Warbird Information Exchange

...if it's looking like a slow day, could this stay in the Hangar for a while? I think it would be interesting to learn what fellow Wixers have to say, as the "Comments" particularly are quite thought provoking...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/0 ... 94880.html

I saw the show last night and it seems there is definately a problem that needs fixing. Its interesting to me that the Air Force wants to keep flying the plane before a fix is found. I hope the two pilots dont get screwed over for speaking out.

_________________
Ain't no sunshine when she's gone!

A couple of points...
They guys fought to fly the F-22 and fighters, then gripe about them. Sounds disingenious at best.

Why would the AF "cover up" safety issues?
To lose more expensive aircraft and expensively trained pilots?

No reason to..what's Congress going to do NOT buy any more F-22s?
Possible motive if the program was still alive, but at this point, there is no motive for a cover up.


Like most conspiracies...they start to lose steam when you ask "what's the motive?" Are career officer/bureaucrats going to risk their pensions to help Lockheed? I don't think so.

Pretty much what I'd expect from CBS...always looking for conspiracies....
(I'm a former AF PAO which first hand experience working with CBS).

BTW: AF pilots...suck it up. If flying fighters was safe and easy, we'd have high school drop outs doing it...and pay them E-4 pay.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

John, how can you "suck it up" (metaphor, I know) if you can't breathe? That seems to be the real issue. It's hard for me to believe that someone motivated, skillful, fortunate, and adept enough to climb the ladder as high as a 22 pilot has will risk throwing away the chance to fly the "it" plane, and perhaps the last "it" one for forever at that, unless there was a real valid, life threatening reason to do so.

It seems to have been addressed on some level...it's not like 20-30 F-22s have been lost. By comparison, look at 1950s fighter loss rates...the F-22 is perfect by comparison.
I agree it's not perfectly safe, and I'm sure LM and AFMC are working on it...but it must be safe enough that the other 500 F-22 pilots aren't worried enough about it to commit professional suicide.

They're volunteers...if they don't want to do their jobs, show them the door.

And remember, the whole point of 60 Minutes is to do a story that supports their thesis. I'm sure there are a lot of facts that weren't presented.
(Rememberthe story they did on the Bonanza? They made it look like flying any GA aircraft was suicidal).

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

It's one thing to blow the whistle, but in uniform and not expect to be discilpined?

That's about what I would expect from a DINFOS trained killer. I am positive you don't have balls enough to tell one of those pilots the same to his face. They'd shove your nose so far down your throat you'd poo snot for a week. It's not that they don't want to fly. It's that they don't want to die for no reason. Combatants place their lives on the line with the reasonable expectation that their leadership is looking out for their best interests or at least won't get them killed stupidly. When leadership doesn't live up to this expectation, they go on news programs and complain a bout it. You think this is the first complaint they've made?

They have every right and reason to expect the AF not to put them into a flying coffin. If it weren't for men like this, standing up for their brothers, the M16 would still be firing dirty rounds into unchromed chambers and rounds packed with ball powder and jamming every time you pulled the trigger. Those pilots threw their careers away to protect their brothers. You think they don't know that? You think they didn't spend countless sleepless nights weighing the value of their careers against their love for their country? Not everyone can be David Hackworth, but I'm glad some are.

The Air Force is acting like Anthony Weiner did--scrambling to avoid facing the truth. Instead they obfuscate and blame the pilots hoping they'll find a solution before someone else dies. It's been this way with damned near every fighting system the American military ever fielded, and I for one am a little tired of our military leadership using our men as test subjects and risking their lives on equipment that isn't ready to be fielded yet. They should ground the things until they're able to figure out what is going wrong. That is why God made test pilots. And Naval Aviators.

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

From what I've been able to find, I think the primary problem with the OBOGS system is that no one (and I mean no one) can find any pattern to what is happening nor why and they can't get it to replicate EVER in a manner which can be tracked. Additionally, the OBOGS system is used on the newest F-16s and the F-15E and there have been NO incidents of this type with either. There have been OBOGS failures, but they were for identifiable causes. Whatever is going on with the F-22 is unique to that fleet, not to the component. Additionally, they've got several early production aircraft that've been flying with what is by all accounts and identical system at both Edwards and Eglin and have almost three times the operational hours as any other aircraft in the fleet and they've not had a SINGLE incident with their OBOGS systems.

So here's the issues -

1) There is a problem with the F-22's OBOGS installation.
2) There is currently no way to replicate it in a reliable fashion to determine the cause.
3) There is no apparent pattern to what airframes/OBOGS systems will present the problem.
4) The USAF can't justify not flying the airplanes and allowing all of the aircraft and aircrews stay static indefinitely.

While I don't disagree that there's a problem and it needs to be fixed, this looks to be one of those issues that the only way it's going to get solved is for the pilots to know there's an issue, fly the airplane, and if they hit a problem, react properly as trained, switch to the backup system, and report in detail what happened. Eventually something is going to show that will tell them what's going on.

BTW, the F-22 isn't the first airplane to have such a mystery problem. The F-15A's had problems, especially with the F100-PW-100 that were hard to track down for quite some time and only operational failures & anomalies eventually showed where the problem was causing the issues. The crews were aware of the problem and tried to avoid causing the problems, but they kept flying.

Additionally, the SR-71 had an extremely dangerous and deadly problem that couldn't be figured out for the entire operational life of the aircraft - the inlet unstart. They tried time and again to figure out why the automatic spike positioning system would make an uncommanded full forward drive and never could. All the crews could do was be aware of the problem and handle it as best possible and hope it didn't put them into a supersonic flat spin if they had a full unstart. Sadly a couple of crews were unable to do it and men were lost. It's one of the risks of operating on the bleeding edge. The question becomes - at what point does the risk of having a problem override the need to have the planes flying? With the F-22, as most of the flights can be conducted under FL240 (above which most of the problems have occurred), then the answer is - the risk is probably worth it as long as the crews are properly informed and steps are taken to mitigate the effects if a problem does occur.

