: F15C Breakup



N0DIH
01-11-08, 12:55 AM
Did you hear about the F15C crash? May doom 40% of the F15C fleet!

http://vusaf.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6335

Rolex
01-11-08, 11:08 AM
I read about this two weeks ago in the paper. This is huge for the US. The F15 is the cornerstone for our air-to-air and air-to-ground defense. For the life of me I can't figure out why they publicized it!?!

dkozloski
01-11-08, 11:31 AM
It's because the Air Force is trying to parley a relatively fixable F-15 problem into a whole lot more F-22s. To the Air Force it's like finding a bird's nest on the ground. The structural engineers are claiming that a rennovation campaign will extend the life of the F-15s for years but the Air Force brass want new planes. For now, the later F-15s and F-16s are getting the job done.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 01:21 PM
So why not order up a bunch more F15E's to replace the F15C's? Seems easy enough.....

Spyder
01-11-08, 01:27 PM
F22 is superior in just about every way and probably not a WHOLE helluva lot more expensive.

Logical guess only, but it makes sense...

dkozloski
01-11-08, 01:34 PM
No new planes are required. The old ones are fixable with normal techniques. New planes are very expensive in comparison. Old airplanes can have structural problems but that's old news. There are been complete wing retrofit programs as well as other repair programs before.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 01:42 PM
If anyone ever got a wind of the Navy's budget they would flip.... Let the Air Force have the F22's.......

Spyder
01-11-08, 02:09 PM
Eh, by not that much more expensive I meant to build new compared to build new, not to build new compared to re-fit. I think they should rebuild them, repair them or whatever else they have to do to make them keep flying. It's a hell of an airplane and a helluva weapons platform that has years of life left.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 02:31 PM
sea level to 100,000 feet in just over 3 minutes.

What plane?

Rolex
01-11-08, 02:46 PM
sea level to 100,000 feet in just over 3 minutes.

What plane?

This was my impression while watching those things take off in San Diego. You could see and hear a commercial jet take off for several minutes. You'd only see the fighter jets for maybe 30 seconds and they'd be gone like a fart in a hurricane. It's an impressive sight indeed.:cool2:

N0DIH
01-11-08, 02:48 PM
Watching which ones? I used to watch F15's as a kid, I lived off the runways where they built them.... Awesome planes...

dkozloski
01-11-08, 04:08 PM
At an armed forces day demonstration at Eielson AFB near Fairbanks, an F-15 took off and flew out of sight straight up. A few minutes later it came back into sight flying straight down with the speedboards out. it tansitioned into a tight 360 degree turn and flew straight up out of sight again all inside of a radius of less than 2500 feet. The demonstration continued for about 30 minutes and it was all directly in front of crowd inside the same radius. A barnstormer in a biplane would have had a difficult time putting on a similar show in the same airspace.

Several years later I saw a Navy F-14 Tomcat fly the unlimited race course at the National Air Races in Reno, Nevada sweeping the wings on the straights and extending the wings at the pylons. This was also an impresssive demonstration for a very heavy aircraft. Minutes later an Airforce pilot in an F-16 beat the F-14's lap time by 1 second over the same course and you could tell he was about to lose his guts out his ass from the G's he was pulling. Interservice rivalry at its most entertaining. The most impressive part to me was that neither pilot had ever flown the course before and they both flew it perfectly. The U.S. does have the finest pilots in the world.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 04:13 PM
F15E can do over 100,000 feet in just over 3 minutes.

Can the F22 keep up?

Rolex
01-11-08, 04:14 PM
Watching which ones? I used to watch F15's as a kid, I lived off the runways where they built them.... Awesome planes...

I'm assuming they were F15s. That base also had a steady flood of blackhawk and other fighter choppers training there. I'm no expert on military hardware which may be why I'm so easily impressed. All the same, those military jets have amazing speed and power no matter what set of standards you have.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 04:20 PM
If you ever can see a CALFEX, DO so. It is a Combined Armed Forces Live Fire Exercise. Everyone (usually not the Navy, hard to get a boat/ship on shore...) comes to play.

Got to see the Army Artillery and Attack Helicopters, Air Force B1 Bombers, Marines and the AV8B's.... Might have been A10's, forget now. The B1's opened the show, came in near supersonic at low altitude, swept the wings forward and blew the crap out of the range and left before you knew what hit you.... All at around 1000 foot.... Very cool. I don't care what people think on the B1's, they rock. Any plane that can do 900+ mph at nap of the earth is very cool....

dkozloski
01-11-08, 04:36 PM
F15E can do over 100,000 feet in just over 3 minutes.

