RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,354
Posts: 5,502,965
Members: 25,121
Currently online: 610
Newest member: MsMarrielle

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 11 2009, 06:15 AM   #1
msbae
Commodore
 
Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met..._marietta.html

If the above article is true, then I am glad that I'm not going into the Air Force to be a Fighter pilot right now.

30 hours of servicing for 1 hour of flying time? What the Hell?
msbae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 08:04 AM   #2
DiSiLLUSiON
Commodore
 
DiSiLLUSiON's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

So it's essentially the stealth coating doing that? Sounds like a lawsuit against Lockheed to me.

Still a beautiful plane, though.
DiSiLLUSiON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 02:34 PM   #3
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

So the thing is multimillion dollar Defense budget sink hole? No surprises there.

DiSiLLUSiON wrote: View Post
So it's essentially the stealth coating doing that? Sounds like a lawsuit against Lockheed to me.

Still a beautiful plane, though.
Meh, the F-14s and the F-15s still have it in the looks dept. as far as I'm concerned. The F-14, especially, just screams "I'm here to fuck you up", IMO.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 02:46 PM   #4
ThunderAeroI
Rear Admiral
 
ThunderAeroI's Avatar
 
Location: Perpetually being chased by airplanes
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

TheGallifreyanSith wrote: View Post
So the thing is multimillion dollar Defense budget sink hole? No surprises there.

DiSiLLUSiON wrote: View Post
So it's essentially the stealth coating doing that? Sounds like a lawsuit against Lockheed to me.

Still a beautiful plane, though.
Meh, the F-14s and the F-15s still have it in the looks dept. as far as I'm concerned. The F-14, especially, just screams "I'm here to fuck you up", IMO.
qft.


i love the turkey!
__________________
No Where to be found, but everywhere you are - I'll be there looking for ways to save your life.
ThunderAeroI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 05:47 PM   #5
Marc
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: An Aussie in Canukistan
Send a message via ICQ to Marc
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

msbae wrote: View Post
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met..._marietta.html

If the above article is true, then I am glad that I'm not going into the Air Force to be a Fighter pilot right now.

30 hours of servicing for 1 hour of flying time? What the Hell?
Well I guess that's another way in which the Raptor outdoes the F-15 (well some of them

just as a matter of interest I found the following thread on airliners.net which gives from mh/fh figures/

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...d.main/103605/

Saab Draken.- 50 to 1
Eurofighter....- 9 to 1
F-14............. - 24 to 1
F-18E/F........- 6 to 1
F-18E/F........- 15 to 1 (different source)
Saab Gripen..- 10 to 1

C-17.............- 20 to 1
F-15A/B........- 32.3 here thru f117 stats from (HaveBlue and the F-117A by David Aronstein)
F-15C/D........- 22.1
F-16A...........- 19.2
F-117...........- 150 (pre 1989)
F-117...........- 45 (after improvements, post 1989)
CH-46E........- 19.6 in 1995 GlobalSecurity.org
CH-46E........- 27.2 in 2000
CH-53D........- 24.8 in 1995
CH-53D........- 27.9 in 2000
F-20.............- 5.6 (http://www.f20a.com/f20maint.htm)
A-6E............- 51.9 DMMH/FH (http://yarchive.net/mil/fa18_vs_a6.html)
F/A-18C.......- 19.1 DMMH/FH[FONT=ARIAL,][SIZE=2][COLOR=#c4c8cc]
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]B-2..............- 124
__________________
Gentlemen you can't fight in here - this is the war room.

Pres. Merkin P. Muffly
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 07:04 PM   #6
msbae
Commodore
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Marc wrote: View Post
msbae wrote: View Post
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/met..._marietta.html

If the above article is true, then I am glad that I'm not going into the Air Force to be a Fighter pilot right now.

