Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Mon May 04, 2026 5:39 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:00 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 7:11 pm
Posts: 2673
Location: Port Charlotte, Florida
rwdfresno wrote:
Remember in the 80s this kit that speculated the appearance of the "Stealth Fighter." If only it would have actually looked that good.
Image


I still have the huge 1/32 scale :shock: version of that kit, unbuilt, in its original box, with the included "bonus" paint set. Hmmm, maybe some day it'll be worth some money. Right now, it just takes up a LOT of space on one of my closet shelves!

:roll: Cheers!

_________________
Dean Hemphill, K5DH
Port Charlotte, Florida


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:15 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:11 pm
Posts: 1111
Location: Outer Space
rwdfresno wrote:
Remember in the 80s this kit that speculated the appearance of the "Stealth Fighter." If only it would have actually looked that good.

Image



According to Ben Rich's book, Lockheed took a lot of heat over this model. Supposedly people in DC thought Testors were churning out the actual stealth models and Congress was pissed at Lockheed for letting the design get out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:11 pm
Posts: 190
Location: Manchester, NH
I think this is part of the Air Forces plan on trying to get there $137 Billion from the government they want on making more advanced aircraft. You know i dont really see why they are letting it go. They have been using the B-52 forever why can't they use the F-117 the same way?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:57 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm
Posts: 2760
Mudge wrote:
I may not understand this part too well, but...
If the USAF wanted to keep a F-117 for the airshow circuit as a PR gimmick, there would be no need to go to the expense of keeping it "stealthy".

Mudge the simplistic :?


This is true. My point above was simply to illustrate how expensive it is for the Air Force to maintain the F-117. Even if they were to let the "stealth" aspect lapse, it would still be a HUGE operating cost for the Air Force. People don't understand how expensive it is to keep a unique national asset in operation. As an example, the SR-71, when it was operational, cost the Air Force over $ 100,000 an hour to operate when ALL expenses were included. I don't know what it is on the F-117, it's probably still classified. But I'm sure it is still very expensive.

I don't think it would do the Air Force that much good to keep it around for PR purposes. Have you ever seen the Stealth in it's airshow routine? It does not even do aerobatics or anything really "cool". It just does a few mostly level passes at various speeds and configurations. Even when it is hauling ass on a flyby, it's still very quiet. Now compare that against the F-22. The first time I saw the F-22 perform, I nearly soiled my shorts from disbelief over it's capabilities. Which airplane do you think the general public would respond to more favorably - a "boring, mostly level, quiet" flyby of the Stealth, or a high-speed, high G, loud, awe-inspiring aerobatic routine of the F-22?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:39 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:54 pm
Posts: 1388
Location: Beautiful, Downtown Danvers, MA
Mudge wrote:
I may not understand this part too well, but...
If the USAF wanted to keep a F-117 for the airshow circuit as a PR gimmick, there would be no need to go to the expense of keeping it "stealthy".

Mudge the simplistic :?


:idea:

_________________
"Hindsight is usually 20% off!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:19 am 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:08 pm
Posts: 2993
Location: Bunker Hill, WV
Warbird...Gotta' agree with you re: the "excitement" factor of the 117. Compared to almost anything else at an airshow, it's pretty boring. Almost as boring as the Tora, Tora, Tora routine. :crispy:

Mudge the stirrer :hide:

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:31 pm
Posts: 285
Location: Georgetown, TX
Mudge wrote:
Warbird...Gotta' agree with you re: the "excitement" factor of the 117. Compared to almost anything else at an airshow, it's pretty boring. Almost as boring as the Tora, Tora, Tora routine. :crispy:

Mudge the stirrer :hide:




"It's Tora! Tora! Tora! and you are there!"



"It's Tora! Tora! Tora! and you are there!"



"It's Tora! Tora! Tora! and you are there!"

:hide:

_________________
"So there I was, knee deep in a river I couldn't pronounce..."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:31 pm
Posts: 285
Location: Georgetown, TX
Ok, I was just funnin'. 8)

My hat's off to those guys who put together those shows. I always love to watch the little ones in their rapt amazement with all of the various planes flying around, the noise and explosions. Sometimes it takes me back to when I was a little one and how it sparked my interest in Warbirds.

Mike

_________________
"So there I was, knee deep in a river I couldn't pronounce..."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:57 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:43 pm
Posts: 1454
Location: Colorado
Quote:
I think this is part of the Air Forces plan on trying to get there $137 Billion from the government they want on making more advanced aircraft. You know i dont really see why they are letting it go. They have been using the B-52 forever why can't they use the F-117 the same way?


Well they haven't been around as long as the BUFF certainly but the design has been in use for well over 20 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:24 pm
Posts: 819
Location: San Angelo, Texas
Someone noted, Rick I believe, that the -117 is being replaced with the F-22. Nope-different critters. The -117 was basically an attack aircraft, not a "real" fighter. The F-22 was supposed to be the replacement for the F-15C (Randy will correct me if'n I'm wrong on that'n), except in ANG service.

The final resting place of the -117s is supposed to be Groom Lake - Tonopah AFS was mentioned at one time, since they have the covered parking areas - noone could see what happened to them there.

_________________
Bob


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:11 pm
Posts: 360
Location: Ohio
At first it wasn't considered a replacement for the 117 but I think the combined benefits of stealth, speed, altitude and flexibility made it an easy choice for the Air Force to save money by retiring the 117 and using the F-22.
Right now the F-22 can carry 2 1000lb GBU-38 JDAMS or 8 GBU-39/B SDB's. Last year they demonstrated that it could drop a 1000-pound JDAM bomb at Mach 1.5. The bomb glided 24 nautical miles from 50,000 feet and scored a direct hit.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:55 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:10 pm
Posts: 4173
Location: Pearland, Texas
Old SAR, the F-117 guys at Holloman are slotted to receive F-22s.

Sounds like a replacement to me. :D

_________________
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass..."
Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:11 pm
Posts: 360
Location: Ohio
I think there next as soon as the 90th get's all their aircraft then Hawaii.

Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:07 pm
Posts: 620
Location: S. Texas
warbird1 wrote:
For example, did you know that every time you break out an access panel on the aircraft, it requires a new coat of RAM (radar absorptive material) and a new "sealing" to keep the stealth qualities? This is just one example of why the F-117 is being retired. It is expensive and it's capabilities can be replaced by other aircraft in the inventory.


Same thing with the F-22 (maybe a different compound being used) AND they have already had some problems with the early block aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:48 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:38 pm
Posts: 2664
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Mudge I was thinking the same thing. Why don't they keep a few in service for airshow appearances, and football game flyovers and help relieve the needed "real" combat aircraft like the F-15's and A-10's? The airframes have to be lower time and with much better avionics than some of the airplanes currently being taxed by our many wars.
It would be great for Air Force morale to let a few guys on rotation from the war, get checked out to make stateside airshow appearances, and Base open houses etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], martin_sam_2000 and 173 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group