Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: jr2 on May 13, 2012, 04:03:18 pm
-
Discuss:
EDIT: According to the video, (see vid link two lines down), this is a known problem. The pilot that died two years ago had a four-second warning before being left without oxygen. A former USMC fighter pilot explaining the USAF computer simulation of the accident believes the simulation shows the pilot blacked out for at least 15 seconds, and recovered consciousness too late to save the plane. (video 1:30 thru 2:35)
http://news.yahoo.com/fighter-pilots-claim-intimidation-over-f-22-raptor-123832451--abc-news-topstories.html
-->> Video link: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fighter-pilots-claim-intimidation-22-raptor-jet-concerns/story?id=16294011#.T7CBh-tYuSo (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fighter-pilots-claim-intimidation-22-raptor-jet-concerns/story?id=16294011#.T7CBh-tYuSo)
Two F-22 Raptor pilots have said publicly that not only are they afraid to fly the most expensive fighter jets in American history, but the military has attempted to silence them and other F-22 pilots by threatening their careers.
"There have been squadrons that have stood down over concerns. And there's been threat of reprisals," F-22 pilot Josh Wilson told CBS News' "60 Minutes" Sunday (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkuYwyEhKgMu51L1sTz2HtCmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFuaWk1aGFhBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzEEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13p6egfh3/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57427432/is-the-air-forces-f-22-fighter-jet-making-pilots-sick/). "There's been threat of flying evaluation boards clipping our wings and doing ground jobs. And... in my case, potentially getting booted out of the Air Force.
"So right now there's an example being set of, 'Hey, if you speak up about safety, you're going to be out of the organization,'" Wilson said.
Despite the Air Force's glowing descriptions of the next-generation jet as America's future of air dominance, as an ABC News "Nightline" investigation broadcast last week (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=ApdUbkcT6zitrBmajKXLc2OmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFuaXBwaHNvBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzIEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13p2o5d83/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-22-raptor-flyers-family-demands-truth-air/story%3Fid=16253815) found, unknown problems with the plane's oxygen system have already contributed to the death of one pilot (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=Asx_PSxFxSrguIdHq7EeP32mWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFuN2VtMGg4BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzMEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=1481okpve/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-22-raptor-flyers-family-demands-truth-air/story%3Fid=16253815%23.T6e8meh5GSo), the near-death of another and mid-air scares for dozens more (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=ArBh1AO76wKxUy.fnqZRDwamWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFuaXBiczg4BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzQEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13kmicku8/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/22-fighter-pilots-fly-troubled-79-billion-jets/story%3Fid=16250417).
READ Exclusive: Family Demands Truth in Air Force F-22 Pilot's Death (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AhQH_y9RNRdA15rqc4QgZjKmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFudGxndGw1BG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzUEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13p2o5d83/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-22-raptor-flyers-family-demands-truth-air/story%3Fid=16253815)
Wilson and fellow F-22 pilot Jeremy Gordon, both veteran fighter pilots for the Virginia Air National Guard who came forward under whistleblower protection from Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R.-Ill.), have asked not to fly the F-22 anymore, according to CBS News, citing their concerns with the oxygen problem.
Follow BrianRoss on Twitter
Gordon said that two weeks after he requested not to fly the jet, he was called before a board of officers.
"I was asked to make a decision that day whether I wanted to fly or find another line of work," he said.
Several current and former F-22 pilots contacted by ABC News for its investigation either did not respond or quickly declined to comment on the plane and two relatives of flyers told ABC News that the pilots had been instructed not to speak to the media on penalty of potentially losing their post with the F-22 -- a coveted position despite the safety concerns. One pilot, when initially contacted by ABC News for comment, agreed to speak on the record but only after he checked with the Air Force public affairs office. Since then, the pilot has not responded to any of ABC News' attempts to communicate.
Air Force spokesperson John Dorrian told ABC News he has no information about any pilots being explicitly told not to speak to the media about the Raptor and noted that several F-22 pilots have been made available to the press at Air Force events. Dorrian did say that if a member of the Air Force wishes to speak with the media as a representative of the Air Force, that engagement is conducted through the Air Force public affairs office, but whistleblowers are still protected.
"Corporately, the Air Force position is the Air Force is not going to tolerate any reprisal actions against whistleblowers," Dorrian said.
Since Wilson and Gordon are assigned to the Virginia Air National Guard, Dorrian said he did not have specific information on their case. Officials at the Virginia Air National Guard did not immediately return requests for comment for this report.
Top officials at the Air Force and Lockheed Martin refused to take part in one-on-one interviews with ABC News for its broadcast report, but the Air Force provided a statement last week in which it says the service is committed to "unparalleled dedication to flight safety."
"Flying America's premier fighter aircraft always entails risk but the Air Force has, and always will, take every measure to ensure the safety of our aircrews while delivering air superiority for the nation," the statement said. The Air Force has also stressed that reports of "hypoxia-like symptoms" are exceedingly rare -- more than two dozen compared to the thousands of flights flown without incident.
READ: Air Force's Full Statement in Response to ABC News Investigation (http://news.yahoo.com/Blotter/air-force-statement-abc-news-22-investigation/story;_ylt=AtrlQvzt4dAnrvqR5sD6WrOmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFubWE2aDJzBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzcEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=3?id=16260060)
Last week the Air Force officially received the last F-22 Raptor from defense contracting giant Lockheed Martin, completing an order of 187 planes that cost U.S. taxpayers an estimated $79 billion -- meaning that including research, development and production among other costs, each plane has a price tag of more than $420 million. Despite being the most advanced fighters on the planet, none of the planes have been used on a combat mission since they went combat-ready in late 2005. Critics told ABC News that's because the jet was designed to fight rival, sophisticated fighters – an enemy that doesn't exist right now.
