My Take on Mustangs and Legends

[David-aviator]

The only reason I went to the gathering was to accompany a friend who wanted company for the trip, and the reason he wanted to go was to meet a tent mate from their days at Madna, Italy, in 1944-45. They were both members of the 4th Fighter Squadron, 52nd Fighter Group.

It was a good trip and much learned about how pilots lived and died in those days. Until these guys arrived in Italy, they had never been in a P-51. Both were shipped overseas out of basic training after a short check out in P-40's, total flying time about 200 hours. After an ocean crossing to Naples in a troop ship, they were assigned to P-47's, P-38's, or P-51's. When Tom and Charlie arrived at the 4th FS, the unit had just 9 pilots so they were thrown into the fray quickly, like after 2 or 3 days of local flying getting familiar with the P-51. The unit had no flight instructors assigned to check out duty as they were on escort or ground interdiction missions every day.

By mid 1944, most of the Luftwaffe had been pulled out of the Italy for defense of the Reich but there was plenty of action over the oil fields of Romania for the 51 pilots. Everyday the B-17's and B-24's were pounding the oil production facilities. The flack was very heavy and a great threat to bombers and fighters. Low level attacks on shipping yards and trains was very hazardous for fighters. Charlie took a hit in his coolant system one day and had to ditch in a cow pastuer. His wing leader decided the field looked good enough for a rescue attempt so he landed his 51 next to Charlies dead bird, opened the canopy and Charlie climbed in on his lap and they took off with just 3 bullet holes from an appoaching German army unit. It is the only recorded rescue mission from behind enemy lines by a P-51. I had the privilege of shaking Charlie's hand at the show.

Because I was a guest of one of these veterans, we sat in box on the flight line for the air show. Whoever set this part up did it well. They brought us lunch at noon!

There was a tribute to the Tuskegee Airmen. A large trailer with about 50 survivors was pulled down the line and through the grounds. They received much applause.

The air show was typical with many war birds, military jets including the Thunderbirds, and other performers. My all time favorite was John Mohr in a stock 220 HP Stearman. He is very good at what he does just inches off the ground.

Perhaps someone can explain what the big deal is with the F-22 Raptor. To me it looks like a perfect sitting duck for any terrorist with a shoulder launched Stinger missle while it does its very slow course reversal manuever.

[briand]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

Perhaps someone can explain what the big deal is with the F-22 Raptor. To me it looks like a perfect sitting duck for any terrorist with a shoulder launched Stinger missle while it does its very slow course reversal manuever.

Stealth and thrust vectoring (tighter turns).

They were putting on an airshow so you have to keep that in mind.

[WSBuilder]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

Perhaps someone can explain what the big deal is with the F-22 Raptor. To me it looks like a perfect sitting duck for any terrorist with a shoulder launched Stinger missle while it does its very slow course reversal manuever.

Many of the airshow demonstrations include components that only demonstrate the excellent handling qualities of the airplane, not tactics used in combat. The "big deal" about the F-22 is killing the bad guys from afar without ever being detected. The F-15 enjoyed a 400:1 kill ratio. The -15 can't even engage Raptor. Be glad you're on our side!

Nice write up on the Mustangs!

[airguy]

From the stories I've heard about mock engagements between the F15 and F22, the Raptor has so far scored a kill on the 15 within 30 seconds of every engagement.

[David-aviator]

Originally Posted by airguy

From the stories I've heard about mock engagements between the F15 and F22, the Raptor has so far scored a kill on the 15 within 30 seconds of every engagement.

Well, I am getting an education on the Raptor. Mighty high tech with weapons and aerodynamics. On one steep turn over the field at very low speed, I noticed the entired leading edge dropped a full length slat. Not new technology as the ME109 dropped a partial slat way back in 1936 and perhaps the Brits worked with the device before that, but this is taking it to a new level as the airplane does not appear to have a stall speed.

[plehrke]

Originally Posted by airguy

From the stories I've heard about mock engagements between the F15 and F22, the Raptor has so far scored a kill on the 15 within 30 seconds of every engagement.

