F-117A retirement bittersweet occasion

HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. -- It was a bittersweet occasion for many members of Team Holloman as the first six F-117A Nighthawks made their final flight into retirement March 12. More than 500 spectators from Holloman and the Alamogordo community showed up to sign the jets and say their goodbyes.

"With the launch of these great aircraft today, the circle comes to a close - their service to our nation's defense fulfilled, their mission accomplished and a job well done," said Brig. Gen. David Goldfein, 49th Fighter Wing commander. "We send them today to their final resting place -- a home they are intimately familiar with -- their first, and only, home outside of Holloman, Tonopah Test Range, Nevada."

General Goldfein, the last bandit, flew the first F-117A out of Holloman.

www.air-attack.com...

I guess this means they wont be using it as a UAV.
On to better things I suppose. It was a cool aircraft though.




[edit on 013131p://5003pm by semperfoo]

Mod Edit: Reduced External Quote.

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 19/3/2007 by Mirthful Me]

Tonapah Test Range was the first base for the operational F-117's. It's ironic that they are being sent back to Tonapah to be decomissioned. How weird is it that the Nighthawk will officially Stand Down at the very same Secret Air Base from which they first achieved Initial Operations Capibility in 1983?

Tim

I believe your right. Im all for downing this bird. It was a beaut...

On to better things I suppose. Obviously we dont need it anymore. Its served out its purpose. Good plane though.

semperfoo,

You don't have to down the F-117, it can do that very well on it's own!


However, I'm with you on that. I really think it's time for the Nighthawk to retire. The technology of the aircraft is getting too old! What we need is a good replacement for the Nighthawk. From what I hear, the pipeline has some canadates in it.

Tim

One of the more interesting things I recently learned about the F-117 is that the primary material for the RAM coating is something you'd find in an ordinary household. They couldn't say what it was, just that it was an ordinary household product that it was made out of.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
One of the more interesting things I recently learned about the F-117 is that the primary material for the RAM coating is something you'd find in an ordinary household.

I THINK I might know! You are going to laugh at me when I tell you, but I'll say it anyway. RAM has a graphite base. I know it sounds rediculas, but as far as I know it's true. They also used graphite in the constrction of the B-2 Spirit.

Graphite

Carbon Fiber is high tesnel graphite!

Carbon Fibre

Cabon Fibre, or graphite is what we call Pencil Lead. How's that for Bizarre Science?

Tim

Actually, that wouldn't surprise me in the least if that's exactly what it was. What makes me laugh is the thought of them bringing in all these things from home to test them and see if they worked or not.

Hey don't knock it sometimes thats the only way to find out if there is something that does what you want. but yeah I agree imagine how they would of had to test a pencils RCS (radar cross section)

The RAM coating on the F-117A and B-2 is not graphite based. There are graphite-epoxy composite panels in both aircraft, however.

The RAM coatings consist of plastic and rubber materials, impregnated with ferrites (microscopic carbonyl iron spheroids). The plastic/rubber serves as a matrix in which the ferrites are suspended.

Early RAM on the F-117A came in sheets, with the consistency of linoleum. Technicians cut the sheets to fit each surface facet, panel or component, and glued them in place with a liquid adhesive. This was messy and difficult, and added a great deal of extra weight to the airframe. Later types of RAM included spray-on and peel-and-stick types. The neoprene rubber RAM on the F-117A is backed with aluminized Kapton.

The natural color of RAM for both the F-117A and B-2 is gray. Because of the iron content, they will attract a magnet. Exposed edges will actually rust if moistened excessively.

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
The RAM coatings consist of plastic and rubber materials, impregnated with ferrites (microscopic carbonyl iron spheroids). The plastic/rubber serves as a matrix in which the ferrites are suspended.

Thank You Shadowhawk! I'll yeld to your greater experience in this area.

However I do wish to ask a follow-on question based on what you have shared:

I have heard that these RAM coating are easy to damage. Now usually rubber is reasonably tought, as it is used in things like tires and soles for boots.

Why would a rubber-coading be so easy to damage? I would welcome any insights you might be willing to share.

Tim

Wow thanks for that shadowhawk. Honestly that well writtin made me flag this thread since no one has been able to explain RAM's construction for me till now thanks EH.

In answer to Ghost's query:

Plastic and rubber sheets aredurable is treated with care, but they can be susceptible to damage. Maintainers needing to walk on RAM-coated surfaces have to wear soft booties or lay down protective padding. RAM can be chipped or scratched, thus degrading its effectiveness.

