Discussion
http://www.aviationarchive.org.uk/Gpages/html/G308...
Maybe no design and development activity but plenty through life support!
Maybe no design and development activity but plenty through life support!
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 12th December 14:17
aeropilot said:
However, as you say, examples have been spotted in the air around the Nevada ranges, on occasion, and the rumour is 6 of them have been kept airworthy for test purposes (likely as stealth targets on the ranges) but examples been seen and photographed in the air 'officially' none are flying, so zero chances of the USAF flying one over to RIAT 
I found the official blurb from the USAF...Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
what would be good if we can get examples fro USAF aircraft which are still flying with oither air fores: Greek Phantoms, for example and get an example of each in the air at the same time. Magic...
(Iranian F14??? Too much to ask for??)
Of course Putin will be annoyed, so for balance lets get some great soviet era stuff over here too. To include a MiG25 Foxbat please!
(Iranian F14??? Too much to ask for??)
Of course Putin will be annoyed, so for balance lets get some great soviet era stuff over here too. To include a MiG25 Foxbat please!
williamp said:
what would be good if we can get examples fro USAF aircraft which are still flying with oither air fores: Greek Phantoms, for example and get an example of each in the air at the same time. Magic...
(Iranian F14??? Too much to ask for??)
Of course Putin will be annoyed, so for balance lets get some great soviet era stuff over here too. To include a MiG25 Foxbat please!
Turkish AF is still flying the Phantom as well.(Iranian F14??? Too much to ask for??)
Of course Putin will be annoyed, so for balance lets get some great soviet era stuff over here too. To include a MiG25 Foxbat please!
Shame we've now lost the Duxford based F-86A Sabre as well now
As for Russian stuff - love to see a MiG-31 do a display over here
Eric Mc said:
One turned up at Farnborough in 1992 (I think). It didn't take part in the flying display but I did see it landing. Smokey old brute too.
In 2000, the Luftwaffe displayed a Eurofighter, which escorted down to about 500 feet by a Phantom.I remember someone saying the Eurofighter was due, and then seeing this "smokey" dot on the horizon, being very surprised, only for it to break into two aircraft, which the Eurofighter being the cleaner one.
ukaskew said:
I found the official blurb from the USAF...
Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
Given they are in flyable storage anyhow, and presumably have a good stock of spares. The additional cost in flying them is probably little more than the fuel cost.Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
Dr Jekyll said:
ukaskew said:
I found the official blurb from the USAF...
Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
Given they are in flyable storage anyhow, and presumably have a good stock of spares. The additional cost in flying them is probably little more than the fuel cost.Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
From an aerospace article a few years ago on this subject.
. said:
Keeping even a small force of F-117s flying is not a cheap or easy task. As the program's active operational talent retires, or migrates deeper into other aerospace programs, the "brain-drain" pertaining to such a unique weapons system would represent serious challenges.
Also, the Nighthawks were unique and temperamental aircraft and required a comprehensive logistical train to keep them in the air. Keeping just a handful of these jets flying would be costly and not without risk. In order to do so the USAF, or Lockheed Martin, would have to keep pilots current without the simulators and large training regimens that once existed for the aircraft. Furthermore, knowledgeable maintenance folks would have to keep these aircraft in the air and their temperamental radar absorbent material, which is somewhat archaic by today's standards, would need constant care.
Also, the Nighthawks were unique and temperamental aircraft and required a comprehensive logistical train to keep them in the air. Keeping just a handful of these jets flying would be costly and not without risk. In order to do so the USAF, or Lockheed Martin, would have to keep pilots current without the simulators and large training regimens that once existed for the aircraft. Furthermore, knowledgeable maintenance folks would have to keep these aircraft in the air and their temperamental radar absorbent material, which is somewhat archaic by today's standards, would need constant care.
aeropilot said:
Dr Jekyll said:
ukaskew said:
I found the official blurb from the USAF...
Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
Given they are in flyable storage anyhow, and presumably have a good stock of spares. The additional cost in flying them is probably little more than the fuel cost.Since its retirement from active flying status in 2008, the Air Force’s cadre of F-117 Nighthawks have been maintained at their original, climate-friendly hangars at the Tonopah Test Range Airport in Nevada. Given the cost of establishing secure storage facilities at Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC at Davis-Monthan AFB), the Air Force chose instead to store the retired F-117s at the pre-existing secure facilities at Tonopah Test Range.
