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.
Originally posted by Harlequin
- but for the official report to say its not as good now as it was in 2004 is of itself damning.
Originally posted by FredT
How much of that was simply a disinfo campaign?
Follow-on operation tests in 2007 raised operational suitability issues and noted that the airplane still does not meet most of its KPPs. It meets some, but not all. Key performance parameters. The trend in those operational tests, there was an IOT&E (Initial Operational Test & Evaluation), a follow-on test I think in 2004 and a follow-on test in 2007. The trend is actually negative.
The maintenance man hours per flying hour have increased through those tests. The last one was a substantial increase. The airplane is proving very expensive to operate, not seeing the mission capable rates we expected. And it's complex to maintain
operational suitability issues and noted that the airplane still does not meet most of its KPPs
Then you Sir, are ignorant. Of course the hot# pilots will tell you that what they are flying is the HOT #. It's the bureaucrats who actually pay attention to the numbers. Good luck with that though.
Originally posted by Harlequin
do they also mention it has the most intensive of all USAF maintenence requirements and if any are missed or done in a shoddy way then the raptor becomes detectable at killable ranges from todays fighters?
whilst the `tech` might be great - it also puts a huge burden on the men and women looking after it