http://news.yahoo.com/...-abc-news-topstories.html

Haney(Capt)was to blame for the crash because he was too distracted by his inability to breathe to fly the plane properly.

Seriously ?

The cost of some kilos of oxygen == the cost of an F-22

Or in other words, american airforce isn't worth more than air. Russia, you've waited quite some time for a good opportunity to expand your borders, here's your chance :P

i'll take one if you give me a years worth of fuel to fly it with. think somebody called me crazy today simply because i had a cup of coffee and a unicycle. should qualify me as crazy enough to fly them.

Uhm bad troll?

It is called ass covering. The USAF has known about the oxygen problem for some time now, but thus far they have been unable to track down the exact cause. So instead of further admitting that they are failing to find the problem and fix it they have instead opted to toss the reputation and good name of a dead pilot right under the proverbial bus.

palli is wise.

and the USAF thought that would fly with the public because...Raptor's pilot are trained to fly without oxygen ?

yeah man, U.S. pilots are SO badass, they don't NEED to breathe!
/sarcasm

Exactly this. You can't imagine how complex that airframe is, and tracking down a specific gremlin like that is a monumental task. In adition, grounding your front page fighter is so not so good, they did it once, couldn't find the problem, and put it back in the air.

The airframe uses a oxygen system that collects oxygen from the engin inlets, feeds it through the engines compressors to compress it, and then stores it in an oxygen storage system. The problem could be anywhere in that system, and they even tried to put a stop gap j. By inserting a charcoal filter in, but ironically the filter made it worse by shedding particulates into the system.

I have been following this problem for quite some time, I also didn't read that article so forgive menif I'm a bit behind lol

hmm, that's kind of interesting. does it actually separate oxygen from the air or does it just kinda compress the air into a bottle and make it available to breath? what haps if they happen to fly into a patch of that evil CO2 gas that was recently expelled from rush hour traffic?

It is pure oxygen.

As for what I think that article is about, in that crash there was a leak in the engine compartment, tainting the oxygen system, so it shut down automatically. Now SOP when this happens is to engage the backup system, which is done by pulling a switch below the seat. Apparently the pilot was also wearing cold weather gear making this even more difficult, adding in the panic, the backup system was never engaged.


This is a completely different problem from the contamination problems that have been reported over a dozen times and why the airframe was grounded in the past.

Thats very interesting. Anyone who cares to elaborate further, please do.

it's a weird problem from what i saw. what kinda plastics do they use on the thing? maintainers experiencing the same kinda problems that the pilots experience? meh, maybe that only happens when they're trying to diagnose the problem.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/...intainers-illness-050712/

not the same system? i don't see where it states that it has a CO2 scrubber. just seperates the Nitrogen with a sieve. http://navyaviation.tpub.com/14020/css/14020_163.htm

yah, yah. go mind your own business Dibs.

Considering that "air" is generally 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, and 0.033% carbon dioxide, a scrubber wouldn't really be needed would it? even if you remove the nitrogen and change the ratio of the remaining gases, it is still only around 0.16% CO2. Only in closed recycling systems are scrubbers needed.

dunno. they're either sucking stuff into the engine that they can't breathe, or a component is producing the toxins. like when certain plastics gets heated. it's all over my head. plus something might be malfunctioning and causing a vacuum, which would probably make it pretty difficult for the pilot to breath, but the sensors should detect that.

FYI Co2 os usually only considered dangerous when it's between 3 and 10%

yah, calli once posted the MSDS for it because i was pestering him about how much CO2 i needed to get my apartment to warm up.

and i can't remember where or if i saw it, but i coulda sworn i saw something about the Emergency O2 bottle being used too often. can't even remember if it was pilot activated or automatic. oh well.

meh. i spent enough time on this anyway. if the AF wanted me to figure it out they wouldn't have switched me from Jet Engine Mechanic to Special Vehicle Mechanic simply because i couldn't tell the difference between little green lights and little red lights in the dark.

I'm not a big fan of the whole program anyway, I get the feeling that defense contractors are trying to suppress openly laughing when they submit their bids. They know damn good and well that once they are $25B into a program with very little delivered, they wont have any problem getting their change orders approved.

