USAF Thunderbird down in CO

newmann wrote:

We sure have been losing a lot of birds lately. 20 trillion dollars in debt, you would think our shit would be fresh, maintained and ready...

We sure have been losing a lot of birds lately. 20 trillion dollars in debt, you would think our shit would be fresh, maintained and ready for anything.

Harry Backmon wrote:

Well, Mr. newmann, they are not "fresh, maintained and ready for anything." I won't speak for all the services, though I suspect the problems are similar...

Well, Mr. newmann, they are not "fresh, maintained and ready for anything."

I won't speak for all the services, though I suspect the problems are similar to the U.S. Navy's & Marines problems.

Basically, by making perpetual war for the past...what? Decades? Our jets are worn out. In the case of the Hornet, many, and I mean many, are at the 8000 hour mark (some even higher) and we now do an inspection known as the "8000 Hour Inspection." It is quite involved. The jet was designed for around 6000 flight hours. Suffice it to say, I think we found way more problems in the areas the engineers targeted for inspection than anyone anticipated. This has resulted in delays in getting the aircraft back to the Fleet. There are engineering issues (how do we repair this?), parts availability issues, manpower issues, etc. No one anticipated the legacy Hornet having to fly this long. The F-35 was going to come along and save us. Still waiting for salvation.

Did you know that we are also doing something called, "Center Barrel +"? Basically, we're splitting the jet in half and removing about a 10 foot section. This particular section is where the wings attach, and where the landing gear attach. I think, using a little imagination, you can see why they want that entire section replaced. We're also replacing the dorsal longerons, the keel longerons, and many other critical structural members. Basically, we're giving the Navy an almost new jet in so far as all of the major fracture and stress critical areas are concerned. Often, the center barrel and 8K inspection take place simultaneously. It is big job. You can't just fasten haphazardly fasten together jets that are capable of supersonic speeds. Many of the fastener holes are critical and must be measured and documented. If they are out of tolerance, a repair must be engineered. These fasteners are what we call interference fit. They must be about .0015 bigger than the holes they are being fitted to. You can't have stuff moving around on a jet flying at 1000 MPH, or lugging heavy ordnance loads hundreds of miles.

Basically, this all comes down to poor planning - poor planning that has been greatly enhanced by F-35 delays, politics, money issues, power struggles, contract awards, etc., etc., on and on, ad-infinitum.

I don't want to point the finger at the Navy. They are doing what they can with what they are given. Often, the Admirals ask for things and those things are refused. NAVAIR is a huge endeavor, and is basically a naval air force that is bigger than 99% of the world's regular air forces. A lot of money and logistics are involved. Not only that, but some of our finest leaders - men of true personal courage and conviction - have been driven from the ranks by politics and political correctness. It's almost like there is a conspiracy to destroy the U.S. military by requiring it to fight endless wars and kowtow to some particular political lines of thought. Those that do not submit, are purged. So, you get what you get. What do they expect? The people doing these things are not stupid - which leaves one wondering. Do they have a plan to weaken the military? Is it all coincidence?

Boy, Mr. newmann, I could go on and on, but I think I'll stop here. Rambled too much as it is.

Harry Backmon wrote:

Well, Mr. newmann, they are not "fresh, maintained and ready for anything." I won't speak for all the services, though I suspect the problems are similar...

Well, Mr. newmann, they are not "fresh, maintained and ready for anything."

I won't speak for all the services, though I suspect the problems are similar to the U.S. Navy's & Marines problems.

Basically, by making perpetual war for the past...what? Decades? Our jets are worn out. In the case of the Hornet, many, and I mean many, are at the 8000 hour mark (some even higher) and we now do an inspection known as the "8000 Hour Inspection." It is quite involved. The jet was designed for around 6000 flight hours. Suffice it to say, I think we found way more problems in the areas the engineers targeted for inspection than anyone anticipated. This has resulted in delays in getting the aircraft back to the Fleet. There are engineering issues (how do we repair this?), parts availability issues, manpower issues, etc. No one anticipated the legacy Hornet having to fly this long. The F-35 was going to come along and save us. Still waiting for salvation.