Can the F22 keep up?
Probably, higher power to weight ratio.

I read an engineering white paper on the SR-71 that said if it were sitting on the end of the runway and started its takeoff as an F-104G went by as fast as it could go(F104-G is the low altitude record holder), by the time the landing gear on the SR-71 was fully retracted it would be in the lead. That would be a drag race to see.

Sinister Angel
01-11-08, 07:01 PM
http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/

But here's a question, can the F-15 do supercruise?

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:27 PM
I think I read the C repair would be $500K -- a new Raptor is about $140M. Repairing the C is a disposable expense in comparison. Not that I don't think they shouldn't build more Raptors, but they could repair 280 C's for the price of 1 Raptor.

Plus you don't have to retrain your entire force all at once.

And -- the National Guard still needs these planes for when the AF is done w/them.

Raptors need to be built for Russia and China's "potential" benefit -- not these smaller conflicts we're in now.

Unfortunately the Lightning won't be ready for a few years, or else they could just run more of those...

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:32 PM
Watching which ones? I used to watch F15's as a kid, I lived off the runways where they built them.... Awesome planes...

That was pretty cool. A lot of times between class at UMSL, you'd see them on maneuvers. Or that viewing area on Lindbergh was pretty cool. I wonder if that's still there or did the new runway eat it up?

One time over the 4th of July, I went to that viewing area during the air show and saw a B-52 land and a B-1 take off (you could feel the heat of the engines from what -- a quarter mile? away as it started out, which was awesome).

The F15s were cool, and also those O-L-D TWA 747s that could barely clear the fence at the end of the runway when they were taking off.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 07:39 PM
PVA, yup, know it well.... Lived close to it, probably 5 miles away. I watched the Enterprise and NASA 905 there! My dad worked for Channel 4 KMOX now KMOV and got my sister and I in NASA 905... Cool is an understatement.

The last time I went there it was still there, but I can't recall WHEN that was! So much is just barren now. Midwest 4WD used to be about 1 mile from there on Lindberg, long before they moved to the new place @ 270 and Lindberg.

I would have loved to see a B1 and B52 there. We did see the Concorde once, noisy sucker. That thing just screamed. 747's weren't common there, loved seeing them. I remember the DC8's and 707's as a kid, now those were loud planes. Coupled with the F100's on full afterburner, it was literally deafening.

TWA = Two Winged Airline.... as my dad always said....

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:48 PM
The B52 landed at about a 20 degree angle which was bizarre. And the B1's afterburners were really something else.

The Concorde's stop was it a publicity thing? They never flew it there regularly did they?

N0DIH
01-11-08, 07:51 PM
They were talking about it, but the runways were too short vs the noise, hence the runway expansion. Not the main reason, but one of the cases I am sure for it.

Ever hear of the barricade at the end of the runways? Because it is a military airport too, it is needed...



The B52 landed at about a 20 degree angle which was bizarre. And the B1's afterburners were really something else.

The Concorde's stop was it a publicity thing? They never flew it there regularly did they?

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:53 PM
No, why -- to keep enemy planes from landing?

N0DIH
01-11-08, 07:53 PM
Nope, but it is one of the only planes that might be able to reach out and touch an SR71/A12....


http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/

But here's a question, can the F-15 do supercruise?

But if you can detect an SR71/A12 on radar coming your way, the chance of scrambling a F15E to intercept (not that we NEED to...) would be tough. After that long of a WOT burn to 100K feet, how much fuel do you have to play before you have to come back down and not be a dart?

N0DIH
01-11-08, 07:55 PM
To catch them from going off the runway if they can't stop.... Like the Navy has on carriers... Not sure how it is deployed....


No, why -- to keep enemy planes from landing?

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:56 PM
I wonder what classified plane replaced the SR-71 that makes all of the UFO goons think we're being invaded :-)

hueterm
01-11-08, 07:57 PM
Oh, ok -- probably a series of nets that pop up or something. I thought they just had that quicksand stuff at the end of the runways.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 07:57 PM
I have heard of a plane called "Aurora", mach 4, 5 and 6.... But does it exist?

hueterm
01-11-08, 08:00 PM
:alien:

dkozloski
01-11-08, 08:10 PM
Nope, but it is one of the only planes that might be able to reach out and touch an SR71/A12....