I'd gladly trade the F-22s for a solvent US Postal Service. We're never going to get into dog-fighting air superiority war again, with production in 46 states(!) the F-22 is nothing but a political gimmick. The JSF made it obsolete before the paint even dried.

arch: I thought F-22 was supposed to be more capable than JSF, which is why the US refuses to sell the F-22 to anyone. (just as a side note, aus has pushed back the JSF's we are buying for several years, apart from the two we are getting delivered initially... in other words, the aus govt won't be purchasing them until they are completely obselete... panks.

The F22 os far more capable than the JSF. That's like comparing the F15 to the F16

different roles? the F-15 is supposed to be for ground attack as well as air combat to a lesser extend while the F-16 is a dedicated air superiority fighter? Pretty sure in terms of manouevreability the 16 will fly rings around the 15?

The JSF made the F-22 obsolet? lmao.

Lol, if you wish to correct me please do so with correct information.

The F15 was developed as an air superiority fighter, as a responce to the MiG-25 Foxbat. It wasn't until the first gulf war and the F-15E that capable groin attack avionics were installed and implemented.

The F-16 on the other hand was developed as an all around attack airframe. It was ment to be cheap and exportable, much like the JSF. Infact, the first time the F-16 was in combat was a clandestine strike mission by the Israelis on Iraqs nuclear facility.

The F-35 is a replacement for the F-16 along with other airframes like the AV-8 and standard f-18 airframes.

The F-22 was ment as a replacement for the F-15, however Obama cut production before significant numbers could be produced.


Military airframes is my job bro. Don't come in here trying to tell me what's up, lol

Ofc it's fluffing pilot error if the pilot panics and can't engage backup system. You don't want someone like that flying a plane in a real combat situation. What of he is in a combat situation things get bad and he panics killing himself and ruining the plane in the process.

Cant the backup Oxygen system comes online automatically as soon as the main system shuts down due to whatever reason ? Probably give precious seconds for the pilot to manage some other pilot/sam site trying to blow his ass and with all the visual in his face. O2 is pretty important you know

Combat divers here have to be able to operate calmly underwater for 3minutes without oxygen. I see no reason why pilots flying billion dollar planes wouldn't have such requirements for being allowed to fly.

Also you have no idea how the plane is designed. You are in NO position to tell guys who A) have specifics of the plane designs. B) probably have knowledge of how to design safety critical systems.

When oxygen system has failed you are in fault tolerant mode. In fault tolerant mode you don't want to depend on any specific part of the plane as it might not be working anymore. If you have a back up system where oxygen back up is automatically turned on by on board computer you are fluffed if on board computer is gone. Better to have manual system.

True that ^

First off there is so much bullfluff in this thread, we are drowning. ford has it right. It's obvious he knows what he is talking about. Even any well educated person, or anyone that watches discovery or history channel knows the facts.

JSF is a project to have a unified airframe across all branches of the military. In the end it will replace all other airframes. The reason is that besides the vertical take off, almost every part is interchangeable among the 3 models. They are practically the exact same plane. If I am not mistaken even the the vertical take off model just has a couple of other pieces but still the same frame and parts.

F-22 is stealth fighter jet, and it is intended for air to air combat only. Besides China's J-20 there is no aricraft that can come close to rivaling it. If by obsolete you mean decades more advanced, powerful, maneuverable, and faster then sure we will call it obsolete.

In no way is JSF better than the F-22 except for cost, and that is to be expected. This does not mean that the JSF platform is weak or useless, they in their own right are basically unmatched and while still expensive, because they use interchangeable parts they will be much cheaper to maintain than any other platform.

Neither one is obsoleting the other, they are meant for completely different tasks.


Do you actually believe they are just untrained idiots. I don't think you know anything about flight, nor even any branch of science. You certainly don't understand g-forces, one of the most simple principles of flight and how that can effect breathing. I also would doubt highly you have ever seen or been in the fluffpit of any single person plane.


Nor are you from the sounds of it.


If you believe that it is good idea to declare the system in an error state because something failed that is so undependable and complex as it is described by many in this thread, then you sir have no business designing anything.

First off let me school you in design. You encapsulate everything. You never have a higher level system instruct or invalidate a lower level system(backups should always be off the base level of any system).

