By: Sens
- 23rd February 2011 at 07:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
^
And what is an alternative ?
To be destroyed and die on the first day of massive NATO air attack by deploying SA-3 classic defense tactics ?
Let me tell you what's different on those SA-3 systems used to shot down US planes. People.
Let me use comparison I've heard from US officer who witnessed and analyzed live usage of SA-3 system by different armies.
"SA-3 is an object just like a basketball (ball). Old and well known, simple, and there's nothing special about it. Bunch of guys are using SA-3, and playing in teams of five people just like in basketball.
But there's one team of five using that simple ball on absolutely different level.
All other professional army teams compared to those guys look like this.
The ball is the same, results are staggering different.
"
p.s. to shorten the quote I've used pictures
Serious military will tell their political leadership, there is no military way to prevent serious harm from the Serbian people. Those have to look for a political solution or give in to avoid desaster. The real outcome in mind the Serbian military and civilians died for nothing. :mad:
By: Wanderlei
- 25th February 2011 at 04:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Serious military will tell their political leadership, there is no military way to prevent serious harm from the Serbian people. Those have to look for a political solution or give in to avoid desaster. The real outcome in mind the Serbian military and civilians died for nothing. :mad:
.. Or, .. serious army such as nato should never think to make such mistake as bomb Serbian people. Its not that simple. Many Serbian people and families died in Kosovo Serbia because they were minority getting harrased and kicked out by KLA terrorist groups n their on homeland. Death "game" went back and forth. In any case country doesn't defend its people by capitulating and easily giving up major region, letting its citizens defend themselves against armed guerillas.
F-117 was used as a dark knight to hit wrong targets, taking its own risk. It got hit as well. It was lucky for pilots that they survived such hits.
Let me ask this:
If Serbia had S300 and THOR M1 integrated systems then, would it be serious mistake according to you to attack Serbia knowing many NATO pilots would certainly go down and likely get killed?
Maybe then it would be unwise (according to your logic) to attack Serbia because of certain higher number of Nato deaths.
I apologies for continuing slight off topic discussion.
By: haavarla
- 25th February 2011 at 08:33Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't understand all the fuzz here.
It doesn't matter if a platform and its system is a 'stealth' or 5th gen aircraft.
If the Intel is bad, loosing a aircraft is bound to happend.
The pre-flight planning and intel was way off prior to the mission leading to the shot down, that much is clear.
Be that as it may, there is no way to be certain when operate in a hostile conflict area.
Every airforce has accepted this fact before they enter such a conflict.
Back on topic, please.
This thread is already on very thin ice.
Regards
GA
So the U.S Airforce museum steps up to support my claim. Wonder if any of you that tried to turn the debate into personal attacks on me, are ready to apologize.
Among others there are quite a few fanatics on this board. The gospel: "if it wasn't invented here, it does not exist"
The story about the second aircraft, has been known to me and others for more than a decade. If you only start to believe this now, there is a strong reason why you should consider yourself a fanatic.
Jun 9, 1999 Operation Allied Force ended. More than 800 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, but only one F-117 and one F-16 were downed. Another F-117 suffered minor damage from a SA-3 that exploded nearby and two A-10s were damaged by anti-aircraft artillery fire. During the campaign, 35,219 sorties were flown, 16,587 non-precision guided missiles and 6,728 precision guided missiles (23,315) were dropped
June 9, 1999 Operation Allied Force ended. More than 800 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, but only one F-117 and one F-16 were downed. During the campaign, 35,219 sorties were flown, 16,587 non-precision guided missiles and 6,728 precision guided missiles (23,315) were dropped.
By: TEEJ
- 14th June 2011 at 19:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So the U.S Airforce museum steps up to support my claim. Wonder if any of you that tried to turn the debate into personal attacks on me, are ready to apologize.
Among others there are quite a few fanatics on this board. The gospel: "if it wasn't invented here, it does not exist"
The story about the second aircraft, has been known to me and others for more than a decade. If you only start to believe this now, there is a strong reason why you should consider yourself a fanatic.
No it doesn't. Go back and read your posts very carefully. Your claim is that the an image of a damaged F-117 was highlighted in the Norwegian media and then covered up. Nothing of the sort took place other than your vivid imagination. The image would still be in the archives in the library. Remember the image and story that you were too lazy to retrieve? Get yourself down the library and see what you can find? If you find nothing no doubt you will be coming back with claims of a cover up story?
You wrote
the story with the grainy photo, was on the front of every newspaper that day.