Per Congressional direction within the FY07 National Defense Authorization Act the aircraft were placed in Type 1000, flyable storage for potential recall to future service. In order to confirm the effectiveness of the flyable storage program, some F-117 aircraft are occasionally flown.
The costs must be huge, that statement was from 2014, but two were photographed in the air together in July this year, so they're still hanging in there.
From an aerospace article a few years ago on this subject.
. said:
Keeping even a small force of F-117s flying is not a cheap or easy task. As the program's active operational talent retires, or migrates deeper into other aerospace programs, the "brain-drain" pertaining to such a unique weapons system would represent serious challenges.
Also, the Nighthawks were unique and temperamental aircraft and required a comprehensive logistical train to keep them in the air. Keeping just a handful of these jets flying would be costly and not without risk. In order to do so the USAF, or Lockheed Martin, would have to keep pilots current without the simulators and large training regimens that once existed for the aircraft. Furthermore, knowledgeable maintenance folks would have to keep these aircraft in the air and their temperamental radar absorbent material, which is somewhat archaic by today's standards, would need constant care.
Also, the Nighthawks were unique and temperamental aircraft and required a comprehensive logistical train to keep them in the air. Keeping just a handful of these jets flying would be costly and not without risk. In order to do so the USAF, or Lockheed Martin, would have to keep pilots current without the simulators and large training regimens that once existed for the aircraft. Furthermore, knowledgeable maintenance folks would have to keep these aircraft in the air and their temperamental radar absorbent material, which is somewhat archaic by today's standards, would need constant care.
F-117's were tricky to get working in operational condition, i.e. fully stealth, but there's no need for that if you're bringing it over for an air display... Assuming you have the parts life (and being a Skunkworks project of that era lots of it is made from quite common parts), it really wouldn't be that much more to bring it.
Krikkit said:
F-117's were tricky to get working in operational condition, i.e. fully stealth, but there's no need for that if you're bringing it over for an air display... Assuming you have the parts life (and being a Skunkworks project of that era lots of it is made from quite common parts), it really wouldn't be that much more to bring it.
Given they are only flying them on limited occasions, and in each case it seems not really beyond the confines of the Nevada test ranges, and therefore certainly not even to any US airshow, there is diddly squat chance of someone in DoD sanctioning a trans-atlantic flight to RIAT. 
NJK44 said:
Bring on the SR72. Not meant to be ready until 2030, but we all know that's BS and it's flying right now.
Can't wait for it to turn up at RIAT
Its stealth and been operating out of there for 6 mont......Can't wait for it to turn up at RIAT
Wait, I've said too much, I can see a black helicopter circling above....
NJK44 said:
Bring on the SR72. Not meant to be ready until 2030, but we all know that's BS and it's flying right now.
Can't wait for it to turn up at RIAT
Actually, taking that point a little sideways....Can't wait for it to turn up at RIAT
Given the amount of UAV's already in service with USAF/USN/RAF etc for a good numbers of years, and they've never been 'displayed' at an airshow, it's an interesting point that, realistically, they probably won't ever be, so, even if the SR-72 is already flying, being a UAV, we're not likely to ever see it at an airshow, even if its existance in ever acknowledged in the public domain.
Trevatanus said:
aeropilot said:
pablo said:
At a guess the grey pointy things like F15, 16, 22 and 35 should be easy enough, an A10 and a T53 (Talon?) would be nice to see. F117A would be awesome and I'll have an F111 too please...
You're a decade too late to see a F117, as they were retired in 2008, and 2 decades too late for a F111 as they were retired 20 years ago!!pablo said:
U2 or SR72 would be my dream come true but as far as the U2 goes, winning the lottery has better odds.. So the port entail from the current fleet is good, Current stuff is fairly generic but still interesting to most.
U2/TR-1......if you are really lucky they might do, as they still do dets at Fairford for them once in a while.I guess you mean a SR-71 though......and again you're 20 years too late for that.
In fact the USAF 50th Anniversary Airshow at Nellis AFB in Nevada that I went to in 1997 had one of the very last public displays of the SR-71
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff