F-117A, U-2 and Half of the B-52 Fleet Many Go Away

I agree will all FlyboyJ said about the F-35 and the X-32. However, the F-117 is NO fighter. It has NO air to air capability. It is subsonic. I have heard that it was call a "F" because funding was easier to get than an "A". I don't really know. It is a pretty basic aircraft with older avionics and no radar. I suspect Lockheed Martin would like to upgrade it. The F-35 will easily replace it in stealth and weapons.

That Boeing plane was UGLY! Lockheed Martin engineers had a ball with jokes about that. One of the most telling comments I heard was to paint he X-35 and X-32 in Thunderbird and Blue Angel colors and the contest would be over. FlyboyJ forgot to say that the X-32 was going to have to be redesigned for the F-32 version with the addition of a horizontal stabilizer!! I can't believe they let them stay in the competition.

Also, for FlyboyJs info, the engineering guys at Ft. Worth was not exactly on a friendly basis with the Skunk Works. I suspect the feeling was mutual.

One on those listed aircraft will not be able to replace by the F-35 fully is the A-10. Fast fliers will just not be as effective as the get in your face and meet my 30 mm nose. I'm sure the grunts would agree. Iraq was an enlightenment to the supersonic jet jocks that run the AF. Still doesn't matter.

One last controversial comment. I think the Eurofighter will be made obsolete by the F-35 because of stealth.

I agree that the Eurofighter will be a step behind the F-22 and JSF, but compared to what else is out there it will still be a damn good aircraft.

I agree. It will be a major player for a long time as I believe the F-15 will continue to be a major player. The stealth players will take the high value targets and the Eurofighters et.al. will be taking care of the main forces.

It is a pretty basic aircraft with older avionics and no radar

Click to expand...

older avionics could be updated yes, but it doesn't have radar not as a design fault but becuase it can be tracked!

The F-35 will easily replace it in stealth and weapons.

Click to expand...

i don't know enough to say you're completely wrong but i do seriously doubt it, the F-117 has the RADAR cross section of a small bird, even the screws had to be specially designed and made for steath, and during peacetime operations she has to carry RADAR reflectors so she can be picked up, she is a real stealth aircraft, whereas the F-35 merely has stealth charactoristics, she has a smaller radar cross section than most fighters but she is far from invisible, especially if you start sticking external stores on her...........

I have friends that worked on the X-35 and are now F-35 program - the F-35 will be more stealthy than the F-117A.....

really? i wasn't sure hence why i didn't say he was wrong outwright........

FLYBOYJ said:

I have friends that worked on the X-35 and are now F-35 program - the F-35 will be more stealthy than the F-117A.....

Click to expand...

This is probably correct. It is at least equal. The F-117 was the first phase of stealth design which had some crude aerodynamic design limitations (slab side/screens over the inlet). It is a testimony to the design team that the plane performed as well as it did. The next phase started with the Northrop Tacit Blue aircraft now in AF museum. It pioneered blended body low RCS and aerodynamically efficient inlets which were also incorporated into the B-2. This technology flowed into the F-22 and F-35.

I doubt very seriously that there are any hard points on the F-117 wings.

the lancaster kicks ass said:

really? i wasn't sure hence why i didn't say he was wrong outwright........

Click to expand...

covering your bases.

I doubt very seriously that there are any hard points on the F-117 wings

Click to expand...

there wasn't i was talking about the F-35.........

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

covering your bases.

Click to expand...

well it wouldn't do to be wrong now would it

davparlr said:

This is probably correct. It is at least equal. The F-117 was the first phase of stealth design which had some crude aerodynamic design limitations (slab side/screens over the inlet). It is a testimony to the design team that the plane performed as well as it did. The next phase started with the Northrop Tacit Blue aircraft now in AF museum. It pioneered blended body low RCS and aerodynamically efficient inlets which were also incorporated into the B-2. This technology flowed into the F-22 and F-35.

I doubt very seriously that there are any hard points on the F-117 wings.

Click to expand...

Actually Lockheed was well aware of blended body and low RCS technology, they incorporated it in the SR-71, they went with the "Radar Deflecting" for ease of manufacture - The F-22 was on the drawing board in the mid-late 80s (I worked on the YF-22A).......

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

No I do not see that happening for the next 25 to 50 years. It will be handeled the way it has been. Bombing the shit out of them, and taking out there radar sites, then the aircraft go in.

Cruise Missles all the way baby!

Click to expand...

Technical capability to replace fighters on Combat Air Patrol with UCAVs will probably exist in 10 to 15 years. Resistance by pilots, who run the AF and Navy, will be intensive (they are already fighting UCAVs) and will delay until your window. Politicians, however, will push for it because captured troops are too much of a drag on overall war effort. And the expense and risk of tring to recover downed airman is high. The overall military push will be to get the troops away from the battlefield. It will be an historical military revolution which we will probably have the priviledge to witness.

davparlr said:

Technical capability to replace fighters on Combat Air Patrol with UCAVs will probably exist in 10 to 15 years. Resistance by pilots, who run the AF and Navy, will be intensive (they are already fighting UCAVs) and will delay until your window. Politicians, however, will push for it because captured troops are too much of a drag on overall war effort. And the expense and risk of tring to recover downed airman is high. The overall military push will be to get the troops away from the battlefield. It will be an historical military revolution which we will probably have the priviledge to witness.

Click to expand...

They have allready started that, when I was in Iraq they were allready using UAV's with missles. I do not see this becoming the norm though for another 15 to 20 years though.

FLYBOYJ said:

Actually Lockheed was well aware of blended body and low RCS technology, they incorporated it in the SR-71, they went with the "Radar Deflecting" for ease of manufacture - The F-22 was on the drawing board in the mid-late 80s (I worked on the YF-22A).......

Click to expand...

The SR-71 was indeed a Low RCS blended design probably by intelligent engineers with good understanding of aerodynamics and radar reflection but few computer tools (1950s!). But it is my understanding that the computer technology and software capable of predicting radar reflections of curved surfaces did not exist until the after the F-117 was designed. I would be surprised that the F-117 slanted in the direction of manufacturing ease vs. RCS. As far as I know (some programs may still be classified) the Tacit Blue was the first DARPA program specifically designed for low RCS that used blended components. All of this was on government money. It would foolish to believe that the flow of information did not flow from F-117 to Tacit Blue to B-2 to YF-22/23 to JSF with the majority of data and tools being generated on the B-2 (in the early 80s) where billions of dollars was spent on technology. While the Lockheed B-2 competitor is still classified, I have heard it looked like an overgrown F-117.

davparlr said:

The SR-71 was indeed a Low RCS blended design probably by intelligent engineers with good understanding of aerodynamics and radar reflection but few computer tools (1950s!). But it is my understanding that the computer technology and software capable of predicting radar reflections of curved surfaces did not exist until the after the F-117 was designed. I would be surprised that the F-117 slanted in the direction of manufacturing ease vs. RCS.

Click to expand...

It did - I was on the program.....
There were design engineers I knew who stated at the time they could build a better product, many were told to "save it for the ATF and other programs."

davparlr said:

As far as I know (some programs may still be classified) the Tacit Blue was the first DARPA program specifically designed for low RCS that used blended components. All of this was on government money. It would foolish to believe that the flow of information did not flow from F-117 to Tacit Blue to B-2 to YF-22/23 to JSF with the majority of data and tools being generated on the B-2 (in the early 80s) where billions of dollars was spent on technology. While the Lockheed B-2 competitor is still classified, I have heard it looked like an overgrown F-117.

Click to expand...

I believe little data was shared with Northrop - remember Have Blue was developed privately by Lockheed. Northrop's R&D expense was rolled into the cost of the finished product (The B-2) and that's one of the reasons the thing costs so much...

It was the Lockheed "ATB" was an oversized F-117, flatter and with a way longer wingspan. At that time Lockheed was partnered with Rockwell. I understand a mock up was completed before Northrop was awarded the program....

I think Northrup also saw some low observability benifits in their B35/B49 flying wing designs.

syscom3 said:

I think Northrup also saw some low observability benifits in their B35/B49 flying wing designs.

Click to expand...

That was know from the getgo - they also knew that wood and fabric aircraft were harder to detect on radar...