There were lots of dodgy images presented at that time. Le Figaro ran the story showing one of the Yugoslav MiG-29s in Bosnia as an F-117. This was already pointed out to you. Remember you are the one claiming that this image was of the actual event featured on every newspaper that day. It should be easy for you to find it in the library archives.
By: pegon
- 14th June 2011 at 20:11Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No it doesn't. Go back and read your posts very carefully. Your claim is that the an image of a damaged F-117 was highlighted in the Norwegian media and then covered up. Nothing of the sort took place other than your vivid imagination. The image would still be in the archives in the library. Remember the image and story that you were too lazy to retrieve? Get yourself down the library and see what you can find? If you find nothing no doubt you will be coming back with claims of a cover up story?
There were lots of dodgy images presented at that time. Le Figaro ran the story showing one of the Yugoslav MiG-29s in Bosnia as an F-117. This was already pointed out to you. Remember you are the one claiming that this image was of the actual event featured on every newspaper that day. It should be easy for you to find it in the library archives.
TJ
So now you change your story, initially you claimed no other stealth aircraft was hit. Now it is "no hit F117 was PHOTOGRAPHED"
By: mack8
- 14th June 2011 at 20:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So much for the " oh it was just a birdstrike! " Bloody dangerous bird those S-125s, eh ?:D .So would this second F-117 be the one that was w/o because of " birdstrike "?
Well slightly off topic but who knows , maby we'll gt the yanks to admit how many aircraft they lost in GW air-to air too, sometime .:diablo:
By: TEEJ
- 14th June 2011 at 20:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So now you change your story, initially you claimed no other stealth aircraft was hit. Now it is "no hit F117 was PHOTOGRAPHED"
You have no credibility left on this topic.
A damaged aircraft is not a combat loss. Every single F-117 that took part in the conflict, bar 82-806, flew after the conflict. All the F-117s returned to the US under their own steam. Your claim is that the actual event was published on the front page of every Norwegian paper at the time with an image of the actual event, but you were too lazy to find it in the library.
By: TEEJ
- 14th June 2011 at 21:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So much for the " oh it was just a birdstrike! " Bloody dangerous bird those S-125s, eh ?:D .So would this second F-117 be the one that was w/o because of " birdstrike "?
Every single F-117 that took part in Allied Force, bar obviously 82-806, was noted active after the conflict.
By: pegon
- 14th June 2011 at 21:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A damaged aircraft is not a combat loss. Every single F-117 that took part in the conflict, bar 82-806, flew after the conflict. All the F-117s returned to the US under their own steam. Your claim is that the actual event was published on the front page of every Norwegian paper at the time with an image of the actual event, but you were too lazy to find it in the library.
TJ
I have never claimed the aircraft was a write off. Every post i have made uses the word "damaged"
Now, a official US source brings credibility to my claim. Since your postings are based on denial and personal attacks, you are discredited.
By: mack8
- 14th June 2011 at 21:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, my mistake, i just had in the back of my head redaing somewhere about another F-117 being w/o during or after Kosovo war . Still, is it correct that previously an F-117 was rumoured/claimed damaged by birdstrike during that time ?:confused: Thanks.
You here ignore the fact that a f-117/B-2, made a emergency landing in Greece.
This was a strange story for me. One day, all Norwegian media posted grainy night photos of a US bomber, damaged over Kosovo. I remember looking forward to reading the news about this the following morning, but guess what !
During the night, the story had simply died. No one refuted it, it was somply removed from all online media, papers had no follow-up, it was not commented on TV.
Now, i know that Norwegian media are free, one exemption is nationaly sensitive issues, or sensitive issues of an ally in times of war. By the crude way that this was done, i know for a fact that something got hit, my guess a B-2, since the story was big enough for USA to hit the panic button.
All the US is saing is that all B-2, are accounted for, they allso say that a number of aircraft had battle damage repair after Kosovo.
I believe they speak the truth.
As already pointed out that 'grainy night photo' and article will only be a search away in the library. The one you refuse to make to back up your claims. You are also making the claim that a 'F-117/B-2' made an emergency landing in Greece based on your Norwegian media story.
So what was the image of the 'US bomber' that you saw in the Norwegian media? As already pointed out lots of dodgy images were posted during the conflict that individuals and media misrepresented. You still haven't provided a date for this Norwegian story. Images such as an F-15 venting fuel (misrepresented as smoke streaming from the wing) and an A-10 deploying flares (The flare was claimed to be a SAM about to hit the A-10). There was also a combat jettisoned F-15 fuel tank misrepresented as part of a MiG-29. These types of images have been pointed out to you in previous posts and all it would take is for you to source the article in the library. You already made your excuse on that matter. Not my fault that you can't be bothered.
That matter aside I have made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request via the USAF in reference to the F-117 update on the history timeline. I have limited it to all releasable information as requests can be denied on classification grounds. One of the requests is a serial of the F-117 and if the update was completed on official information or from open source. I should receive a reply within a 20 day timeframe.
By: TEEJ
- 16th June 2011 at 00:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, my mistake, i just had in the back of my head redaing somewhere about another F-117 being w/o during or after Kosovo war . Still, is it correct that previously an F-117 was rumoured/claimed damaged by birdstrike during that time ?:confused: Thanks.
Hi,
Apologies for the late reply. There was an F-117 on test and evaluation in the US that was reported in Air Forces Monthly as damaged on April 21st 1999.
April 21 An F-117A 86-0837/'OT' of the USAF 422nd TES "suffered extensive damage in an unspecified landing accident, details unconfirmed, but reported as a Class A accident." (source: Air Forces Monthly, August 1999, p. 74)
Individuals and groups at the time tried to link it to a combat loss during Allied Force with the accident as a cover up. 86-0837 was in the US at the time. Images of 86-0837 post conflict.
By: TEEJ
- 18th September 2011 at 16:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No joy on my request for an F-117 serial number. After several transfers between various USAF bases I have finally received a reply to my Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, Case 2011-05080-F.
All documents are classified and not releasable... Your case is now considered closed.
Posts: 11,742
By: Sens - 23rd February 2011 at 07:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Serious military will tell their political leadership, there is no military way to prevent serious harm from the Serbian people. Those have to look for a political solution or give in to avoid desaster. The real outcome in mind the Serbian military and civilians died for nothing. :mad:
Posts: 480
By: Wanderlei - 25th February 2011 at 04:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
.. Or, .. serious army such as nato should never think to make such mistake as bomb Serbian people. Its not that simple. Many Serbian people and families died in Kosovo Serbia because they were minority getting harrased and kicked out by KLA terrorist groups n their on homeland. Death "game" went back and forth. In any case country doesn't defend its people by capitulating and easily giving up major region, letting its citizens defend themselves against armed guerillas.
F-117 was used as a dark knight to hit wrong targets, taking its own risk. It got hit as well. It was lucky for pilots that they survived such hits.
Let me ask this:
If Serbia had S300 and THOR M1 integrated systems then, would it be serious mistake according to you to attack Serbia knowing many NATO pilots would certainly go down and likely get killed?
Maybe then it would be unwise (according to your logic) to attack Serbia because of certain higher number of Nato deaths.
I apologies for continuing slight off topic discussion.
Posts: 10,160
By: Grey Area - 25th February 2011 at 08:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Moderator Message
Back on topic, please.
This thread is already on very thin ice.
Regards
GA
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 25th February 2011 at 08:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't understand all the fuzz here.
It doesn't matter if a platform and its system is a 'stealth' or 5th gen aircraft.
If the Intel is bad, loosing a aircraft is bound to happend.
The pre-flight planning and intel was way off prior to the mission leading to the shot down, that much is clear.
Be that as it may, there is no way to be certain when operate in a hostile conflict area.
Every airforce has accepted this fact before they enter such a conflict.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1705407&postcount=3
Told you what would happend.:)
Posts: 690
By: Lonevolk - 14th June 2011 at 12:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
For the doubters out there...
A Nighthawk leak at the museum?
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/06/a-nighthawk-leak-at-the-museum.html
Posts: 297
By: pegon - 14th June 2011 at 14:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So the U.S Airforce museum steps up to support my claim. Wonder if any of you that tried to turn the debate into personal attacks on me, are ready to apologize.
Among others there are quite a few fanatics on this board. The gospel: "if it wasn't invented here, it does not exist"
The story about the second aircraft, has been known to me and others for more than a decade. If you only start to believe this now, there is a strong reason why you should consider yourself a fanatic.
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 14th June 2011 at 19:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Confirmed on the USAF website.
I have contacted the museum to see if they can provide the serial of the damaged F-117.
http://ipv6.af.mil/information/heritage/milestones.asp?dec=1990&sd=01/01/1990&ed=12/31/1999
Jun 9, 1999 Operation Allied Force ended. More than 800 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, but only one F-117 and one F-16 were downed. Another F-117 suffered minor damage from a SA-3 that exploded nearby and two A-10s were damaged by anti-aircraft artillery fire. During the campaign, 35,219 sorties were flown, 16,587 non-precision guided missiles and 6,728 precision guided missiles (23,315) were dropped
From
http://ipv6.af.mil/index.asp
The history of the previous entry going back for example to 2008 has the damaged F-117 and A-10s omitted.
http://www.379aew.afcent.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080616-015.pdf
A 2008 'Today in History' for June 9th
June 9, 1999 Operation Allied Force ended. More than 800 SAMs were fired at NATO aircraft, but only one F-117 and one F-16 were downed. During the campaign, 35,219 sorties were flown, 16,587 non-precision guided missiles and 6,728 precision guided missiles (23,315) were dropped.