But if you can detect an SR71/A12 on radar coming your way, the chance of scrambling a F15E to intercept (not that we NEED to...) would be tough. After that long of a WOT burn to 100K feet, how much fuel do you have to play before you have to come back down and not be a dart?

One guy I knew who was in Blackbirds for years said the you could be standing in the tower looking out at an incoming Blackbird and if you looked at the ATC RADAR right by you it wouldn't be painting. The SR-71 was stealth before most people knew what stealth was.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 08:20 PM
Think of it this way, drop the plane in chrome, and shine the brightest spotlight in the world at it. Whatever reflects back is your radar picture.

The SR71/A12's engines are not that good for radar, and the edge of the plane, but overall very good when you compare the other planes of the day.....

Yeah, I was a radar guy.... Just fixed, didn't operate (boy that torqued some radar section guys, "how can you not know how to operate it and still fix it?").

In a personnel radar (like a PPS5, TPS25, TPS58, etc) you can actually tell the difference from a man to a woman if you really are good. I used to listen to the radio of cars as they drove by the motor pool gate I was shooting out of.... The beam goes out, and sound modulates it and you can detect that when the beam gets back.... It isn't just noise like you would think...

JimHare
01-11-08, 08:51 PM
I read an engineering white paper on the SR-71 that said if it were sitting on the end of the runway and started its takeoff as an F-104G went by as fast as it could go(F104-G is the low altitude record holder), by the time the landing gear on the SR-71 was fully retracted it would be in the lead. That would be a drag race to see.

The Starfighter was certainly no slouch for it's time, eh? Freakin' rocket engine with wings... :)

N0DIH
01-11-08, 08:54 PM
Hmm, I never thought the SR71 was that fast off the line, but then again, I haven't seen a take off either. I guess power to weight ratio is the key.... LOTS of power and little weight...

dkozloski
01-11-08, 09:00 PM
At Mach 3 and at 80,000ft. the total drag of an SR-71 was 12,000lbs. There were 33,000lbs. thrust available per engine.

Spyder
01-11-08, 09:15 PM
I live just over the bridge from Beale AFB in Marysville, CA. One of, if not THE main SR and U2/TR-1 bases in the world. Brian Shul comes into my restaurant once in a while.

One of my bartenders is the grandaughter of the pilot of one of the first operational SR-71 missions.

Incredible airplane...

dkozloski
01-11-08, 09:39 PM
Think of it this way, drop the plane in chrome, and shine the brightest spotlight in the world at it. Whatever reflects back is your radar picture.

The SR71/A12's engines are not that good for radar, and the edge of the plane, but overall very good when you compare the other planes of the day.....

Yeah, I was a radar guy.... Just fixed, didn't operate (boy that torqued some radar section guys, "how can you not know how to operate it and still fix it?").

In a personnel radar (like a PPS5, TPS25, TPS58, etc) you can actually tell the difference from a man to a woman if you really are good. I used to listen to the radio of cars as they drove by the motor pool gate I was shooting out of.... The beam goes out, and sound modulates it and you can detect that when the beam gets back.... It isn't just noise like you would think...

I did some work on the AN/SPG-51 and AN/SPS39-A. The 51 was a SAM missile target ilumination radar and the 39 was a precision target designation height finder with a stabilized beam. A lot of vacuum tubes and klystrons. Doppler was a great aid in identifying a target and maintaining lock.

We called surveilance radar operators scope dopes. The fire controlmen operated their own stuff as well as repairing it.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 10:42 PM
scope dopes! Nice!

Love tubes and Klystrons! We used to have an old radar, the AN/TPQ-4, one of the early target acquisition radars, it had a Maggie, aka, Magnetron and it would arc sometimes, like 2-3 inches. I didn't work on them, they were before my time, but my section chief, had a picture of it arcing and him pointing at it (a safe distance!)....

The only arc I got was a Q-37, it arc'd around 4-5 inches, but in a sealed compartment. So no one saw it or why it did. But 50KV @ 18amps will make some noise..... Almost like mortar shell going off!

dkozloski
01-11-08, 11:19 PM
The SPS-39A had microswitches that detected the sides of the pulse forming network bulging and would shut it down if it did. The PFN charged to 90Kv and discharged at 180Kv. 26 beams in a height scan. 1.5Mw with double 6usec. bangs in the bottom beams and 900watts in the highest beams. It had a synthesized exciter and transmitted a chirp to get the height scan. The main bang was amplified by TWTs fed into a 5 cavity klystron amp. With the right atmospheric conditions we could detect aircraft to 185 miles.

