On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:55:26 PM UTC-10, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> The pilot ejected and is safe
any pilot given a nearly half billion dollar toy to play with should have made a pledge to commit suicide if crashing it, even if due to fault of mechanic or designer. the country is wounded beyond measure for any loss of f22 or b2 because we can never ever afford to replace even one. the time is past to wear the wing spars out doing mock combat, thats just joyriding, endangering the priceless. keep pilots on any crappy kind of simulator except one short orbit around the runway four times a year. bring on the drones.
p.s. youtube has a 2012 part one crash compilation showing a gun camera or heads up display view from a crippled fighter gently gliding to a stop on the ground. then you see the ejected pilot slam down brutally on pavement just in front, maybe breaking many bones. i propose disabling all ejection seats, and reassigning pilots who dont concur.
dumbstruck wrote:
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:55:26 PM UTC-10, Orval Fairbairn
> wrote:
>> The pilot ejected and is safe
> any pilot given a nearly half billion dollar toy to play with should
> have made a pledge to commit suicide if crashing it, even if due to
> fault of mechanic or designer. the country is wounded beyond measure
> for any loss of f22 or b2 because we can never ever afford to replace
> even one. the time is past to wear the wing spars out doing mock
> combat, thats just joyriding, endangering the priceless. keep pilots
> on any crappy kind of simulator except one short orbit around the
> runway four times a year. bring on the drones.
> p.s. youtube has a 2012 part one crash compilation showing a gun
> camera or heads up display view from a crippled fighter gently
> gliding to a stop on the ground. then you see the ejected pilot slam
> down brutally on pavement just in front, maybe breaking many bones. i
> propose disabling all ejection seats, and reassigning pilots who dont
> concur.
On Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:50:45 PM UTC-10, Keith W wrote:
> dumbstruck wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:55:26 PM UTC-10, Orval Fairbairn
> > wrote:
> >> The pilot ejected and is safe
> > any pilot given a nearly half billion dollar toy to play with should
> > have made a pledge to commit suicide if crashing it, even if due to
> > fault of mechanic or designer. the country is wounded beyond measure
> > for any loss of f22 or b2 because we can never ever afford to replace
> > even one. the time is past to wear the wing spars out doing mock
> > combat, thats just joyriding, endangering the priceless. keep pilots
> > on any crappy kind of simulator except one short orbit around the
> > runway four times a year. bring on the drones.
> > p.s. youtube has a 2012 part one crash compilation showing a gun
> > camera or heads up display view from a crippled fighter gently
> > gliding to a stop on the ground. then you see the ejected pilot slam
> > down brutally on pavement just in front, maybe breaking many bones. i
> > propose disabling all ejection seats, and reassigning pilots who dont
> > concur.
> Troll rating 7/10
> A good effort spoilt by exageration.
> Keith
bad call by you. i am a flyer myself, soloing before of an age legal to drive cars. chased military airshows and museums in usa and europe at great sacrifice. have lived in a military airbase or near an air guard airbase for decades. hated to see the inferior f22 win over the elegant f23, but now am tormented daily by the stupendous f22 thunder of (i assume) part time air guard buzzing my home needlessly for their adolescent thrill seeking, more like a reckless paris airshow where i have seen crashes than any reasonable practice.
f22 tips over the limit of brutal cost for small value. keep them on ice for some future urgent need maybe 30 years out. no casual pilots should get the honor of risking something approaching the cost of a battlecruiser. if you get in the seat, be prepared to give your life like a captain goes down with his ship, because you sunk the life savings of a hundrd thousand taxpayers
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:50:45 PM UTC-10, Keith W wrote:
> > dumbstruck wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:55:26 PM UTC-10, Orval Fairbairn
> > > wrote:
> > >> The pilot ejected and is safe
> > > any pilot given a nearly half billion dollar toy to play with should
> > > have made a pledge to commit suicide if crashing it, even if due to
> > > fault of mechanic or designer. the country is wounded beyond measure
> > > for any loss of f22 or b2 because we can never ever afford to replace
> > > even one. the time is past to wear the wing spars out doing mock
> > > combat, thats just joyriding, endangering the priceless. keep pilots
> > > on any crappy kind of simulator except one short orbit around the
> > > runway four times a year. bring on the drones.