READ: Final F-22 Delivered, McCain Says $79B Jets Still Have No Mission (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AtmwGr.yokvv04Bx8Tq9x6GmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFudGNubDVjBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzkEc2VjA01lZGlhQXJ0aWNsZUJvZHlUZW1wQXNzZW1ibHk-;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=143m6kgbj/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/final-22-fighter-delivered-sen-john-mccain-79b/story%3Fid=16270127%23.T6fEBeh5GSo)
F-22 Pilot Blamed in Fatal Crash After Plane Malfunction
Capt. Jeff Haney was flying the Air Force's next-generation stealth F-22 Raptor on a routine training mission in Alaska in November 2010 when a sudden malfunction cut off his oxygen completely. Capt. Haney never made a distress call but took his plane into a dive and, a little over a minute later, crashed into the winter wilderness at faster than the speed of sound.
After a lengthy investigation, an Air Force Accident Investigation Board could not find the cause of the malfunction but determined "by clear and convincing evidence" that in addition to other factors, Haney was to blame for the crash because he was too distracted by his inability to breathe to fly the plane properly.
READ: Air Force's Accident Investigation Board Report (PDF)
But Haney's sister, Jennifer, told ABC News in an exclusive interview (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AiWUtZ.xItb7QbJExfSme0SmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFvbmEyOWVtBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzEyBHNlYwNNZWRpYUFydGljbGVCb2R5VGVtcEFzc2VtYmx5;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13p2o5d83/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-22-raptor-flyers-family-demands-truth-air/story%3Fid=16253815) she believes her brother blacked out trying to save himself and said that by blaming him, the Air Force was attempting to deflect attention from the ongoing, mysterious oxygen problem with the costly planes.
"I don't agree with [the Air Force]. I think there was a lot more going on inside that cockpit," Jennifer Haney said. "A cover-up? I don't know. But there's something."
In at least 25 cases since 2008, F-22 pilots have reported experiencing "hypoxia-like symptoms" in mid-air, according to the Air Force. Last year the Air Force grounded the full fleet of F-22s (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AsV1QW9G3WhNRRlE2nwH8SamWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFvbzRrbDlrBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzEzBHNlYwNNZWRpYUFydGljbGVCb2R5VGVtcEFzc2VtYmx5;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=13mguooct/EXP=1338176888/**http%3A//abcnews.go.com/Blotter/77-billion-22-raptor-fleet-grounded-indefinitely/story%3Fid=13545306) for nearly five months to investigate, but still no one knows what is going wrong, even as the planes are back in the air. Hypoxia is caused by a lack of oxygen to the brain and is characterized by dizziness, confusion, lack of judgment and, eventually, unconsciousness.
In one case before the grounding, a pilot became so disoriented that his plane dropped down and skimmed treetops before he managed to save himself and return to base, an Air Force spokesperson told ABC News. Presumably speaking of the same incident, Gordon told "60 Minutes" the pilot had to be told he had hit the trees -- he didn't remember doing it himself.
Wilson described experiencing apparent hypoxia while in the cockpit as a "surreal experience" and Gordon said the onset is "insidious."
"Some pilots will go the entire mission, land and not know anything went wrong," Gordon said.
To Jennifer Haney, every time an F-22 goes up, it's risking the life of its pilot. She spoke to ABC News because she said she couldn't stand to see another family go through what hers had.
"I know that the Air Force has said that they were very proud to have Jeff and are very sorry for our loss -- well then, in Jeff's name, fix this," she said. "We want to make sure Jeff did not die in vain -- that his death will mean something and that if it saves lives of pilots now, future pilots, then he died for the greater good or something."
The Air Force has already begun to enact changes to the jet in hopes of mitigating the oxygen problem, including adding pilot-monitoring equipment and improving the emergency oxygen system.
But for all their effort, the Air Force still doesn't have what Jennifer Haney said is most important both to her family and to the families of pilots that risk their lives every day at the controls of the F-22: answers.
"I believe Jeff deserves that. That was my baby brother and I believe he deserves that. He deserves the truth to be told as to what happened. Not anybody's guesses," she said. "He deserves the truth. He deserves honor and so do his little girls."
WATCH '60 Minutes': Is the Air Force's F-22 Fighter Jet Making Pilots Sick? (http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=AkoPiR73kZnQPgh7Fb5pA.mmWot4;_ylu=X3oDMTFvN3M3ZGRmBG1pdANBcnRpY2xlIEJvZHkEcG9zAzE0BHNlYwNNZWRpYUFydGljbGVCb2R5VGVtcEFzc2VtYmx5;_ylg=X3oDMTNiMzYxYmV0BGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDYzg3MDk5MmYtYzdkNi0zYjRlLTlmZjEtN2FhNmI5MWY2ZDNkBHBzdGNhdANwb2xpdGljc3xkZXN0aW5hdGlvbjIwMTIEcHQDc3RvcnlwYWdl;_ylv=0/SIG=135m05r2k/EXP=1338152483/**http%3A//www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/%3Fid=7407680n%26tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox)
-
Wrong forum...
This is the General FreeSpace discussion.
The generel discussion for non-freespace stuff is further down.
-
I have been following a bunch of air force dudes discussing this. Opinions are mixed.
-
seems you could get around the problem with an emergency o2 tank. stick an oxygen sensor in the mask lines, and if it doesnt detect sufficient oxygen, open up a solenoid valve on the emergency tank, and sound an alarm so the pilot can drop below 10k feet before the tank runs out. this kinda thing is cheap and simple to do with a few off the shelf parts. making it milspec and mounting the hardware, just add a couple of zeros to the end of the price tag.
-
That could work as a stopgap, but a more permanent solution would be required sooner or later.
-
But it would give time for a formal solution to be put into place.
I am more interesting in what could be causing the O2 failures, it's not like its something new and should be so routine on combat craft that beyond poor maintenance just should not fail in any form. The basics are compressed gas cylinder, hose, regulator and delivery mask. the only place for electronics is pressure sensor to detect remaining supply and ambient O2 sensor linked to the regulator to keep the O2 levels even, so one moving part and 2 points of electronic involvement.
-
Unless the Raptor has some new "improvements" to the O2 system, it's indeed something that has no way to fail. It should be easy enough to check and the problem shouldn't be hard to find. I suspect the pressure and/or the ambient O2 sensor, but only on the basis that everything else can only have easily detected structural failures (it'd be rather embarassing for Lockheed if the hose had a tendency to spring a leak after a certain period of use, plus such a leak should quickly be found). In fact, Nuke's stopgap solution is pretty much how the actual system works, minus the alarm and with a bigger tank.
-
But it would give time for a formal solution to be put into place.
I am more interesting in what could be causing the O2 failures, it's not like its something new and should be so routine on combat craft that beyond poor maintenance just should not fail in any form. The basics are compressed gas cylinder, hose, regulator and delivery mask. the only place for electronics is pressure sensor to detect remaining supply and ambient O2 sensor linked to the regulator to keep the O2 levels even, so one moving part and 2 points of electronic involvement.
that was my thought, the systems just aren't that complicated. we've been using these systems or similar since ww2. seems like it would be easier to just retrofit the jets with a known reliable oxygen system. even then this is a system you kinda want to have a redundant backup system for. a few thousand dollars is nothing compared to a $420 million dollar jet, not to mention a pilot that cost a fortune to train who would rather not be dead.
-
TBH, I wonder what prevents USAF from taking one of those systems out of the plane and putting it in a vaccum chamber, perhaps attached to a G simulator. AFAIK, they're the last thing to fail on most planes, because they're fairly simple, and for a good reason. Unless they overengineered it (like the rest of the plane), testing it shouldn't be difficult.
-
I'm going to not go out on a limb at all and hazard a guess that some defense contractor who donated to a re-election campaign was awarded a hundred million dollars or so to build an excessively complicated new oxygen system for this plane.
-
Wrong forum...
This is the General FreeSpace discussion.
The generel discussion for non-freespace stuff is further down.
Apologies. Was in a hurry and skipped "FreeSpace" between "General" and "Discussion".
I find it odd that a stop-gap solution has not been implemented, and, heck, wtf could actually be that wrong with the main system? Although, maybe the main system extracts O2 from the compressor stage of the engine, like commercial liners do.. idk.
Anyways, blaming a pilot for being distracted by his hypoxia... hmm. :rolleyes:
-
I was just about to comment on that... I'm not sure it's just the article's means of spinning things to get a rise out of readers or it's genuinely the case (I should probably try to find official publications...), but regardless it leaves a horrid taste in my mouth.
When the pilot noted a problem with breathing, he presumably put the plane in a dive to get below 10,000 feet, which I believe is the standard protocol for a combat aircraft. If he simply passed out, that might have been the reason for the lack of communication - flight paths on any aircraft are usually stringently monitored, so breaking flight from cruise-at-altitude without a call is very strange indeed. In any sense, the point is he didn't recover... blacking out from lack of oxygen is never your own damn fault, and I'm ashamed of the Air Force if they're passing the blame of mechanical failure onto a pilot qualified to fly what is supposed to be the most potent tactical asset in our arsenal.
-
It's probably got more in common with a commercial aircraft system than a simple oxygen bottle. The F-22 is from the post-aerial-refueling age, you'd need a huge amount of oxygen to cover some the possible missions it would have to fly. 18 hours? 22? There's no place to put it all.
Given the known problems with skin separation this sounds like a predictable sort of screwup.
-
Thing is... problem with the O2 system or not... I can't believe pilots are not getting a warning from an internal sensor in the cockpit! And if there is a sensor, it's not acceptable in quality. I'm not sure what the general expected quality of oxygen equipment in fighters has been for the past 50 years is, either. But I can tell you, that for a fighter plane that was designed to operate at high altitudes, yeah... not acceptable.
As far as endurance goes, Introducing a re-breather system in a fighter could probably keep an emergency supply going for a good long while, and not take up too much space (hopefully)... but, regardless... all that R&D, I'm guessing they just bought the system from the lowest bidding subcontractor.
:doubt:
-
I believe the oxygen system is fed off of bleed air from the engine compressor. More details in this whack o text
An Air Force accident report said the F-22, tail number 06-4125, had a bleed air problem that caused both the stealth fighter jet's Environmental Control System (ECS) and On-Board Oxygen Generating System (OBOGS) to automatically shut down, the sources said.
The report has been released to Air Force officials at Pacific Air Forces, but has not been made public, the industry source said. The F-22 fleet was grounded May 3 after pilots suffered more than a dozen hypoxia-like incidents while flying.
Lt. Col. John Dorrian, an Air Force spokesman wrote in an email, "The information provided by your 'industry source' is not a wholly accurate characterization of the crash. However, due to the ongoing Accident Investigation Board process I am not able to provide point-by-point confirmation, as the information is not yet releasable. PACAF is conducting the AIB process and will release appropriate information once the process is complete."
The bleed air system siphons off air from a jet engine's compressor section to generate power, supply oxygen and inert gases, and handle heating and cooling.
If the ECS and OBOGS shut down, the pilot would not have air coming into the cockpit, and would have to switch to his emergency oxygen supply and dive to 10,000 feet, another source said.
"If the ECS is out … there is no conditioned air pressure pushing through the OBOGS, so he would be sucking rubber," the source said. However, as the aircraft descended, "the cabin pressure would be gradually rising as long as the canopy was still intact completely," he said.
But Haney's F-22 never recovered from its dive. The twin-engine jet hit the ground, and it is unclear whether the pilot had switched to his emergency oxygen supply, the industry source said.
"The rate at which he descended, though, he would have been at a hypoxia-safe altitude within time to have not fully succumbed to hypoxia and should have only had symptoms versus unconsciousness," the pilot source said. "The green ring [emergency oxygen bottle] in the Raptor is a tough pull, and it was altered to give the pilot some pressure."
Activating the emergency oxygen system is tricky in the Raptor, the source continued.
"It is a double pull that has to be practiced and experienced a few times before you end up in that bad situation, or you will panic," he said.
The industry source said the report declared that the accident was not related to the OBOGS.
But there are skeptics who say the OBOGS can't be ruled out as a culprit.
"Around May, the aircrew were briefed that the mishap OBOGS unit was operating fine on [Haney's] flight," the pilot source said.
The source said that if the report's findings are accurate, though he is not convinced it is, it could be that other physiological factors with pilot's g-tolerance and the oxygen levels in his body could have played a role in the crash. Haney was attempting a maneuver called a "rejoin" and made a fairly aggressive turn during the procedure, the pilot source said.
"I would have done the same thing with a Raptor in my hands," he said. "It's just that if OBOGS and the whole ECS was working nominally, physiological stuff is what might have crept up on him and impaired his normal ability."
The pilot source said the investigation would have had to determine Haney's oxygen supply and g-tolerance in that exact instance, but a precise assessment would not have been possible because of the condition of the pilot after the crash.
"I don't see how you can absolutely rule out OBOGS by checking a smoked and crushed system and using what aircraft data was available based on a lack of an [Integrated Caution and Warning] showing unacceptable [oxygen] concentration or pressure," the pilot source said. "You have to look at what testing was done to call those concentration and pressure limits as good, and that goes back before the flight of Ship 4001," the first F-22 test plane.
Why Did Bleed Air Fail?
Questions remain as to the nature and cause of the bleed air system malfunction.
Hans Weber, who owns Tecop International, a San Diego-based aerospace consulting firm, said that while bleed air systems are ubiquitous, they are complex and occasionally malfunction.
"It's a fairly complicated system," said Weber, a former member of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee. "So there can be failures in it."
Bleed air is very hot when it is sucked from the compressor; it goes through a series of heat exchangers to cool it to about 450 degrees Fahrenheit, he said. From there, it is further processed and cooled before it is used. Failures are rare, but they do happen, Weber said.
What is particularly worrisome is that aircraft bleed air systems have built-in safety gear, and whatever this malfunction was, it managed to overcome them, he said.
Further, Weber said that even if the OBOGS is exonerated in this incident, there have been more than a dozen hypoxia incidents. It is possible the problem is related to the other oxygen system incidents, he said.
"Might that apply to the others? Is this an outlier or at the core of the problem?" Weber asked.
-
Wrong forum...
This is the General FreeSpace discussion.
The generel discussion for non-freespace stuff is further down.
Apologies. Was in a hurry and skipped "FreeSpace" between "General" and "Discussion".
I find it odd that a stop-gap solution has not been implemented, and, heck, wtf could actually be that wrong with the main system? Although, maybe the main system extracts O2 from the compressor stage of the engine, like commercial liners do.. idk.
Anyways, blaming a pilot for being distracted by his hypoxia... hmm. :rolleyes:
i would assume a military jet wouldnt use bleed air for its oxygen system, to protect the pilot from nuclear/biological/chemical hazards (but im not sure if this is an issue at altitude). but idk, i didnt design it.
It's probably got more in common with a commercial aircraft system than a simple oxygen bottle. The F-22 is from the post-aerial-refueling age, you'd need a huge amount of oxygen to cover some the possible missions it would have to fly. 18 hours? 22? There's no place to put it all.
Given the known problems with skin separation this sounds like a predictable sort of screwup.
of course this is a good point too. but like i said, i didnt design it so i dont know, its probibly all classified anyway.
-
see what i just post (it does use bleed air from the compressor)
-
im still reading :D
i reply to posts in order, in this case i was distracted and hit post before i was done.
sources like that are good to have though. save us time toying with assumptions.
a couple of things, the op article said the aircraft dove in at super sonic velocity. it could be the pilot started his decent, he may have panicked and pushed to hard on the throttle prior to blacking out. you wake up around 10000 feet, flying nose to the ground at super sonic speed. you cannot change direction rapidly, and pulling up at that speed would kill you or tear up the aircraft, not that you would have very much time to react. im surprised the flight computers would let you maintain high throttle in a supersonic dive without locking out the controls and pulling up before the dive becomes a one way shot to hell.
im also wondering if the problem may be co/co2 leakage through the bleed system. less likely, as the compressor is upstream of the burner. another possibility is substandard parts in the high pressure high, temperature part of the bleed system. there was that article awhile back about us military hardware being full of counterfeit chinese parts.
-
im surprised the flight computers would let you maintain high throttle in a supersonic dive without locking out the controls and pulling up before the dive becomes a one way shot to hell.
Well, in a fighter jet at least, the computer needs to allow pilots room to make pretty crazy maneuvers, as those can be the edge that means they are the one that goes home in an engagement with another fighter. So the computer can't be too much of a nanny. Now, if you had it in terrain-hugging mode, it might prevent you from accidentally nosing into the dirt, but I think that'd be a toggleable feature and probably suited more for the F-35 than the F-22...
there was that article awhile back about us military hardware being full of counterfeit chinese parts.
I was thinking that too.
-
The article suggests that both the ECS and OBOGS of the O2 supply shut down, suggesting to me a problem in the ECS (if I understand the terminology properly in that it is the nanny system for the cockpit environment) and it is shutting down the air feed to the OBOGS (air processor?) from the engines so probably a software glitch (good luck hunting that down) the article also says it requires pilot intervention to activate the backup O2 supply which is concerning in some respects but it also prevents the computer system from locking out the system.
Another interesting thing is that the article suggests it's an all or nothing failure which I would have thought would be noticeable by the pilot enough so to activate the emergency supply, the only exception would be if the failure happens while manoeuvring, then the pilot has other things to worry about like getting the plane into a level flight which would take critical time.
-
Battuta's post stated the pilot was performing a maneuver when the problem occurred:
Haney was attempting a maneuver called a "rejoin" and made a fairly aggressive turn during the procedure, the pilot source said.
And according to the video, he got a four-second warning while performing the maneuver that he was going to be doing the fish out of water routine... so he had to
1) control the craft mid-maneuver,
2) (quote)"The green ring [emergency oxygen bottle] in the Raptor is a tough pull, and it was altered to give the pilot some pressure."
Activating the emergency oxygen system is tricky in the Raptor, the source continued.
"It is a double pull that has to be practiced and experienced a few times before you end up in that bad situation, or you will panic," he said.(/quote)
3) Put the plane in a dive for 10,000 feet
Now, couple that with the fact that apparently, pilots aren't getting enough flight time with the birds because they are down for maintenance pretty often... (source: video)
-
I guess it was it then. It's no secret that flying Raptors is expensive, their maintenance takes long and pilots don't get nearly as much flight time as they should. Activating this system at high G wouldn't be easy, I guess he panicked and passed out before being able to engage it. Since the whole problem with such G forces is blood flowing away from the brain (thus already decreasing the amount of oxygen delivered to it), the maneuver would have amplified the effects of hypoxia, and made him pass out unusually quickly. He did manage to put the plane into dive, but he fell unconscious before being able to pull out of it.
-
Maybe instead of playing armchair accident board we could wait for the real accident board's report - is it out yet? it's 8 AM and i'm too lazy to look :nervous:
-
We could just wait, or we could continue playing to kill time while waiting for the real report. :)
-
Maybe instead of playing armchair accident board we could wait for the real accident board's report - is it out yet? it's 8 AM and i'm too lazy to look :nervous:
I don't believe so. I read the initial report that blamed the pilot and followed a discussion made by some serving knuckleheads about the hard-to-reach switch in le cockpit a few months ago. Was interesting stuff and I'm interested in seeing how this goes. Agree with all sentiments re: the USAF behaving in a rather appalling manner about this.
But hey, isn't it easier to blame someone other than yourself when your 1503498024 million dollar bird turns to dust? :rolleyes: Reminds me of when the first stories came out about the the USAF giving their pilots some go-juice, very much a 'do you want to fly or not?' affair, as I recall. But good on these two pilots!
-
That too. Maybe the cause was poor maintenance, and USAF is trying to cover up the embarrassment. It seems that they don't want to admit that the project that they spend so much money on (and who did they got the money from? American taxpayers...) might not have been such a good idea. "Distracted by the lack of oxygen"? They'll have to try harder than that, pretending the problem doesn't exist isn't going to fix it.
-
i dont know if thats the case either. one of the sources stated that these birds spend more time in the shop than in the air. but that could just mean its a maintenance hog. but id hate to see them in the shop when we need them.
-
The Raptor does have a very high ratio of maintenance time:flight time, and now it has the highest accident rate in our arsenal, possibly the highest since the much-maligned and extremely tricky F-104 Starfighter.
Advanced or not, I don't know if I've ever really agreed with our policies regarding aircraft design. Even the Eagle and Falcon were primadonnas compared to Soviet/Russian jets. Some of the first targets of any competent enemy is going to be our airfields, and if we lose those, we'll be in pretty deep trouble. The Raptor especially needs a nicely maintained runway; craters and debris won't do it any favours. Despite the high-tech sweetness of the Raptor and the Lightning II, I'm a bit worried about a non-nuclear engagement with an enemy that isn't hiding in the mountains with 40-year-old AK's and IED's.
-
I've been a big critic of the Raptor, but I've heard some sources say that criticisms are overblown, that the F-16 (for example) had enormous teething problems yet turned out to be an incredibly prolific and popular fighter.
At the same time, the F-16 had things to shoot at (soviets), export customers, and a production run that hadn't already ended. :blah:
-
The biggest problem with the Raptor is that it's overengineered. It's a flying electronics store, filled to brim with delicate (and expensive) systems, failure of which may leave the pilot relying on a dinky, hard to reach backup instruments panel, cut off flight controls or even completely destabilize the plane. It has no normal airbrakes, relying on "speedbrake configuration" of it's control surfaces, and it's a maintenance nightmare due to all those electronics. And to add insult to injury, it can't even stand in the rain because it's stealth coating would peel off. F-16 had it's problems, but they weren't as bad as on the Raptor.
When everything's going right, the Raptor is a dream to fly and easily dominates the sky. But when something goes wrong, I think I'd rather be in an F-16 than in the Raptor.
-
I'm not sure you're describing the issues accurately. Those lines get talked up a lot but from what I've heard some of them may be seriously overblown.
-
Of course, I'm not describing them accurately, I'm making a short summary. I don't think I need to post it's complete flight record with more comments than the Kenneth Miur's edition of "Macbeth". :)
I could elaborate on any of those, but elaborating on them all seems like an overkill to me.
-
I think a good stance to take is that as a bunch of civilian amateurs we really have no good information on this topic.
-
i'll just put this here http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-moves-closer-to-solving-raptor-oxygen-woes-whistle-blower-pilots-wont-be-punished-371588/
Under USAF regulations, the Boeing F-15 Eagles and Lockheed F-16 Fighting Falcons are limited to 50,000 ft-though they rarely operate that high up. The F-22 routinely operates above 50,000 ft up to an operational ceiling of 60,000 ft. Raptor pilots receive a waiver to fly above the 50,000 ft mark-their Combat Edge anti-g ensemble is ostensibly considered to be a partial pressure suit.
60,000 ft is the limit due to the Armstrong Line, which sits at about 62,000 ft to 63,000 ft. At altitudes above the Armstrong Line the atmospheric pressure so low that water will boil at human body temperature--37 °C (98.6 °F).