N0DIH
01-11-08, 11:45 PM
Nice. The radar I worked on had a TWT that was around 5 feet long, input power to the TWT was around -10 dBm and output of the TWT was around +126dBm, not as much amplification as a Klystron, but it did better than a lot of TWT's I have seen. So, doing our math, 30 dBm is 1 watt, and ever 3 dB is double the power, that puts peak power around 2,500,000,000 to 4,300,000,000 watts... (but pulsed, so average is much lower).... Range was only 50KM, until we did the software change which brought us to 250KM.... It had some neat varying PW's to extend the range, as well as freq hopping.... And antijamming....

We had over current checking to look for arcing, the TWT was prone to it if the humidity control system wasn't working or leaking.

The antenna array has 5000+ dipoles in a phase/phase array. So it doesn't have to move to see 90 degrees AZ and 30 degrees EL

lawfive
01-13-08, 03:12 AM
The Starfighter was certainly no slouch for it's time, eh? Freakin' rocket engine with wings... :)
The Widowmaker

CIWS
01-13-08, 10:17 AM
The Widowmaker

:yeah:

Certainly one of them anyway. I have a friend that owned one years ago along with a few other vintage fighters.




For Koz - Ours was the SPS-40 air and SPS-10 surface.

dkozloski
01-13-08, 02:51 PM
:yeah:

Certainly one of them anyway. I have a friend that owned one years ago along with a few other vintage fighters.




For Koz - Ours was the SPS-40 air and SPS-10 surface.
We also had an SPS-40 but it belonged to the operations guys and was maintained by ETs. It seems to me that the SPS-40 was a UHF radar made by Lockheed. It had multiple main bangs that were stacked on return by delay lines so it had the range of a long pulse radar but the range resolution of a short pulse radar. The return video painted on the screen looked like a banana. The return video from the SPS-39 looked like pinpoints in comparison.

dkozloski
01-13-08, 03:06 PM
The SPS-39 operators console was an interesting animal. Since it was located in CIC all the work done on it was done in the dark. It looked like a big government desk with a swivel chair bolted to the deck in front of it. The areas of the console that looked like the drawers in the desk were actually big circuit boards covered by sheet metal cabinetry. The electronics were all vacuum tubes and high voltage. If somebody had to work on the area in front of the chair we always had a guy standing by the main circuit breaker to cut the power and a couple of other guys ready to drag him out from under the console in cae he got across the high voltage. More than once the guys would report that they had a trouble cleared and you'd go look to find a couple of wires leading from under the console over to a paper bag tied on the outside with the repair part inside. "We'll neat it up when we get back to port and can turn the lights on".

N0DIH
01-13-08, 05:41 PM
LOL!!! Love it! "Field expedient repair"....

dkozloski
01-13-08, 06:01 PM
LOL!!! Love it! "Field expedient repair"....
Sometimes the report would be, "We don't know what's wrong, but this 'cap' hooked on here and in this bag over here fixes it". Good enough. In no case did the old man want to have to send a message to the Commodore telling him we were limited by equipment failure. We repaired a high voltage power supply that we were specifically prohibited from working on by the documentation because there were no spares in existance. The thing was in a big cast aluminum tub filled with insulating oil. We drilled and tapped holes in the lid so we could refill it and expell the air bubles. It continued to work for years after.
We ran out of cooling water for the radar klystron amplifiers so we used boiler feed water cleaned up with demineralizer cartridges and it did the job. When a precision power supply on the gun firecontrol system failed, we rigged the ships heliarc welding machine to replace it.
Use it up,
wear it out,
make it do,
or do without

N0DIH
01-13-08, 06:06 PM
Which is why I am 100% having the military being able to have the technical ability to fix anything in their inventory. To LEARN the electronics and know everything about them. It matters, if not, you might not know what killed you....