> > > p.s. youtube has a 2012 part one crash compilation showing a gun
> > > camera or heads up display view from a crippled fighter gently
> > > gliding to a stop on the ground. then you see the ejected pilot slam
> > > down brutally on pavement just in front, maybe breaking many bones. i
> > > propose disabling all ejection seats, and reassigning pilots who dont
> > > concur.
> > Troll rating 7/10
> > A good effort spoilt by exageration.
> > Keith
> bad call by you. i am a flyer myself, soloing before of an age legal to drive cars. chased military airshows and museums in usa and europe at great sacrifice. have lived in a military airbase or near an air guard airbase for decades. hated to see the inferior f22 win over the elegant f23, but now am tormented daily by the stupendous f22 thunder of (i assume) part time air guard buzzing my home needlessly for their adolescent thrill seeking, more like a reckless paris airshow where i have seen crashes than any reasonable practice.
> f22 tips over the limit of brutal cost for small value. keep them on ice for some future urgent need maybe 30 years out. no casual pilots should get the honor of risking something approaching the cost of a battlecruiser. if you get in the seat, be prepared to give your life like a captain goes down with his ship, because you sunk the life savings of a hundrd thousand taxpayers
Captains don't *really* go down with their ships you know.
On Friday, November 16, 2012 5:33:24 AM UTC-5, dumbstruck wrote:
> On Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:50:45 PM UTC-10, Keith W wrote:
> > dumbstruck wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:55:26 PM UTC-10, Orval Fairbairn
> > > wrote:
> > >> The pilot ejected and is safe
> > > any pilot given a nearly half billion dollar toy to play with should
> > > have made a pledge to commit suicide if crashing it, even if due to
> > > fault of mechanic or designer. the country is wounded beyond measure
> > > for any loss of f22 or b2 because we can never ever afford to replace
> > > even one. the time is past to wear the wing spars out doing mock
> > > combat, thats just joyriding, endangering the priceless. keep pilots
> > > on any crappy kind of simulator except one short orbit around the
> > > runway four times a year. bring on the drones.
> > > p.s. youtube has a 2012 part one crash compilation showing a gun
> > > camera or heads up display view from a crippled fighter gently
> > > gliding to a stop on the ground. then you see the ejected pilot slam
> > > down brutally on pavement just in front, maybe breaking many bones. i
> > > propose disabling all ejection seats, and reassigning pilots who dont
> > > concur.
> > Troll rating 7/10
> > A good effort spoilt by exageration.
> > Keith
> bad call by you. i am a flyer myself, soloing before of an age legal to drive cars. chased military airshows and museums in usa and europe at great sacrifice. have lived in a military airbase or near an air guard airbase for decades. hated to see the inferior f22 win over the elegant f23, but now am tormented daily by the stupendous f22 thunder of (i assume) part time air guard buzzing my home needlessly for their adolescent thrill seeking, more like a reckless paris airshow where i have seen crashes than any reasonable practice.
> f22 tips over the limit of brutal cost for small value. keep them on ice for some future urgent need maybe 30 years out. no casual pilots should get the honor of risking something approaching the cost of a battlecruiser. if you get in the seat, be prepared to give your life like a captain goes down with his ship, because you sunk the life savings of a hundrd thousand taxpayers
Your personal experience is irrelevant as are your trolling attempts.
1. I am very glad the pilot bailed out and no one else was injured. This is the main thing.
2. For the person who suggested they never be flown except in emergencies or battle use, simulators are good but nothing will beat actual stick time for the fliers.
3. Yes one did crash, that happens in training and every day duty with just about every type of aircraft imaginable. Much like risking an aircraft and crew in war it is why we build them. Crews training in everyday conditions take risks that we don't always appreciate.
4. The military budget is a very small fraction of our national spending.
On Friday, November 16, 2012 8:49:24 AM UTC-5, David E. Powell wrote:
> 1. I am very glad the pilot bailed out and no one else was injured. This is the main thing.
> 2. For the person who suggested they never be flown except in emergencies or battle use, simulators are good but nothing will beat actual stick time for the fliers.
> 3. Yes one did crash, that happens in training and every day duty with just about every type of aircraft imaginable. Much like risking an aircraft and crew in war it is why we build them. Crews training in everyday conditions take risks that we don't always appreciate.
