Well, at least Hawker didn't make crude comments involving oral sex and your mother like he did over on the non-aviation board. Hawker is showing himself to be about as dumb as a box of rocks. I'd recommend ignoring him from this point on.

 

[floater_b2]

For all those pointing out that SDB won't be useful in a conflict like N.Korea I beg to differ. We are not getting rid of all the 2000# bombs. We're just adding to the arsenal. And I guarantee that there are plenty of useful SDB targets in any conflict that we fight, Korea included. Don't worry, we'll still have the larger bombs for those targets that require them. My point was that there are a lot of targets that do not require the 2000# munition. SDB will be great for certain targets. Plus, it doesn't matter what the F-117 was designed to carry. It is first generation stealth and technology has come a long way since it was first designed. The F-22's stealth technology is far superior to anything else that is currently fielded.

 

[Wang Wei]

If we get Hillary elected, we will reduce the national Debt by selling them to IRAN and Syria for top dollar. Oh, almost forgot, we will also be paying alot higher taxes.

IT's THE ECONOMY, STUPID!!!!

The Wanger can't wait to fly black jet!!!!

 

[JimNtexas]

I think that we should buy enough F-22s for three operational squadrons and one school house. That would be more than enough. Use the money we save for the F-35, a far more practical airplane.

I strongly suspect that the age of "stealth" airplanes is about over, cheap and easy detection systems will ensure that there will be no 'invisible airplanes', not that there ever really were.

 

[stonewall]

Yes I do. Small Diameter bomb, used to fight the todays war and to rationalize the money wasted on the F-22. It is a disaster in the making if we ever have a conflict with an actual orgainized military force, as opposed to urban terrorists.

Of course if the only wars in the future are against terrorists we pretty much can retire all the F-15, F-16, and certainly don't need B-2s, F-22s, or F-35s.

I've forgotten more about this stuff than you'll ever know, kid.

Easy, old man. I'm alot more current than you are. Pretty bold statement from a 'vark driver.

 

[Kuma]

If you want to take out permanent equipment, use a missile. If you want to take out people and other soft targets use bombs. If you are going to use bombs, make sure you use bombs that give lots of concussive effects and have lots of schrapnel.

SDB is the Mk 81 reincarnate. Yes, it is more accurate, but against bomb targets, accuracy isn't all that important (as long as you've got great concussion and lots of frags).

You can't take out double digit SAMs with cruise missiles because they are mobile. You need a stealthy aircraft to get in close and VID the thing. Once you make it there, do you really want to drop your half dozen tiny (I mean SDB) bombs and call it a day? The enemy will repair the little damage and continue their mission.

Overkill is always preferable in wartime. JimNTexas knows this...MAGNUM will know this in a couple of years.

We definitely need an air superiority fighter. Once we own the air, then we can use lower tech systems to deliver vast quantitites of death and destruction to our enemies. Most of that "lower tech systems" will be 18 year old riflemen.

Spending as much money as we are on the F-22 is totally criminal.

My 2 cents.

 

[XShipRider]

Debt? We don't need no stinking debt.

That's going to happen regardless. Whoever is next is going to have to raise taxes to pay off this massive federal debt, just like Bush1 and Clinton had to do to clean up Reagan's mess. IT'S SIMPLE MATH, STUPID!!!!

How many years and how many Presidential admin's and how many Congresses
has this been said? All of 'em. We've not been out of debt since before the
Civil War.

http://www.toptips.com/debt_history.htm
http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opd.htm#history
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Now as far as the F-117 goes... look at the billions spent on the space program.
It wasn't the ride or the moon that was important but rather the technology
advancements. That was money well spent.

I believe the same will hold true for the 117, it will be considered the forerunner
to many follow-on technologies.

 

[Kuma]

Double digit SAMs aren't mobile.

Really?

 

[JimNtexas]

Just for record, I think the F-117 was a terrific program. This airplane addresses a real military requirement. It was run in (by military standards) a very efficient and economical way.

The only problem with the F-117 isn't with the airplane at all, it is with General Officers who got their technical data on it from the Public Affairs Officer ("It's invisible and needs no support of any kind!") rather than RF engineers ("Its low observable by many radars.").

 

[DaveGriffin]

Double digit SAMs aren't mobile.

Magnum:

The Russian TOR-M1, sold to Iran, is a SA-15 mounted on a tracked vehicle and can shoot on the run. Do you consider that mobile?

 

[stonewall]

Magnum:

The Russian TOR-M1, sold to Iran, is a SA-15 mounted on a tracked vehicle and can shoot on the run. Do you consider that mobile?

Sure. When we talk about "double digit SAMS" these days, we're referring to the SA-10/12/20 type stuff. If that's not what we were talking about earlier, then I apologize for the confusion.

 

[Merlin'05]

I know people will make fun of me for not actually doing anything, thus I should be stupid and not know anything, but...

The SDB uses a much more destructive compound (I don't remember what it's called), than the old Mk 80 series. Combined with the new compound and its greater accuracy, it has the same capability of an Mk 83. You add a few more DMPIs to a target and you can kill large structures pretty well. Its just like nuclear weapons, 10 100 kiloton warheads spread out around a city are significantly more effective than one megaton bomb placed in the center of the city.

In other uses why the heck would you need a 1,000# bomb or a 2,000# bomb or even a 500# bomb to take out a vehicle if something much smaller will do just as well?

Furthermore, it has greater hard target penetration capability than the Mk 80 series. Not as good at the BLU-109, -110, and -111, but still very good.

Additionally, with the strap on glide wings, each SDB has the capability of flying 60 nm when released from the Raptor's cruise speed of Mach 1.5-1.8 and 40,000 to 50,000 ft. Other aircraft will not give the SDB that kind of range, but they can give it a good stand-off range for specific types of targets. That type of stand-off comes in important when you are trying to take out those SA-10s and -20s.

They are also looking at including a datalink and the JDAM kits (to include the SDB), which will update the GPS coordinates during flight to allow accurate attack of moving ground targets and switching of targets in the air.

Of course the SDB won't take over every role. It has its place, just like the Maverick, HARM, SFW, GBU-28, other LGBs, and ballutes have theirs.



When the -117 leaves, you loose the capability to drop 2,000# LGBs. There will be situations where that capability is needed.

When the Raptor takes over, you have the capability to fly in much more dangerous airspace, have a self defense capability against air and ground threats, have significantly greater speed (allowing it to take out the targets faster than the -117, great for time sensitive targets), and perhaps the most important of all--the ability to fly missions 24 hours a day. The downside is you are stuck with using GBU-31s or SDBs. In most cases, those will probably work out pretty well. In some others, not. Overall, the Air Force is gaining a significant combat capability with the Raptor--something the JSF can't come close to touching in regard to internal payload, speed, maneuverability, and all aspect stealth. But saying the AF should ditch the Raptor for the JSF, or the JSF for the Raptor is just as ignorant as saying we should ONLY use F-15s OR F-16s.

 

[DaveGriffin]

Sure. When we talk about "double digit SAMS" these days, we're referring to the SA-10/12/20 type stuff. If that's not what we were talking about earlier, then I apologize for the confusion.

The SA 10/12 can both be deployed on a mobile launcher. Not sure about the SA-20.

 

[paid4training]

I know people will make fun of me for not actually doing anything, thus I should be stupid and not know anything, but...

The SDB uses a much more destructive compound (I don't remember what it's called), than the old Mk 80 series. Combined with the new compound and its greater accuracy, it has the same capability of an Mk 83. You add a few more DMPIs to a target and you can kill large structures pretty well. Its just like nuclear weapons, 10 100 kiloton warheads spread out around a city are significantly more effective than one megaton bomb placed in the center of the city.

In other uses why the heck would you need a 1,000# bomb or a 2,000# bomb or even a 500# bomb to take out a vehicle if something much smaller will do just as well?

Furthermore, it has greater hard target penetration capability than the Mk 80 series. Not as good at the BLU-109, -110, and -111, but still very good.