The USAF has looked at hundreds of potential root causes of the problem, but the two most likely culprits are either some sort of contaminant or a problem with the oxygen flow to the pilot.
-
Looks like good news for a change. It does indeed seem that they're onto the problem. I wonder what really caused it.
BTW, now that you mentioned the operational ceiling, I wonder if anybody did the math to check if strapping an SRB to a Raptor could launch it into space. (before anybody says anything, I know that it'd be impractical for a lot of different reasons. I just wonder if it's physically possible, that's all).
-
Looks like good news for a change. It does indeed seem that they're onto the problem. I wonder what really caused it.
BTW, now that you mentioned the operational ceiling, I wonder if anybody did the math to check if strapping an SRB to a Raptor could launch it into space. (before anybody says anything, I know that it'd be impractical for a lot of different reasons. I just wonder if it's physically possible, that's all).
Like a couple of JATOs?
-
i have to agree with battuta here. we dont know the systems at all. we dont have access to flight data, radar data, etc. we cant look at the debris. i may have had a little fun wanking my self learned engineering know how back on page 1, but a hardware hacker is a far stretch from a formally trained aerospace engineer.
-
I don't think we have enough qualifications to give the -22 a thumbs up or down as a whole (yet anyways), however, I think we posses enough common sense to agree that something is definitely wrong here. I might expect as much from an F-86 during initial test runs, but I would expect that they would get the problem in hand before attempting to replace the entire line of P-51s with them.
The F-22 is supposed to replace the F-15, although I guess that's not going to happen any time soon...
I guess it's to be expected with new craft that push the envelope, however, kicking the mess under the bed won't clean the room. What is happening, I believe, is that they don't want McCain & co. to use this as an excuse to can the project (which, guess what, they are now! so how'd that work out for them?).
I tend to disagree a bit with people who think the F-22 is unnecessary. Sure, it is now, but by the time we realized that we needed one (let's say, the Chinese, however unlikely that might be) and got around to producing a competitor, I think it would be a bit late; you don't want to be on the reaction side of a technology war if it goes to a hot war. That's a good way to either a) lose or at least b) lose a lot more of your forces and resources than you otherwise would have.
-
I don't think we have enough qualifications to give the -22 a thumbs up or down as a whole (yet anyways), however, I think we posses enough common sense to agree that something is definitely wrong here.
Do we?
I guess it's to be expected with new craft that push the envelope, however, kicking the mess under the bed won't clean the room. What is happening, I believe, is that they don't want McCain & co. to use this as an excuse to can the project (which, guess what, they are now! so how'd that work out for them?).
The project is already done. The last F-22 was produced last year, and there will be no more orders as far as I know.
-
Oh, and Chinese, Russians, Indians, Turkey, Japan and South Korea are all working on their own 5th generation projects, and the Russian one (PAK FA) is nearly ready (there are talks about it entering service in 2015).
F-22 will never replace the F-15, just because Congress decided to stop F-22 production. Considering how expensive the Raptor is (and the fact it can't be exported), this was a reasonable decision.
Let's just hope F-35 turns out better.
-
it won't, it's a cluster****
-
Too many hands and conflicting interests in its development to become a great plane but hopefully will be usable
-
Delightfully off-topic, but that's the nature of our forums...
I'm going to postulate that the next major fighter to enter service in the US (after the F-35, which despite lengthy delays was also designed on a rush/design-on-the-fly mentality) will be the Navy's "F/A-XX," which ought to fill a heavy air superiority/tactical fighter role (like the Super Tomcat). Ideally, this will prove to be a true replacement for the F-14, do what the A-12 (Avenger II, not the mach 3 interceptor-turned-fighter) should have done, and given to the Air Force, will do what the F-22 could not: replace the F-15, and not just the air superiority fighter variant. The Air Force would do well to adopt a fighter besides the F-16 that can do everything, and be designed to do everything in the first place.
...You can argue that about the F-22, but the strike role is most definately an afterthought for the Raptor.
-
i dont see no point in building planes for wars that dont exist. our biggest threats right now are those who can do more with less (guerrilla warfare/terrorism). expensive planes do little to fight those. its just an international penis measuring contest that we've won several times over. were better off pumping the money into intelligence and associated tech.
-
Oh damn, that's so true.
-
@Battuta's comment: I should have said "didn't"; they didn't want the F-22 canned. Yeah I knew they were done producing them. I wonder if Boeing's version would have been better... [insert suspicions of corporate contributions affecting craft selection here]
Like the DC-X from McDonnell Douglas -- oh, let's use our pet lockheed x-33 project instead ~ so they ditch the dc-x and instead get stuck with nothing but a computer simulation (which was all they had to begin with) and which ends up getting canned anyways. Makes sense.
Go look on youtube for dc-x test flight :doubt:
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/slowchange/simages/dcxpic.html
This is an historic picture: the birth of DC/X. This is the West Wing of the White House, with Vice President Dan Quayle, then Chairman of the National Space Council; Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham; rocket scientist Max Hunter; and me, presenting Quayle with the arguments for an experimental rocket.
(http://www.jerrypournelle.com/images/dcxpic_files/image001_small.jpg) (http://www.jerrypournelle.com/images/dcxpic_files/image001.jpg)
After considerable skepticism generated by NASA officials who assured him that Single Stage to Orbit rockets could not work, and in any event it would be impossible to control the DC/X at low speeds, the ship was built and flown. Quayle extracted the money from the Strategic Defense Initiative Office budget, so none of it came out of NASA.
DC/X had several historic flights at White Sands Proving Grounds under USAF sponsorship. It was "piloted" by Pete Conrad (who stayed on the ground and controlled the ship through a Macintosh computer interfaced to the main system controls.) It had a number of successful flights under Air Force control, and demonstrated that it was capable of fully controlled flight at low speeds.
