It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why are F117's still flying? Well the Air Force has all the answers for you....

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2019 @ 05:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Woody510

Everyone is hoping that since they're flying low in Panamint that they'll eventually run Jedi.




posted on Feb, 28 2019 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You heading that way for a look at all?



posted on Feb, 28 2019 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Woody510

Not soon. Too much on my plate right now.



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 03:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Not sure whether it's true but it's reported here that 4 F117s took part in roads over Syria in 2017.

[url=https://theaviationist.com/2019/03/02/four-f-117s-conducted-covert-air-strikes-in-syria-in-2017-reputable-dutch-scramble-magazine-says/]link[/url ]
edit on 2-3-2019 by Woody510 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Woody510

Yeah, i'm going with bull#. It doesn't make sense.



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Haha fair enough just thought I'd post it see what people thought.



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Woody510

It makes for an interesting read, but they had aircraft in theater much more capable. What possible reason is there, that makes sense, to pull F-117s out of Tonopah and fly them all the way over there.



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Autonomous test platforms for loyal wingman?

Faceted stealth comeback tour?



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 07:01 PM
link   
This is a pretty weird, but I think not entirely implausible story. Could it be F117s were used not just for their radar stealth but suppressed IR signatures? If the Russians had advanced Su-27/MiG-29 derivatives in theater with IRSTs, maybe it was deemed too risky to fly F-22s/35s with big heat plumes on certain missions targeting mobile targets. I assume mobile as why not just use cruise missiles? Maybe we didn’t want to reveal our hand with some IR suppression tech with the newer platforms?

There have also been rumors on some threads that the Israelis had/have some F117s. Maybe these were theirs?

Another farfetched idea is that maybe the long-rumored, ATS-favorite-topic, F117 companion aircraft, the R119 Manta (or whatever it’s called if even real), was used in its bird-dog companion role. Maybe it’s technology/datalink system for communicating with the 117s isn’t compatible with the newer birds. Maybe these old warbirds were pressed into service due to the presence of high-end Russian sensor systems and the US not wanting to expose the F-35s datalink and networking secrets until absolutely necessary. Hell maybe the Chinese had sensors in theater. Who knows?

Seems a bit outlandish and improbable to me... but I bet stranger things have happened.
edit on 2-3-2019 by bigbadbird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Wouldn’t it make more sense to use stealthy but already compromised drones like the RQ-170 in concert with F-22s around Russians than the ancient F-117 and ultra secret not star-shaped, not delta shaped, not spanloader shaped, not frisbee shaped, not pterodactyl shaped, not pointy shaped, not Testors but maybe Monogram model shaped, but with inward-canted tailplanes for sure 1970s vintage RF-119A Super Phantasm companion craft?
edit on 2-3-2019 by TheHans because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Sorry double post...
edit on 2-3-2019 by TheHans because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: TheHans

That's why it doesn't make sense. Three are better, more capable platforms for almost anything that needs doing. The only way this makes any sense is if there was an extremely tight time critical window to test something already installed on it, in a way we can't replicate.



posted on Mar, 2 2019 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The only way this makes any sense is if there was an extremely tight time critical window to test something already installed on it, in a way we can't replicate.


+1



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 08:52 AM
link   
The following was posted on Reddit, which kind of makes sense:

“The F-22 is 30 years old. What the US must protect is the F-35’s technology, as it’s pretty much the only ride in town to be fielded in quantity for the next 30 years. The IR suppression notion is interesting. It would also be interesting if they’ve converted a few F-117s to optionally-manned QF-117s that can be deployed against really hardened targets where they don’t want to risk pilots or tech. I could see SOCOM operating a silver bullet force of a half dozen QF-117s. The Drive did an article a few years ago lamenting (really lambasting) the USAF’s lack of any credible stealthy UCAV capability. Maybe the notional QF-117 is an interim solution to achieve that capability.”






originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TheHans

That's why it doesn't make sense. Three are better, more capable platforms for almost anything that needs doing. The only way this makes any sense is if there was an extremely tight time critical window to test something already installed on it, in a way we can't replicate.



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 09:07 AM
link   
a reply to: TheHans

Just because we don't know about them doesn't mean they aren't out there. There is no evidence beyond "maybe they did..." to suggest they converted them to unmanned. In fact there are a couple recent pictures that very clearly show they are manned still.



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TheHans

That's why it doesn't make sense. Three are better, more capable platforms for almost anything that needs doing. The only way this makes any sense is if there was an extremely tight time critical window to test something already installed on it, in a way we can't replicate.


Maybe they needed to deploy a 2.000lb class weapon with a stealth? *Operational need emerged* and all that.
The F-22 wouldnt be able to, the F-35 neither at this point. B-2s would though, but maybe they don't want to expose those to modern russian AD modern than neccessary.

Edit i swear i didnt get it from tyler


a reply to: TheHans
run for the hills dude

edit on 3-3-2019 by mightmight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Working with the Rq-180 maybe?No news on that bird for a long time..



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

RQ-170 would probably work just fine.



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Interesting! It would be great to see some old F-117s flying missions again. Run for the hills why? My companion doubting? I just don’t see enough evidence for its existence. If it did exist, and that’s a big “if”, I’m guessing the RQ-170 has replaced it.

Anyways, Rogoway over at Drive has piled onto this whole F-117s thing... wonder if SOCOM operates a few old F-117s.


quote]originally posted by: mightmight

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: TheHans

That's why it doesn't make sense. Three are better, more capable platforms for almost anything that needs doing. The only way this makes any sense is if there was an extremely tight time critical window to test something already installed on it, in a way we can't replicate.


Maybe they needed to deploy a 2.000lb class weapon with a stealth? *Operational need emerged* and all that.
The F-22 wouldnt be able to, the F-35 neither at this point. B-2s would though, but maybe they don't want to expose those to modern russian AD modern than neccessary.

Edit i swear i didnt get it from tyler


a reply to: TheHans
run for the hills dude



posted on Mar, 3 2019 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: TheHans

They're flown around the range by Lockheed pilots is the word that was posted somewhere. I can see AFRL and Lockheed using them around the range, but not SOCOM using them operationally.
edit on 3/3/2019 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join