Didn't the F-16 have problems with the software indicating in some circumstances incorrect information on the HUD (I think there was a movie made about this)? Also, during ejection, the cable for the canopy that would make the seat eject (when the canopy was clear) would snag and not eject the pilot until it was redesigned.

Thanks for trying the guilt by association card (the DINFOS remark). You must be an MSNBC fan.
Your childish remarks almost makes me regret answering you.
Yes, i would tell them that to their faces. If they were to attack me as you suggest...they must have be Academy grads.

I worked with a lot of fine officers...rated and non-rated. None would do a cover up if there was real danger involved.
I watched as the Wing DO, Chaplain and head nurse meet with the Wing Commander before driving to a pilot's home and break the news to his wife that she's a widow.
Despite what you may think, these are not men who would toy with the lives of others.

Again, what motive would they have to hype the F-22 when production is going to be cut at 187?
It's not like we're in an air-to-air conflict where we must "keep 'em flying" or hope foreign military sales...so the reputation of the F-22 must be upheld by the big, bad military industrial complex.

Here, read a story about the issue in the latest Aviation Week...(a step up from Air Classics) it discusses what the current thinking is on the matter.
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 453509.xml
Doesn't seem like they're trying to hide anything. It's a puzzle and they're trying to fix the issue.

If you know military aviation history, you know types often fly under restrictions and have "work arounds" while issues are being sorted. Follow procedures and its no huge deal...but flying a combat type will never be as safe as flying a 172 or jetliner. Military pilots who don't accept that might as well skip the service and go direct to Southwest or Delta (probably their ultimate destination anyhow).

Next time, don't make personal assumptions about someone who posts here...someone you don't know.

BTW: How long were you in the military?
Did you work with senior staff and aircrew at base, MAJCOM and SecDef level?

Also...at least I'm man enough to use my real name here and clearly state my background so people can take into account any biases they feel I might have.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Don't cry John. My secondary MOS was photojournalist (46Q) My primary was infantry.
I was in twelve years before I was wounded and had to retire. The highest on the chain I ever worked was for Wes Clark in Kosovo (SACEUR), and Eric Shinseki in Bosnia (LANDCENT) before that. Yes, I have seen media coverups done to buy time. Which is what your Air Force goons are doing. They're hoping their engineers will solve the problem before the news media makes too big a mess out of it. I guess they waited too long this time, eh? When you wait so long to address a problem that the troops won't accept your orders any more you've made a mistake, me thinks.



Sure John. Tell it to the Marines. They'll believe you. They're good for that I hear.




Oh I've seen the same. I'm sure it eats at their souls, if they haven't already sold them in exchange for a big ego and the power that comes with rank. There is a huge difference between the way a Lieutenant and a Brigadier and a Four Star operate. You will never convince me that the vast majority of senior leadership see their troops as anything but tools. Been used as one too many times to have any other viewpoint. Been lied to, and lied about too many times to accept it as anything but fact. By the time a man reaches the big leagues he's sold his soul and will do whatever it takes to keep his service (be it AF or Army Or MC Or Navy) ahead of the rest at the feeding trough. And he'll do that because when he retires, if he's done a good job of defending his pet projects and the contractors that support them, he'll be offered a high paying cushy job in private industry.Or he'll do it because he's vain and doesn't want to be seen as a failure. Or because he can't be wrong. Or because he "won't let someone else drive his car." But you can bet he'll do it.
No enlisted man ever really likes or trusts his officers. That's because no matter how great a guy he is, or how fantastic a combat leader he is, his mission is to spend his troops lives. Some manage to do it wisely, some don't. In this case, the troops don't seem to trust their leadership's ability to spend their lives wisely. If they did they'd be driving on instead of making it public.

Why is the F22 still in the air? It's someones pet. It would make the AF look bad to ground it until the problem is found or a new system can be developed. The contractors who support it flying won't be able to support it grounded. Their cash flow will dry up. They'll be pissed. A pissed contractor won't hire a colonel or general who cut his cash supply. The Air Force needs this aircraft to work, and they need it to work FAST. They've wasted too much on it to allow it to be a failure.

As for my name, the people on WIX who need to know it, and deserve to know it, DO know it. The rest can lump it. It takes more than a couple of pictures and some comments on the internet to be invited into my life, thanks. This is a website, not a family.

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

Wow. I guess what they say about manners on the internet are true.

Is that too harsh? Sorry John. I'm in the middle of finals and a little grumpy. I'm sure the Air Force has nothing but the best of intentions and when they kill another pilot will weep salty tears as they pass the flag to his widow and children.


Speak of the devil. The Air Force is using twitter to counter the 60 Minutes report. John, does CNN count or are they out to get the AF too? Who can you trust if you can't trust CNN? FOX?

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/07/lo ... hter-jets/


What happens when the enemy comes in at 25K plus? Call them cheaters and hold our breath? We've built a 361 million dollar aircraft that can't fly any higher than 25 grand. And the AF is using twitter to tell the public what an awesome bird it is. It's a 60 billion dollar paperweight. No wonder pilots don't want to fly it. They could get better performance out of a piper cub. And no wonder the AF is afraid to admit it's a paperweight after spending all that money in the middle of a recession. Heads will roll if this thing doesn't produce.

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

Well, that's better (almost).

I made a mistake on the cost of the F22. It's actually 412 million per unit.

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."