Additionally, with the strap on glide wings, each SDB has the capability of flying 60 nm when released from the Raptor's cruise speed of Mach 1.5-1.8 and 40,000 to 50,000 ft. Other aircraft will not give the SDB that kind of range, but they can give it a good stand-off range for specific types of targets. That type of stand-off comes in important when you are trying to take out those SA-10s and -20s.

They are also looking at including a datalink and the JDAM kits (to include the SDB), which will update the GPS coordinates during flight to allow accurate attack of moving ground targets and switching of targets in the air.

Of course the SDB won't take over every role. It has its place, just like the Maverick, HARM, SFW, GBU-28, other LGBs, and ballutes have theirs.



When the -117 leaves, you loose the capability to drop 2,000# LGBs. There will be situations where that capability is needed.

When the Raptor takes over, you have the capability to fly in much more dangerous airspace, have a self defense capability against air and ground threats, have significantly greater speed (allowing it to take out the targets faster than the -117, great for time sensitive targets), and perhaps the most important of all--the ability to fly missions 24 hours a day. The downside is you are stuck with using GBU-31s or SDBs. In most cases, those will probably work out pretty well. In some others, not. Overall, the Air Force is gaining a significant combat capability with the Raptor--something the JSF can't come close to touching in regard to internal payload, speed, maneuverability, and all aspect stealth. But saying the AF should ditch the Raptor for the JSF, or the JSF for the Raptor is just as ignorant as saying we should ONLY use F-15s OR F-16s.

Blah blah blah....nothing is ever going to replace BOOTS ON THE GROUND, head in the helment or guts behind the flak vest.
War or "conflict" as the politican likes to call them, is a lot like football...
A good passing attack wins games but a great defense wins championships. Meaning airplanes will not go into the caves, foxholes and get the bastards out!!!! If it did we would have BL's head mounted in the Rose garden!!!!

 

[Merlin'05]

Blah blah blah....nothing is ever going to replace BOOTS ON THE GROUND, head in the helment or guts behind the flak vest.
War or "conflict" as the politican likes to call them, is a lot like football...
A good passing attack wins games but a great defense wins championships. Meaning airplanes will not go into the caves, foxholes and get the bastards out!!!! If it did we would have BL's head mounted in the Rose garden!!!!

Dude, when did I EVER say aircraft were going to replace people? Last I checked, this thread was never even about troops--meaning they have no bearing on the conversation.

 

[bssthound]

Orginally posted by paid4training
Blah blah blah....nothing is ever going to replace BOOTS ON THE GROUND,

That's not the point. Everyone agrees that we have to have boots on the ground. BUT . . . in order for the grunt to hold a piece of ground we have to own the sky above the ground. That is what is being discussed.

 

[AD SUPT Hopeful]

When the -117 leaves, you loose the capability to drop 2,000# LGBs. There will be situations where that capability is needed. [/quote]

Strike Eagles carry the 2,000lb LGBs.

 

[JimNtexas]

Don't forget that both John Wayne (In 'The Green Berets' ) and Tom Hanks ('In Saving Private Ryan') had boots on the ground, but in both cases their asses were saved by the Air Force at the end of the movie.

Of course no one here said anything negative about the ground forces, in fact, no one even mentioned them.

But since the subject has come up, has any money been spent on the USAF ground FAC forces since the mid-ninties?

One of the reasons for my viserial hatred of the F-22 and the B-2 was that my last assignment in the Air Force before I retired was as an Air Liason Officer at Fort Hood.

At that time the ONLY difference between the tools I had and the tools they had WWII were that I had a Humvee instead of a Jeep, and my radio was solid state instead of tubes. Other than that, I had no technology whatsoever that was not present in WWII. No lasers, no encoded communications, no data links to anywhere. Certainly no way to receive an ATO in the field other than by courier, and certainly no way to control CAS other than a grease pencil, a chart, and a nine-line card. GPS units were rumored to be on the way.

Not that was much CAS to control, what with the A-10s gone, and the active duty F-16s too good to be bothered with such a minor and disgusting mission.

Meanwhile they are buying gold plated lugnuts for the B-2 and and silver spoons for the F-22 squadron bar, just in case the F-22 (then almost ten years behind schedule) was ever delivered.

To this day it burns me to think of it.