Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:43 pm
That is a possibility but what do you believe a 'spam can' would be?
Many possibilities out there!
Many possibilities out there!
Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:47 pm
Spam can = general aviation. 
Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:54 pm
An F-102 still has significant military capability ? Give me a break !
I would agree that the F-102 or even the F-106 still have military capabilities. And they have one bigger bang then WWII planes have...their faster!
Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:56 pm
Oh, forgot to add. There is a Poland Mig-17 being restored to flying condition at the Natioanl Warplane museum in Elmira NY aka. Wings of Eagles.
They also have an A-37 to fly.
They also have an A-37 to fly.
Mon Apr 30, 2007 1:29 pm
Nice to hear that my favorite museum is still flying some aircraft.
After the B-17 and Pby left, its sad to say that there arnt many ringers for the museum.
Also. Is there a chance in the future for them to fly there F-4?
After the B-17 and Pby left, its sad to say that there arnt many ringers for the museum.
Also. Is there a chance in the future for them to fly there F-4?
Mon Apr 30, 2007 1:45 pm
I don't think their F-4 will ever fly again. Pretty sure the engines were taken out. As far as I know the Mig-17 is not flying yet and is privately owned. Although it is listed as the museums aircraft. They also have an A-37 Dragonfly that is planned to be a flyer.
Cheers,
Nathan
Cheers,
Nathan
Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:22 pm
Isn't there another F-4 somewhere that is being restored to flying condition?
Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:46 pm
Well, they are taking furball F-4's out of storage and making them into drone aircraft. Does that count?
Mon Apr 30, 2007 3:29 pm
Nathan wrote:An F-102 still has significant military capability ? Give me a break !
I would agree that the F-102 or even the F-106 still have military capabilities. And they have one bigger bang then WWII planes have...their faster!
I agree the Century Series Fighters do pose a significant threat to National Security if they were to fall into the wrong hands. They are all faster than hell, capable of carrying a variety of weapons and could be very hard to catch if the pilot is well trained. Even Kelly Johnson said his F-104 Starfighter could give an F-15 Eagle trouble if there is a highly trained pilot flying it. He was surprised the Air Force didn't buy more of his Starfighters.
Jim
Mon Apr 30, 2007 4:18 pm
You guys are missing the point.
Operating these things isn't easy ! The average bad guy wouldn't have the patience nor the desire.
Old American fighters ARE NOT a threat to the general public. There are plenty of non US fighters availible ALL over the world if they really wanted them.
AS far as hanging weapons on these things, yeah the F-100 could hang external stores, so could the 84 & 86. But the 101, 102, 104, & 106 not so much in fact I've never seen anything external on any of them. The primary weapons on these were early air to air only. Yeah there fast but again what does that really get you ? A bigger smoking hole ? Certainly not anything bigger than a loaded 757.
Again, the availability of these aircraft to the public is limited primarily because of DoD policy as it relates to liability issues in case of a catastrophic event.
Operating these things isn't easy ! The average bad guy wouldn't have the patience nor the desire.
Old American fighters ARE NOT a threat to the general public. There are plenty of non US fighters availible ALL over the world if they really wanted them.
AS far as hanging weapons on these things, yeah the F-100 could hang external stores, so could the 84 & 86. But the 101, 102, 104, & 106 not so much in fact I've never seen anything external on any of them. The primary weapons on these were early air to air only. Yeah there fast but again what does that really get you ? A bigger smoking hole ? Certainly not anything bigger than a loaded 757.
Again, the availability of these aircraft to the public is limited primarily because of DoD policy as it relates to liability issues in case of a catastrophic event.
Mon Apr 30, 2007 4:25 pm
Sure I agree that it would be very hard to service a old cold war jet for use in bottly harm. But what I was trying to say was that these aircraft still have good performance. Heck some third world countries are using less performance aircraft that still don't even match the century fighters.
Mon Apr 30, 2007 5:31 pm
I agree with Rick, It is one thing to own one of these planes and another thing entirely to actually get it to operational status - read "big money" here.
By the way, if you really want to catch up with a great group of guys and thier JETS. go visit www.classicjets.org
Tom P.
By the way, if you really want to catch up with a great group of guys and thier JETS. go visit www.classicjets.org
Tom P.
Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:06 pm
Funny, ya know.... The gov't is worried about our own obsolete jets, but!
Would you believe there's about 40 MiG-21s on the US register??
And 3 MiG-29s?
That's more than most Third-World air forces!
Just go to the FAA site and do a search by type......
Would you believe there's about 40 MiG-21s on the US register??
And 3 MiG-29s?
That's more than most Third-World air forces!
Just go to the FAA site and do a search by type......
Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:10 pm
Don't forget that Mig-23 in Delaware.
Mon Apr 30, 2007 8:13 pm
Old SAR pilot wrote:Funny, ya know.... The gov't is worried about our own obsolete jets, but!
Would you believe there's about 40 MiG-21s on the US register??
And 3 MiG-29s?
That's more than most Third-World air forces!
Just go to the FAA site and do a search by type......
Wow!! 40?!?!
Who has MiG-29s?????
When will we see those on the air show circut?