30 hours of servicing for 1 hour of flying time? What the Hell?
Well I guess that's another way in which the Raptor outdoes the F-15 (well some of them

just as a matter of interest I found the following thread on airliners.net which gives from mh/fh figures/

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...d.main/103605/

Saab Draken.- 50 to 1
Eurofighter....- 9 to 1
F-14............. - 24 to 1
F-18E/F........- 6 to 1
F-18E/F........- 15 to 1 (different source)
Saab Gripen..- 10 to 1

C-17.............- 20 to 1
F-15A/B........- 32.3 here thru f117 stats from (HaveBlue and the F-117A by David Aronstein)
F-15C/D........- 22.1
F-16A...........- 19.2
F-117...........- 150 (pre 1989)
F-117...........- 45 (after improvements, post 1989)
CH-46E........- 19.6 in 1995 GlobalSecurity.org
CH-46E........- 27.2 in 2000
CH-53D........- 24.8 in 1995
CH-53D........- 27.9 in 2000
F-20.............- 5.6 (http://www.f20a.com/f20maint.htm)
A-6E............- 51.9 DMMH/FH (http://yarchive.net/mil/fa18_vs_a6.html)
F/A-18C.......- 19.1 DMMH/FH[FONT=ARIAL,][SIZE=2][COLOR=#c4c8cc]
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]B-2..............- 124
I had no idea it commonly took so long to service military planes.

Also, I too miss the venerable F-14. That plane still flies circles around most of the newer aircraft out there.
msbae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 07:39 PM   #7
timelord1010
Captain
 
timelord1010's Avatar
 
Location: Sector 001
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

This just goes to show what a good job commercial airline companies do. There are thousands of planes in the air every day and what is there, maybe 1 or 2 major crashes a year that cause loss of life?

The F-22 is a beautiful plane but it is just too expensive for what we are getting. It would be better if the US Airforce started buying a version of the Navy F-18 to fill in for older fighters that are retired. From what I understand you can buy 4 or 5 F-18's for one F-22. Is stealth that important when your firing missiles from beyond visual range? Couldn't electronic countermeasures be a cost effective solution?

As for the technology in the F-22, I remember seeing a F-15 test plane with the vector thrust nozzles so existing planes could be modified to use the engines and vectored thrust system that the F-22 has possibly at a lower cost.

Just my 2 credits
timelord1010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 08:14 PM   #8
DiSiLLUSiON
Commodore
 
DiSiLLUSiON's Avatar
 
Location: The Netherlands
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Why not simply stop using planes all together? That whole war thing is quite unproductive anyway. Better to pour that money into better education and welfare.
DiSiLLUSiON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2009, 08:39 PM   #9
msbae
Commodore
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

timelord1010 wrote: View Post
This just goes to show what a good job commercial airline companies do. There are thousands of planes in the air every day and what is there, maybe 1 or 2 major crashes a year that cause loss of life?

The F-22 is a beautiful plane but it is just too expensive for what we are getting. It would be better if the US Airforce started buying a version of the Navy F-18 to fill in for older fighters that are retired. From what I understand you can buy 4 or 5 F-18's for one F-22. Is stealth that important when your firing missiles from beyond visual range? Couldn't electronic countermeasures be a cost effective solution?

As for the technology in the F-22, I remember seeing a F-15 test plane with the vector thrust nozzles so existing planes could be modified to use the engines and vectored thrust system that the F-22 has possibly at a lower cost.

Just my 2 credits
I'd prefer that they just buy some more F-15 and F-16 planes with updated controls, ECM, Avionics, et al.

Also, the vectored engines on the F-22 are there to aid in making the plane stealthy. That wouldn't have much of an effect on the F-15 with all of it's sharp edges.

DiSiLLUSiON wrote: View Post
Why not simply stop using planes all together? That whole war thing is quite unproductive anyway. Better to pour that money into better education and welfare.
This will never happen. Also, war can be quite productive when the goal is protecting Freedom or liberating the oppressed.
msbae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 02:56 AM   #10
Marc
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: An Aussie in Canukistan
Send a message via ICQ to Marc
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

msbae wrote: View Post
timelord1010 wrote: View Post
This just goes to show what a good job commercial airline companies do. There are thousands of planes in the air every day and what is there, maybe 1 or 2 major crashes a year that cause loss of life?

The F-22 is a beautiful plane but it is just too expensive for what we are getting. It would be better if the US Airforce started buying a version of the Navy F-18 to fill in for older fighters that are retired. From what I understand you can buy 4 or 5 F-18's for one F-22. Is stealth that important when your firing missiles from beyond visual range? Couldn't electronic countermeasures be a cost effective solution?

As for the technology in the F-22, I remember seeing a F-15 test plane with the vector thrust nozzles so existing planes could be modified to use the engines and vectored thrust system that the F-22 has possibly at a lower cost.

Just my 2 credits
I'd prefer that they just buy some more F-15 and F-16 planes with updated controls, ECM, Avionics, et al.

