Pictures of various military aircraft

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pictures of various military aircraft (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:12:29 PM EDT

Old lady landing at Jacksonville Int'l Saturday 6 Feb 10.

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:13:13 PM EDT

[#1]

Nice pic!

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:14:21 PM EDT

[#2]

Old? No. It doesnt even have a tailwheel or fabric!

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:15:09 PM EDT

[#3]

76, yeah.

She's getting old.

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:16:52 PM EDT

[#4]

The 76- indicates the year congress funded its purchase, so I'd bet it's older than most CJ-7's (still) on the road today.

-Gator

Posted: 2/16/2010 6:18:25 PM EDT

[#5]

Back in the day, we had an AFSC for "F-15A Oiler"; those guys had a cool trailer to drag around the ramp.

Posted: 2/16/2010 7:17:23 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
The 76- indicates the year congress funded its purchase, so I'd bet it's older than most CJ-7's (still) on the road today.

-Gator

Interesting. I Learn something new on arfcom every day.

Posted: 2/16/2010 7:50:45 PM EDT

[#7]

34 years later, the premier fighter is the F-22. 34 years before, it was, what, the P-40?

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:18:30 PM EDT

[#8]

I think there was some incorrect info floating around last fall about the last "A" models being retired, but, FANG should be the last operators of that model.

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:20:14 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

34 years later, the premier fighter is the F-15C/E. 34 years before, it was, what, the P-40?

Fixt

The F-22, while a favorite of mine, has not done anything to prove it is better than the current generation F-15s...

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:47:13 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The 76- indicates the year congress funded its purchase, so I'd bet it's older than most CJ-7's (still) on the road today.

-Gator

Interesting. I Learn something new on arfcom every day.

That is very good info to know.

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:51:03 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The 76- indicates the year congress funded its purchase, so I'd bet it's older than most CJ-7's (still) on the road today.

-Gator

Interesting. I Learn something new on arfcom every day.

That is very good info to know.

My jet is a 59 model.

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:53:32 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The 76- indicates the year congress funded its purchase, so I'd bet it's older than most CJ-7's (still) on the road today.

-Gator

Interesting. I Learn something new on arfcom every day.

That is very good info to know.

My jet is a 59 model.

Mine is a '46 model...

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:57:51 PM EDT

[#13]

Here is a shot from last week. At Stennis IAP, Bay St. Louis, Miss.
RC-26B 94-0260.

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:59:24 PM EDT

[#14]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22_7jsQy7s

Posted: 2/16/2010 8:59:48 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

I think there was some incorrect info floating around last fall about the last "A" models being retired, but, FANG should be the last operators of that model.

Well, we had an article last Fall about our last A model being retired, but it was specifically from the ORANG. Not sure about the other ANG units. We have all C/Ds now in the 142d FW. Story here.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:00:14 PM EDT

[#16]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:00:45 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:

34 years later, the premier fighter is the F-15C/E. 34 years before, it was, what, the P-40?

Fixt

The F-22, while a favorite of mine, has not done anything to prove it is better than the current generation F-15s...

Seriously?

Exercise highlights Raptor synergy,
joint capabilities
by Capt. Elizabeth Kreft

1st Fighter Wing Public Affairs

6/16/2006 - ELMENDORF AIR FORCE
BASE, Alaska (AFPN) –– The final mission flies today at Northern
Edge 2006, but the majority of the results are already in, and success
is the buzzword from Alaska.

During the two-week joint service
exercise, several scenarios have proven that the interoperability and
integration between American assets are stronger than ever.

“Alaska’s
aerial ranges and airspace provide unique capabilities to train to this
scope,” said Col. Steve Hatter, Northern Edge exercise director. “We
are extremely pleased with what we’ve been able to see thus far.”

One
major goal of the exercise was to test and train with the Department of
Defense’s newest weapons system, the F-22 Raptor. Northern Edge 2006 is
the first exercise opportunity Raptor teams have had to display
seamless integration with operators from the Navy, Marine Corps and
Army, and to prove how the jet’s capabilities will transform the wartime
environment.

“We’ve had the chance to work with some of these
assets before on a limited basis,” said Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver, 27th
Fighter Squadron commander and F-22 pilot. “But this is really the first
time we’ve been able to demonstrate the synergy between our resources
on such a large scale.”

Each exercise day included distinct
scenarios based on air-to-air and air-to-ground tasks or personnel
recovery operations. Diverse joint-service assets were incorporated to
accomplish every mission, with robust air-to-air and surface-to-air
threats simulated daily to investigate the enabling muscle of the F-22.

