Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you think about it, its seems like a dilemma. One feels compelled to buy the most sophisticated weapons to cope with the more sophisticated/formidable opponents. In the meantime, asymmetrical warfare makes your efforts more and more problematic
In the meantime, the big ticket projects threaten to suck up all the money, causing a death spiral in terms of quantity.
For the Air Force, beside the F-35, the KC-46 tanker and the B-21 Raider bomber are in the works.
For the Navy, besides the F-35, the new Ford class super carriers and the Columbia class submarine are in the works.
The B-21 and the Columbia subs are to be built for our nuclear deterrent.
As for manned aircraft, it looks like we will end up with: 1. A few big ticket items, each small in quantity. 2. A shrinking pool of aging aircraft.
The Ford carriers are threatening to go over budget even more than it has already with sea trials just starting. I don't know any thing about the Columbia subs. A new boomer is it? I'll have to look that up. There have been a couple aircraft that were in the lower tech area that went on to prove themselves more than capable and endeared themselves to both pilots and maintenance crews. The A4 being the biggy that the US actually bought off on and put in service and the F20 Tigershark. The F20 was beat out by the F16 but did sell in foreign services well. Like the A4 it was simple , capable and reliable. Actually with an avionics package like the F16s it may have beat the latter head to head, but it's not always performance that gets the contract.
Politics do figure in a lot with any military selection process. The F20 was a very upgraded version of the F5. The Navy still flies both the A4 and F5 in aggressor roles at Top Gun. I live right next door to NAS Fallon and see them flying all the time. VFA 127. Last I checked they were calling themselves the Cylons. They also fly the F16 N.
Isn't this generation of aircraft in the tail end of their service lives?
Just attended a system capabilities brief in Fort Worth (FAA airspace council) and the F-16 is viable through 2030. With the F/A-18E and F, there's capability through at least then. Same for the F-15E.
The Ford carriers are threatening to go over budget even more than it has already with sea trials just starting. I don't know any thing about the Columbia subs. A new boomer is it? I'll have to look that up. There have been a couple aircraft that were in the lower tech area that went on to prove themselves more than capable and endeared themselves to both pilots and maintenance crews. The A4 being the biggy that the US actually bought off on and put in service and the F20 Tigershark. The F20 was beat out by the F16 but did sell in foreign services well. Like the A4 it was simple , capable and reliable. Actually with an avionics package like the F16s it may have beat the latter head to head, but it's not always performance that gets the contract.
Politics do figure in a lot with any military selection process. The F20 was a very upgraded version of the F5. The Navy still flies both the A4 and F5 in aggressor roles at Top Gun. I live right next door to NAS Fallon and see them flying all the time. VFA 127. Last I checked they were calling themselves the Cylons. They also fly the F16 N.
The F-20 was not sold. The story is all the potential buyers refused it holding out for F-16s
The F-20 was not sold. The story is all the potential buyers refused it holding out for F-16s
mmm. I just remember reading something ( and granted it's been a while) that a couple South American and Arab countries had put in orders on F20s because of cost factors. But I can't prove they actually went through. I do remember very clearly that the F20 had proved itself well in trials and was considered to be a more than capable platform. This is all ancient history in the grand scheme though as the F16 has been in service and is proven to be a great performer in actual combat for a LONG time now.
I remember building models of the prototype when I was a kid. I think that was in the mid 70s, when the F14 was just coming into its heyday, and the latter held an honored place on my model shelf. Next to my lovingly put together model of an F6F Hellcat with all moving parts and paint in favor of decals to match a squadron from USS Hornet and an AD1 of similar stripe painted to match a squadron from USS Boxer during Korea.
Alas, my model shelf met with a dire fate, at the receiving end of my Mom on a cleaning tear, and was knocked over effectively wiping my air wing off the map. My Essex model painted to be the Boxer, Pappy Boyingtons F4U, My pride and joy Hellcat and Spad, as well as all my jets were left in unsalvageable bits of plastic. I was quite devastated as that was several years worth of hard work.
I was looking at an article about the Army's aging helicopters. It was commented that the CH-47 Chinook may in be service from 1965 to 2065-that's right, a full century.
Thinking back a century, to 1917, brings us back to World War I. Imagine a Sopwith Camel still in service today.
I was looking at an article about the Army's aging helicopters. It was commented that the CH-47 Chinook may in be service from 1965 to 2065-that's right, a full century.
Thinking back a century, to 1917, brings us back to World War I. Imagine a Sopwith Camel still in service today.
Yea, no kidding. It does speak well to the abilities of the CH47. Sometimes high tech isn't as important as shear brute power. The CH47s role doesn't require high tech gadgetry. It just needs to keep doing what its doing, being big, tough and able to haul lots of heavy stuff.
I was looking at an article about the Army's aging helicopters. It was commented that the CH-47 Chinook may in be service from 1965 to 2065-that's right, a full century.
Thinking back a century, to 1917, brings us back to World War I. Imagine a Sopwith Camel still in service today.
The C-130 first flew in 1954. And they're still in production today, 63 years later! So it's a certainty that they'll still be flying in 2054, which is less than 37 years away. When I was in Afghanistan we had a unit show up with E models that were built in 1962 and were 44 years old at the time. Everyone else was showing up with H models, so we could interfly each other's airplanes. Except for the E models, which would have required crossover training.
The DC-3 was introduced in 1936 and is still in use today.
Some aircraft turn out to be unusually versatile/adaptable. (My favorite example is the de Havilland Mosquito). In a few cases they remain in service for a lifetime.
Last edited by Tim Randal Walker; 06-03-2017 at 02:40 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was quite devastated as that was several years worth of hard work.
CAS options
