SocialD Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Is it a quality of life thing? I would guess this. Ya know, horrible basing options and high ops temp and all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Not to mention the harsh reality that they're forced to fly CT instead of ONE...poor guys, must be one hell of a total letdown. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I've tasked the Langley guys more than once for ONE so I know they have done it on occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Well, at least one side of the country doesn't do it...morale has plummeted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Noonin Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Well, at least one side of the country doesn't do it You just can't stop yourself from opening your cake hole when you have no idea what the fuck and why, can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Relax, just giving the dudes shit...they're doing good work and I know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaded Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 ...they're doing good work and I know it. Really? I appreciate what the jet can do, but I can't name an airframe doing less "mission". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B.M. Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Really? I appreciate what the jet can do, but I can't name an airframe doing less "mission". Think "F-15C". At least the -22 still has a demo team. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTB Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 In the Track Assignments thread, someone mentioned the rumor that F-22s have the lowest retention rate in the AF. Does anyone actually know if this is true or not? If so, why would dudes be wanting to get out of the 22? I don't buy that everyone is afraid of hypoxia. Is it a quality of life thing? It's more a 'grass is greener' thing combined with a horrible (non-existent) personnel management plan for the Raptor. Lots of guys bailing from the AD pain train for the goodness of the Guard and Reserve, in both the F-22 (large TFI footprint at every base) and Vipers/Eagles. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Really? I appreciate what the jet can do, but I can't name an airframe doing less "mission". All shit flipping aside, the dudes actually are deployed to more than one place around the world. No, they won't win the "I'm in a bigger shithole then you" fight, but it's not their fault U.S. strategic need leads them to Location X instead of Location Y. Additionally, not their fault Country X and Y don't see value in or are too scared to start some shit with America. Are they actively doing more than others right this minute...hell no, but they are certainly strategically necessary in a few locations and are damn well ready to kick the shit out of somebody if it comes to it. Now back to giving Raptor dudes shit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilgore Trout Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20120927/as-f-22-problems-predicted/ Pretty extensive read that hit the AP wire today. It shows the timeline of when oxygen problems began in the jet dating back to more than a decade ago and what people tried to do about it. It at least shows that people knew changes needed to be made in the past but the funding or desire wasn't in place to fix it. Among the problems was the oxygen scheduling. Too much oxygen at lower altitudes and too little oxygen at high altitudes. A proposed software upgrade to fix the oxygen schedule was thought to have cost about $100,000 per jet but never completely researched to discover if it would solve the problems back in 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaddebate Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 I know this isn't directly related to the F-22 but the Oxygen problem made me post this here. If somebody knows a better thread, please let me know. Requesting somebody in the know go to:http://www.sousaffs.org/FLarchives/FL-2015Spring.pdfSkip to page 9 and read the article titled "Hypoxia by Design." Here's the opening paragraph:For once I’m going to give you a BLUF: If you are flying in any model of F-15 or the F-16, your oxygen system could be faulty. There might be another airframe or two out there, so if you recognize the unit in the picture (Figure 1), ask your local MXG about it. When you need 100% oxygen either by schedule according to cabin altitude or because you select 100% oxygen, the diluter valve might not close. You and the pilot flying the aircraft could be at risk for hypoxia when your cabin altitude is high. Your regulators should be inspected for this problem. I am told that as of late March, National Guard Bureau (NGB) and ACC are aware of the problem and are investigating.I'm curious about any thoughts or insight into this problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 (edited) Offhand, I can think of at least two separate events where a hypoxia situation wasn't solved by selecting 100% oxygen, and the pilots had to descend and/or activate the emergency oxygen supply. I am not surprised if they are related to the article you posted. EDIT: Clarification: I'm talking about Viper hypoxia incidents. Edited October 29, 2015 by Ram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12xu2a3x3 Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 (edited) I know this isn't directly related to the F-22 but the Oxygen problem made me post this here. If somebody knows a better thread, please let me know. Requesting somebody in the know go to:http://www.sousaffs.org/FLarchives/FL-2015Spring.pdfSkip to page 9 and read the article titled "Hypoxia by Design." Here's the opening paragraph:I'm curious about any thoughts or insight into this problem.i'd be curious to know if the problem is with that particular