“The
Raptors gave our guys a chance to focus on their mission to find and
destroy specific naval targets,” said Capt. George Mullani, 3rd Wing
air-to-ground tactics chief and F-15E Strike Eagle pilot. “That was just
one example of our joint domination in the airspace.”

Though
specific threats are all simulated for this exercise, pilots at Northern
Edge know the dangers are real, and they are thankful for the
opportunity to prepare.

“Several forces around the world have
many assets to test our country’s defenses,” Colonel Tolliver said.
“Examining the interoperability of our joint operating systems is key to
the success of future engagements, and to achieving confidence in each
other’s abilities.”

The F-22’s capabilities were highlighted
during several air-to-air engagements that included facing an opposing
force at a 4-to-1 disadvantage. In each circumstance the F-22 teams ––
paired with joint-service jets such as F/A-18 Hornets, F-15C/E Eagles,
E/A-6B Prowlers and E-2C Hawkeyes –– were able to soundly defeat their
enemies.

“Throughout the exercise we were able to see just how
effective this jet can be at integrating with multiple joint assets for a
number of different missions,” Colonel Tolliver said. “The Raptor’s
success here is something that should be shared among all the services,
because it means our entire force has capabilities that it didn’t have
just a short time ago.”

The F-22’s integrated avionics, stealth
and supercruise ability were just some of the advantages that played
into the exercise success.

“They were able to fly in threat
rings using their stealth technology, opening up doors for us,” Captain
Mullani said. “Their ability to ensure air dominance gave us the
opportunity to operate freely.”

With more than 5,000 military
members participating, information gathered from Northern Edge will
extend far beyond the airspace. Training lessons and battlespace
knowledge gained here will undoubtedly affect future U.S. military
engagements.

Senior exercise leaders are confident in the
overall lessons learned, especially those gathered from the F-22's
involvement.

“We have certainly proven the value of the
technology leaps found in platforms like the F-22,” Colonel Hatter said.
“The exercise has given Airmen and our joint forces priceless
information for use in future engagements.”

F-22 excels at establishing air
dominance
by Staff Sgt. C. Todd Lopez

Air Force Print News

6/23/2006 - WASHINGTON (AFPN) –– Beginning
with Lot 7 production of the F-22 Raptor, the Air Force hopes to enter
into a cost-saving, multi-year procurement contract with the aircraft
and engine manufacturer.

According to Maj. Gen. Richard B.H.
Lewis, Air Force executive officer for the F-22 program, a multi-year
procurement contract could mean a $225 million cost avoidance for the
Air Force.

"Is that substantial? To me that is," General Lewis
said. "To the taxpayer, a quarter of a billion savings on 60 airplanes
is huge."

Lots 7, 8 and 9 of the F-22 will each produce about 20
aircraft, for a total of 60 over the course of six years. The last jet
would be delivered around 2011. Due to Department of Defense budget
constraints, the Air Force was directed to purchase fewer aircraft in
these lots than what the manufacturer is actually capable of producing.
That slowdown of production would mean a cost increase for each
individual jet, one that would be mitigated, in part, by the savings
realized with multi-year procurement.

Under multi-year
procurement, some funding for all three lots of aircraft would be given
to the manufacturer in advance under economic order quantity purchase,
allowing it to buy materials and parts in bulk to reap a savings.
General Lewis said multi-year procurement could save the Air Force as
much as $3.7 million per aircraft.

By the end of Lot 6
production of the F-22, the Air Force and manufacturer will have worked
out all the major design changes to the Raptor and integrated those
changes into design plans for lots 7, 8 and 9. According to General
Lewis, there should be no more changes to the aircraft until the service
wants to produce a B model.

Cost savings, and now the stability
in design, make lots 7, 8 and 9 of the F-22 program ideal candidates
for multi-year procurement, General Lewis said.

"I contend there
has never been a program better prepared for a multi-year contract," he
said.

The Air Force now has funding for up to 183 F-22
aircraft, which will be distributed among seven squadrons. But General
Lewis makes no secret of the fact the Air Force would like to see even
more Raptors.

Today there are about 23 Air Force fighter
squadrons, supported by more than 800 aircraft that are currently flying
air-to-air, destruction of enemy air defenses, suppression of enemy air
defenses and strategic attack missions. Those missions are performed by
aircraft such as the F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-117A
Nighthawk. General Lewis said he believes about 381 F-22s could do those
same missions.

"We think we can replace all of those, reduce
our force structure and have more capability in the future with 10
squadrons of F-22s," he said. "When you look at the training, the
combat-coded and the attrition reserve that you have for 40 years of
having this airplane around, that's where we come up with 381. Right now
we are happy to get our seven squadrons funded, but the requirement is
greater than seven. We need 10 squadrons."