In-flight hazards include ice/hail and aerodynamic drag. On a number of occasions, strips of RAM have simply torn off in flight under normal conditions. The peel-and-stick sheets were particularly susceptible to this due to the realtive weakness of the adhesive. Sheets attached with liquid adhesive often suffered irregularities (bumps and bulges) that created additional drag. Spray-on RAM goes on in a thinner coat and is generally only susceptible to abrasion/impact damage. Stealth aircraft, such as the F-117A and B-2 also incorporate RAM tape for sealing panel lines and ceramic tiles for exhaust IR suppression. The latter are subject to heating and vibration stresses as well as abrasion/impact hazards.

Thank you for the Clear, detailed answer! Now I know a lot more about RAM!

Tim

i live under a rock, just wanted to get that out there and with that being said, here goes

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo i love that plane, anybody knows what's the replacement for it??? because it might go together with some of the latest ufo sightings; aww heck dont mind me im just a little sad to see it go and hopeful about the next plane.

It's hard to know if there will actually be a replacement for the F-117A. Official spokemen for the Air Force are pushing the F-22A, originally conceived as an air superiority fighter, as a "jack of all trades" with application to an air-to-ground strike role.

On the other hand, several years ago Daniel R. Vanderhorst flew a classified aircraft with internal weapons bays and conducted weapon separation tests. That suggests a stealthy air-to-ground attack mission. It could be a one-of-a-kind technology demonstrator or a prototype for an operationl aircraft.

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
On the other hand, several years ago Daniel R. Vanderhorst flew a classified aircraft with internal weapons bays and conducted weapon separation tests. That suggests a stealthy air-to-ground attack mission. It could be a one-of-a-kind technology demonstrator or a prototype for an operationl aircraft.

Well whenever you drop names now Shadowhawk I have to go hunting for them etc since your info is usally right on the money. Was this time any different? ..... No I found it in under 10 min . It looks like this Daniel R. Vanderhorst test flights are declassified ut contain little information. I found a link to another site mentioning much the same info that Shadowhawk touched upon. I'm interested if you think the A-12 programe is even a possiblity for a revived project to fall into this catigory?

A hint about possible all-weather attack vehicles now in testing—ones available sooner than 2014 and capable of carrying significant bomb loads—could reside, aerospace historian Peter Merlin pointed out, in a test pilot’s unclassified biography. Daniel Vanderhorst, who flew Northrop’s Whale and six other secret aircraft in a 20-year career, evidently “tested modified landing gear and conducted initial tests of internal weapons bays and weapon separation tests.” What’s unusual about this is that most prototypes are simple aircraft without weapon bays, which suggests that this airplane was closer to an operational type. Specifically, I’m guessing, it could be an extension of the heavy-payload, all-weather attack jet A-12 Avenger II, which then–Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney canceled in 1991 because it was overbudget and not meeting its technological goals.

link: www.popsci.com...

An A-12 derivative could be a potential candidate to replace the F-117A in the air-to-ground attack role, providing it didn't run into the same difficulties that cancelled the original program.

There have been so many classified manned aircraft programs over the last two decades that one of them could easily have a similar shape. I would say, based on its configuration, that it's not the one in which Dan has the altitude record. The "flying Dorito" doesn't exactly lend itself to high-altitude operations.

I guess the problem is do they really expect the 22 to take over the role of the 117s? That is the underlying current to the Raptor A2G thread I posted but now the question here is does the AF want to field a new weapon when they have the high alt high speedbomber project, numerous UCAV tests and the biggest need of a new tanker force. I guess it touchs on what me and Mondo have disscused that maybe the USAF is choicing to use the 22 capablity in the interm so as to have the money set asside for the tanker projects and porcurement.

Originally posted by Canada_EH
. . .maybe the USAF is choicing to use the 22 capablity in the interm so as to have the money set asside for the tanker projects and porcurement.

That's a good theory! Our tanker fleet is aging very fast, and it's only a matter of time before we will have to deploy a new tanker, if we want to meet the needs of our air fleet. Look how old these planes are:

Date first deployed:

KC-135 - August 1965
KC-10 - March 1981
KC-130 - 1962

Dates Provided by www.fas.org...

Our newest tanker is 26 years old, and the back bone of the fleet is nearly 52 years old. These tankers have served us well, but even the best aircraft don't last forever. It's time for a new tanker!

Tim

It is sad to see this plane go... for some reason I have been absolutelly in love with the wobblin goblin since the first time I saw it. Additionally it strikes me that it is being retired before even half of it's true capabilities are even known. I sincerelly hope they don't just tear them up or use them as target drones.