Warbird Information Exchange

Sounds like the Air Force is preparing to retire the New Mexico F-117A squadron, and replace them with F-22A's. Anybody in the market for a Stealth Fighter?
----------------------------------

[Federal Register: April 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 68 )]
[Notices]
[Page 18087]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10ap06-41]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Notice of Intent To Perform an Environmental Assessment for the
Retirement of the F-117A and T-38A Aircraft and Beddown of the F-22A at
Holloman Air Force Base, NM

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Air Combat Command.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment at
Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico for retirement of the F-117A, and
T-38A, and 3rd operational beddown of the F-22A.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The United States Air Force is issuing this Notice of Intent
(NOI) to announce that it is conducting an Environmental Assessment
(EA) to determine the potential environmental consequences of a
proposal to transform the combat capability of the 49th Fighter Wing
and maximize the use of available infrastructure at Holloman AFB by
replacing the retiring F-117A aircraft and T-38A aircraft supporting
the F-117A mission with two F-22A squadrons. The Air Force has
identified Holloman AFB as the preferred location for the third
operational wing of the Air Force's F-22A Raptor, which would enhance
the low observable, precision weapons system capability of the 49th
Fighter Wing.
The EA for the proposed action will be prepared in compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4347), the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA Regulations (40 CFR
1500-1508); and the Air Force's Environmental Impact Analysis Process
(EIAP) (Air Force Instruction 32-7061 as promulgated at 32 CFR 989). As
part of the proposal, the Air Force will analyze the following actions
at Holloman AFB:
Retire F-117A and T-38A aircraft currently based at
Holloman AFB.
Beddown and operate two F-22A aircraft squadrons.
Renovate existing facilities and construct new facilities
to support the F-22A squadrons.
Adjust base manning to reflect F-22A beddown requirements
Conduct F-22A training routinely in airspace within 100
miles of Holloman AFB, to include supersonic operations.
Expand chaff and flare use in military airspace.
Alternatives meeting the underlying purpose and need of the
proposed action, if any, will be developed during the EIAP process.
This process includes gathering information from the scoping meetings.

DATES: The Air Force will host public scoping meetings April 17 through
19, 2006 for the general public and government agencies to help
determine the scope of issues to be addressed and identify
environmental issues to be analyzed in depth. All meetings will be held
from 5:30 p.m.-7 p.m.
April 17, 2006, 5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m.; Town: Ruidoso; Location: Best
Western Pine Springs Inn, 1420 West Highway 70, Ruidoso Downs, NM.
April 18, 2006, 5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m.; Town: Truth or Consequences;
Location: Truth or Consequences Civic Center, 400 W 4th Ave., Truth or
Consequences, NM.
April 19, 2006, 5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m.; Town: Alamogordo; Location:
Sergeant Willie Estrada Memorial Civic Center, 800 East First Street,
Alamogordo, NM.
During these meetings, the Air Force will provide additional
information about the proposed retirement of the F-117A and T-38A
aircraft and beddown of the F-22A at Holloman AFB. Public and agency
comments presented at the meetings, as well as written comments
received by the Air Force during the scoping period and throughout the
environmental process, will be considered in the preparation of the EA.
These scoping meetings would satisfy the requirement in 32 CFR 989.18
should the AF later determine an EIS is necessary. The Air Force will
accept comments at any time during the environmental process. However,
to ensure the Air Force has sufficient time to consider public input in
the preparation of the Draft EA, comments should be submitted to the
address below by May 4, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Linda A. DeVine, HQ ACC/A7ZP, c/o
SAIC, 22 Enterprise Parkway, Suite 200, Hampton, VA 23666, 757-827-
2659.

Bao-Anh Trinh,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E6-5169 Filed 4-7-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P

Must find $200,000,000 (takes £0.01 out of piggy bank) :(

_________________
Chris Globe
UK
http://www.picasaweb.google.com/Chris.M.Globe

man!!! makes me feel like an old geezer that some of these are worn out already!!! i remember when they were nothing but speculation & rumor!!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

I'd speculate that the earliest F-117A's have probably seen a considerable amount of service compared to say, F-14's, pre-Super Hornet F-18's, or any of the other "'tweener" planes in service (those that built & served between Vietnam and Gulf I). Those airframes probably have a disproportionantly high number of sorties in comparision to airframes that served at the same time such as the Super Hornets.