We had to use "Water Reagent", aka, next level over battery water, if resistivity of the water cooling system got below 1Mohm the system tripped. Last thing you want is a water cooled TWT, or HV transformer with conductive water running through it. I had to learn to be a plumber while I was in, I hate plumbing.... Stupid leaks.... I fixed them were my bosses (E5's and E6's) couldn't and I was fresh out of school.....

dkozloski
01-13-08, 06:13 PM
Which is why I am 100% having the military being able to have the technical ability to fix anything in their inventory. To LEARN the electronics and know everything about them. It matters, if not, you might not know what killed you....

We had to use "Water Reagent", aka, next level over battery water, if resistivity of the water cooling system got below 1Mohm the system tripped. Last thing you want is a water cooled TWT, or HV transformer with conductive water running through it. I had to learn to be a plumber while I was in, I hate plumbing.... Stupid leaks.... I fixed them were my bosses (E5's and E6's) couldn't and I was fresh out of school.....
The klystrons and HV power supply were part of the euipment mounted right underneath the dish. Cooling water was plumbed to it using rotary joints and they were the source of the major leaks.

N0DIH
01-13-08, 09:03 PM
So I guess Permatex Ultra Blue it out of the question eh? :)

Love those rotary joints.... We didn't have any, we had a turntable with a very long S-Band waveguide and it only turned 370 degrees either way tops.

The Q-36 was different, the entire radar transceiver was on the turnrable, so it didn't need but small 10 inch or so waveguide and that was soley for elevation movement of the antenna from stow to setup looking downrange....More like the Patriot Radar is, only the Patriot Radar is size of the Q37, only the Q37's antenna only turns, the Patriot, the whole radar body turns....

heavymetals
01-14-08, 06:13 PM
Rotary joints?

HAHAHA

When I worked at Raytheon we had some IDIOT spend over 1 million researching & developing a "rotary connection" for the radar units.

What a joke.

The antenna people just shook their heads.

The IDIOT blamed everyone else for sabotage when the crap failed (gee no kidding?).

What really suprised me was that this crap got hidden from the Air Farce in some kind of R&D budget, and he got away with it.

As for the F15's "breaking up", this is just the sort of news the Iranians should not be made aware of.

Let them find out the hard way when they try a high G turn.

N0DIH
01-14-08, 07:50 PM
Don't tell me, the part number assigned to the rotory joint was 1-D10-T?

heavymetals
01-14-08, 08:04 PM
Never got that far as mostly everyone who had any smarts new that this was some "science project" that wasn't going to work, but the snowball was rolling down the hill.

The lucky ones got out of the way, or found real work.

I was assigned the task of instrumenting the testing.

I showed exactly when and how it failed :D

dkozloski
01-14-08, 11:19 PM
Was this rotary joint for cooling water or RF? There is nothing to invent for either one. They've both been around for over 60 years. What was the real PIA was the silver slip rings.

heavymetals
01-15-08, 12:28 AM
The hope was to be able to get rid of the coiled "watch spring" cable setup that rotates in a FLIR head.

The IDIOT didn't want to use "slip ring" and brush technology, and there is a couple of other ways (they don't work either) that were proposed.

The RF people were laughing to themselves.

Yeah, go ahead and try to run RF through anything other then a shielded cable.

There is a reason for the shield!

The IDIOTS method didn't even make it through minimum cycle testing, but he sure blew a wad of money.

Sinister Angel
01-15-08, 12:38 AM
Yeah, go ahead and try to run RF through anything other then a shielded cable.


Ha ha, retard.

N0DIH
01-15-08, 01:03 AM
I figured that all radars that spin the antenna all have some sort of rotary joint that allows RF through, just round instead of rectangular waveguide....

heavymetals
01-15-08, 02:10 AM
Nope.

It is a "watch spring" wound bundle of wires.

The reflections caused by a joint in high power RF applications are horrendous they don't even like connectors!

dkozloski
01-15-08, 02:35 AM
I tried as best I could to keep my mouth shut but I can only stand so much. Waveguide rotary joints have been used to transmit high power RF energy since the early days of WWII.
There are literally hundreds if not thousands of successful designs.
http://www.siverslab.se/RJ%20tech%20des.htm

heavymetals
01-15-08, 02:52 AM
In the FLIR applications where I worked the sensor/electronics were hardwired via the "watch spring" technique.

Where the waveguide has to spin around, your right, you can have a rotary joint, but you can't have a bundle of wires spin around with it without it spinning back the opposite way.

The IDIOT was proposing a system that didn't have to "unwind".

think of this: try putting two rotary waveguides parallel to each other and rotate them.