Remember those numbers are provided by the USAF that continue to have funding issues due to huge cost over runs. Most information comes from carefully choreographed engagements. They would never let the F-22 lose.

[Bob Axsom]

The F-15 has been the front line fighter for the USAF for the period of time equivalent to the span from WWI through the Korean war. In the military contractor market there is virtually no competition any more and the "best & brightest" are no longer aspiring to the leading edge of aircraft development. Airplane for airplane the F-15 is probably as good as anything out there. The weapon system of the F-22 certainly should be better but not because of the airplane itself. There was a time when another country wanted to re-engine the F-4, make it single place and upgrade the systems. That was not allowed. The most inspired company with the kind of personal leadership found in the 30s through the 50s appears to be located in Minnesota. It's certainly not LM.

Bob Axsom

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by David-aviator

Perhaps someone can explain what the big deal is with the F-22 Raptor. To me it looks like a perfect sitting duck for any terrorist with a shoulder launched Stinger missle while it does its very slow course reversal manuever.

I think as some one mentioned its vector thrust will make it maneuvrable. The Air force version will not have the lift fan for VTOL I believe (marine/navy will have VTOL). The F-22 has the radar signature of a flee. The real cool stuff is the internal weapons (low drag) and electronics that can hit multi targets on the horizon (may be beyond). It can apparently super cruise (near supersonic) and do so with less gas (for less global warming green friendly warfare ). One thing is for sure (may be), you are looking at the last manned fighter. Future fighters will no doubt be remote controlled and pull massive G's.

[plehrke]

Originally Posted by gmcjetpilot

I think as some one mentioned its vector thrust will make it maneuvrable. The Air force version will not have the lift fan for VTOL I believe (marine/navy will have VTOL). The F-22 has the radar signature of a flee. The real cool stuff is the internal weapons (low drag) and electronics that can hit multi targets on the horizon (may be beyond). It can apparently super cruise (near supersonic) and do so with less gas (for less global warming green friendly warfare ). One thing is for sure (may be), you are looking at the last manned fighter. Future fighters will no doubt be remote controlled and pull massive G's.

There is only an Air Force version of the F-22. You are thinking of the F-35 (strike-fighter to replace F-16, F/A-18C, and AV-8B) which has a Marine version that is STOVL (not VTOL) and a Navy version that is cat and trap on a carrier. The F-22 does supercruise which actually is going supersonic without afterburners. I am not to sure on the less gas part as the TSFC on the F119 engine (in F-22) is considerably higher than those of the F100 (F-15) engine. Internal carriage on the F-22 may make it cruise at a lower throttle setting therefore use less gas. It definately uses less gas to go supersonic (if supercruising) but over the life cycle of the airplane supersonic flight is less than 1% of the flight hours.

The only ones that think the F-22 will be the last manned fighter is the media. Those of us in the business and our customers in the government do not believe that to be true. There will always be a mix. Also the advantage of unmanned is not to pull g's. A small missile will always be able to out maneuver an aircraft. Also, unmanned aircraft are not remote controlled. Unmanned aircraft are now totally autonomous, only requiring a human in the loop for major decisions like weapons release.

[WSBuilder]

Originally Posted by Bob Axsom

The F-15 has been the front line fighter for the USAF for the period of time equivalent to the span from WWI through the Korean war. In the military contractor market there is virtually no competition any more and the "best & brightest" are no longer aspiring to the leading edge of aircraft development. Airplane for airplane the F-15 is probably as good as anything out there. The weapon system of the F-22 certainly should be better but not because of the airplane itself. There was a time when another country wanted to re-engine the F-4, make it single place and upgrade the systems. That was not allowed. The most inspired company with the kind of personal leadership found in the 30s through the 50s appears to be located in Minnesota. It's certainly not LM.

Bob Axsom

Bob,
Not sure what you intended to say other than dis LM. (because they won JSF?) The -15 was and still is an awesome fighter. The -22 is a radical improvement because of stealth and modern systems/sensor integration. Supercruise has yet to show it's life cycle benefits, but the 1% supersonic statistic is shackled by the high flow rate of afterburner. When you can supercruise w/o burner you're going to be able to fly supersonic longer. Who's in Minnesota? 3M?