• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

usaf times f-22 obogs

PhrogLoop

PhrogLoop

Adulting is hard
pilot
Long time ago, I posted something to this effect, so forgive me for the repeat story. I was a T-6 Flight Commander at Vance AFB in 2006 and I had a long conversation with my CO about the future of our Services. He is an all-USAF fighter guy, in good shape to screen for his first star (PM me if you want to know more about him). I asked him why the Air Force was holding on so tight to a program so far over budget, so far below its promised capabilities, and leveraging the rest of its manned fixed wing force to purchase less than 190 of a type that was supposed to replace over 1,000. His answer was as direct as it was candid..."It's all we got." Basically, not only is the program too big to fail but its existence is the main reason why USAF is able to keep its roughly quarter of the Defense Budget allocated to the Services and that is something that the Air Staff would never endanger. So fast forward 6 years and it makes sense to this casual observer (with no insider information) why the Air Force would re-launch the fleet before fixing the problem. "The Raptors must fly" just as "the Spice must flow."
 
M

MasterBates

Well-Known Member
Also a service difference in that a training squadron CO can get a star in the USAF.

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2
 
P

Pags

N/A
pilot
PhrogLoop said:
Long time ago, I posted something to this effect, so forgive me for the repeat story. I was a T-6 Flight Commander at Vance AFB in 2006 and I had a long conversation with my CO about the future of our Services. He is an all-USAF fighter guy, in good shape to screen for his first star (PM me if you want to know more about him). I asked him why the Air Force was holding on so tight to a program so far over budget, so far below its promised capabilities, and leveraging the rest of its manned fixed wing force to purchase less than 190 of a type that was supposed to replace over 1,000. His answer was as direct as it was candid..."It's all we got." Basically, not only is the program too big to fail but its existence is the main reason why USAF is able to keep its roughly quarter of the Defense Budget allocated to the Services and that is something that the Air Staff would never endanger. So fast forward 6 years and it makes sense to this casual observer (with no insider information) why the Air Force would re-launch the fleet before fixing the problem. "The Raptors must fly" just as "the Spice must flow."
Click to expand...
I'd be curious to know how much of the system integration/performance was covered in the early fly-offs between the YF-22 and the YF-23. Making a sweet looking prototype that can hit your vehicle performance KPPs/MOEs is one thing, but the systems integration seems to be much more challenging these days. Maybe the "prototype fly off" worked back in the day when adding weapon systems was done by just adding guns, but it seems that this is the more challenging aspect of current programs and maybe should be addressed more rigorously in the early stages of testing.
 
P

Pags

N/A
pilot
helolumpy said:
But he's a test pilot and the TPS Mafia take care of their own...
Click to expand...
Isn't that the point of a Mafia? The TPS/Acquisition stink does help keep some doors open that would be largely shut to non-test guys. Being PMA-299 during the intro of the MH-60R probably didn't hurt either.
 
scoober78

scoober78

(HCDAW)
pilot
Contributor
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/0...deprivation-in-cockpit-solved/?iref=allsearch

CNN ran a story this morning on Soledad O'brien..at least I'm pretty sure that's her name talking about this problem...Half of their stock footage showed F-35's taking cat shots, but I digress. (Damn the media is aviation stupid...) Count the exhaust holes morons.

They also interviewed a Congressman who was a former Air Force pilot and current ANG type, for color...
http://www.wjbdradio.com/?f=news_single&id=33324
He basically was pointing out that pilots must not fly if they aren't comfortable with the aircraft etc...Defended the two pilots being protected under Whistleblower.

Still a story apparently.
 
helolumpy

helolumpy

Apprentice School Principal
pilot
Contributor
According to that CNN report that Scoober linked:
"While Hostage said that there was certainly a concern about the group of incidents, he didn't think it was necessary to pull the entire group of jets, which have had 12,000 deployments and a total of 15,000 flight hours since September 11 and only a handful of problems. "

So, 12,000 deployments and a total of 15,000 flight hours. That means that USAF pilots are either getting 1.25 flight hours per deployment. Pretty crappy deployments if you only get to fly once. Or maybe in the eyes of the USAF each flight (of 1.25 hours) consitutues a deployment...

What am I missing? Of have I made over 2,000 deployments in my career?
(Holy crap, how many stars will be on my SSDR for 2,000 deployments.....????)
 
scoober78

scoober78

(HCDAW)
pilot
Contributor
helolumpy said:
According to that CNN report that Scoober linked:
"While Hostage said that there was certainly a concern about the group of incidents, he didn't think it was necessary to pull the entire group of jets, which have had 12,000 deployments and a total of 15,000 flight hours since September 11 and only a handful of problems. "

So, 12,000 deployments and a total of 15,000 flight hours. That means that USAF pilots are either getting 1.25 flight hours per deployment. Pretty crappy deployments if you only get to fly once. Or maybe in the eyes of the USAF each flight (of 1.25 hours) consitutues a deployment...

What am I missing? Of have I made over 2,000 deployments in my career?
(Holy crap, how many stars will be on my SSDR for 2,000 deployments.....????)
Click to expand...

Nice. I was also doing a little mental math as I read it...My former squadron typically flew in the neighborhood of 7000 hours a year +/-....on 7 40 year old airframes. Congratulations Air Farce...you've managed to get two squadrons worth of production out of 187 brand new $150 million dollar aircraft. Oh, and your pilots don't want to fly it. Congratulations!
 
Treetop Flyer

Treetop Flyer

Well-Known Member
pilot
scoober78 said:
Nice. I was also doing a little mental math as I read it...My former squadron typically flew in the neighborhood of 7000 hours a year +/-....on 7 40 year old airframes. Congratulations Air Farce...you've managed to get two squadrons worth of production out of 187 brand new $150 million dollar aircraft. Oh, and your pilots don't want to fly it. Congratulations!
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that their sorties aren't the same duration as your old squadron's were.
 
scoober78

scoober78

(HCDAW)
pilot
Contributor
owl-orly-jpg.32806


Stick with me here...
15000/187 = 80.2 hours/F-22 airframe last FY
~7000/7 = 1000 hours/EP-3 airframe last FY
AVG F-22 sortie length = (and I'm guessing...1.8 hours?)
AVG EP-3 sortie length = 8.5 hours

AVG sortie count per airframe last FY F-22- 44.55
AVG sortie count per airframe last FY-EP-3- 117.65
 
scoolbubba

scoolbubba

Brett327 gargles ballsacks
pilot
Contributor
I finally found an aircraft less threatening to the enemy than the Orion: The F-22! nice job, air force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top