http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/20...p_luke_080214/

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/20...pdate_080215w/

we all knew 15/16s wouldn't fly forever, but to see it happen real time and right now....almost brings a tear to my eye.

 

here is a question for all of you fighter guys..... Me coming from the Herc community, the airframe has been flying in some form or model since the early 50's..... the new J's are NOT the same as the E's I flew in the 80's and early 90's.....

Are the F-22 and F-35 aircraft worth the cost?..... would there have been a cost benefit to do total makeovers as was done to the Herc with the J model, and use the time tested 15/16 airframes even NEW airframes on existing lines that could have been restarted.....

just a question... no need to flame my ignorance of the situation...

 

F-35, I would say easily YES. Since we are planning on buying so many, the R & D costs will be spread over so many aircraft, their price will be similar to buying a new F-16, except that it's a whole generation better than the F-16! By the time you remove and replace stuff on a plane that small, you can just about build a newer better version.

F-22 can be argued. There's obviously a lot about what it can do that we can't talk about but I'm sure plays a lot into the decision making. Other countries are starting to catch up in terms of what the Eagle can do, so in order to stay ahead in the Air Superiority game, here comes the F-22.

In general, for any fighter, at the time we started purchasing F-15's and F-16's, no one in their right mind thought we'd be flying with them with as many hours as the already have. 18+ years of flying in the Persian gulf area haven't helped any either.

More important than plane hours and costs, I think the AF needs to start paying more attention to pilot manning and retention. What I saw growing up in a Viper squadron from 2002-6, the only NVG IPs we had at Aviano were the squadron CC and the weapons officer! How do you do upgrades w/ experience levels that low? Most of the problem was so many dudes (like me at the time) were showing up from the B course as a new wingman instead of other flight leads and IPs w/ experience. So, in order to create experience, we had some rather large flying hour programs. But the AF is still turning dudes away from TX opportunities b/c there are too many guys in the B course... Kind of a Catch-22 which won't get any better w/ Luke downsizing... I know it's currently happening at Shaw w/ dudes having to go on instrument sorties single ship b/c there are no flight leads and too many wingman.

 

Thanks guys......

 

i think they should have found some middle ground with the 22 and 35. cost is the driving force these days. i dont think people thought armed uavs would be so effective when the first started flying raptors back in the early 90's. my vote, in terms of effectiveness and cost is for one 5th gen ftr, a bunch of reapers (i hate to say this, but they are cheap and efficient), and the AT-6 to fill in the CAS/FAC-A/CSAR/etc holes.

 

we used to. i'm still waiting for the next reincarnation of the phoenix aviator program. sadly, it will not happen.

 

I had a 4 star tell me the usaf does the no fly only option so @ holes don't become all the leaders..... Doesn't work.

 

That's not just a fighter problem, it's the same in the C-17. Tons of brand new LTs and very little experienced IPs and EPs. The few experienced guys that we have are all busy with office stuff - ORI prep, XP, Installation Excellence teams, AFSO-21, and crap like that.

I'm doing my part to keep my experience in the cockpit - I'm heading to the Reserves. Believe it or not, the Reservists at my base fly about twice as much as the active duty guys.

 

I don't want to hijack this thread, but I have been saying this for years. We have the same problems in the KC-10 fleet. From day one, rated officers are trained to be the best pilots possible but at the same time are trained to be generals. That makes no sense to me because it is extremely expensive to do both -- especially when most people aren't going to be good at both and news flash; don't want to be!!!

We should model after the airlines -- line pilots and management pilots. Line pilots can stay as long as they want until retirement thus keeping our experience in the weapon systems. Could you imagine how great our Air Force would be if we did? The management pilots would be selected from the line pilot pool after 2 or 3 operational tours and would go through the proper "grooming" courses. The Air Force could then reduce pilot training and only "hire" pilots when the line pilot pool reaches a certain number (turn off pilot training when it isn't needed).

It is ridiculous that every single day we are training the new guy to fly the airplane just because the personnel system forces people up and out of the cockpit. If we had a cadre of pilots who were experienced, we wouldn't need to fly as much basic/intial training sorties and we'd end up having the money necessary for new weapon systems.

-Fatty

 

or the way the army does with warrants and regular officers. warrants make good pay and get a bonus i believe. army guys chime in on this.