US Jet Fighter: F15

[GeoModder]

I'm no USAF maintenance engineer, so the jargon isn't clear to me.

Btw, why the rush on replacing F15's with the F35? Is is supposed to be more maintenance-friendly? Would supprise me, as I thought stealth fuselage needs to be replaced more often.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Code 1 status means every systems, from major to minor, have been certified individually and in integrated checks, called 'ops checks', with the other systems of the aircraft. In simple-speak, code-1 is "good to go".

A Code 2 status aircraft means there are some issues that while does not affect the overall flight status, the aircraft as a platform, be it a military platform or a civilian airliner, is degraded in performance. Obviously, the flight control system itself cannot be certified as Code 2 but an aircraft does not need a functioning radar to fly. So the aircraft itself as a platform is certified as a Code 2 aircraft and can fly in an airshow for a gullible crowd.

A Code 3 aircraft is simply unflyable for any reason. It is generally cannibalized for parts to keep other aircrafts in Code 2 or Code 1 status. A Code 3 aircraft is often down for so long that it will earn the title 'Hangar Queen'.

 

[GeoModder]

So in general you had to strip parts from a code-3 F15 to keep the rest of the wing flying for perhaps a few sorties more?

Sounds to me that within a month a whole airgroup is grounded due to cannibalization, unless spares come from the factory on a continued base.

 

[Wolfshanze]

So in general you had to strip parts from a code-3 F15 to keep the rest of the wing flying for perhaps a few sorties more?

Sounds to me that within a month a whole airgroup is grounded due to cannibalization, unless spares come from the factory on a continued base.

Check any F-15 squadron in the USAF inventory... at any given time, two-three F-15s per squadron are in "Cannibalization" status for spare parts... that's the REAL reason why the F-15 is being replaced... it has nothing to do with combat performance... the things are total maintenance hogs!

 

[GeoModder]

And the F16? Is it the same story there? Or are those decent enough to break up during flight so the "cannibalization" status never apply to them?

 

[Wolfshanze]

And the F16? Is it the same story there? Or are those decent enough to break up during flight so the "cannibalization" status never apply to them?

Actually that pointy-thing at the front of the F-16's nose usually sticks in the ground so the whole jet is verticle when it crashes to earth after its single-engine flames-out... hence the term "lawn dart".

 

[GeoModder]

Yeah, enough of them hit dirt quite catastrophically in my country's Air Force to get the picture. Talking about attrition...

 

[Wolfshanze]

Yeah, enough of them hit dirt quite catastrophically in my country's Air Force to get the picture. Talking about attrition...

Why do you think the US exports those lawn darts so much?

 

[GeoModder]

Hey, most were at exported at the time this wasn't common knowledge.
But you haven't told yet what their code in general was after flight (for those surviving a sortie that is ).

 

[arithegreat]

After reading all of that F/A-18C is the only good plane then its maybe slow, but it should not need so much service to fly and it would probably take a good load to. But the F-16 is cheap so you get what you pay for so they buy other planes instead like EF, JAS 39 (All most a F-16 with a better datalink ), F-15A/C old, E/K good but it cost a lot more

 

[Wolfshanze]

The F-15A Eagle is out of front-line service now... only the C/D is still in service... and of course the Strike Eagles.

The F-18 is a much newer aircraft, so it's mechanical problems are fewer... one has to remember, the stress the airframe of a fighter takes over the years with high-G turns and what-not.... the service life of a fighter is much, much shorter then that of any cargo/bomber/airliner for reasons of the types of stress the frames get from the kind of flying a fighter does.

The F-22 is necessary, if for no other reason then the fact that it is a fresh start on a new airframe. Many of the F-15s now in service are older then the crews that work on them.

 

[GeneralMatt]

Many of the F-15s now in service are older then the crews that work on them.

Sounds like our Canadian armies weapons, vehicles, you name it..

 

[raynkel]

You weren't a Loader, were you?

Yepper

5 years at Kadena AB on Okinawa

Great forum guys.

I am amazed at what you are doing to this game.

Just started playing CIV 3.
Long way to ...

 

[phungus420]

From my experience the A-10 is the best to work maintenance on... those things land code-1 every damn time!

I was only a medic in the army for 4 years, never saw combat. But as those that have served will know, you here people talking about random battle related crap at times. And I have to say in general military equipment gives people the impression it sucks (basically if you know how military contracts work, you get what you expect here). Two exceptions though, the Warthog (A-10), and the SAW (M249), I've heard nothing but praise about these two instruments of war from people that have used them, or were supported by them.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Yeah, enough of them hit dirt quite catastrophically in my country's Air Force to get the picture. Talking about attrition...

This incident happened on 23 March 1994... a classic example of a larn-dart in action...

An F-16 collided with C-130E (68-10942) over Pope AFB, near Fayetteville, North Carolina. Both the C-130 and the F-16 were trying to land at the same time. The F-16 was above the C-130 and could not see it. They collided at 300 feet. The F-16 hit the tail of the C-130 which damaged the nose of the F-16. The pilot could not regain altitude and before he ejected made an attempt to guide the aircraft away from the parking ramp and buildings by engaging the afterburners. The damaged C-130 landed safely. The F-16 crashed into the cargo aircraft parking ramp, shortly after the crew ejected safely.

The wreckage of the F-16 scattered across the ramp, hitting a C-141B (66-0173) getting ready to load paratroopers. The paratroopers were rigging in the grassy area behind the C-141. The C-141 caught fire which ignited the fuel tanks. Wreckage from the F-16 scattered through hundreds of fully rigged paratroopers. The C-141 was completely destroyed.

By the 25th of the month 23 had people died and 80 were seriously injured. Pieces of the F-16 were found out the back gate of the base, over 1,000 feet away from point of impact. The cause of the mishap was a chain of errors by civilian and military air-traffic controllers. This is the worst F-16 accident to date.

 

[GeoModder]

That doesn't exactly sound like a technical failure.

 

[Xenomorph]

Why do you think the US exports those lawn darts so much?

Because despite their pitfalls, they remain very effective, affordable aircraft?

 

[Wolfshanze]

That doesn't exactly sound like a technical failure.

Trust me... the technical problems of the F-16 (and it's single engine) factored in... you just have to think about it really hard!



(if an F-15 kicked-in it's afterburners in such a situation, the jet would have either reached the moon, or struck a bunch of Chinese).

 

[hun+celt]

This is a beautiful model. One question...does this support team color, or are those stripes on the tail civ-specific for the US?

Also, since you seem to like planes, any chance of an A-10 making an appearance? As a former ground-pounder, this plane has a near and dear place in my heart, and I'd love to include it as a specialized ground-attack plane.

 

[psob2]

@ hun+celt

snafusmith made a nice a10

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=164552


there is a "unit index" sticky at top of forum if you are looking for other units. its out of date, but there are still many units listed