5th Sept 2017 Nevada crash

Well we are on a conspiracy forum LOL..
If it was a two seater Su27 it can be flown by a single pilot if it was just a ferry flight.Rear seaters are just WO,s in combat or exercises.

I'm wondering what AviationWeeks sources are. I am assuming that it's most likely the US Air Force "leaking" this themselves? (deliberately). Wonder how they managed to set up a relationship like that...

a reply to: C0bzz

From what I've heard, he's their go to "we need to leak something to cover our ass" guy.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I wonder how to get that job...

a reply to: C0bzz

Step 1: Work for AvLeak.

Saddly , each program can have a crash classified or not, each flight is a risk , I don't understand why a crash on a demonstrator will put the program at risk ? Its automatic with new technology or actual technology the crash is a possibility , Look in France 5 Rafales go down by accident and the program is more alive than ever.

a reply to: darksidius

Because if it were to crash, the odds are good that you're looking at grounding, possibly for an extended period of time. That means delays to the program. Delays to the program mean either penalties, lost incentives, or even a reduction in numbers bought. Any one of those can be a big hit to the bottom line of the program.

a reply to: darksidius

To add to what Zaph said too. Public perception in these matters is a huge deal. Look at the undue negative press and the pain that the F-35 program went through because of normal developmental growing pains. If the same negative public perception hit this program, the ignorant masses start screaming about this and that then the politicians start questioning the validity of the entire program and real money is lost in the process. Also there are a fair number of groups out there, just like the F-35 program had, that would love nothing more than to see what actually crashed fail.

Look at the V-22 it was an open program and the public watched all of the failures and people dying trying to get it going.
Cost went from $29 Billion R&D to $56 Billion. And the cost per unit is around $100million per.
Honestly its not doing much more than a CH47 or CH53 do for 1/3 the price.
These programs will continue in the black and have a blank check to do so.

a reply to: ChrisM101

The Osprey was as much a political program as a military program. Just like the KC-46 is now.

And sweeping it under the rug and lying about it will look better in the long run?

a reply to: mightmight

It won't hurt as much. If it does eventually get out, they can point to the lessons learned and that they're flying again with improved aircraft based on what was learned, and most people won't even blink.

a reply to: Sammamishman
For a lot of reason working in the black is a better solution , public have not the capacity to judge with objective eyes program like the F-35 , B-21 and others , the world need secrecy and a lot more with the new mentality of a lot of connected people

Well in the end I hope this very accomplished man gave his life for something deep in the black world, given his background in pulsewave detonation engines and nuclear materials. Not crashing a 3rd world SU-27 for an aggressor training sortie.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mightmight

It won't hurt as much. If it does eventually get out, they can point to the lessons learned and that they're flying again with improved aircraft based on what was learned, and most people won't even blink.

Most people wont blink either way. If an aircraft related to an actual black program crashed the Air Force should have just shut up about it. Nobody relevant will have clearance anyway, lying about it is just an unneccessary risk and generates further attention. You can already read about this incident in foreign language newspapers for *** sake.
And if it was a known/grey program - LRSB - the truth will come out, rather sooner than later imo. Way too many people have access and the entire project is far to politically sensitive for a crash not to leak. I'd bite the bullet and get in front of the storm before it hits the fan.
As said, i dont see any compelling reason to doubt the Su-27 rumors. I really cant see them pulling a stunt with saying Lt Col Schultz was the Red Hats Squadron CO for starters.

a reply to: mightmight

It's amazing how many people think that they'd be absolutely honest about a crash.

Where has the Air Force confirmed he was the Red Hat commander? There have been articles speculating he was, and saying that there are anonymous sources saying he was, but there's been no official conformation that I've seen.

They didnt confirm it. Aviation Week claimes he was. Just like they claim a foreign plane crashed. Both claims are based on sources within the Air Force/DoD. If the Air Force is feeding them, why would they come up with a bs story about Schultz being the Red Hats CO?
I dont see the Red Hat Squadron CO testing secret prototypes as a side job.

a reply to: mightmight

And I don't see someone with his engineering resume flying an OpFor mission in an Su-27. Everything he's done in his career has been testing new aircraft.

a reply to: Zaphod58
I dont think this is a valid argument. Its the Air Force. They probably needed him in a command slot at some point to continue to promote him. And why wouldnt he fly all those foreign aircraft every cance he got as CO? Beats flying a desk.

The Warzone published another piece on this as well. Nothing new
www.thedrive.com...

a reply to: mightmight

They easily could have put him in command of a unit through AFRL or even a development unit, instead of the Red Hats. There are other command slots that could have been used, and his experience would have been a lot better used in something other than flying with the Red Hats.