NASA eventually took over the ship. On the first NASA controlled flight a NASA technician failed to connect the hydraulic lines to the landing gear, and after a successful flight the ship did a "wheels up" landing, fell over on its side, and burned. It was never replaced.
NASA has always seen Single Stage to Orbit craft as a threat to Shuttle, the enormous Shuttle budget, and NASA control over manned space.
-
@Battuta's comment: I should have said "didn't"; they didn't want the F-22 canned. Yeah I knew they were done producing them. I wonder if Boeing's version would have been better... [insert suspicions of corporate contributions affecting craft selection here]
As I recall, the YF-23 outerperformed the YF-22 in all areas except dogfight maneuverability. I suspect that air cowboy fantasies played a role in craft selection.
-
I've heard it had a lot to do with where major politicians and generals lived, actually...
:doubt:
I'd argue that the '23 also had a developable airframe as well - the '22, once designed, was done in the aircraft evolution scale (without significant changes to the airframe). That also wasn't Boeing, that was McDonnell Douglas and Northrop Grumman. Boeing actually was a joint partner with Lockheed Martin in the F-22 project.
-
Hmm. Well, Boeing now owns McDonnell IIRC. Interesting.
-
I do indeed hate Boeing, but it is interesting...
If the company merger (Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, etc.) isn't just a merger, if you will, and there's a buy-out (like Boeing and McDonnell Douglas)... well, it explains itself. BUT, as you can see, the whole US aerospace industry is just like the automotive industry: super corporations (birthed usually via merging) own everything, and are bloated and stagnated by their own size and comparative lack of competition. Boeing hasn't been building fighter planes for DECADES, yet they managed to swallow up some of the finest manufacturers of combat aircraft the US has ever seen (This also includes North American Aviation Company). I like to pin them as the penultimate of corporate evil in the aerospace sector, but I'm not sure that's completely fair.
-
The project is already done. The last F-22 was produced last year, and there will be no more orders as far as I know.
The more the Eagle force ages, the more likely we are to see either more F-22s or a derivative of their airframe. Either that or we'll end up with something like Dale Brown's Cheetah; a super-15 based on the NASA testbeds.
It's not like the F-22 had the production line demolished, just placed in storage.
-
The project is already done. The last F-22 was produced last year, and there will be no more orders as far as I know.
The more the Eagle force ages, the more likely we are to see either more F-22s or a derivative of their airframe. Either that or we'll end up with something like Dale Brown's Cheetah; a super-15 based on the NASA testbeds.
It's not like the F-22 had the production line demolished, just placed in storage.
probably not, it would be more economical to develop the next iteration F-15 than dust off and build more 22s, higher number of 15 mean that the cost of development is spread out over more units By the time the 15s come up for replacement the electronics package on the 22 will need updating and some engineer will want flaws X, Y and Z fixing before they will certify the design ready to resume production so it will take at least as long, do U/AH-1 on the 15, the base design is sufficient just update the materials and electronics and you will have something that is good for another 15+ years. As stated before current conflicts are West vs comparatively low tech opponents so good tactics are more valuable than bleeding edge tech anyway. The F-35 is there if the Americans need a low observability strike plane and I am sure it wont take much to produce a domestic version using the latest of everything they can find to make it better than the export version.
-
the export version is always a stripped down version of the domestic model. the us isn't just gonna give away their best ****.
-
I've been a big critic of the Raptor, but I've heard some sources say that criticisms are overblown, that the F-16 (for example) had enormous teething problems yet turned out to be an incredibly prolific and popular fighter.
At the same time, the F-16 had things to shoot at (soviets), export customers, and a production run that hadn't already ended. :blah:
I agree, yes, we are for all intents and purposes, non-uniformed amateurs on this forum, but the bolded sentence is what I believe to be the real key here.
These things are natural when introducing a new aircraft, **** goes wrong and we fix it, but in this day and age, ****-going-wrong is getting harder and harder to justify.
Now, with my uninformed armchair economist hat on (correction is welcome): the US is losing its ability to go toe-to-toe with countries such as China and projects like the F-22 are great in theory because they push along the USAF's hi-low fighter mix idea quite well. But in practice, and as time goes on, I can't see the perceived practicality of it to outweigh the massive costs incurred for very much longer. The US armed forces are all on the downswing and the longer that they kid themselves they can sustain parading like it's the mid-70s and 80s, the deeper into the gutter they're going to run themselves.
While I don't see their armed forces going the way of Britain's (which you should all take a look at, and perhaps weep at too :( ), well at least, for now, the F-22's cost is becoming bloody hard to justify when there's no immediate commies to shoot at. Unless of course I'm wrong in my assessment of how seriously the USAF takes China.
The project is already done. The last F-22 was produced last year, and there will be no more orders as far as I know.
The more the Eagle force ages, the more likely we are to see either more F-22s or a derivative of their airframe. Either that or we'll end up with something like Dale Brown's Cheetah; a super-15 based on the NASA testbeds.
It's not like the F-22 had the production line demolished, just placed in storage.
My money's on this. Also because I <3 Dale Brown. :P
-
i dont think china is going to piss away their new found economic prosperity on fighting wars with the country that gives it most of its income. unless of course we dont pay our bills and they plan on cashing in.
-
Exactly.
The only reason someone would start a war these days is to get re-elected, and they don't even have that problem in China. :P
-
The only reason someone would start a war these days is to get re-elected, and they don't even have that problem in China. :P
They do have to worry about not getting shot or lynched, though. How much is a subject of debate.
-
i dont see no point in building planes for wars that dont exist. our biggest threats right now are those who can do more with less (guerrilla warfare/terrorism). expensive planes do little to fight those. its just an international penis measuring contest that we've won several times over. were better off pumping the money into intelligence and associated tech.
