105-0
04-28-2012 | 06:16 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,822
Likes: 0
105-0
The greatest fighter in the world flown by the BEST operators in the world. I feel blessed to have been able to be a maintainer and a instructor on the beast. LONG LIVE THE EAGLE!!!!
enjoy
2012 Raytheon Award Video
enjoy
2012 Raytheon Award Video
04-28-2012 | 10:55 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,064
Likes: 37
From: 767 Captain
Pretty good video.
Outstanding jet. I loved every minute I had the privilege to fly it. A killing machine.
After 20+ years of jokes during my career, not to mention the years before I got started, do you think they could have used a different callsign for the video? Maybe? Just this once?
Outstanding jet. I loved every minute I had the privilege to fly it. A killing machine.
After 20+ years of jokes during my career, not to mention the years before I got started, do you think they could have used a different callsign for the video? Maybe? Just this once?
04-29-2012 | 01:16 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
EAGLE!!
It's like an Air Force past time to make fun of the c-model amongst those who haven't flown it. It may be getting a little older but she is an incredible airframe.
Cool BFM footage. I like that shot of the high aspect merge.
It's like an Air Force past time to make fun of the c-model amongst those who haven't flown it. It may be getting a little older but she is an incredible airframe.
Cool BFM footage. I like that shot of the high aspect merge.
04-29-2012 | 03:43 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,510
Likes: 110
Fixed it for ya. BFM footage was pretty cool. Silent Eagle with AESA, big motors, and the latest toys would be sweet, and a cheap alternative to the Raptor.
04-29-2012 | 09:41 AM
#10
Moderate Moderator
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,681
Likes: 0
From: Curator at Static Display
Manufacturer's Recall
Not really an age-issue or design issue. The investigation showed that MacAir/nee "Boeing" built the fuselage longerons incorrectly (too small; not to design specs). This issue did not affect the E-model.
What I don't understand: Why couldn't the Air Force make Boeing liable for their mistake, and fix it?
The total cost estimated to repair the 150-ish jets affected was $500k each, or about $75 million. The Air Force instead opted to retire those airplanes, saying it "....wasn't cost-effective."
Instead, they advocated vigorously (and lost) an argument to replace those 150 jets with additional F-22s.
BTW: the cost to repair those jets? Half the price of ONE F-22. Smart move.
There is also no guarantee that the F-22 doesn't have a ticking bomb in it like this. Oh wait, OBOGS......
What I don't understand: Why couldn't the Air Force make Boeing liable for their mistake, and fix it?
The total cost estimated to repair the 150-ish jets affected was $500k each, or about $75 million. The Air Force instead opted to retire those airplanes, saying it "....wasn't cost-effective."
Instead, they advocated vigorously (and lost) an argument to replace those 150 jets with additional F-22s.
BTW: the cost to repair those jets? Half the price of ONE F-22. Smart move.
There is also no guarantee that the F-22 doesn't have a ticking bomb in it like this. Oh wait, OBOGS......
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