General Lewis said
that if the aircraft manufacturer were to shut down the production line
for the Raptor, it would be unlikely the Air Force could ever get more.

"Once
production shuts down, that's basically it," he said. "You can't go
back and start this thing up 10 years from now and get more in order to
carry out 40 years. So we are concerned about that."

One
roadblock to more Raptors is the aircraft's high cost. Estimates for the
fighter jet range from as little as $132 million to as much as $312
million. So far, the Air Force has invested as much as $28 billion in
the Raptor's research, development and testing. That money, referred to
as a "sunk cost," is already spent and is separate from money used for
future decision-making, including procuring a copy of the jet.

By
the time all 183 jets have been purchased, around $28 billion will have
been spent on research and development. An additional $34 billion will
have been spent on actually procuring the aircraft. That's about $62
billion for the total program cost. Divided out, that's comes to about
$338 million per aircraft.

But the reality is, if the Air Force
wanted to buy just one more jet, it would cost the taxpayer less than
half that amount. The current cost for a single copy of an F-22 stands
at about $137 million. And that number has dropped by 23 percent since
Lot 3 procurement, General Lewis said.

"The cost of the airplane
is going down," he said. "And the next 100 aircraft, if I am allowed to
buy another 100 aircraft ... the average fly-away cost would be $116
million per airplane."

The F-22 Raptor is not an inexpensive
fighter jet. But it brings to the fight a capability that eclipses that
of legacy aircraft such as the F-15, F-16, F-117, the Navy's F-18 Hornet
and even the yet-to-fly F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

"Even
without stealth, this is the world's best fighter," General Lewis said.
"The F-22, its ability with speed and maneuverability, is unprecedented.
The problem with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in establishing air
dominance is that you have to buy two or three to replace the F-22,
because it only has half the weapons load, and it doesn't have the
speed. You can't replace (the F-22) one-for-one with an F-35 or any
other legacy fighter such as the F-15E."

During Exercise
Northern Edge 2006 in Alaska in early June, the F-22 proved its mettle
against as many as 40 "enemy aircraft" during simulated battles. The
Raptor achieved a 108-to-zero kill ratio at that exercise. But the
capabilities of the F-22 go beyond what it can do. It is also able to
help other aircraft do better.

"When you are outnumbered on the
battlefield –– the F-22 helps the F-18 and the F-15s increase their
performance," General Lewis said. "It gives them more situational
awareness, and allows them to get their expenditures because you can't
kill all these airplanes with just the weapons aboard the F-22. It takes
the F-15's and F-18's weapons. It was very successful, (in its) ability
to get everybody to integrate."

One role the F-22 is
particularly good at, General Lewis said, is establishing air dominance.
This means making airspace above an area safe for other aircraft to
come in do their mission. The F-22 is superb at performing air-to-air
combat and eliminating surface-to-air missiles. In fact, the F-22 is
capable of dealing with both of those threats at the same time.

"Because
of its stealth and its speed, it is unique in that category, in that it
allows us to establish air dominance," General Lewis said. "It goes
after the aircraft, the SAMs, and the cruise missiles. And it can do it
all at the same time. The legacy (aircraft) can do any one of those,
kind of okay, but they can't survive in contested airspace. They can
first try to take care of the aircraft, then they can work on the SAMs.
But the F-22 has demonstrated, last year in (final operational testing
and evaluation), that we can do that simultaneously."

Of
particular interest to the Air Force is the F-22's ability to deal with
"double digit SAMs." A double digit SAM, Air Force parlance for
Russian-designed mobile surface-to-air missiles, is so named for the two
digit designator in their NATO reporting name. The Russian-designed
S-300P Angara, for instance, is designated "SA-10" by NATO countries.
The "S-300PMU Favorit" is designated the "SA-20." Both Russia and China
manufacture these weapons systems, and they are readily available on the
market. These weapons are highly mobile and pose a threat to Air Force
legacy aircraft such as the F-15 and F-16.

"It's a huge problem
in the future if you think about a double digit SAM. A double digit SAM
is equivalent to our (phased array tracking intercept of target
missiles)," General Lewis said. "As you know, PATRIOTs shot down some of
our own friendlies. And the friendlies knew they were being targeted by
the PATRIOT. They tried the best they could and they still got shot
down. That is the future if there are double digit SAMs in that
environment. You have got to go in there and kill them. If you can't
kill them, you will be denied air space. That is what we envision."