Did you know that we are also doing something called, "Center Barrel +"? Basically, we're splitting the jet in half and removing about a 10 foot section. This particular section is where the wings attach, and where the landing gear attach. I think, using a little imagination, you can see why they want that entire section replaced. We're also replacing the dorsal longerons, the keel longerons, and many other critical structural members. Basically, we're giving the Navy an almost new jet in so far as all of the major fracture and stress critical areas are concerned. Often, the center barrel and 8K inspection take place simultaneously. It is big job. You can't just fasten haphazardly fasten together jets that are capable of supersonic speeds. Many of the fastener holes are critical and must be measured and documented. If they are out of tolerance, a repair must be engineered. These fasteners are what we call interference fit. They must be about .0015 bigger than the holes they are being fitted to. You can't have stuff moving around on a jet flying at 1000 MPH, or lugging heavy ordnance loads hundreds of miles.

Basically, this all comes down to poor planning - poor planning that has been greatly enhanced by F-35 delays, politics, money issues, power struggles, contract awards, etc., etc., on and on, ad-infinitum.

I don't want to point the finger at the Navy. They are doing what they can with what they are given. Often, the Admirals ask for things and those things are refused. NAVAIR is a huge endeavor, and is basically a naval air force that is bigger than 99% of the world's regular air forces. A lot of money and logistics are involved. Not only that, but some of our finest leaders - men of true personal courage and conviction - have been driven from the ranks by politics and political correctness. It's almost like there is a conspiracy to destroy the U.S. military by requiring it to fight endless wars and kowtow to some particular political lines of thought. Those that do not submit, are purged. So, you get what you get. What do they expect? The people doing these things are not stupid - which leaves one wondering. Do they have a plan to weaken the military? Is it all coincidence?

Boy, Mr. newmann, I could go on and on, but I think I'll stop here. Rambled too much as it is.

Harry Backmon wrote:

Was there no one guarding it?

newmann wrote:

Sat it down nice and soft it appears. Beautiful aircraft!

Harry Backmon wrote:

Was there no one guarding it?

Old-Man wrote:

Guards all around, just didn't get any in the pics

XXVoid MainXX wrote:

I'm sure they were hauled there after the fact.

Harry Backmon wrote:

Was there no one guarding it?

Old-Man wrote:

Guards all around, just didn't get any in the pics

Harry Backmon wrote:

I figured as much. I'm kind of surprised they let you photograph it, but I guess the cat's long been out of the bag on this...

I figured as much. I'm kind of surprised they let you photograph it, but I guess the cat's long been out of the bag on this one.

Harry Backmon wrote:

I think he meant the seat and canopy, and certainly he is correct. By the way...each post I've made since you put the pictures up, I...

I think he meant the seat and canopy, and certainly he is correct. By the way...each post I've made since you put the pictures up, I have been meaning to thank you and tell you what a great job you did. Thank you and great pictures!

GeorgiePorgie wrote:

This is why I get irritated when oeople use the argument "we spend 50 zillion times more than any other country in the world on the...

This is why I get irritated when oeople use the argument "we spend 50 zillion times more than any other country in the world on the military. Let's just cut all that spending in the military and use it on the people of the USA"

Can't spend it on the people of we can't protect our sovereignty, and can't protect our sovereignty if all our shit is clapped out !!

kongols wrote:

I haven`t read detailed report, so, how did it land in tact on a field? Pilot never catapulted?

kongols wrote:

I haven`t read detailed report, so, how did it land in tact on a field? Pilot never catapulted?

kongols wrote:

I haven`t read detailed report, so, how did it land in tact on a field? Pilot never catapulted?

kzizok wrote:

Go to OP's initial post and open the hyperlink. Picture #5 shows the pilot descending with parachute.

kongols wrote:

I haven`t read detailed report, so, how did it land in tact on a field? Pilot never catapulted?

kzizok wrote:

Go to OP's initial post and open the hyperlink. Picture #5 shows the pilot descending with parachute.

kongols wrote:

Ok, then it`s sort of miracle that it landed relatively in tack after pilot catapulted.