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.

 

F-15 grounding strains U.S. air defenses

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   

F-15 grounding strains U.S. air defenses


news.yahoo.com

FRESNO, Calif. - The grounding of hundreds of F-15s because of dangerous structural defects is straining the nation's air defense network, forcing some states to rely on their neighbors' fighter jets for protection, and Alaska to depend on the Canadian military.

The F-15 is the sole fighter at many of the 16 or so "alert" sites around the country, where planes and pilots stand ready to take off at a moment's notice to intercept hijacked airliners, Cessnas that wander into protected airspace
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   
The California Air national guard is bascially watching the entire west coast fo the US and the Canadian AF has had to keep tabs on Alaska for 3 weeks in november as well. Im a bit skeptical that by the statement that they can respond with the same abilites as if the F-15 are still on duty. With F-16 unavalible due to war operations, we seem to have very little reserve a/c in the even something like this happens.

Now how much of this is the military hamming things up to get more F-22's?

Also if there are issues with border coverage, why not set up a picket line of Aegis ships to help cover and deal with any threats?

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Now how much of this is the military hamming things up to get more F-22's?


I was going to ask you the same question...

When I was in the Army I was in maintenance and it was a struggle to keep company commanders from cooking the books to make the readiness reports reflect well on the Officer, I went round and round but stood my ground to ensure that the vehicles my unit used were up to the stipulated standards.

Mind you these were all ground assets. My dealings with the maintenance workers on aircraft always reflected a MORE scrutinized (by the book) level of inspection and upkeep, if something was wrong, they were grounded.

Of course peacetime/wartime criteria are different, the standard is sometimes lowered for obvious reasons while conducting war.

I cannot see the Air Force intentionally grounding these jets to try and gain more F-22's, I can see that they have run these birds down and have probably slacked on the maintenance and repair, since there is probably a limited stateside repair parts budget, with most of the money delegated to overseas assets.

If your unit's priority is lower than required, you don't get parts, equipment goes down, readiness goes down, I wonder but seriiously doubt that some of the commander's of the squadron's might have tried to pull the Army way of reporting their equipment readiness and it bit them in the rear.

Either way, if the jets are deemd unsafe, they should stay grounded until the money needed to repair them is in place.

More than likely, I think it is probably a wake-up call to the Pentagon to give these stateside units the funds they have been deprived of due to the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.

This is just an opinion, I am no longer in the service, just using my experience to come up with a possible scenario.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


the United States of america short of planes?
come on your pulling my leg

i mean the US is suppose to have the largest fleet in the world
heck it has a entire desert full of them which arent being used (outdated and mostly stripped) but still the US seems to produce them in numbers

maybe they can borrow some from Pakistan/Israel and so on



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
the Canadian AF has had to keep tabs on Alaska for 3 weeks in november as well.

As a Canadian, all I can say is

Whoa!

Seriously, I'm a proud Canuck and supportive of our troops... but we honestly have enough aircraft to patrol our own country at the best of times!

Why would this "serious airframe problem" only come to light now?
How long has the F-15 been in service??



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul

maybe they can borrow some from Pakistan/Israel and so on


Well the IAF's F-15 that we gave them are also grounded the last time I looked.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 03:57 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

on going discussion (and previous mention) about the CAF flying BARCAP when needed

japan and israel also grounded there aircraft - and in the case of japan meant there air defence was comprised of


F4`s

and whilst this issue effects 8 of the fleet -they are saying with teh aircraft as old as 30 years - and the `C` types having a much harder life than the `A` it is only a matter of times before more issues start coming to the fore



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


damn
so the Israelis are just using the f16s? and so on lol

on a serious note doesnt the US operate diffrent planes?
i mean it does have them in larger quantities?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


By and large it seems. the US has alot of aircraft on the books, but many are tied up in Iraq/Afganistan, and not all the a/c are mission capable at any given time.

