ERJF15

Viral Chromeless Video Player

UAL T38 Phlyer

Very sad to see...including the QF-4 that was flying chase...

goirishgo1976

Unfortunately, the end of the modern combat aviator is getting closer.

propfails2FX

Maybe fighter and reconnaissance types. Transports and Helos still stand a fighting chance.

ForeverFO

Don't believe so. Creating a QF-16 is easy. Making that airplane perform in a complex air to air environment is immensely difficult. The decision tree in a huge, swirling furball makes chess look like tic-tac-toe from a computer perspective.

But the real problem is sensors. The QF-16 can "see" only within the radar cone. It has no way to detect an enemy anywhere else, and an enemy could simply slip up on its flank undetected.

Unmanned bombers - yes
Unmanned targets - yes
Unmanned fighter sweeps/caps - not so easy

BFMthisA10

If anyone here is familiar with the operation:

Wondering if that jet might swap roles from day to day, manned and unmanned. The reason that I ask is that I see the seat still in place. I would think that if there were a likelihood that the jet isn't coming back, that all of the high value and/or non essential items would be stripped. I'm guessing that on a "shoot" day that there is some prep, removing items that can be removed, especially if the item in question would be bad sitting on the bottom of the gulf (like an ACES II rocket, for instance).
Anyone familiar?

Hawk 285

Once a drone, always a drone in most cases. My guess is they had to leave the seats in for CG purposes, but removed the rocket motors from it.

ForeverFO

My limited understanding is that the Q series of manned fighters like the QF-100 onward retain the ability to fly both remotely AND piloted. And it would make sense to do it this way. You might have missions requiring the drone to do complex things where no ordnance is expended, and a pilot would be the way to go.

I'm with the dude in the video... sad to see it. That jet was built in 1983, and when I was a new USAF guy, that would have made it a brand new, very sweet front line aircraft.

I DESPISE the fact that the US gubbernment created a law prohibiting the sale of surplus aircraft to the public. Post WW2, they were all for sale, and we know now how precious those remaining airframes are. There are wealthy people who could easily afford to restore and fly an F-4, F-16, F-15, etc. They could be demilled with ease, radar removed, etc.

The T-37 with modern engines would be a great sport jet.

HuggyU2

If you are talking a company (Draken, ATAC, ATSI, AirUSA) that is trying to use them for a gov't contract, it may be possible. But I've met and talked to a number of these people in the jet warbird community. Owning and flying any of those 3 aircraft would be pretty much cost prohibitive for a private individual. Ask the Collings Foundation how easy it is to maintain and fly their F-4.

There is at least one F-104 out there that could be bought up and flown, and there are some MiG-29's and -23's. When the SU-27's were in the US a few years ago, a few folks were sniffing around, but ultimately no one bought them up once they became available.

When it comes to "bang for the buck", most people are buying into the L-39. Expect to see a few L-159's pop up. The Alpha Jet will give lots more performance for only a modest increase in price. And for the real "exotica", you will see the occasional F-5. Beyond that, it is just too difficult and costly.

KC135guy

I did contract engine maintenance at NAS New Orleans. We were responsible for working on (converting/testing/storing) the engines for the QF-16 program. We maintained two different engines that are being used for the drones. Splash engines, which will be in the planes when they are used as targets and test engines, which will be used when a pilot is in the plane during test/evaluation flights. The engines are the older F100-PW-100.