Also, the vectored engines on the F-22 are there to aid in making the plane stealthy. That wouldn't have much of an effect on the F-15 with all of it's sharp edges.
Doesn't vectoring also have an big impact on the manouverability though?

While the F-15 is still a good air craft it's debatable whether it could match with the latest designs even with updated avionics. A good fighter is a combination of avionics, manouverability, stealthiness, performance.

And truth be known I'm not sure the American phsyche could handle U.S.A.F being second fiddle still flying the Eagles against the likes of the Eurofighter and some of the lastest MIG and Sukhoi designs
__________________
Gentlemen you can't fight in here - this is the war room.

Pres. Merkin P. Muffly
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 04:17 AM   #11
Gaseous Anomaly
Wacked out trippin dude™
 
Gaseous Anomaly's Avatar
 
Location: One screw loose and oof my nut...
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Marc wrote: View Post
And truth be known I'm not sure the American phsyche could handle U.S.A.F being second fiddle still flying the Eagles against the likes of the Eurofighter and some of the lastest MIG and Sukhoi designs
Sorry, USAF is already second fiddle to the US Navy.
__________________

Gaseous Anomaly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 04:45 AM   #12
Marc
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: An Aussie in Canukistan
Send a message via ICQ to Marc
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Gaseous Anomaly wrote: View Post
Marc wrote: View Post
And truth be known I'm not sure the American phsyche could handle U.S.A.F being second fiddle still flying the Eagles against the likes of the Eurofighter and some of the lastest MIG and Sukhoi designs
Sorry, USAF is already second fiddle to the US Navy.
\

Okay okay

I should of said second fiddle to non-U.S millitary forces.
__________________
Gentlemen you can't fight in here - this is the war room.

Pres. Merkin P. Muffly
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 06:11 AM   #13
Samurai8472
Vice Admiral
 
Samurai8472's Avatar
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

TheGallifreyanSith wrote: View Post
The F-14, especially, just screams "I'm here to fuck you up", IMO.
comes with optional "highway to the danger zone" tape

yes I know it wasn't the plane in movie
Samurai8472 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 06:32 AM   #14
msbae
Commodore
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Marc wrote: View Post
msbae wrote: View Post
timelord1010 wrote: View Post
This just goes to show what a good job commercial airline companies do. There are thousands of planes in the air every day and what is there, maybe 1 or 2 major crashes a year that cause loss of life?

The F-22 is a beautiful plane but it is just too expensive for what we are getting. It would be better if the US Airforce started buying a version of the Navy F-18 to fill in for older fighters that are retired. From what I understand you can buy 4 or 5 F-18's for one F-22. Is stealth that important when your firing missiles from beyond visual range? Couldn't electronic countermeasures be a cost effective solution?

As for the technology in the F-22, I remember seeing a F-15 test plane with the vector thrust nozzles so existing planes could be modified to use the engines and vectored thrust system that the F-22 has possibly at a lower cost.

Just my 2 credits
I'd prefer that they just buy some more F-15 and F-16 planes with updated controls, ECM, Avionics, et al.

Also, the vectored engines on the F-22 are there to aid in making the plane stealthy. That wouldn't have much of an effect on the F-15 with all of it's sharp edges.
Doesn't vectoring also have an big impact on the manouverability though?

While the F-15 is still a good air craft it's debatable whether it could match with the latest designs even with updated avionics. A good fighter is a combination of avionics, manouverability, stealthiness, performance.

And truth be known I'm not sure the American phsyche could handle U.S.A.F being second fiddle still flying the Eagles against the likes of the Eurofighter and some of the lastest MIG and Sukhoi designs
Spoken like a man who has never seen what an F-15 can do...

Vectoring does help with manuevering, among other things.

Also, those MiG, Sukhoi and Eurofighter planes are being flown by second fiddle pilots. You can have as many super planes as you want. If the pilot is shit, so's the plane. The Europeans have already seen this back in WW2 when the Luftwaffe had no choice but to use shit pilots in their primitive jet fighters. The prop-driven P-47 & P-51 fighters annihilated them.
msbae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2009, 08:41 AM   #15
deadbabyseal
Cadet
 
Re: Pentagon tests: F-22 has maintenance shortcomings

Samurai8472 wrote: View Post
TheGallifreyanSith wrote: View Post
The F-14, especially, just screams "I'm here to fuck you up", IMO.
comes with optional "highway to the danger zone" tape

yes I know it wasn't the plane in movie
Yes it was.
deadbabyseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.