The F-16I should be fine o backstop the IAF untill the issues with the 15's get worked out. However, I have a feeling the the "fix" is going to be time consuming and expensive if they have to go in an modify airframe structural elements



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   
And it *suddenly* might just be cheaper to buy more F22`s - oh and the allies can buy into the F35 programme



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


ok,
what air craft are used by the navel strike force that was sent to the middle east a while ago?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by bodrul
 


Are you talking about the US Navy?

If so none of their planes are part of this problem.

The navies a/c by and large consists of the:

F/A-18 Hornet E/F
F/A-18 Hornet C/D
S-3 Viking


The P-3 Orion sub hunters have had a few grounded for structural issues recently however



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


www.abovetopsecret.com...


39 out of 161 P3`s - and the CAF has done the same for the same checks.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   
This is a bit on the sensationalized side don't you think? We have plenty of F16s sitting around the country.




With F-16 unavalible due to war operations


Im sorry but thats not true. The 56th fighter wing alone has more jets assigned to it then USAFE itself.

Besides, if there was truly an "issue" i highly doubt its going to be blabbered all over the mainstream news!




[edit on 26-12-2007 by LwSiX]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Well nothing to worry about on Alaska's front. Canadian CF118's piloted by some of the worlds renowned pilots aren't going to let Alaska become vulnerable.

However, I am very surprised that the worlds "superpower" has to rely on us to defend them. Our RCAF is, after all, designed for pure defense... you'd assume the worlds offensive superpower would have a few aircraft to replace their aging f15 fleet...

... why do you guys still use those things anyways? Weren't you supposed to have the worlds biggest air force?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
However, I am very surprised that the worlds "superpower" has to rely on us to defend them. Our RCAF is, after all, designed for pure defense... you'd assume the worlds offensive superpower would have a few aircraft to replace their aging f15 fleet...


Yes thanks for keeping us safe from the bad guys, i know ill be able to sleep better tonight knowing the super bug is on the prowl!

[edit on 26-12-2007 by LwSiX]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
Well nothing to worry about on Alaska's front. Canadian CF118's piloted by some of the worlds renowned pilots aren't going to let Alaska become vulnerable.


Is that a stealth biplane right after the F-117? j/k

Did you really mean the CF-18's



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 12:13 AM
link   
Looks to me like plans for more F-22's are already underway;
Forbes< br />
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the problem was exagerated a bit so that we could obtain more F-22's. The Air Force has in the past played up the threat a little bit to obtain more and better stuff. Ironically the F-15 was concieved through the use of exagerating a threat, the MiG-25 was painted to look like some kind of invincible fighter and thus came the F-15.

Not that I'm against getting more F-22's however. I always figured that about 180 planes isn't nearly enough to maintain air superiority against an enemy with actual air power.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I thought I saw they were grounded for about a month and now they are back in the air now. At least thats what I saw on the news about a month ago.As far as the U.S. being short of planes.....I just have to laugh at that one...

I think it is as one poster said probably mostly made up to get more f-22's.
Which I actually agree with...the f-15 was designed in the early 70's and we need some updating on our main fighter aircraft.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by johnsky
Well nothing to worry about on Alaska's front. Canadian CF118's piloted by some of the worlds renowned pilots aren't going to let Alaska become vulnerable.


Is that a stealth biplane right after the F-117? j/k

Did you really mean the CF-18's


No, it's called the CF118, it's a modified version of the original F18. Extended sensor arrays under the fuselage, replaced engines, and the elevators are extended further back.
Oh yeah... and we paint a cockpit on the undercarriage as an inside joke. lol.
Basically just an upgrade for the F18 that makes it a little juicier for RCAF pilots. (We couldn't call it an F18 when we were done, it wasn't modified by the original creators.)


Still through, I thought the US were supposed to have F16's and their own F18's. I mean, we bought the CF118's original chassis from the States, shouldn't they have some of their own?

[EDIT] I wouldn't place so much faith in the F22. Though it is a remarkable aircraft, they've made it too damn expensive to risk sending it into an air battle. It's a mistake that cost many countries a few wars, making their equipment too good to mass produce and afford.

[edit on 27-12-2007 by johnsky]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join