> 4. The military budget is a very small fraction of our national spending.
dumbstruck wrote:
> bad call by you. i am a flyer myself, soloing before of an age legal to drive
>cars. chased military airshows and museums in usa and europe at great sacrifice.
On Nov 16, 6:39 pm, "D.W." <doug...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> dumbstruck wrote:
> > bad call by you. i am a flyer myself, soloing before of an age legal to drive
> >cars. chased military airshows and museums in usa and europe at great sacrifice.
On Friday, November 16, 2012 3:00:06 AM UTC-10, Vaughn wrote:
> On 11/16/2012 5:33 AM, dumbstruck wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 11:50:45 PM UTC-10, Keith W wrote:
> >> Troll rating 7/10
> >> A good effort spoilt by exageration.
> >> Keith
> > bad call by you.
> Wrong again!
Another needless, crippling f22 crackup just happened today at a pearl harbor comemoration formation flight... one of umpteen needless ceremonial flights these priceless assets are wasted on. The pilot should be put in lifetime imprisonment, as well as whoever ok'ed the flight.
This is like not like aircraft of the past.. now they are irreplaceable, infinitely precious assets for the long term future. No longer the age for gonzo pilots to learn by making mistakes in half billion dollar rides... we need to only use whitebearded elders at the helm, like responsible ocean liner captains of long ago.
It started with that stupid photo flight where a f104 jockey took down an irreplaceable b70. It continues with b2 and f22 crashes. Wake up and see this is a permanent, unrecoverable loss for our now broke country. All involved should know that risking these assets will lead to max punishment. I know the lust for flight will still keep pilots lining up to go, but maybe more sustainably!
On Saturday, December 8, 2012 1:11:37 AM UTC-6, dumbstruck wrote:
> Another needless, crippling f22 crackup just happened today at a pearl harbor comemoration formation flight... one of umpteen needless ceremonial flights these priceless assets are wasted on. The pilot should be put in lifetime imprisonment, as well as whoever ok'ed the flight. > ...
Scraped tail on landing--hardly a "crack-up." If anything, indicative of a lack of proficiency due to limited flying time. You need to fly to get good and stay good.
On Saturday, December 8, 2012 1:11:37 AM UTC-6, dumb#uck wrote:
> Another needless, crippling f22 crackup just happened today at a > pearl harbor comemoration formation flight... one of umpteen > needless ceremonial flights these priceless assets are wasted on. > The pilot should be put in lifetime imprisonment, as well as whoever > ok'ed the flight.
> ...
-Scraped tail on landing--hardly a "crack-up."
-If anything, indicative of a lack of proficiency
-due to limited flying time. You need to fly to
-get good and stay good.
The combat performance of third-world air forces shows what happens when the planes are considered too valuable to risk in training.
http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1986/mar-apr/seg... "AFTER nearly five years of fighting, the Iraqi Air Force has finally come into its own as an important-some say decisive-factor in the Gulf War with Iran. It now shows a previously unseen effectiveness in ground support and tactical operations and has undertaken its first real strategic bombing campaign with at least moderate success."
I am fully aware of the proficiency issue, but nobody seems to see the new issue at hand. Leading edge manned fighters and bombers are at an end in this country and we have to make the few ones we have last for 100 years. We cant afford to burn them up to keep up readiness all the time... maybe 75 years out there will be a building serious threat for which we can ramp up readiness at that time. Meanwhile limit the f22 and b2 flights to a few touch and gos per month by cautious pilots, just to check the mechanical condition.
The root cause is that although the usa won the battle against communism, it lost the war against the eurosocialism. Social spending will suck military aviation dry until disaster hits. Meanwhile capitalist china will advance manned warbird programs... and maybe if we are lucky, will sell affordable fighters to usa to upgrade, like the israelies do with US aircraft.
dumbstruck wrote:
> Another needless, crippling f22 crackup just happened today at a
> pearl harbor comemoration formation flight... one of umpteen
> needless ceremonial flights these priceless assets are wasted on.
> The pilot should be put in lifetime imprisonment, as well as whoever
> ok'ed the flight.
More like a minor incident, without sunstantial damage of injury.
Display flybys like this are actually slotted into and budgeted from
the normal proficiency training for the unit.
(As in a cross-country navigation exercize, for example.)
