Old girl is starting to show her age (again)

[super61 0]

F-15

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22366201/from/RSS/

Edited December 22, 2007 by super61

[Nesher 628]

thanks for the news...!

[sparkomatic 7]

like any machine...its just needs money and love to fix it...unfortunately the USAF is now run by vain bean counters who do not want heroes nor icons...they would much rather buy 100 F-22 instead of 40,000 airmen, so how do you think they feel about a 30+ year old fighter?

 

especially since Moseley is not a "true" fighter pilot...read his bio

[+Dave 2,322]

like any machine...its just needs money and love to fix it...unfortunately the USAF is now run by vain bean counters who do not want heroes nor icons...they would much rather buy 100 F-22 instead of 40,000 airmen, so how do you think they feel about a 30+ year old fighter?

 

especially since Moseley is not a "true" fighter pilot...read his bio

 

Now on that note Sparky I got to see the cracks on 2 of those Albinos stuck here. Knowing what I know about machinery and mechanics. They are going to have to redo that whole section because a patch wont fix it. It's broke right in area that isn't easy to repair. I love the F-22, but not at the cost of 40,000 airmen. But on the flip side I think retiring older Eagles and getting new F-22's can't hurt.

[+drdoyo 2]

The truth is that every great warhorse meets it day to pasture. The Tomcat is gone, and it's probably getting close to time to retire the some Eagles, earlier Falcons and early Hornets. It's IMO past time for some new steel to carry the weight and match the new Flankers.

[sparkomatic 7]

- we could buy more mud hens...or even more Ramptors...I just do not know how we are going to pay for either

[JediMaster 451]

The situation could be far better if they weren't spending money in the WRONG ways. I see it here all the time. There's no money for X, but they waste money on Y. Why is that? Because that's what that area's budget says they can have. It's totally stupid.

[sparkomatic 7]

I am also a proponent of Space being its own Service (not a space geek)...that stuff eats up our budget like mad cow disease and for what? Yeah, its cool and important, but I do not want to pay for something that everyone else gets to use...more sharing or a separate Service, period

[+Gocad 26]

Link: New CNN report about the F-15 grounding with an interesting interview at the end

Edited January 11, 2008 by Gocad

[sparkomatic 7]

heck, the video did not co-operate for me.

[rovert97 1]

id say retire the older F-15's up to the C varients, and let just the Strike Eagles carry on the missions that all the older eagles can no longer do. the Strike Eagles are just as good in air combat as any other eagle. they dont suffer from this same crack as other models do (yet), and two sets of eye balls are always better then one. that should buy them enough time for the F-22 squadrons and eventually the F-35 groups to get online and assuming the F-15's role.

[sparkomatic 7]

sounds so simple, the way you put it...except we are talking about hundreds of airplanes...and the mud hens are already tasked on their own missions...there are two wars going on right now...

[+Dave 2,322]

Sparky did you get the message COMACC sent out today about the F-15's? I wonder if we can release it here. That will give everyone the final word on the F-15's. It came via regular email and not marked FOUO. What do you think?

[sparkomatic 7]

no idea...we are still in an ORE, so email is kaput...brilliant comm sqd

[JediMaster 451]

LOL! We have the same thing here. Ever notice the Comm Sqd has the worst record of communicating with others? Irony on a plate!

[+Typhoid 231]

Sparky did you get the message COMACC sent out today about the F-15's? I wonder if we can release it here. That will give everyone the final word on the F-15's. It came via regular email and not marked FOUO. What do you think?

 

you mean the one putting 60% of the fleet back in the air and the other 40% pending a COMACC decision?

[sparkomatic 7]

And now they are standing up Cyber Command or whatever...IMHO, yet another horrible idea by Moseley...but how can they group so many dudes that never knew the kiss of a woman into one command?

 

even if they put 100% of the fleet into the air today, it will be a while before you can CMR all of those squadrons, not to mention there will be limitations, etc.

[+Typhoid 231]

And now they are standing up Cyber Command or whatever...IMHO, yet another horrible idea by Moseley...but how can they group so many dudes that never knew the kiss of a woman into one command?

 

even if they put 100% of the fleet into the air today, it will be a while before you can CMR all of those squadrons, not to mention there will be limitations, etc.

 

 

nice one

[cgold 0]

This is from the good ol' boys at airfighters.com.

 

"LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE - At 9:22 a.m. Wednesday morning, six F-15 Eagles took off from Langley Air Force Base, marking the first time in 44 days the planes have flown since a C model plane from Missouri broke apart in mid-air during a simulated dogfight.

 

That's good news for national security.

 

Residents around the Hampton base, though, may notice some extra planes in the air and additional noise.

 

Returning the Eagles to flying status returns all three of Langley's fighter squadrons, two F-22A Raptor squadrons and one Eagle squadron, to the skies.

 

Also, because the Eagles were grounded for so long, pilots lost their flying qualifications.

 

While the pilots spent time in a flight simulator and in the classroom during the grounding, a Langley spokesman said, renewing flight qualifications has to be done in the air.

 

The Eagle fleet was grounded in November after an Air National Guard's C model F-15 "experienced catastrophic structural failure" and broke apart in flight during a simulated dogfight in Missouri, the Air Force said.

 

Newer Eagle models resumed flying shortly after the accident. But it wasn't until Tuesday that Air Combat Command cleared 60 percent of the F-15 A - D model planes to fly. Ten of Langley's 20 Eagles are scheduled to fly Wednesday. The remaining planes are still being inspected.

 

The command, which is headquartered at Langley and oversees the service's fighters and bombers, "recommended a limited return to flight for Air Force units worldwide following engineering risk assessments and…multiple fleet wide inspections, " according to a press release.

