Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air Force Grounds Entire F-15 Fleet.  
User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7359 posts, RR: 85
Posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5431 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Seems the Air Force has some safety issues with this a/c.

Over 700 in their fleet.





article

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 5367 times:

Not the first time. A friend of mine once grounded the whole RAF fleet of Jet Provost trainers after he noticed that rivets attaching the lower skin to the wing spar were coming off (he is quite short and noticed it, where taller people would have walked past) on several planes in his flight.

Another Canadian ex-colleague once grounded all C-130s worldwide for special inspections and repairs after he noticed cracks in the upper fuselage near the tail plane on several of his unit's planes.

Jan


User currently offlineN74jw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5276 times:

The majority of the USAF's F-15A/C's are over twenty years old. Time to re-evaluate the fleet and retire the old-old birds.

User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12872 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5273 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A cynic would suggest this move by the AF is designed to put pressure on Congress to approve additional F-22s. scratchchin 


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlineDeltaGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5259 times:

Hah, funny you mention that, people were talking about that at the squadron the other day.

Alot of these birds are 30 yrs+, especially some of our A models. They're flying past their original design lifespan and are doing it well, but they're tired. 6000 hours on a fighter is alot.

DeltaGuy


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5227 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 4):
A cynic would suggest this move by the AF is designed to put pressure on Congress to approve additional F-22s.

You wouldn't have to be a cynic to think about the impact the F-15 grounding is having or what the condition of the fleet might be found to be. It seems odd to me, though, that the newer F-15E is also affected, unless the grounding is a result of something other than structural issues.

Might this grounding give rise to further F-22 purchases? Probably too soon to tell, but the possibility is stronger than it was.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2776 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5217 times:

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 5):
Alot of these birds are 30 yrs+, especially some of our A models. They're flying past their original design lifespan and are doing it well, but they're tired. 6000 hours on a fighter is alot.

Yep the Oregon Air National Guard still has all the old A models, their burners malfunction a lot in different ways sometimes. Big grin



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Phil Gilston



KPDX  Smile

Hopefully they'll be back in the air by November 11th.



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineN74jw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5180 times:

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 6):
Might this grounding give rise to further F-22 purchases?

I doubt it. I think it may change the priority to which units will receive the F-22 and when. Hopefully this will speed u pthe transfer of C models to the ANG.


User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5121 times:

I find it funny that the media is just now getting the story out. The Air Force released an article on it's website the morning after the grounding.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123074547

Quoting N74jw (Reply 3):
Time to re-evaluate the fleet and retire the old-old birds.

Old- Old birds? Not all of them are old-old. The grounding encompassed all F-15 models.
http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/070610-F-0205S-333.jpg
Tail code with 97. 97 being the year it was ordered, meaning delivery was sometime less than 10 years ago.

Quoting KPDX (Reply 7):
burners

It wasn't an A model that went down it was a C. The crash that prompted this was due to a structural failure, not the afterburners. If the burners did malfunction it generally isn't a bid deal, out side of them being stuck on. They are at the back of the exhaust section out side of the "engine proper" if you will.




I said in the other thread. This is SOP!! The Navy and Marine Corp do the same thing when something like this happens. When a problem is found with an aircraft that has not been seen before the entire fleet is grounded until every aircraft can be checked for the same problem. For some reason it must have been a slow news day and the media decided print this story making everybody crap their pants.


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5109 times:

Quoting N74jw (Reply 8):
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 6):
Might this grounding give rise to further F-22 purchases?

I doubt it. I think it may change the priority to which units will receive the F-22 and when. Hopefully this will speed u pthe transfer of C models to the ANG.

Possibly. Of course, the big questions are: What was the specific system or structural feature of the F-15 that caused the grounding? How hard and how expensive will it be to fix? What is the impact on the Eagle's status within the Air Force and ANG; i.e. how long will the airplane remain in service? Will additional F-22 orders provide a long term solution to a shortfall in fighters if the F-15s have to be retired early? Will the AF consider modifying the F-35s configuration to make it more of a suitable air-to-air fighter to avoid having to buy the more costly F-22?

And the final question: Is the Eagle grounding being blown all out of proportion?  Smile



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5104 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 9):
Tail code with 97. 97 being the year it was ordered, meaning delivery was sometime less than 10 years ago.

This is an E model...they won't be going away anytime soon; they replace the F-111.



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5090 times:

Quoting Michlis (Reply 11):
This is an E model...they won't be going away anytime soon; they replace the F-111.

