| Author |
Message |
|
MICAP
|
 Posted: Feb 10, 2006 - 10:31 PM
|
 
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
| The F-22s first have to be capable of regular flying operations, which they don't appear to be doing..... |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: Nov 19, 2008 - 3:25 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
shiz302
|
|
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 - 09:55 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
Posts: 677
Location: Long Island NY
|
| Yeah I've heard of alot of code 3's and ground aborts as well. |
_________________
Ex 16 CC workin 'hawks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICAP
|
|
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 - 10:04 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICAP
|
|
Posted: Feb 10, 2006 - 10:10 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
| The thing is that it is such an advanced piece of technology that the designers (LM, Boeing, Honeywell, etc.) don't know how to provide solutions to MX issues. We are in all new territory with this jet and we are constantly rewriting the T.O. and A.Rs and learning about the jet as we go along. I'm sure this applies to legacy aircraft as well. Just yesterday 1 FW submitted a change to be reviewed to the -1 for the F-15. Can you believe they are making a change to be included during start-up procedures 34 years after it (the F-15) first flew. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
checksixx
|
|
Posted: Feb 12, 2006 - 04:50 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 1035
Status: Offline
|
|
MICAP wrote:
The F-22s first have to be capable of regular flying operations, which they don't appear to be doing.....
You obviously don't live near Langley if you think they arn't regularly flying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
swanee
|
|
Posted: Feb 13, 2006 - 01:26 AM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Jan 25, 2005
Posts: 531
Status: Offline
|
|
checksixx wrote:
MICAP wrote:
The F-22s first have to be capable of regular flying operations, which they don't appear to be doing.....
You obviously don't live near Langley if you think they arn't regularly flying.
Yeah, they are flying daily, though I haven't seen more than 2 at one time very often at all. I wouldn't be so sure that all 12 were able to be flown daily. |
_________________
Life is too short for ugly sailboats, fat women and bad beer!
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICAP
|
|
Posted: Feb 13, 2006 - 03:19 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
| I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, what I meant was that not all the jets are capable of flying regular operations. Swanee, there are more than 12 jets and we're having issues with them being CC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shiz302
|
|
Posted: Feb 13, 2006 - 09:41 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
Posts: 677
Location: Long Island NY
|
Maybe they've adopted the Turkey ops plan, launch out 8 jets for a 4 jets sortie  |
_________________
Ex 16 CC workin 'hawks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICAP
|
|
Posted: Feb 14, 2006 - 08:43 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
| Hell they have to, they launch 8 jets and 4 make it off the ground and then 2 more abort once airborne. It's sad.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The_Mastiff
|
|
Posted: Feb 15, 2006 - 11:07 AM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Posts: 116
Location: Raleigh NC
Status: Offline
|
| MICAP is it the computer still? JL Raleigh NC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
akruse21
|
|
Posted: Feb 15, 2006 - 01:18 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran
Joined: Jul 30, 2005
Posts: 750
Status: Offline
|
| shhhhh....big brother is watching and listening |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICAP
|
|
Posted: Feb 15, 2006 - 08:01 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Posts: 27
Status: Offline
|
| Computer? The whole jet IS a computer. Raptor drivers aren't pilots, they're systems operators......that being said, yeah sure, it's the computer...i.e. the whole jet..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The_Mastiff
|
|
Posted: Feb 16, 2006 - 06:20 AM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Posts: 116
Location: Raleigh NC
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Computer? The whole jet IS a computer. Raptor drivers aren't pilots, they're systems operators......that being said, yeah sure, it's the computer...i.e. the whole jet.....
And computers are supposed to make life easier. Oh well.  There were some articles recently about this kind of thing with the Typhoon in some UK papers recently. The Eagle had trouble when it first hit the units too. That didn't turn out too bad. IMO Raptor is worth the trouble getting it through the learning/debugging process.
Speaking of the Typhoon some have stated the Typhoons have begun DACT against Raptor. As the first operational unit has FF done much DACT yet. Have you heard of any ( not asking for anything confidential-don't want it). Just PA type stuff. JL raleigh NC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
elp
|
|
Posted: May 02, 2006 - 01:38 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Editor
Joined: Sep 23, 2003
Posts: 2862
|
|
|
|
|
|
snypa777
|
|
Posted: May 03, 2006 - 10:32 PM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Jul 26, 2005
Posts: 1455
Status: Offline
|
Excellent article. Paints an honest picture of a new jet coming into service, warts and all. Makes you wonder if the designers underestimated the effect of heat soak/build up with such a huge number of electronic systems.
I am sure that will be ironed out. There are all sorts of cooling technologies out there, like liquid cooled chips.
The mid-air reboot seems scary as hell! The Microsoft blue screen of death springs to mind....  |
_________________
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Forum Guidelines