Hm. Intelligence I might agree with, but I disagree with you in saying that these kinds of projects are necessary. The reason we haven't had a hot war with a country or coalition of countries that might challenge us is because of this stuff. We've won the war before it even starts, and we've left all of the other developed nations in the dust, desperately trying to play catch-up, especially China. It doesn't matter how many personnel they have, with outdated, rusting hardware, a couple of our CVBGs could wipe them off the map. The same could be said for just about anyone else, too. The Soviets tried to play this game with us, and they lost. Hard.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the threat of a true World War 3 is overblown because the world economy is so co-dependent. Maybe we don't need these projects and our isolated location would be enough to protect us from invasion. Maybe the world's free trade lanes would be fine without our CVBG's prowling around loaded to the gunwales with ordinance.
But I sure as hell wouldn't want to actually test that.
Oh, also, about the Cheetah:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15_STOL/MTD
From all accounts, its performance was mind-blowing.
This wouldn't be a bad airframe to build off of, either:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-31
-
HOLY ****!
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/F-15B_C-1984-6457.jpg)
Is that an F-15 with the OUTER WING PYLONS attached? If so, I've never seen that configuration used in flight with ordnance before... that's crazy!
*Edit...
No, temporary optical illusion. But, it's not every day you see an F-15B with a MER full of CBU's, at least...
-
It looks like that was a pre-production model, so it was probably a big time tech demonstrator. I believe that MD-D always had a ground attack variant in mind, even though it would be a while before the USAF actually expressed interest in one.
-
i dont see no point in building planes for wars that dont exist. our biggest threats right now are those who can do more with less (guerrilla warfare/terrorism). expensive planes do little to fight those. its just an international penis measuring contest that we've won several times over. were better off pumping the money into intelligence and associated tech.
Hm. Intelligence I might agree with, but I disagree with you in saying that these kinds of projects are necessary. The reason we haven't had a hot war with a country or coalition of countries that might challenge us is because of this stuff. We've won the war before it even starts, and we've left all of the other developed nations in the dust, desperately trying to play catch-up, especially China. It doesn't matter how many personnel they have, with outdated, rusting hardware, a couple of our CVBGs could wipe them off the map. The same could be said for just about anyone else, too. The Soviets tried to play this game with us, and they lost. Hard.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the threat of a true World War 3 is overblown because the world economy is so co-dependent. Maybe we don't need these projects and our isolated location would be enough to protect us from invasion. Maybe the world's free trade lanes would be fine without our CVBG's prowling around loaded to the gunwales with ordinance.
But I sure as hell wouldn't want to actually test that.
well look at our existing arsenal. we've got nukes, we got some bad ass planes from the cold war (and unlike the russians/chinese/etc designs, ours actually work and are maintained). we have top notch ground forces, we've got carriers, submarines, and other warships, many with near infinite range thanks to nuclear reactors. from a technological standpoint we pewn, we really dont need anything else. we have the best military hardware there is, and we have a lot of it, do we really need better?
if some nation decided to try and outdo us, it would be all over our radar. our satellites and intelligence operatives would know what they were doing. they would get our gears turning, and before they were done, and we could roll out a superior design and we would have ours on the assembly line while they are still hammering the bugs out of their prototype. we are the primary producer of military hardware in the world after all. im just saying the funds would have been better off feeding our early warning engine, so that we can react to what a potential enemy is doing. intelligence is one thing that needs work, but were also starting to fall behind in space tech as well. surely we wouldn't mind having the f22 money spent on space stuff. but i guess its too late for that.
-
Hm. Intelligence I might agree with, but I disagree with you in saying that these kinds of projects are necessary. The reason we haven't had a hot war with a country or coalition of countries that might challenge us is because of this stuff. We've won the war before it even starts, and we've left all of the other developed nations in the dust, desperately trying to play catch-up, especially China. It doesn't matter how many personnel they have, with outdated, rusting hardware, a couple of our CVBGs could wipe them off the map. The same could be said for just about anyone else, too. The Soviets tried to play this game with us, and they lost. Hard.
Maybe I'm wrong, maybe the threat of a true World War 3 is overblown because the world economy is so co-dependent. Maybe we don't need these projects and our isolated location would be enough to protect us from invasion. Maybe the world's free trade lanes would be fine without our CVBG's prowling around loaded to the gunwales with ordinance.
Yes, the United States has an overpowering lead in terms of military power and technology over every other major nation on Earth, and that's precisely what the problem is. Every nation on Earth knows that the US would beat them in a straight-up fight. There's simply no denying it, the US has an overwhelming ability to project force anywhere on the planet, and the economy and manpower to back it up. The downside of this overwhelming superiority is that any opponent to US knows exactly how outmatched they are in conventional battle, and will therefore do everything possible to avoid just such a conflict. Take China for example; they have a large military, but it's honestly outdated. Moreso, they lack any true ability to project force far outside the Asian theatre. Therefore, why would they even try? They can't fight the US conventionally, so they'll attack using cyberwarfare, terrorism, or outright economic warfare. They would attack the US in every way possible that doesn't involve marching armies and grand battles. In that type of battlefield, the bloated US military would serve as more of a hindrance than advantage. Asymmetrical warfare has always been a troubling task for modern military establishments.
Nuke has it 100% correct; extensive and reliable intelligence resources are infinitely more useful than a fleet of a thousand F-22s. I hate to drag a cliche out of the bag, but you should always win the war before you fire the first shot.
-
Intelligence is useless without strength. I can offer you dozens of examples. The Germans got to experience this paradox a lot; so did the Poles. You can't concentrate on one or the other. You have to continue to work on both.
-
Intelligence is useless without strength. I can offer you dozens of examples. The Germans got to experience this paradox a lot; so did the Poles. You can't concentrate on one or the other. You have to continue to work on both.
Well, yes. A balance is needed, rather than the lopsided investment in ultra-expensive weapons programs with questionable payoff. The influence of the military-industrial complex strikes again.