Doesn't it seem that the U.S. retires some its secret black aircraft to soon like the SR-71 and now the F-117? Now there is no set date but the F-117 is set to be drawn down starting next year and maybe completely by the end of 2008. :cry I personally believe that is too early with only a small number of F-22A's in service and the F-35 a number of years away. The USAF is saying they don't need the F-117 anymore because they have the Raptor, but the air force is only getting 180 of the 350 really want. The F-35 still hasn't flown, and problems have arisen that may delay the program. I think they should keep the Nighthawk until at least all F-22's enter service. I do understand the concerns of the USAF, with the F-117's limited payload, range, and no radar its years are numbered. Though not to long ago, USAF and political leaders were calling for the A-10 to retired, and the Gulf War showed that would have been a bad decision. The Warthog today has proven to be a very capable and soon will be even more so. So I say let the Nighthawk serve on for a few more years, till we have a good number of replacements. I bet the old birds :rel still have some life in them yet.
F-117 Retiring Too Soon?
- Thread starter LancerMc
- Start date
There are several reasons the F-117A is being retired, but must of these relate to maintenance.
Although based on HAVE BLUE and other stealth programmes the actual development schedule for the F-117A was 31months from the contract being signed to first.
As only a small number of aircraft were to be built, many components from other aircraft were used (many Lockheed items F-104 Starfighter etc). Not only mechanical items (wheels), but parts or whole electronic systems were borrowed from other aircraft (or in a couple of cases cancelled projects). Now that these older platforms are no longer in service the F-117A has a very big obsolescence problem. If a part is worn out or breaks and there are no spares available, and nobody makes the part any more what can you do? There ways of managing obsolescence. Buy additional spares when you have the chance “life of type buys”, re-design etc. The current operational is gradually reducing and the non-operational aircraft are being stripped for spares, to keep the rest of the fleet flying.
The aircraft was not optimised for its flying characteristics but for stealth. This and the manner in which the aircraft was operated resulted in greater stress on the structure and more metal fatigue that was originally planned.
Applying the RAM material involved the use of very toxic chemicals that caused unexpected corrosion. Having to re-apply the coating after each flight was also a huge maintenance task.
In order to check for metal fatigue & corrosion additional scheduled maintenance was required, involving the removal of wing skins and very time consuming non-destructive testing (NDT).
It is not really a matter of choosing to retire the aircraft, it is more that they have become increasingly difficult to maintain and that as other platforms come on line the can take of the task performed by the F-117A; the aircraft will be phased out of service.
Chris
Although based on HAVE BLUE and other stealth programmes the actual development schedule for the F-117A was 31months from the contract being signed to first.
As only a small number of aircraft were to be built, many components from other aircraft were used (many Lockheed items F-104 Starfighter etc). Not only mechanical items (wheels), but parts or whole electronic systems were borrowed from other aircraft (or in a couple of cases cancelled projects). Now that these older platforms are no longer in service the F-117A has a very big obsolescence problem. If a part is worn out or breaks and there are no spares available, and nobody makes the part any more what can you do? There ways of managing obsolescence. Buy additional spares when you have the chance “life of type buys”, re-design etc. The current operational is gradually reducing and the non-operational aircraft are being stripped for spares, to keep the rest of the fleet flying.
The aircraft was not optimised for its flying characteristics but for stealth. This and the manner in which the aircraft was operated resulted in greater stress on the structure and more metal fatigue that was originally planned.
Applying the RAM material involved the use of very toxic chemicals that caused unexpected corrosion. Having to re-apply the coating after each flight was also a huge maintenance task.
In order to check for metal fatigue & corrosion additional scheduled maintenance was required, involving the removal of wing skins and very time consuming non-destructive testing (NDT).
It is not really a matter of choosing to retire the aircraft, it is more that they have become increasingly difficult to maintain and that as other platforms come on line the can take of the task performed by the F-117A; the aircraft will be phased out of service.
Chris
The F-117 is not very stealthy at all by current standards.
The level of maintenance required to keep it stealthy is much higher than current standards.
Its level of performance and range is not up to current stanards.
The B-2 and F-22 are both way smaller in radar cross section. Even the JSF has a radar cross section far smaller.
With current radars being 100 times more powerful than the first gulf war they will now be able to detect the F-117 and shoot it down. This was demonstrated by the F117 shot down over Serbia by a missile that entered service in 1961. Once they knew it was approaching it was quite easy to get a missile to lock onto the F-117.
As the F-22 can do all the missions that the F-117 can plus much more, and that the JSF will also be able to do all of the F-117 missions. This clearly demonstrates that its time to let thje F-117 go.
Retiring the entire fleet of F-117's and purchasing a small amount of F-22's will cover any capability gap.
The level of maintenance required to keep it stealthy is much higher than current standards.
Its level of performance and range is not up to current stanards.
The B-2 and F-22 are both way smaller in radar cross section. Even the JSF has a radar cross section far smaller.
With current radars being 100 times more powerful than the first gulf war they will now be able to detect the F-117 and shoot it down. This was demonstrated by the F117 shot down over Serbia by a missile that entered service in 1961. Once they knew it was approaching it was quite easy to get a missile to lock onto the F-117.
As the F-22 can do all the missions that the F-117 can plus much more, and that the JSF will also be able to do all of the F-117 missions. This clearly demonstrates that its time to let thje F-117 go.
Retiring the entire fleet of F-117's and purchasing a small amount of F-22's will cover any capability gap.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7
The shoot down of the F-117 was mainly due to pilot error. On the return part of the mission, the pilot dropped below cloud level during a moon lit night. This made the aircraft a sitting duck for AAA, which hit and caused a fire on the aircraft. A IR SAM was then launched and destroyed the aircraft. It had nothing to do with its Radar cross section.