Recently,
the Air Force and the aircraft manufacturer have been dealing with F-22
design issues. Those issues include changes to the canopy actuator, the
air recharge system, the nose gear retraction system, the forward boom
heat treatment and several structural retrofits. The total cost to make
these repairs to the existing fleet of Raptors comes to about $105
million. These issues will be corrected in the production line for lots 6
to 9.

Before the word about the Raptor's capabilities quieted down significantly it became very obvious that it completely dominates all comers on today's battlefield.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:02:11 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
34 years later, the premier fighter is the F-15C/E. 34 years before, it was, what, the P-40?

Fixt

The F-22, while a favorite of mine, has not done anything to prove it is better than the current generation F-15s...

You mean besides not have the same RCS as a semi?

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:02:27 PM EDT

[#19]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:03:17 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:

34 years later, the premier fighter is the F-15C/E. 34 years before, it was, what, the P-40?

Fixt

The F-22, while a favorite of mine, has not done anything to prove it is better than the current generation F-15s...

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:04:46 PM EDT

[#21]

F-4J 155579 NF212 VF-151 CV-41 Dec 1977

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:05:50 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

snip

you cant have a kill ration in a exercise, where you shot down more planes than missles you can carry, and there was no gun shots, I was there BTW

just sayin, dont beleive everything you read.

Im not saying its not the best but it ain't some almighty fucking untouchable

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:07:14 PM EDT

[#23]

VAQ-141 CAG Bird

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:08:16 PM EDT

[#24]

VAQ-132 CAG bird

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:09:12 PM EDT

[#25]

VAQ-141 CAG bird in the paint shop

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:09:18 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:

snip

you cant have a kill ration in a exercise, where you shot down more planes than missles you can carry, and there was no gun shots, I was there BTW

just sayin, dont beleive everything you read.
Im not saying its not the best but it ain't some almighty fucking untouchable

Sore loser.

Why don't you tell your pilot to climb up to 60K' and play with them then.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:11:28 PM EDT

[#27]

Davis-Monthan, January 2007

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:12:45 PM EDT

[#28]

Nellis August 2009.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:14:14 PM EDT

[#29]

Nellis August 2009 - a long way from home.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:16:21 PM EDT

[#30]

VA-93 A-7A 152678 lands at NAF Atsugi in 1975

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:20:52 PM EDT

[#31]

Here is former 163TFS QF-100D 55-2917.
In the second image you can see the smoke system plumbing running along the outside of the rear fuselage.

Here is a former 112TFS QF-100D 56-3155 complete with green canopy and red stars.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:23:17 PM EDT

[#32]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:25:34 PM EDT

[#33]

US Navy EB-47E

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:27:12 PM EDT

[#34]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:32:03 PM EDT

[#35]

B-17G, 44-85790 - wonder what the price of gas was for a fill up.

Serial #: 44-85790
Construction #: 8699 (-VE) (built by Vega Aircraft, a subsidiary of the Lockheed Aircraft Company)
Model: B-17G
Name: Lacey Lady
Status: Restoration
Last info: 2002

History:
Art Lacey, Portland, OR, Mar. 5, 1947-1995
- Last Flight from Altus AFB, OK, Mar. 8-10, 1947
- Displayed at Lacey's Bomber gas station, Milwaukie, OR, Mar. 1947-1990.
- Displayed at Lacey's Bomber Restaurant, Milwaukie, OR, 1990-1995.
- Displayed on pylons as 485790/Lacey Lady, 1947-1995.
- Upper turret donated to CAF's Sentimental Journey

The Bomber Foundation, Milwaukie, OR, 1995-2002.
- Static restoration on site.
- Forward fuselage removed and under restoration, Aurora, OR, 1996-2000.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:34:37 PM EDT

[#36]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:36:09 PM EDT

[#37]

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:40:58 PM EDT

[#38]

YA-7F at Edwards 1997

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:46:36 PM EDT

[#39]

NASA F-111 63-7778 1997 at Edwards

NASA F-111 63-7777 at Davis-Monthan 1988

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:52:41 PM EDT

[#40]

Early Navy F-4A - short nose

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:53:59 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

http://www.vaq34.com/junk/145315_F-4A_NATC_19640815.jpg

Early Navy F-4A - short nose

Low canopy too, fast bastard like good ol sageburner.

Posted: 2/16/2010 9:58:23 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:

snip

you cant have a kill ration in a exercise, where you shot down more planes than missles you can carry, and there was no gun shots, I was there BTW

just sayin, dont beleive everything you read.

Im not saying its not the best but it ain't some almighty fucking untouchable

Sore loser.

Why don't you tell your pilot to climb up to 60K' and play with them then.

Not a sore loser, that one article just pisses me off.

As to the second part, I will wait till they run out of gas a head back to the tanker to shoot them