If you think about it, every major conflict from Panama on has seen F-117 involvement, which says a lot about the way that bird both created and filled its role. Its come a long way from being the "Hopeless Diamond."

Now for the question that's sure to perk up a sniffer at the NSA (especially if this traffic passes through an AT&T network)....I wonder what the radar cross section numbers of the F-117A and the F-22 look like? How "invisible" is the F-22 in comparison to the F-117. Eyeballing it says it can't even be close.

(side question: Who runs the skunk works nowadays? Are they a direct (company wise) descendant of Ben Rich?)

_________________
Phil K.
Yankee Air Museum
Systems Admin / Ramp Crew / Professional Photo Ruiner

The Raptor is significantly stealthier than the F-117, as is the F-35.

Maintenance on the 117s is eating the troops up at Holloman. Each aircraft is virtually handbuilt, only common generalities between them.

The Defense Authorization Legislation passed last year specifically prohibited the Air Force from retiring any 117s and B1s for this year. Don't know if it will be included in this year's version.

thats the problem with computer / electronic technology today.......... progress advances so fast that any break though is obsolete before it is put into use!! quite frusterating for us all!!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Lockheed Martin Runs Skunkworks.



F-22 Raptor [dBsm]= -22 [m2]=0.0065 [Ft2]=0.07
F-117A [dBsm]= -25 [m2]=0.003 [Ft2]=0.03







http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/el ... 0168.shtml

Look on the bright side! The museums that get them will not have to worry about them corroding away

Rgds Cking

I read somewhere the RCS of the F-22 is like that of steel marble. The RCS of the F-35, a golf ball. The F-117, a bowling ball.

The Super Hornet is pretty stealthy, much more so than the original.

Paul the avionics suite in the F-117 is off the shelf F-18 Hornet. The maintenance problems they are having are apparently airframe and systems related.

In his autobiography Ben Rich (then leader of the skunk works, Kelly Johnson's sucessor) tells the story of the sales pitch of the F-117. He had the designers calculate the size of the Radar cross section of the aircraft. He then had the machine shop mill some ball berings to that size (supposedly less than an inch.) When Rich would have to make a presentation to the various Air Force brass, he'd walk into the room and roll one of the berings across the officers desk. The officer would ask something to the effect of "what the hell is this?" and he'd respond, "that's your new fighter!" He was later told to can the act by the AF brass, as they were a bit worried about keeping the project secret.

Of course, there's a certain level of shilling involved in any published numbers, but I still have a hard time believing the F-22 is even close to the size of the 117. The return off of the 22's cockpit alone should be more than that of the entire 117. Especially if the whole theory of stealth is based on geometry in conjuction with the coatings. But then, I disagree with calling the B-2 a "stealth" aircraft, so what do I know.

_________________
Phil K.
Yankee Air Museum
Systems Admin / Ramp Crew / Professional Photo Ruiner

Muchos gracias for the numbers. Way lower than I expected.

I was just curious who "the guy" was over there now, If he was a part of the good old days or if it was someone else.

I seriously doubt that those are accurate numbers, they would be classified. Besides that, they are way too generalized due to the RCS being very different depending upon the aspect of illumination. As an RF engineer, I can tell you that size is not what determines radar cross sections, it's all down to materials and geometry. The F-22 is supposed to be a good deal more stealthy that the F-117, despite being larger. I don't know what the numbers are, but considering that they cost $400M a piece, it had better be a whole lot better both as an air frame and a tactical platform.

With regards to the F-117, they are supposed to be phased out of service completely by FY2007. We are dropping about 1300 aircraft from the inventory in fact, including about half of the B-52 fleet. Not so sure that that's such a wise idea!

Richard

Those were public numbers. Of course, anyone would assume that those are general numbers and that the real RCS numbers are highly classified.