FLYBOYJ said:

It did - I was on the program.....
There were design engineers I knew who stated at the time they could build a better product, many were told to "save it for the ATF and other programs."
I believe little data was shared with Northrop - remember Have Blue was developed privately by Lockheed. Northrop's R&D expense was rolled into the cost of the finished product (The B-2) and that's one of the reasons the thing costs so much...

It was the Lockheed "ATB" was an oversized F-117, flatter and with a way longer wingspan. At that time Lockheed was partnered with Rockwell. I understand a mock up was completed before Northrop was awarded the program....

Click to expand...

I was working at Northrop on Tacit Blue when this all took place. This is the story I heard. During one of our reviews with the AF on Tacit Blue, we, not knowing that the AF was pursuing a strategic bomber, made an unsolicited presentation on a long range bomber. After that, the AF wanted to know more and more. Finally they said that they had a sole source bomber work in progress and wanted us to bid to keep the competition although they we had a very small chance of winning the contract. I was then transfered to the B-2 team. There were more VPs around than workers! Anyway as the proposal work went on, we began to think the AF was more and more interested. By the time we got the contract, it didn't seem to be surprising. The rumors we heard, and some debriefings, was that the identified competition, Lockheed, seemed to have missed the AFs desires. The was a big plane, much bigger than Lockheeds with larger payload and range. This seems to have been what the AF was looking for. In addition, the AF perfer ed our avionics suite (my area, yeah!). I had no insight into RCS performance comparisons which would probably still be classified. I continued on the B-2 as avionics controls and displays manager. I worked on the B-2 almost to my retirement. I was with the plane from proposal till bombs falling on the enemy. Not too many people can say that now days. It was a great honor to have worked on the most technologically advanced aircraft in its day. And very rewarding to hear the debrief by the pilots of its exceptional performance over Kosovo.

As for cost. Many things weighed in to make it expensive. The largest single thing was the AFs insistence on changing the B-2 from a high flyer to a low flyer. The two concepts do not have a natural compatibility. Strengthening the B-2 to endure a high "q" cost a billion bucks, lots of max altitude, and lots of bomb load/range (due to increase structural work), all the things the AF would like to have back. Nuclear hardness, EMI limits, vibration endurance (due to the low altitude flight), were other requirements which made almost every part specially designed for the B-2. Almost no government furnished equipment. Mix in typical missmanagement and government meddling and then reduce the buy from 132 to 21 and you had a huge cost. Of note, if the original buy of B-2 would have remained, the proportional cost to the economy of the US would have been less than the B-52 buy. Of course, the soviet threat to the US did not warrant such numbers. We had a difficult time justifying more than 40 just because of the target per sortie capability of the plane. However, 21 is too small, not because it is ineffective, with the new weapons becoming available, hundreds of targets per airplane can be individually hit, but because the B-2 fleet has no attrition tolerance. If two planes taxi into each other, 10% of the fleet would be unavailable.

WOW Great Info!!! Did you ever work up in Palmdale? I worked for Boeing on the project and worked AV3 - 7. This was the summer and fall of 1990. We used to call either 4 or 5 "Christine" after the movie - I lay claim for that name as it was the same name as my -ex at the time!

I always "heard" about the ATB "mock-up" and a "friend" mistakenly saw it. "My friend" was told that Lockheed engineering brass wanted some thing quick and simple (kind of the skunk works way of thinking) and it almost seems that many thought just because we had the -117 that we were going to build "the big bomber." Around 1983 or 1984 (I can't remember) there was a spell with a lot of unhappy people in the skunk works and even some lay-offs as "something happened - it all makes sense!!!

What I always laughed about was the Skunk Works producing something in quantity - I remember when there were masses of people working in Burbank on the "secret program." It was exciting times, 25 years go so quickly!!!

If you were ever in Palmdale we might of crossed paths, who knows!!!

Yea "my friend" also can't believe how time flys!!

I spent a couple of full time tours in Palmdale, both six months long. In 1990 I may have still been in Pico working the Multistage Improvement Program. Also, in 91 or so I started working half time on the JSF proposal for Lockheed. Up there I continued to work in flight avionics (not flight controls).

The program was a dream for an aerospace engineer, but oh the stress at first flight! Its a lot of fun coming up with ideas, a whole new world when it comes to making those ideas work.

What did you do at Palmdale