g0_command0 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread618907/pg1 what do you guys take of it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Camus272 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread618907/pg1what do you guys take of it? I imagine they are using one for testing stealth/ radar equipment at Groom, or maybe they are maintaining them to keep them in flying condition. I hope that is the case . I suspect the USAF has a newer stealth aircraft that hasn't been revealed yet, like the F-117 was in the early 80s. If not, I believe the F-117 retirement was too soon. I'm still holding out hope for seeing one at an airshow someday. Brian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rapier01 Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Hard to say. Just because they were retired, doesn't mean some of the airframes aren't being used for test purposes or whatever. The F-4 was retired, and they're being used as target drones, NASA flew SR-71s. If it is indeed from Groom lake, it could be part of some test program for any number of "black" projects. The photos mean nothing by themselves, no time stamp etc, no way of knowing who took them, when, where or if they have been manipulated- frankly the word of some photographer isn't good enough without supporting evidence. Mind you, I'm not saying there are no black projects going right now out there in Nevada (there are), I'm just saying these photos don't prove anything. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Abovetopsecret forums are terrible, and shoud not be considered as a source. That said, i will be much more surpriced if they *weren't* flying... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
garthk Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 The F-117 used a heck of a lot of off-the-shelf components, and the LO parameters of the faceted shape and stealth coatings are exceptionally well-documented and tested. There's also 50 or so available, so plenty of spares. It would probably be a lot cheaper to keep a couple/few F-117s flying to test bleeding edge stealth technology than to either dedicate examples of one of the newer designs (B-2, of which there are only 20 left, or F-22, which are extremely expensive and too-few in numbers as well) or a dedicated one-off test platform (like Tacit Blue). OR for use as a Red-Hat style aggressor aircraft using the kind of stealth technology and tactics that our adversaries may be capable of employing at this point or in the near future. So, while I can't speak for the veracity of the pics (notice that they DO have the national insignia still in place), it's absolutely reasonable that some are still flying. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
modelman11 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 I too would be surprised if the Air Force didnt have a few F-117's for stealth/other testing. Especially considering they have a TON of spares right down the street. Also not that even after the retirement, plant 42 was home to four aircrafes that flew all the way through october of 08------five months after all the others were gone. Dont know why they would have to hide them at groom though. Its not an aircraft that anyone would be surprised to see if they had just said well were going to have some test aircraft but thats it. Heck they probly could have kept them at plant 42! Who knows though. The video seems legit as well as the part with the KC-10 and then n105tb....which can be identified by the blue rudder and wing pylons. wish there were better photos though.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sig Saur & Son Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 What next, grainy pix of a Tweet in US markings? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 I say no...they were flown to Tonopah and stripped of parts...wings and tails removed and put 3 to a barn. As they come up for destruction they have the RAM stripped and then they are cut up...dumped in a pre dug hole, soaked with fuel and burned. Covered up and each one will have it's own headstone to mark it's grave at TTR. Got that info from a former 117 pilot that came through school here at Kirtland not to long ago. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
internationalblue Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Its a shame they cannot just bury them and have a headstone put over the grave of an "intact" aircraft. In 100 years they might actually have some historical interest. Understood however that everything about the plane is still secret, and that secrecy must be maintained.... Still some of those gallant little birds should be protected for the future... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Still am curious as to why this program was terminated so quickly. Was it because we discovered that our adversaries found some way of negating the plane's stealth technology and it was no longer the "silver bullet" that it used to be or does the AF have some other program that is still on the dark side of the spectrum and provides a similar capability. Seemed like one minute these were super-top secret national assets and the next day nothing but obsolete junk. Very strange. John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 The two places in the world I wouldn't find it strange that they are still flying is there and Palmdale/Edwards .... Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Still am curious as to why this program was terminated so quickly. Designed - mid-late 1970s First flight - 1981 (29 years ago) IOC - 1983 (27 years ago) Revealed to the public - 1988 (22 years ago) First combat - 1991 (19 years ago) Retired - 2008 (2 years ago) 25 years for an frontline combat aircraft that can only perform one mission, zero capability to defend itself from other aircraft, has no radar, is subsonic and can only carry a maximum of two bombs is hardly quickly. does the AF have some other program that is still on the dark side of the spectrum... Yup, you'll get an answer to that, just wait right here does the AF have some other program that...provides a similar capability. And in case of emergency, break glass.... Seemed like one minute these were super-top secret national assets and the next day nothing but obsolete junk. Very strange. More like they were retired earlier than the planned 2011 because of budget cuts. Better to put that remaining funding towards newer and more advanced muti-role types than a 30-year old platform with thousands of airframe hours already on it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Thorsten Wieking Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 [...]Seemed like one minute these were super-top secret national assets and the next day nothing but obsolete junk. Very strange. John First - I really, really like the F-117, but - that plane is old. No matter how many spares, no matter how secrect some stuff still is.... look at the current und possible future adversaries. You either have an assymetric warfare and would be better of with a hot'n'high gunship type of plane for CAS (anyone saying A-1?) or a very sophisticated adversary (Pakistan, India, China, North Korea) for which the F-117 is too old technology - remember some serbs brought one down - what, ten years ago?. Albeit with luck, they nonetheless downed it. Nonetheless, I do hope that some examples will survice in museums. Smithsonian and USAF come to mind. I think there is one already in some museum, stripped of the RAM coating and repainted in black paint. Better than nothing. Regarding those pictures - to me they can be everything, starting from old pictures to scale models. Cheers Thorsten Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Moose135 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Nonetheless, I do hope that some examples will survice in museums. Smithsonian and USAF come to mind. I think there is one already in some museum, stripped of the RAM coating and repainted in black paint. Better than nothing. There is one at Wright-Patterson in the Air Force Museum. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Two of the FSD airplanes are in museums...one at the AF museum and another on a pole at Nellis AFB. F-22, F-35 and B-2 are all well capable replacements. Even the B-1 bomber is making it's way to the boneyard yet the old slow RCS of a barn B-52 is still serving proudly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
aircommando130 Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 There is one at Wright-Patterson in the Air Force Museum. [/quote Nice picture...I see the AC-130A in the background. Wish they would of put a set of 3 bladed props back on it and repainted it back to the SEA paint with the black sides and bottom. The 117 was the work horse of opening night of Desert Storm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jay Chladek Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Not all of the jets will get destroyed right away though. Reason being is while F-22 has taken the deep precision strike role of a heavily defended target area, it is still a stop gap until F-35 comes online as it can only drop JDAMs. The plan for the F-117s retirement is to keep at least a handful flyable in case its laser and FLIR systems were needed for a conflict where JDAMs couldn't do the job (and in some cases, they can't). When the F-35 makes it to full combat capability, then the last of the 117s would be destroyed. Airplanes are fickle things as if you park them for long periods of time, they don't always work if you try to fire them back up. Checks have to be done from time to time that everything continues to work and some maintenance has to be done to make sure the aircraft can at least be restored to a flyable condition if the need arose. As such, I would not be at all surprised if some jets were at least run up and had their systems tested. Flying might be part of the picture as well, but the only people in the know on that one aren't going to talk about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
A6BSTARM Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Designed - mid-late 1970sFirst flight - 1981 (29 years ago) IOC - 1983 (27 years ago) Revealed to the public - 1988 (22 years ago) First combat - 1991 (19 years ago) Retired - 2008 (2 years ago) 25 years for an frontline combat aircraft that can only perform one mission, zero capability to defend itself from other aircraft, has no radar, is subsonic and can only carry a maximum of two bombs is hardly quickly. Yup, you'll get an answer to that, just wait right here And in case of emergency, break glass.... More like they were retired earlier than the planned 2011 because of budget cuts. Better to put that remaining funding towards newer and more advanced muti-role types than a 30-year old platform with thousands of airframe hours already on it. So Tony when are you going to give the suit over? We could use the suit, are you going to be a good American and give us the suit? Seriously, though the F-117 is old technology. It was designed to defeat guidance and track radars, so for it to go into injun country it requires a large support foot print. Talking to someone I know in the EA community, they were telling me that typically planning required at a minimum of two and a maxium of 4 prowlers just for the soft SEAD portion, then you have the TARCAP, and Escort CAP coming from the non-LO aircraft to defend the lanes. I would also note that the airplane is short legged as well. You would note that none deployed into theater for either OIF or OEF. So except for three deployments (supposed Panama '89, ODS in 91, and Serbia in 96), the airplane hasn't factor in that many crisis deployments like some other aircraft like the F-15 or F-16. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dahut Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 (edited) Is the F-117 still in use, in secret? If we're lucky, yes. Since we're interested in conspiracy's, lets consider this. Retiring a perfectly useful, in-stock night time assault weapon makes sense these days. After all, employing it would mean we actually WANT to send trained fighting men to rain doom upon our enemies. Since we cant admit to that any longer, and worse can't get caught at it... well, you do the math. We, here at www.Guts2BTheBest.com, are calling it this one a fluke. Edited October 15, 2010 by dahut Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caudleryan Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 By the way, Burkut, your post got posted on that forum. They are watching us........ RYAN. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IrishGreek Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 Here are a couple shots that I got of one in Palmdale, CA at Blackbird Air Park. Sorry for the fuzziness on the edge of the second shot. Had to take the picture through the metal fencing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tony Stark Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 So Tony when are you going to give the suit over? We could use the suit, are you going to be a good American and give us the suit? Hand the suit over? I'd file a lawsuit against the USAF and the Senate over the theft of the Mark II platform, but they've already been punished enough when they (over)paid Justin Hammer for his software "upgrades" and that "Ex-Wife" of his. In fact, the only things that worked were my basic designs and the third-party weapons installed Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Andre Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 Airplanes are fickle things as if you park them for long periods of time, they don't always work if you try to fire them back up. As anyone who enjoyed the documentary "Battlefield Earth" can testify, that is simply not true - those Harriers worked perfectly after being parked for 1000 years! There was even full air pressure in the non-degraded-at-all rubber tyres! So there! Cheers, Andre Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Thorsten Wieking Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 Glad that there a few preserved examples. Cheers Thorsten Quote Link to post Share on other sites
afspret Posted October 16, 2010 Share Posted October 16, 2010 (edited) The Air Force neither confirms nor denies they're still flying. Well that pretty much means they are . Edited October 16, 2010 by afspret Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.