Exactly my point my friend  thumbsup  Trust me I am well aware of the difference between and E and a C  Wink

N74jw was saying that we need to retire the old-old birds. I was pointing out that the grounding included F-15Es and they are not old nor are the being retired.


User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5076 times:

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 10):
And the final question: Is the Eagle grounding being blown all out of proportion?

YES!! Thank You EBJ!!!!


User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5065 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 12):
I was pointing out that the grounding included F-15Es and they are not old nor are the being retired.

I misunderstood...my apologies.  Smile



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5063 times:

Quoting Michlis (Reply 14):
I misunderstood...my apologies.

No worries.


User currently offlineN74jw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5048 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 9):
Not all of them are old-old.

Yeah, thanks... I meant the 'old' A/C models, that are 20+ in years. I did not mention the E models, but I do know they were affected by the ground.


User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5035 times:

Quoting N74jw (Reply 16):

Yeah, thanks... I meant the 'old' A/C models, that are 20+ in years. I did not mention the E models, but I do know they were affected by the ground.

My bad dude.  Smile


User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1444 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5022 times:

Quoting KPDX (Reply 7):
Yep the Oregon Air National Guard still has all the old A models, their burners malfunction a lot in different ways sometimes.

Alot of thge A models still flying are strictly ANG birds flying with some A model frankenjets at Edwards, the A models are in better shape than most C models, with the Iraqi 1991 to 2004 no fly zones it took there toll on the c models plus the dreaded flying hour program that active duty wings had to fly so their wing kings could get promoted. Maybe we see some new builds with GE110's come out of St Louis for the USAF.



I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4952 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4993 times:

Latest news indicate that Israeli and Japanese Eagles will also be grounded.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...an-join-us-in-grounding-f-15s.html



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4969 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 4):
A cynic would suggest this move by the AF is designed to put pressure on Congress to approve additional F-22s.

I don't believe for an instant the USAF would jeopardize their planes, and more important their people, to play games with congress.

I don;'t believe you believe it either BTW  Wink


User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4955 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 18):
Maybe we see some new builds with GE110's come out of St Louis for the USAF.

New Eagles for the USAF would be awesome, but there is the matter of money. One of their procurements would have to suffer and you can bet it won't be the F-22.  

[Edited 2007-11-06 11:23:15]

[Edited 2007-11-06 11:24:42]


If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13252 posts, RR: 77
Reply 21, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4948 times:

It is far from uncommon for a type in military to have temporary groundings, as has been alluded to, probably easier to find a type that has not, rather than list those that have.
I really don't see any 'lobbying for more F-22's' in this, for one, there is no chance of anything like a one to one replacement of Eagles by F-22's, those operating/maintaning the fleet, I suspect are too busy with the issues around the grounding to worry about any politics.

But the USAF has a dilemma, if F-22's will not replace the majority of the F-15's, even only F-15A/C's, do you reduce force levels, accepting the far greater potency of the F-22, or buy new Eagles?
But to buy new F-15's, means those $ are not spent on F-22's, F-35 of course is needed for eventual USAF F-16 replacement.

The first option, is much more likely IMHO.


User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2776 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4823 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 9):
It wasn't an A model that went down it was a C. The crash that prompted this was due to a structural failure, not the afterburners. If the burners did malfunction it generally isn't a bid deal, out side of them being stuck on. They are at the back of the exhaust section out side of the "engine proper" if you will.

Oh I know, I wasnt saying the burners had anything to do with the crash, just responding to

Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 5):
Alot of these birds are 30 yrs+, especially some of our A models. They're flying past their original design lifespan and are doing it well, but they're tired. 6000 hours on a fighter is alot.

By saying, yea, things like the burners malfunction a lot.

 Wink

KPDX  Smile



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineScottieprecord From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1363 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4741 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 9):
I find it funny that the media is just now getting the story out. The Air Force released an article on it's website the morning after the grounding.

Hmm... F-15s were grounded on the 3rd, but I saw one flying that afternoon at the Randolph Airshow. Either way, guess that explains why it wasn't flying Sunday! At least I know why I missed the Eagle now. lol

-Mike


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4731 times:

I saw a beautiful F-4 arrive tonight into DM ... Flew in over Tucson right near sunset. Have they replaced the 15's with the old standby ?!  Smile


You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
25 Post contains links and images FXramper : I use this pic on my notebook background. Hope the 15 is around for another decade.
26 Checksixx : They are talking about the grounding, not the crash! Are you serious??!?!
27 Checksixx : No change will be made on what units receive the F-22.
28 DEVILFISH : Now that this is happening while they're getting another twenty Raptors, the USAF may be wondering if they should have taken up the F-15E+ Super Eagl
29 Post contains links and images Michlis : Good money says that Boeing may thinking along the same lines.   Although, they might have to wait now that Congress has given a very big Christmas
30 Post contains images MCIGuy : No, the current grounding has nothing to with trying to get more Raptors. However, I remain convinced that the USAF will eventually get the 400 F-22s
31 F27Friendship : of course I'm serious when saying that the USAF does not crash it's planes on purpose
32 Wingnut135 : We haven't flown all week here. But ours at Shady J are 86 thru 90 models. We've got one of the converted D models that spent a lot of time at Edward
33 KevinSmith : I take it then those aren't big motor birds are they?[Edited 2007-11-10 20:13:01]
34 Wingnut135 : If you mean F100-PW-220, then yes, we have the weaker motor. (I'm not sure if it's the -200 or -220, not an engine guy.) But I do know that all other
35 Venus6971 : The F-16 Community has 3 types of engines, 220.229, and the GE 110. TYhe GE is the far superior engine mx wise but would like to hear from a pilot wh
36 DeltaGuy : It's -220. The -100 is junk, the -220 is nice, but the -229's are a work of art. PW took some notes from GE when they designed the -229, it's alot mo
37 L-188 : I am sure that the grounding is a case of caution. First you ground the lot, and then as you learn more details, reduce the number grounded as you ru
38 Post contains images KevinSmith : Way ahead of you.
39 L-188 : If you repeat it enough the kids might remember it.
40 Post contains links Michlis : And the saga continues... http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...%20Grounded%20Around%20the%20World
41 Post contains links DEVILFISH : While Boeing remains optimistic and sees the grounding as an opportunity to offer new-build Eagles..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...der-for
42 Post contains images KevinSmith :
43 Wingnut135 : Ok, so I was here at the house this morning when I got a call that I needed to go in to start the inspections to un ground our planes. Although I can'
44 EBJ1248650 : Grounding is a result of structural failure. Now the thing to be determined is whether the airplane was overstressed at th So it's going to take about
45 F27Friendship : if it's design related, you want to know if any other planes are showing indications it might happen to them
46 Wingnut135 : From my understanding, even though the crash investigation isn't complete, the engineers saw something that made them do a fleet wide inspection. From
47 Post contains links DEVILFISH : Update: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ng-f-15es-to-return-to-flight.html
48 Wingnut135 : We got five in the air today after completing the TCTO inspection. We should have more available for tomorrow, and so on. So far we haven't found anyt
49 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : There are reports of a new F-15A-D grounding order..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-catastrophic-design-weakness.html Quote: "Recent inspe
50 Post contains images DeltaGuy : Bottom line, the ACC braintrust found more reasons to keep the plane on the ground, for now at least. The possibility for this to repeat (and not have
51 Post contains links and images DEVILFISH : As borne out in this latest update..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...grounded-as-more-cracks-found.html Quote: "US Air Force Boeing F-15A-D
52 DeltaGuy : NDI is done in house, at least most units I know of. People out there with x-rays and dye, sounds like tons of fun. Sorry to confuse. Dear Santa: all
53 Post contains links DEVILFISH : Though not necessarily for the ANG, this piece shares the same sentiment. But the idea that new-build F-15s might be expensive while hypothesizing wi
54 Venus6971 : I wonder the cost of taking old birds in AMARC and refurbing and updating to a Super Eagle version. Would it be cheaper to have new build F-15 or just
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Air Force Grounds Entire F-15 Fleet.
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Indian Air Force 707 In Delhi posted Fri Sep 14 2007 15:42:16 by N383PA
Air Force One (VC-137C) Livery posted Mon Sep 10 2007 23:45:06 by EFCar98
Algerian Air Force posted Thu Sep 6 2007 13:00:31 by Saintsman
Air Force One SEA Departure posted Thu Aug 30 2007 00:58:42 by Nwray
Winglets For Every US Air Force C-32A? posted Mon Aug 20 2007 03:02:25 by Socal
Pakistan Air Force Selling Off VIP And Cargo 707 posted Mon Aug 13 2007 19:22:11 by 777way
Taiwan Air Force Corsair IIs posted Mon Aug 13 2007 01:31:56 by EBJ1248650
Portugal Air Force Withdraws FTB-337G Milirole! posted Wed Jul 25 2007 16:12:20 by CV990
787 Next Air Force One? posted Mon Jul 23 2007 10:34:34 by Boeingluvr
"Transformers" Air Force One Continuity Error posted Tue Jul 3 2007 08:05:05 by FL1TPA

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format