Tyndall AFB a "complete loss" amid questions about F-22s

By the images and videos of the evacuation to Wright-Patterson and later to Langley, I can confirm that the following serial numbers are safe:

Combat coded:
076
080
089
091
095
099
100

Training:
039

If someone knows more numbers I would like to expand the list.

First, I hope all F-22's and personnel at the base are safe. Failing that, someone should drag Gates to Tyndall to personally task him with repairing damaged F-22's, since he was so certain 187 were "enough".

As far as global warming, I'm not sure what to believe. Science isn't what it used to be - it's increasingly manipulated for personal/political gain. But one thing is for certain: I absolutely love it when Trump says, "climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese...".

Sends liberal moonbats into orbit..

https://twitter.com/ACC_Commander/status/1053666561511354370

General Mike Holmes "Glad to see these Tyndall Raptors getting cleaned off and ready to fly again as part of Tyndall recovery efforts. #Airmen on the job."

I guess 5 of them flew out today to Virginia, tail codes are listed in the article, but the bird pictured being clean up above was one of the 5.

https://theaviationist.com/2018/10/24/h ... e-michael/

The drive citing Marco Rubio's letter confirming that number of F-22s left at the base was 31% or 17 units.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24 ... ne-Michael

It's high time we address the elephant in the room and point out that those birds should never have been there in the first place. Was it also "Cancel 'Em" Gates's genius idea to station our most expensive aircraft in the same state that saw Homestead wiped out by the prevailing weather in the region? It's not like we're short of bases, so maybe we're just short of common sense...?

Salute!

Many considerations when the storm is bearing down. Leave now? Wait a bit longer? Hangars for the worst conditions? What about all the groundpounders? Lottsa considerations for the boss, ya think?

Over here by Eglin we cheered when the track kept veering east. The number of Raptors left behind was a shock to most of us.

Many would have wondered why a few cannibal parts could have let more jets get out. Oh well.

Looks like almost all the jets are gonna be put back into service. The rest can be cannibalized for parts, as many vendors don't make them anymore.

Gums sends...

It's high time we address the elephant in the room and point out that those birds should never have been there in the first place. Was it also "Cancel 'Em" Gates's genius idea to station our most expensive aircraft in the same state that saw Homestead wiped out by the prevailing weather in the region? It's not like we're short of bases, so maybe we're just short of common sense...?

The F-22 bases were consolidated to cut redundancy and cost. The F-22 were moved from my home state (Holloman) to Florida.

Ironically NM is pretty much devoid of quakes, hurricanes, monsoon, typhoons, tornado or even flooding and has flying weather about 360 days of the year. But NM is not Florida, no way they were going to pull jobs and assignments from Florida to put them here. Theres a hierarchy of states, and the big square ones are at the bottom

Update of comfirmed safe:

(*)=Survivors

Combat coded: (8 of 24)
076 
080
083 * 
089
091
095
099 
100

Training: (5 of 31)
022 *
031 *
039
040 *
044 * 


I also saw 036 in Tyndall's hangar, it looks good but I did not put it on the list because I can not confirm if it's okay.

Many years ago I advocated for the construction of hardened tactical aircraft shelters at our stateside fighter bases. We do not need dozens of shelters. At the time I suggested six per base. They would be identical to the ones in use in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. There could even be three pairs of different shelters to reflect the diverse types in use around the world. The shelters would be in daily use as training facilities for both ground and aircrews. This would allow the units to practice operations out of the same type of facilities that they would use once deployed.


When threatened by adverse weather, all flyable aircraft would depart. The remaining non-flyable hangar queens would be towed to the shelters and jammed in. Most shelters will actually fit at least two fighters in each if placed nose-to-nose and cocked at a 20 degree angle. When I was stationed in Korea (very long time ago) we never had to typhoon evac, as all of our TAB-V were more than capable of withstanding the strongest possible storms.


Yes, the shelters would cost a few million dollars each. However, the design, construction, and use of the shelters is well established. The shelters will be usable for at least 50-75 years, so the amortization makes it quite cheap. Considering the exorbitant $100,000,000+ cost of new fighters, spending the same amount of money for six shelters that will last half a century is sensible.


During the next 50 years there most assuredly will be coastal bases struck by hurricanes. There most assuredly will be unflyable hangar queens. As at Homestead and Tyndall, there will be aircraft damaged or destroyed. Building shelters for both training and weather protection seems like a good investment.


(Vulnerable fighter and training bases could be Langley, Oceana, Cherry Point, Jacksonville, Homestead, Tyndall, Eglin, Pensacola, North Island, Miramar, and a few others.)

Stop making sense.. You'll scare the children.

If you can get something positive out of this disaster is that public opinion is aware that these new hangars are necessary.

And while they are being built, would it be possible to use the current structures to improve them to withstand a CAT5?

Salute1

tnx for the updates, Rimmer:

Building thousands of hardened shelters is possible, expensive and was done 50 years ago. Drive thru the abandoned deployment bases in Holland, Belgium and Germany.

It ain't worth the initial cost for the long term benefit. Like your "getaway bag", it sits there and is ready for the "move now" moment. To get value, you must use it for day-to-day operations to keep the cobwebs from growing and plumbing working. Otherwise, it's a good deal except for the initial cost. And then what thappens if we close the base? Drive thru some of myold haunts - England AFB, Myrtle Beach, Perrin, Craig, and the beat goes on.

As I mentioned before, I was shocked at how many jets could not be deployed. I could take 10% or so, considering we could "cannon-ball" parts from a few hangar queens. But that big number disturbs me. And I hope the F-35 is less subject to the special coatings and other stuff. The single engine is a good player in the equation, huh?

Gums sends...

Two dozen air transportable flatbed trucks are probably cheaper. Fly them in before the storm, tie down the non flyables, truck out. Probably cost less than one hanger.

Too bad the Raptor is too heavy hang from a sling off of a CH-53K.