LRU, the CRU-98 or with it's installation into a light grey. Edited October 29, 2015 by 12xu2a3x3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12xu2a3x3 Posted October 29, 2015 Share Posted October 29, 2015 talked to e & e about it:"we have to use the tester and not the "suck and blow" method (sic, sts) we usually do" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11F Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 If you have access to safety privileged info, read some of the recent fighter SIB out briefs for more info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12xu2a3x3 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 will do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 The one that got away. Article on the runner up in the ATF selection. http://warisboring.com/articles/the-f-23-fighter-the-super-plane-america-never-built/The article implies politics and the cost overrun of the B-2 and failure of the A-12 program (along with thrust vectoring) swung the ATF to the 22 but that the 23 had it on speed, range and stealth. If we won't export the 22, why not sell the 23 design to some allies that can afford it (Japan, Brits, Aussies, etc...) and have asked for the 22 but are blocked from it by congress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 The one that got away. Article on the runner up in the ATF selection. http://warisboring.com/articles/the-f-23-fighter-the-super-plane-america-never-built/The article implies politics and the cost overrun of the B-2 and failure of the A-12 program (along with thrust vectoring) swung the ATF to the 22 but that the 23 had it on speed, range and stealth. If we won't export the 22, why not sell the 23 design to some allies that can afford it (Japan, Brits, Aussies, etc...) and have asked for the 22 but are blocked from it by congress?If a foreign nation wanted the F-23, they'd have to pony up the cash for the work needed to develop the YF-23 into a fully-capable F-23. I think you'll find that, in general, the YF-22 and YF-23 were very much prototypes, and pretty far from a fully-developed weapons system.It would be cost-prohibitive for just about anyone but the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
busdriver Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Internet articles about LO platforms are terrible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmacwc Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I'm hearing from good sources the F-22 line might open back up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 (edited) If a foreign nation wanted the F-23, they'd have to pony up the cash for the work needed to develop the YF-23 into a fully-capable F-23. I think you'll find that, in general, the YF-22 and YF-23 were very much prototypes, and pretty far from a fully-developed weapons system.It would be cost-prohibitive for just about anyone but the US.No doubt and it would be in the billions for program restart, development beyond prototype, inevitable problems, etc. but if we want our friends to have capabilities that give our potential adversaries something to worry about, this could be a win-win. Lockheed is going to SK this week and it sounds like they want to partner on the South Korean Stealth-ish Fighter Program, KF-X. Partnering with other nations to get another 5th gen option out there without having to foot the entire bill is the leverage we need in sequestration budget times.http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/11/116_191216.htmlThe potential revived F-23 would probably be beyond the means of SK and Indonesia, the two stated customers of that program's eventual aircraft, but Japan, Australia, maybe the UK and/or Israel, could cover the higher cost of development and acquisition and have the industrial capability to develop the mission systems, the GE motors for the original YF-23 could be our stake in it to develop the variable cycle turbofan technology that was demonstrated on one of the two YF-23s. Everybody gets a cut.Internet articles about LO platforms are terrible.Yup, caveat emptor I'm hearing from good sources the F-22 line might open back up.Nice. If LM is building the 22 and the 35 and the 22 line opens back up, would they really protest / enforce curtailed purchase of the 35? I guess it would matter how it affected their subs but if they can keep them in line, they win either way. Next question would be is that speeding up retirement of the 15s & 16s? Divestment of the A-10? Edited November 18, 2015 by Clark Griswold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushItUp Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 I'm hearing from good sources the F-22 line might open back up.What are the actual odds of this happening? Isn't the cost of opening the line back up some crazy amount of money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AA Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Unlike the B-2 line where they destroyed the equipment, the manufacturing equipment for the F-22 was maintained in "storage". There is actually a "How to build a Raptor in 69,000,000 easy steps" manual tucked away somewhere. LM took detailed notes on each step in the manufacturing process with the specific intent of having the know-how later in case they ever did re-open the line. It was an interesting tour to hear them talk about how meticulously detailed they were being with each step...to include taking pictures. Although I agree that actually opening the line back up is not likely and would be exceptionally expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 The Air Force Boss Gave A Depressing Response When Asked About Building More F-22s I wouldn't say depressing (Tyler Ridgeway's article title) but honest, anyway the view from the top of the food chain on a restart of Raptors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now