 

"The priority in resuming operations for a portion of the F-15 fleet is the defense of our nation - America deserves nothing less," said Air Force Gen. John D.W. Corley, head of Air Combat Command.

 

Corley made the decision to return the planes to flying status following a detailed briefing he received late last week on the investigation results of the Missouri incident and fleet maintenance inspections.

 

The investigation showed that the National Guard plane broke apart in mid-air as a result of a fault in a support beam, called a longeron. "Inspections have discovered nine other aircraft with longeron failure cracks," according to the Air Force. "Approximately 40 percent of inspected aircraft have at least one longeron that does not meet blueprint specifications."

 

So, I think this is a good time to say... "I feel the need... the need for speed!"

[sparkomatic 7]

sounds suspiciously politically motivated...not cool

[+Typhoid 231]

sounds suspiciously politically motivated...not cool

 

what is politically motivated? The 60% of the fleet that has passed has been put back in the air. Did I miss something?

[sparkomatic 7]

reading between the lines "America deserves" and "Homeland Defense"...being in the post-modern USAF has taught me one thing...the USAF abhors bad press like a wasp sting in the junk...

 

I am not convinced that all of the decisions made are in the best interest of the public / pilots and rather are more of a gamble to get flying again as more news articles began mentioning the lack / gap of air defense due to Eagle non-availability.

 

Hey, I am a child of air dominance and even I think that when it comes to air defense a few more Patriot batteries is way cheaper / more effective than flying CAPs. Not perfect, but certainly cheaper. Of course flying CAPs is way more about re-assuring the public than protecting targets.

[+Typhoid 231]

reading between the lines "America deserves" and "Homeland Defense"...being in the post-modern USAF has taught me one thing...the USAF abhors bad press like a wasp sting in the junk...

 

I am not convinced that all of the decisions made are in the best interest of the public / pilots and rather are more of a gamble to get flying again as more news articles began mentioning the lack / gap of air defense due to Eagle non-availability.

 

Hey, I am a child of air dominance and even I think that when it comes to air defense a few more Patriot batteries is way cheaper / more effective than flying CAPs. Not perfect, but certainly cheaper. Of course flying CAPs is way more about re-assuring the public than protecting targets.

 

 

well..............

 

I see your point, but....

 

as I read it, those Eagles that were cleared are the only ones that were put back into flying. With 40% of the Eagle fleet still grounded that is hardly leaning out there too far. It strikes me as being very conservative and focused on aircrew safety. No operational flying yet, that I know of.

 

second point is that Patriots have a HUGE footprint downrange. Very dangerous to put into a congested airspace over the US in an air defense mode. I've been involved in Integrated Air Defense with combined CAP/SAM. The CAP is preferred for operational reasons for a lot of reasons.

 

Key among those is range - you can get out there a lot further out than by hosing off a Patriot or something.

 

Second is control of the situation. Over the US in an ONE event you get eyes on the target for positive ID as well as the key assessment of what is going on and what is the likely intent of the target. With only a GBAD, all you can do is shoot based on target profile and hope you are right and that it isn't just some guy with a transponder failure who is lost.

 

Third is airspace. We have extraordinarily dense airspace with a lot of traffic. Its not so easy determing with a GBAD missile that you actually have the correct target locked up. Much more control with a fighter.

 

our priority is to put a fighter on a suspicous track. GBAD SAM engagement is a last resort, but one that we do drill and are prepared to execute in certain areas as required.

[sparkomatic 7]

I am not saying that it is knee jerk, hey look at me press seeking...well maybe. Obviously there were a lot of smart dudes involved and a lot of consequence-oriented discussion...clear the fleet too soon and the first one that crashes gets front page coverage.

 

And never said SAMs are perfect. There are targets that SAMs can protect that fighters cannot, particularly point defense high value. And airspace? We control the airspace, we decide who flies where, with as many concessions to the commercial market as one can imagine. That being said...

 

We have a Patriot battalion here on Okinawa...of course it does not take an entire battalion to defend a nuclear power plant or the white house.

 

What I am saying is that we have options. As an informed member of the defense community you know, as well as I do, that we have spent the last 12 years driving by the rear view mirror...even after 9/11.

 

It is time to do better. Have we been effective? In many ways yes, in many ways we should be doing better.

 

Who can fix it? Not one person, it is a culture change that may take a while longer to materialize

[+Typhoid 231]

We control the airspace, we decide who flies where, with as many concessions to the commercial market as one can imagine. "

 

overseas, maybe. Depends on where you are. Here in the US the military DOES NOT control airspace!!!! The FAA owns and controls the airspace. Under certain emergency conditions we can take it from them (9/11 comes to mind....) but day to day it is FAA owned, FAA controlled and FAA locked up!! :(

 

"of course it does not take an entire battalion to defend a nuclear power plant or the white house."

 

rotational NG battalions called up for a year of duty.

 

"What I am saying is that we have options. As an informed member of the defense community you know, as well as I do, that we have spent the last 12 years driving by the rear view mirror...even after 9/11." yup. I would say much longer than 12 years - the charitably described "acquisition holiday" of a certain, past administration comes painfully to mind.........

 

"It is time to do better. Have we been effective? In many ways yes, in many ways we should be doing better."

 

yes and no. I think nothing beats having an eye on an intruder or off-course aircraft to determine what his intent is. A pilot in a fighter can control the situation much better, much further out, than the point defense GBAD SAM engaging with ultimate finality some dumb flight student who is lost or some state governor with a bum transponder (both being real events).

 

"Who can fix it? Not one person, it is a culture change that may take a while longer to materialize"

 

what do you think needs to be fixed? I can think of a huge laundry list but just curious as to what you see the shortfalls are.