I probably should have clarified that these are multiple signals requiring different connections.

here is a link to a similar product: http://www.mercotac.com/html/products.html

Like I said, the RF people just threw up their hands and wouldn't even do calculations.

They wanted to see it pass basic power and signal levels first (it didn't).

Basically his design was multiple slip rings. Too noisy for the application and the contact areas ground themselves up in testing (guy did no metallurgy whatsoever)

dkozloski
01-15-08, 11:18 AM
Now I'm with you. FLIR is a passive sensor and you're trying to couple low level signals to and from a seeker head. It's an entirely different kettle of fish from trying to couple high power RF to and from an antenna. Western Electric had some very successful slip-ring designs for a similar application but used some unusual brushes. Even at that. for something that was supposed to be able to run 24/7 it took a lot of maintenance. Now days they couple the signals with infra-red or optical couplers.

heavymetals
01-15-08, 01:34 PM
I really do apologize for not making it more clear. :alchi:

The IDIOT was touting his "method" would handle RF also.

Florian
01-15-08, 10:17 PM
theres a great article in AW&ST this week that has pix of the failure, where the seam fractures and splits....frightening indeed.


F

heavymetals
01-16-08, 12:07 AM
It is all propaganda to get the Iranians to junk their F15's and quit trying to get spare parts for um. :shhh:

There is no problem.

Fly it you'll like it.....

dkozloski
01-16-08, 11:18 AM
If they can get he F15s out of the air they can preserve their perfect record in air to air combat.

N0DIH
01-16-08, 12:40 PM
Yup, you know it.... Last thing you want it to be on the wrong side of an F15....

EcSTSatic
01-16-08, 01:49 PM
I've often wondered why the DoD doesn't embed some benign code in all non-US military gear we sell that could be activated externally to disable some critical system? Surely we're smart enough to conceal it. That way, we fall out with some country or one country sells to another and we zap them.

heavymetals
01-16-08, 02:37 PM
I've often wondered why the DoD doesn't embed some benign code in all non-US military gear we sell that could be activated externally to disable some critical system? Surely we're smart enough to conceal it. That way, we fall out with some country or one country sells to another and we zap them.


The hook is the sale.

The US is one of the biggest if not the biggest arms dealer in the world.

The US tries to keep control by spare parts (pretty effective).

Did you know that when the US was providing STINGER's, the Afghan's would not get a replacement unless the tube was returned?

That was to keep them from being sold on the black market and potentially shooting down airliners.

dkozloski
01-16-08, 02:41 PM
The hook is the sale.

The US is one of the biggest if not the biggest arms dealer in the world.

The US tries to keep control by spare parts (pretty effective).

Did you know that when the US was providing STINGER's, the Afghan's would not get a replacement unless the tube was returned?

That was to keep them from being sold on the black market and potentially shooting down airliners.
Limited battery life also dudded a lot of them.

heavymetals
01-16-08, 07:45 PM
Limited battery life also dudded a lot of them.

Did you see the History Ch on this?

I liked them showing the first firing at a Russian helicopter and the thing falls on the ground about six feet from the tube. :eek:

Pretty amazing when one weapon makes your foe rethink their strategy.

Spyder
01-16-08, 08:14 PM
I've often wondered why the DoD doesn't embed some benign code in all non-US military gear we sell that could be activated externally to disable some critical system? Surely we're smart enough to conceal it. That way, we fall out with some country or one country sells to another and we zap them.

Wouldn't that make it a malignant code? :confused:

Vesicant
01-16-08, 08:28 PM
I doubt we'd get much positive feedback from other countries for doing so haha. If they ever found out, it'd be like a drug deal gone bad.



Oh, and Iran doesnt have F-15s, they've got some of our F-14s and that fleet is hardly operational as it is.


Im waiting for the JSF to come into service, atleast that'll make up for the huge pricetag of the F-22.

heavymetals
01-16-08, 08:55 PM
OOPS!

Thought they did.:alchi::alchi::thepan:

EcSTSatic
01-17-08, 09:53 AM
Wouldn't that make it a malignant code? :confused:

Good point. I don't think either adjective works. Something like "dormant" in reference to a virus is probably better.

My thought is that this would be a last resort so as to keep it unnoticed. Maybe even tied to the serial number of a specific box. You can't guarantee to keep weapons out of the hands of terrorists. Hell, we sold weapons to the Iranians in '86-87 when they were our enemies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair