F-117 Woblin Goblin

If I'm not mistaken the F117 first saw service over Grenada. 10 years before the public knew of it's existence.
Best kept secret since the Manhattan Project. So I heard

First Flight: 1981
Public Debut: 1988

7 Years? Not bad for a Government "secret"

The "Have Blue" project went all the way back to 1976!

JeffreyG wrote in post #11745531
Our current enemies are mostly armed with the AK-47 defense system which can be defeated by just about any plane in the US arsenal if you can ID the target.

Be careful fighting the last (or current) war. Fight the one of the future.

Yup...

I agree, the F-35 is a pointless program that didn't need to exist. Look at how many F16's crash due to a single engine mishap. The 15's still crash, but its less common. And like I always say every time I work on one: "Two is always better than one".

Silly government, cutting the 117 and the a10.

i still can't understand how those things can actually fly.

great shot!

Chippy569 wrote in post #11747844
Silly government, cutting the 117 and the a10.

They really didn't "cut" the F-117 per se...

It was life limited and it was either park them or risk losing air crew due to airframes coming apart in flight.

Australia choose the F18 over the F16 due to the single engine issue. Apparently (so they say) the F35 engines 'wont" fail so we were convinced to sign up to the F35. Apparently production starts here in2014 so I heard recently?

Desertraptor wrote in post #11750556
Australia choose the F18 over the F16 due to the single engine issue. Apparently (so they say) the F35 engines 'wont" fail so we were convinced to sign up to the F35. Apparently production starts here in2014 so I heard recently?

I work on the F15E and I will have to say that it may come down broke a lot but its nothing serious, mostly picky pilots. I wished the A/F would just phase the C models that have no mission orientation. Here on my base we have a C models that go to places just to go. Not for show of force, not to deploy to help the war. Just here to waste money in my honest opinion. If they dont have a mission then we dont need them any more. Im not hating on C models, b/c there is a few bases in america where they have a mission.

jeswaw wrote in post #11750733
Here on my base we have a C models that go to places just to go.

Sounds like a pretty sweet deal for those LTs! Really though, they don't even deploy?

*cough cough cough* correction:

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #11749250
It was life limited and it was either park them or risk losing more air crew due to more airframes coming apart in flight.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #11745389
The 117s were early generation composite and RAM (radar ablative material) technology.

They were life limited and the clock was ticking the second they left the factory.

Not surprising that they can still fly but (probably) never again in anger.

Speaking of the B-52... Did you know that there hasn't been a B-52 built new since roughly 1965?

Correction -- the last B-52 to come off of the assembly line was the last of the "H" models in 1962 after 744 aircraft were built -- I may be wrong -- but now only the "g"'s and "h"'s are still operational. I worked on the ECM gear on the C's and D's in 1969 at Ellsworth AFB SD

JHutch wrote in post #11751017
Sounds like a pretty sweet deal for those LTs! Really though, they don't even deploy?

Well if you count 4-6 month TDY to vacation spots. Im talking they went to a place on TDY and made more in Per Diem then what I made in a war zone, which tells you that the places they are going to are nice.