The one thing I agree with is that it's better to have a manual system, which brings us to the final relevant points. For every critical system, there should be a backup that can at least fulfill the critical operations, and maintain the dependent systems. For every automatic system there should be a manual control.

This is all basic design stuff that applies to anything be it software, a car, a plane, a train, or whatever.

If you are actually interested to be educated in design take a look at some of the design principles for any given subject. For any given subject you will find principles that match each of the ones given here.

Now on to a disclaimer, these jets could very well be designed in this fashion. If they are it does not surprise me one bit, because the military and government does many things wrong. As "systems" develop they also lose touch with the most basic design principles. Take a look at automobiles in the beginning they met every single ones of these principles, now however there are many automatic systems that have no manual control. There are many critical systems that have no backup(In common cars).

Anonymous, instead of mentioning the J-20, which is only a project, you should have mentioned the russian PAK-FA 50, imo. :)

Hadn't heard much of this one, although I find it interesting that it is more maneuverable and that they have 3d thrust vectoring. I should say I guess that I find it interesting how they are using 3D thrust vectoring. Cool stuff.

Although it sounds like from the wiki they gave up some stealth as a tradeoff.
Anyways interesting example. So make that 3 aircraft that pose any competition.

F22 being the only production model(if you want to call such a short run as such).

Anonymous you sound like you just did your beginners OOP class and are now the master of design. Lol

I think I have plenty of schooling and work experience to say I have a firm grip on design.

I was doing network design and software development for a military contractor long before it was legal for me to have the clearance to see the projects I was working on.

I have been doing software design for 10 years, and doing integrated systems hardware and software design for the last 4.

As I said in my disclaimer portion, perhaps believing basic design principles should be followed for billion dollar machines, that risk the lives of their controllers and civilians, and are paid for by tax payer money is naive; it however does not mean it is wrong.

Or in other words, american airforce isn't worth more than air. Russia, you've waited quite some time for a good opportunity to expand your borders, here's your chance :P


let one of them red commie bstards try and take an inch of the USA in fact we own russa

"I'd gladly trade the F-22s for a solvent US Postal Service."

The postal service itself is solvent - it had a $3.5B profit last year.

However, Repubicans about 5 years ago inserted a poison pill into the annual budget of the Post Office. It has to fund 75 years of its employee pension obligations in 10 years. No joke. Nearly every business in the country would go broke if it attempted to do that.

So, when you include that year's "required contribution" to the budget of the post office, yes, it's in the red.

makes you wonder how private enterprise supposedly has to pay entitlements to workers , oh thats right , they dont , they just declare bankrupt and walk away . you never see someone who used to be a CEO or high flyer , starving

You clearly havnt seen Eddie Murphy's 1983 classic "Trading Places"

I just saw that post, and it is quite possibly the dumbest and most ignorant thing you have ever posted.

Whatever, zoomy fanboy. It sounds like you work for Lockheed or one of their contractors and don't like it when the huge cost over-runs are questioned. I assume basing production of the F-22 components in 46 states was based on sound business principles?

The F-22 is a miracle pill for which there is no disease. When was the last time US pilots entered into an A2A engagement in ANY airframe where their opponent even got within their horizon, much less got off a shot. The two F-14's in Lybia in 1981? Even then, that fight was over as soon as the US pilots were green-lighted. Now we're paying $1B per each 7 F-22's and they will never in there history encounter anything those same two F-14's from 1981 would not have been able to shoot down. The F-22 is being built to match planes that we think the Chinese and Russians have, even though we're not going to be fighting the Chinese or the Russians. Its just big spending cold war carry over.

So yes, from a value standpoint, the F-35 has made the F-22 obsolete. With our OTH theater support and communications, there is no reason to think that the F-35 will not easily hold its own against current Russian/Chinese technolgy. If you want to make the F-22 truely a good value, rebuild it without the life support systems and operate it is an ROV. That way they won't have to de-tune the damn thing to keep from killing the pilot. Having a pilot in seat as an ego-fueld throw back to Eddie Rickenbokker makes about as much sense in 2012 as a mounted calvalry.

Lol I don't even know where to start with you. You are so far off base that it is almost comical. I'll bet you would of fit right in with the idiots that developed the F4 and committed one of the largest blunders in military design by deleting the gun because suerlynmissiles eliminated all need for close range knife fighting. When Vietnam escalated a gun pod was developed so fast that it would make your head spin.