The airplane was going to be flying no matter what, whether people
were going to be looking at it or not.
> This is like not like aircraft of the past.. now they are
> irreplaceable, infinitely precious assets for the long term future.
> No longer the age for gonzo pilots to learn by making mistakes in
> half billion dollar rides... we need to only use whitebearded elders
> at the helm, like responsible ocean liner captains of long ago.
I've been to a World's Fair, a Picnic, and a Rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I've seen come across my screen in a long time.
In order to maintain proficiency, Pilots, and airplanes, need to fly.
(Airplanes sitting on the ramp develop all sorts of problems as seals, wiring connectors, pumps, and actuators dry out and aren't exercized.)
It's generally considered that to just maintain proficiency, a fighter/attack pilot need at least 200 flight hours per year.
> It started with that stupid photo flight where a f104 jockey took
> down an irreplaceable b70. It continues with b2 and f22 crashes.
> Wake up and see this is a permanent, unrecoverable loss for our now
> broke country. All involved should know that risking these assets
> will lead to max punishment. I know the lust for flight will still
> keep pilots lining up to go, but maybe more sustainably!
The "F-104 Jockey" was one of the most experienced and capable Test Pilots in the world at that time, NASA's Chief Test Pilot, in fact.
The cause of the collision was the wingtip vortices from the B-70 whippng the F-104 from under the lowered wing tip of the B-70 and
whipping it up around the wingtip and through both vertical stabilizers of the B-70.
(The formation photo part of the mission was already completed.)
The fact is, if you fly anything, be it a Wright Flyer, a Curtiss Jenny, a DC-3, or a Space Shuttle, you're going to crash it.
I suggest that you go over to the the USAF Safety Center's website and
take a look at the Statistical Data - especially the Historical Data
here:
http://www.afsec.af.mil/organizations/aviation/aircraftstatistics/ind...
You'll see that it's absolutely established that flying in the USAF
is safer than it's ever been.
(Especially check out the stats on the F-84 and F-86)
And, guess what? Airplanes cost, especially these days.
An A380 (When Airbus can sell one) goes for a For Real half a billion
Dollars US. A new 777 is a bit over 300 million. Even the 45 year old (And thus its development costs are fully amortized) 747 sells for
350 million dollars these days.
An F-22,even with its development costs factored into its limited production numbers, goes for 150 million (About the same as a new
small airliner, like a 737) even an old tech airframe, like the F-15Ks being built for South Korea are going for 100 million a pop.
-- Pete Stickney
From the foothills of the Florida Alps
> An F-22,even with its development costs factored into its limited
> production numbers, goes for 150 million (About the same as a new
> small airliner, like a 737) even an old tech airframe, like the
> F-15Ks being built for South Korea are going for 100 million a pop.
> -- > Pete Stickney
> From the foothills of the Florida Alps
The US population is over 300 million, so one F-22 costs each of us 50 cents.
jsw
On Sunday, December 9, 2012 2:37:21 AM UTC-10, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "Peter Stickney" wrote...
> > An F-22,even with its development costs factored into its limited
> > production numbers, goes for 150 million (About the same as a new
> > small airliner, like a 737) even an old tech airframe, like the
> > F-15Ks being built for South Korea are going for 100 million a pop.
> > --
> > Pete Stickney
> > From the foothills of the Florida Alps
> The US population is over 300 million, so one F-22 costs each of us 50
> cents.
> jsw
NO! The 150 million is only flyaway marginal production cost, and is anyway completely irrelevant since no more will ever be build. From wikipedia, the under 200 f22s were built for $67 billion total, which means a third of a billion per aircraft (not being able to spread devel costs by making more).
However, a normal hard-flying attrition rate out of such a few aircraft results in an exponential rise in the investment per remaining plane... not a program that can carry us 60+ years with massed force like the b52. For B-2's we spent 45 billion for 21... er, make that now 19 uncrashed airplanes... over a couple billion each and rising as we wear it out.
If we insist on burning up our last ever manned aircraft, we had better hope the drone replacements will be outstanding. The problem is our opponents may have just as good drones and software; our hard-to-reproduce edge has been pilot training rather than software.
Wake up, these are new times. Look at our air control software which is decades behind the times and has proved resistant to replacement. Just try and hire a good programmer... they have to look overseas half the time.
