F-15 CRASH IN LAS VEGAS!!

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Thorlifter

Captain
7,980
433
Jun 10, 2004
Knoxville, TN
F-15 crashes north of Las Vegas; no injuries - Yahoo! News

An Air Force fighter jet crashed in a sparsely populated part of southern Nevada on Monday, but the pilot was able to eject from the aircraft and didn't suffer any injuries, authorities said.

The F-15C Eagle from Nellis Air Force Base crashed on federal land northwest of Alamo, Nev., said Lt. Ken Lustig, an Air Force spokesman. Alamo is about 100 miles north of Las Vegas.

Lincoln County Sheriff Kerry Lee said a citizen reported seeing a large explosion and fireball west of U.S. Highway 93 shortly after 4 p.m. Deputies made their way over rough terrain and through a ranch toward the plume of smoke about five miles from the highway, he said.

"It was out in the desert, really hard to get to," Lee said. When deputies arrived, they found a debris field about 100 yards long.

"It didn't look like the plane slammed into the ground," the sheriff said. "There was a lot of the plane left, but it burned up."

The pilot had started walking and was picked up by a military helicopter about 30 minutes after the crash, Lee said. He was flown to Mike O'Callaghan Federal Hospital near Las Vegas for an examination that revealed no injuries, Lustig said.

Lustig didn't have any details about the nature of the flight and couldn't say whether the jet that crashed was accompanied by other aircraft.

An investigation into the cause of the crash was already under way Monday night, Lustig said.
 
The pilot was not hurt, and that's a good thing. From what I've read and heard, that's not allways the case during ejections.
 
They're getting pretty long in the tooth now. SE strike eagles for Saudi are new build though, so the operational life will continue another thirty years, but the USAF fleet is definitely getting old. Many already retired for airframe hours. At the moment the sharp end of the sword is Vipers and navalised force projection, or diplomatic threats. Advantage in large scale conventional land based operations could be shifting back eastwards, the modern CIS military is nothing like what it was in the 90s. They're just finishing up a complete avionics updates on the entire VVS air fleet (SM/S/SMT modifications) and have started equipping Su35 to deal with Raptors. Meanwhile now it is the US economy in shambles.
 
They're getting pretty long in the tooth now. SE strike eagles for Saudi are new build though, so the operational life will continue another thirty years, but the USAF fleet is definitely getting old. Many already retired for airframe hours. At the moment the sharp end of the sword is Vipers and navalised force projection, or diplomatic threats. Advantage in large scale conventional land based operations could be shifting back eastwards, the modern CIS military is nothing like what it was in the 90s. They're just finishing up a complete avionics updates on the entire VVS air fleet (SM/S/SMT modifications) and have started equipping Su35 to deal with Raptors. Meanwhile now it is the US economy in shambles.

Vanir, despite what you think or believe, the US economy is still not bad enough to prevent the Pentagon from continuing to ensure fighter superiority over "the competition" and although it's far from "good" here, I can tell you that the US economy if far from "shambles." If required I can show you pics and you can compare them the the CIS of the early 1990s. Comparing our economy and defense budget to the CIS of the early 1990s is like comparing gold to lead, even in today's market. Although Russia has started to repair her dilapidated armed forces, she is still a shadow of the former Soviet Union as far as technology goes. Bring on the Su-35 mods, there's going to be a rude surprise when it's discovered that the F-35 (and I'm talking USAF and Navy versions) are going to be just as if not more capable than anything the Russians are going to come up with. Back in the 1990s there were thousands of former Soviet aircraft being parked and rotting away and thousands of servicemen not getting paid, and today in some situations is still the case. I can tell you that not only are our servicemen getting what they need to do the job, but they are very well paid and live in luxury when compared to their Russian counterparts and most other armed forces, not bad for a "shambled" economy.

The day the US is in the state the CIS was in during the 1990s, the rest of the western world better worry because they would have already fallen into the abyss, and I'm not pumping pro-American propaganda here, just fact.
 
Last edited:
You're looking ahead. I'm talking right now today. The CIS is in a surprisingly strong position north of the Caucasus, militarily anyways. NATO has been sapped in the middle east for the last twenty years, the only thing the Russians have been doing is trying to bring their district commanders under control (like the one who invaded South Ossetia, or the Captain of the Moscow battlecruiser that did a missile attack on Georgia). Their Afghanistan was over twenty years ago now, and they didn't spend a cent on defence budget through the 90s, except for a helicopter force that was already paid for.

The US went and, you guessed it, commissioned yet another carrier battlegroup. You know how many thousands of millions of dollars that cost right? The US is almost committed to venturing from Afghanistan into the Caspian oil table and that's going to be like dropping nukes on the Kremlin.

The tell is what happens with the Iran thing. The concern is utterly fictional. If the US moves on Iran, they're making for the Caspian oil, there is no question. Russians will see it that way too.
 
You're looking ahead. I'm talking right now today. The CIS is in a surprisingly strong position north of the Caucasus, militarily anyways. NATO has been sapped in the middle east for the last twenty years, the only thing the Russians have been doing is trying to bring their district commanders under control (like the one who invaded South Ossetia, or the Captain of the Moscow battlecruiser that did a missile attack on Georgia). Their Afghanistan was over twenty years ago now, and they didn't spend a cent on defence budget through the 90s, except for a helicopter force that was already paid for.

The US went and, you guessed it, commissioned yet another carrier battlegroup. You know how many thousands of millions of dollars that cost right? The US is almost committed to venturing from Afghanistan into the Caspian oil table and that's going to be like dropping nukes on the Kremlin.

The tell is what happens with the Iran thing. The concern is utterly fictional. If the US moves on Iran, they're making for the Caspian oil, there is no question. Russians will see it that way too.

Doens't matter - despite what you might see in the crystal ball, the point is the US economy, although bad, is far from being in shambles or anything close to what the CIS was in the early 1990s.
 
While not as bad as immediate post soviet, the US economy isnt what it was either, nor will it be for a while, certainly while a few governments are having to pay for an addicted gambling bankers who continue to think they are untouchable and they refute what blame they share in what nearly bankruted the US a few years back.
 
Doens't matter - despite what you might see in the crystal ball, the point is the US economy, although bad, is far from being in shambles or anything close to what the CIS was in the early 1990s.

Yeah I know, I'm just speaking loosely, conversationally. Our culture is to always try to even the playing field with international politics too, we get by on treaties, and learned that positions of power tend to make others nervous, so when talking to asia alliance we put anzus on the same terms, then dealing with nato-coalition we change tact and put us on their terms, etc.
Habit.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back