Yes I actually work for a military defense contractor as an entry level design engineer, but it is not LM. Your view of need for military technology and advancement is a very dangerous one, and safely called an ignorant one as well. You have no clue what the future holds, and holding back just because you doubt something will happen is an ideal that had been proven to be astupid many times in the past.

What happens if one of the dozen or so countries that we will be exporting the f35 to decides to be on the opposite side of the next conflict? Sure would be nice to have a superior airframe in the F22.

Just because you think that the stick you have is big enough, doesn't mean you should stop looking for a bigger one, because there is always the possibility of someone comming along with one. You can use all your reasoning you want, but contracts like the f22 provide jobs, national security, technological advancement, and deterrent to our enemies. Seems like a good project to me.

But you would rather mail someone a letter, lol

Pretty much exactly.

Building $150M fighters when our last 40 years of conflicts have involved exactly 0 dogfights is retarded. Our air superiority levels from the 1970s would have been sufficient to pacify the air forces of Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Lybia, Grenada, Lebanon, etc. You guys are spending a lot of money building planes to defeat our allies.

Just because of a Vietnam era prediction of the future of warfare was a decade premature, does not make it invalid today. You can keep drinking the cold-war kool-aide about the stick we 'might' need, I'd rather not keep paying defense contractors billions just so they can kick a few million back to politicians to use as their personnel stimulus packages.

You can always leave, doubt the US would miss you.

Ford:
"The General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon is a multirole jet fighter aircraft originally developed by General Dynamics for the United States Air Force (USAF). Designed as an air superiority day fighter, it evolved into a successful all-weather multirole aircraft. Over 4,500 aircraft have been built since production was approved in 1976. Although no longer being purchased by the U.S. Air Force, improved versions are still being built for export customers. In 1993, General Dynamics sold its aircraft manufacturing business to the Lockheed Corporation, which in turn became part of Lockheed Martin after a 1995 merger with Martin Marietta."

So I was right about the F-16 INITIALLY being designed as an Air Combat Fighter.
However I was thinking of the F-15E Strike Eagle, which is designed as a medium range strike aircraft rather than air superiority, as a replacement for the F-111, rather than the standard F-15, so I will take my correction there.

We will be using the JSF's in Australia as a replacement for our F-111's which were FINALLY just retired, and as a replacement for our F/A-18's and F/A-18F's (which we have just bought)... however, whilst we are supposedly meant to be getting 100, I don't see it happening at this point, as we have only committed to the initial 2, and have pushed back the rest.
The F/A-18's may also need to be retired early as a lot of them are having structural fatigue issues :S

Also, I believe the F-22 is designed as a counter to the MiG-35 amongst other things.

why should someone who knows how to make money end up on the street starving?

because they were incompetent enough to run their company broke?
Instead, it's the poor joes working down the line who end up owed thousands of dollars while CEO's walk away with golden handshakes of millions of dollars...

why did the poor joes settle for allowing the company to handle their future retirement money? they obviously agreed to it, or they wouldn't be owed the money.

Why would I want to leave? I love my country, I served my country, and I'd die to defend my country. I just don't see the point in building hugely expensive weapons who's only purpose is to sit here waiting for our allies to attack us at a time when our debt load is through the roof and peoples health care and nutritional support are being cut.



Pretty sure Somalia doesn't have too many Mig-35's.

You are so short sighted. The F-15 airframe was put into service in the late 1970s. That means it's been around more than 35 years and still going strong.

This means that the F-22 has a planed service life of 40+ years. Who the fluff knows what war we will get into in the next 40'years. Many think we will be at war with China before that, and let me tall you, if we fight china we will need the F-22.

Your ignorant short sightedness would risk American lives. How about we stop federal funding for Viagra research, and stupid projects like the bridge to nowhere. Never stop fundin military technology advancement. It saves lives and trickles down into the civilian world.

You really think Boeing and LM civilian technology advances would of happened without these large contracts? Boeing about went under when it lose the JSF bid. I also can't belies anyone who served would be against better equipment. You must not of been in combat. No one in combat has ever thought "well my old gun was good enough, why the fluff do I need this new one that works 10 times better?"

You are idealistic, and that's cool, but it really doesn't match up with the practical world.