Posted on 03/15/2007 4:35:28 PM PDT by IonImplantGuru
Recently, American F-22 fighters were sent, for the first time, across the Pacific, to Japan, for a training exercise. This would be the first time the aircraft would cross the International Date line, where it is tomorrow, and the aircraft's GPS and navigation software would handle the date change.
There were problems.
All off a sudden the software that ran the navigation and communications systems wasn't working too well. Being in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, this was a problem. Some of the pilots were able to reboot their software and make the problem go away, but this did not always work, so all the aircraft turned around and returned to Hawaii. Those aircraft that still had malfunctioning navigation software, followed other aircraft back.
The contractor quickly found and fixed the problem (the routines for crossing the International Date Line, and changing the date, were not well thought out and tested.)
To quote Murphy's Law; "Whatever can go wrong, will, and at the worst possible time."
I kinda agree, but I haven't had a chance to post anything (that hadn't previously been posted) in such a long time that ... hey! ... any port in a storm, eh?
Besides which, this has gotten more responses (neg and otherwise) than anything I've posted in eons! I be happy.
HF
All my detractors will fail to read your validation of my point. But I thank you for recognizing the issue: poor engineering decision-making. At least the problem was revealed and fixed before one or more a/c or pilots were lost.
As opposed to to the dismal failure of ... oh, let's say Naval bureaucrats in WW II in recognizing the real issues with Mk XIV torpedoes, which doomed many of my submarine forebears, before the problems were demonstrated and fixed 'in the field'.
Count me as a little "veklemt" (sp?) -and- a little defensive.
Veklemt? I love a challenge; now I have something new to find out.
Sweet dreams, big guy, and remember: Maui no ka o'i!
Yeah, I think you're right c-five - it's likely that the problem wasn't crossing the date line, but rather going from -180 to +180, the explanation having been mangled by a reporter who didn't know the difference between 180 degrees longitude and the international date line.
With the tests properly rigged.
I’ll still bet a Top Gun instructor in an A-4 could still flame all the F-22s he wanted.
"See that black box in the upper left hand corner? That F-22 is dead."
But couldn't this picture be an example of a friendly pilot targeting a F22 for grins when the Raptor was not operating in a defensive mode?
"40 years ago the 'common wisdom' was "... you better learn Russian ..."
20 years ago, it was "... time to figure out Kanji characters and learn Japanese ..."
Right now, here in Southern AZ the mantra is "... it's time to take New World Spanish lessons because ..."
Screw Chinese!"
If the MSM numbed electorate votes in a CIC and a congress that "loathes the military", all our weaponry is usless.
Bill Clinton expended a sizable chunk of our cruise missile inventory at the time on a political diversion.
Oh, I agree that frame shot shows an apparent kill.
I'm just ASKING you if that is *actual* REDFLAG (or other) exercise 'gun camera' or is it camera footage from training, testing, wingman fun, etc. The 'aggressor' in this frame you posted might just be having fun for bragging rights-- with a buddy. I am especially curious since the F-22 appears to be flying from left to right, and the aggressor from right to left [ I don't do photo-interpretation ] which would be a TOUGH aspect to get a kill with missiles or guns 'in real life'. It would seem to show a criss-cross during a scissors (or similar) ACM maneuver. But I am NOT good at figgering out camera shots.
Cuz I'm just saying that in articles I can find, there are no documented 'kills' on an F-22 by an aggressor.
There are a lot of angry "WHAT'S YOUR SOURCE???" fanatics on FR, so I am honestly just curious ... what's the source/origin of that kill-shot?
One last comment. No plane is invincible. A lot comes down to the wet-ware inside the helmet. The airframe and weapon systems are only so good. Sure the USAF is hard-selling the F-22, but bear in mind that pilots and aircraft of all types (and from multiple friendly nations) have gone up against the F-22 and gone home repeatedly, persistently dead and frustrated. It's not just USAF BS (of which there is PLENTY to go around) it's also apparent from the available data that the F-22 is THAT good. Bear in mind I come from a Naval Aviation family that holds considerable disdain for the Country Club of the Armed Forces, where every airfield has a fixed location AND a golf course alongside.
I just happen to believe the F-22 is the real deal. Not invincible, but certainly awesome and worth the bucks.
Ask yourself: if you and your wingman were wanting to own your kill box, or come out of every furball alive, what aircraft would you pick out of the worldwide inventory?
Thanks for the reasoned opposition, by the way. ;-)
Those 2 kills were NOT F-22s. Read the articles I posted (unless of course you have different articles ;-)
AMEN!!
I see YOU can do the photo-interpretation that I can only guess at!
The F-22 (and its reputation) keeps OPFOR Air Forces on the tarmac. Remember how the Iraqis would flee from (and return to the airfield) if they were painted by F-14 radars?
Sure, Ahkmed and his buds will not have much beyond a King Air, but 'Lin Chau' in SE Asia, and Hugo Chavez Jr in S. America will.
Not all threats are terrorist, and the ability to deter/defeat the enemy so that we have air SUPREMACY gives us freedom to prosecute our battle plan. If we control the order of battle, we win. (um, as long as our politicians let us ...)
Sure, there's still a BIG role for other aircraft types -- manned and unmanned, including the B-52 up through F-15Es and Super Hornets and Falcons. The F-22 and soon the JSF will give us an extra edge that we really need.
Besides, a great deal of air-to-mud is gonna go RPV anyway. There, I threw in THAT thread-hijacker ;-p
"I’ll still bet a Top Gun instructor in an A-4 could still flame all the F-22s he wanted."
Sorry to burst your bubble but that cannot be the case. Have you seen any film footage on the F22 and just how it can move in flight?
Also the tests were with the top pilots from all over the world flying their countries best fighters.
What?
The RUSSIAN system won't be working?
I like what you said ;-)
Serious question follows: It appears to me (I suck at photo inter.) that the Raptor is flying from left to right, crossing below the Hornet flying right to left. How the H@LL do you get a lock-up (or a gun kill) with those physics? [aside from a golden BB scenario]
I think your scenario that the Hornet is a mort is a good one. Perhaps the Raptor jock was offering a "you're number 1" moment to the Hornet driver, or vice versa.
Sorta true ... until you consider close air support. When grunts need iron on a target RIGHT NOW, you need the human in the seat to confirm the target and kill it. RPVs are not yet up to that task.
... although I agree with you that the [distant] future of strike platforms are pilot-less (i.e., the pilot is sitting in an AIR-CONDITIONED trailer using his PS-3)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.