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.

 

Fans of the F-22 Raptor need to wake-up

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
The idea was for a 1 to 1 replacement of the F-15, not 2 to 1.


I know, that's why the USAF wants 381, 381 Raptor’s would give us a 1 to 1 replacement for the frontline F-15C’s. If we got 381 F-22’s we could place part of the current F-15C force in the Air National Guard and keep the latest in active squadrons to support the F-22.




posted on May, 2 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
But there were 750 F-15's in service or planned for service when the ATF was started until defence cuts began to trim that number, and the ATF requirement with it, you see?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Yes I do see, however I still don't think acquiring 750 Raptor’s is necessary, isn't the current theme of things to do more with less?



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Oh I agree there, its not necessary at all, I was just saying how each cut in numbers came about, nothing more than that. I would however say that for a force of the USAF's importance 300 or so might be a realistic number rather than the 180 they look like getting.

Now, the RAF could make do with 60 if it was to have any and 20 of them would be 'attrition spares' as we like to call our unused aircraft.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Now, the RAF could make do with 60 if it was to have any and 20 of them would be 'attrition spares' as we like to call our unused aircraft.

Just slightly off-topic, but when I was in service, my PJ unit did an overnight stopover at Loring, AFB, in Maine,--which is now closed--a SAC air base. They had a rotating bomber fleet of about 25-30 B-52s, 8-10 of which were used as you have described, waynos.





seekerof



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Seekerof, if by 'rotating' you mean that aircraft were swapped around to maintain an average wear and tear throughout them all then that makes perfect sense to me and I wish someone in the MoD was bright enough to think of it.

Here in the UK, as squadrons were disbanded as part of defence cuts, Tornadoes and Jaguars were sent away as attrition spares never to be seen again. When the two types were upgraded to GR.3 GR.4 standard these attrition spares were ignored and remained as GR.1''s, now they have been sent to the crusher as they are incompatible with the rest of the fleet despite many of them being in storage since virtually brand new with very few airframe hours used up.

You know what the supremem irony of this is? The Tornado GR.4 will now be required to continue in service beyond 2018 and, due to the high airframe hours accumulated in the fleet, there is a strong doubt that they will last that long! Further, as more and more cut backs reduce the number of aircraft in front line service, those that are left will wear out even more quickly. The pressure on the Tornado squadrons is further heightened by the early and complete withdrawal from service of the Jaguar GR.3 which only completed its expensive upgrade programe in 1999!

You couldn't make it up could you


And therein lay the root of my attrition spares remark. I bet you're sorry you started me off now aren't you



posted on May, 6 2006 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Using a/c as attrition spares??!!
The cannibals!!!

Every air force in the world does that, more so in 3rd world countries!



posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Well, when the tired airframes fall from sky like rocks. You can blame yourselves for not backing a new fighters. OH WAIT THE ALREADY ARE!!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join