I understand maintenance issues are a reason why they are being retired, but there only going to be something like two operational squadrons of F-22's by the time they retire the Nighthawks. I say just keep them a little longer until the F-22 is further along in service, and the JSF is closer to being ready.
I understand maintenance issues are a reason why they are being retired, but there only going to be something like two operational squadrons of F-22's by the time they retire the Nighthawks. I say just keep them a little longer until the F-22 is further along in service, and the JSF is closer to being ready.
exdropfrog
New Member
There is, as always, a finite amount of money in the defence pie. The more expensive programs are always looked at first when it comes to rationalisation. I think that the real reason for the demise of the F-117 is the advent of the stealthy, weapon carrying UAV (why risk a pilot at all) and the upgrading of the precision attack cruise missiles, JDAMs etc.
It appears to me that the F-117 is now less necessary and the bang for the buck can't be justified.
It appears to me that the F-117 is now less necessary and the bang for the buck can't be justified.
rumor say we and russia get a part of wing of F-117A crashed in Yugoslavia, maybe US think it no longer suitable for it to serve when two his potential rival has known its secret.------by examine the material other country may decide what kind of wave length is most suitable to detect it , and what kind of weakness it bore. perhaps that can be a part of reason for why it retired .
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #11
Even so if China and Russia knew some of the secrets of the F-117, when are open hostilities ever going to open between Russia/China and the U.S. Never
The F-117 is a good weapon for stealth strikes on less sophisticated defence networks.
Concerning the shoot down of the F-117, I read a report written for Air Forces Monthly years ago that said the missile that shoot down the jet was an IR SAM. The evidence came from Yugoslavian sources. Its not suprising that the exact story is still a little clouded.
The F-117 is a good weapon for stealth strikes on less sophisticated defence networks.
Concerning the shoot down of the F-117, I read a report written for Air Forces Monthly years ago that said the missile that shoot down the jet was an IR SAM. The evidence came from Yugoslavian sources. Its not suprising that the exact story is still a little clouded.
Yeah LancerMc I read a similar story, and I even read one shortly after the event that claimed a MiG-21 had shot it down!
But even the Pentagon now admits that both aircraft lost during the Kosovo War were shot down by SA-3s. The focus now is on how - lucky shot, long-wavelength radars combined with good drills and lateral thinking, spies within NATO reporting flight paths, altered radars/missiles, or any combination of the above.
Search google for "zoltan dani" if you want to read the interview with the guy who supposedly commanded the battery that shot the two US aircraft down.
But even the Pentagon now admits that both aircraft lost during the Kosovo War were shot down by SA-3s. The focus now is on how - lucky shot, long-wavelength radars combined with good drills and lateral thinking, spies within NATO reporting flight paths, altered radars/missiles, or any combination of the above.
Search google for "zoltan dani" if you want to read the interview with the guy who supposedly commanded the battery that shot the two US aircraft down.
But both Russia and China sell weapons to potential US enemies where hostilities are quite possible - Iran, Syria and North Korea to name just a few.
The ability to maintain those features are impracticle today with the low cost of maintenance on the F-22. While the F-117 is stealthier than the Raptor the question became at what price. The F-22 can do the same job plus superiority fighter while the F-117 was relugated to a small payload of JDAMs that could only be delivered at night. It isn't exactly an all weather bomber if it can't operate with the sun out.
The reports of Serbs being able to detect it are false, they had intelligence, trajectory calculations and multiple shots for a lucky hit. That and the fact command didn't have the common sense to alter the flight plan from the last bombing run. If they had really figured out how to shoot them down the info would be common knowledge among all radar operators world wide and more would have been shot down since then.
The reports of Serbs being able to detect it are false, they had intelligence, trajectory calculations and multiple shots for a lucky hit. That and the fact command didn't have the common sense to alter the flight plan from the last bombing run. If they had really figured out how to shoot them down the info would be common knowledge among all radar operators world wide and more would have been shot down since then.
I agree with you on the reasons why the F-117A is being withdrawn from service, too difficult to maintain, too small a bomb load and too many operational limitations (day only, huge fuel burn etc).
As to the loss of the aircraft in Serbia; the problem is that many people mistake stealth for “invisible to radar”. Having a low RCS is only part of the equation. Having appropriate intelligence enables flights to be planned to avoid threats. This means knowing the location of threats and capabilities, and knowing your own RCS enables a bubble to be drawn around each threat. The F-117A can then fly radials between each threat. If the opposition know in advance your flight path and can put new threats into position, blocking the gaps, then the F-117A just runs into the wall. If enough weapons are fired then the target can be hit.
The loss of the aircraft was not a failure of LO (reduced RCS), but rather failings of security (human weakness), intelligence (did not detect change in location of enemy assets) and mission planning (flying the same route, over and over again, again human factors at play).
Today the F-117A can still offer the reduced LO contribution to stealth operations and be effective, the problem is that the price is too high, other platforms, at present B-2 & F-F/A22 and in the future F-35, can do it better.
BTW Congratulations on your promotion, in only 9 years that is impressive!
I left the RAF in 1981 as Sqn Ldr (equivalent to LCDR) in the Engineering Branch (my vision was not goon enough for aircrew, although I have now over 5,000hrs in trials work and similar as P1 GA & gliders. I am currently teaching folk to fly, good fun). Whilst in the RAF I did an exchange tour with the USAF and have worked with USM officers on exchange and with USN when engaged in A2A missile trials. After leaving the RAF I became involved in the development of radar systems and ECM, RF, IR and Laser.
Thanks for your thoughtful input
Chris