TJ
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 14th June 2011 at 19:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No it doesn't. Go back and read your posts very carefully. Your claim is that the an image of a damaged F-117 was highlighted in the Norwegian media and then covered up. Nothing of the sort took place other than your vivid imagination. The image would still be in the archives in the library. Remember the image and story that you were too lazy to retrieve? Get yourself down the library and see what you can find? If you find nothing no doubt you will be coming back with claims of a cover up story?
You wrote
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1707949&postcount=69
There were lots of dodgy images presented at that time. Le Figaro ran the story showing one of the Yugoslav MiG-29s in Bosnia as an F-117. This was already pointed out to you. Remember you are the one claiming that this image was of the actual event featured on every newspaper that day. It should be easy for you to find it in the library archives.
TJ
Posts: 297
By: pegon - 14th June 2011 at 20:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So now you change your story, initially you claimed no other stealth aircraft was hit. Now it is "no hit F117 was PHOTOGRAPHED"
You have no credibility left on this topic.
Posts: 2,114
By: mack8 - 14th June 2011 at 20:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So much for the " oh it was just a birdstrike! " Bloody dangerous bird those S-125s, eh ?:D .So would this second F-117 be the one that was w/o because of " birdstrike "?
Well slightly off topic but who knows , maby we'll gt the yanks to admit how many aircraft they lost in GW air-to air too, sometime .:diablo:
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 14th June 2011 at 20:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A damaged aircraft is not a combat loss. Every single F-117 that took part in the conflict, bar 82-806, flew after the conflict. All the F-117s returned to the US under their own steam. Your claim is that the actual event was published on the front page of every Norwegian paper at the time with an image of the actual event, but you were too lazy to find it in the library.
TJ
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 14th June 2011 at 21:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Every single F-117 that took part in Allied Force, bar obviously 82-806, was noted active after the conflict.
http://www.f-117a.com/Yugo.html
link from a few years ago, but should still be active. Many of the serials that took part will have more up to date images on the web.
The serials:
Aviano
80-0788 - Scramble on the web sighting March 2004
80-0791 - Scramble on the web sighting May 2002
81-10795 - http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=81-10795&distinct_entry=true
82-0800 - http://www.scramble.nl/mil/show/showreports/mounta00.htm
82-0803 - Scramble on the web sighting June 2003
82-0805 - http://www.scramble.nl/mil/show/showreports/tyndal03.htm
82-0806 - Shot down during Allied Force
83-0807 - Scramble on the web sighting October 2002 Imaged at NAS Whidbey Islan Aug 2002 http://www.airshowphotography.com/F-117/w02f117-830807-3.jpg
84-0828 - Scramble on the web sighting Seymour Johnson AFB October 1999.
85-0817 - Scramble on the web sighting Altus AFB September 2002
85-0820 - http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=271378
85-0833 - http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=85-0833&distinct_entry=true
Spangdahlem
80-0786 - http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=170738
81-0794 - http://www.rdavp.com/Reports/Andrews%202004/Andrews_Photo25.htm
82-0799 - http://www.scramble.nl/mil/show/showreports/dayton02.htm
84-0809 - http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=84-0809&distinct_entry=true
84-0810 - http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2320
84-0824 - http://www.scramble.nl/mil/show/showreports/langle00.htm
84-0826 - wright-patterson afb 2003 10 may
85-0818 - http://www.scramble.nl/mil/show/showreports/barksd00.htm
85-0819 - Scramble on the web sighting June 2003
85-0832 - Scramble on the web sighting April 2004
86-0821 - Scramble on the web sighting October 2000
88-0842 - Scramble on the web sighting October 2003
88-0843 - Scramble on the web sighting August 2005
TJ
Posts: 297
By: pegon - 14th June 2011 at 21:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I have never claimed the aircraft was a write off. Every post i have made uses the word "damaged"
Now, a official US source brings credibility to my claim. Since your postings are based on denial and personal attacks, you are discredited.
Posts: 2,114
By: mack8 - 14th June 2011 at 21:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Ah, my mistake, i just had in the back of my head redaing somewhere about another F-117 being w/o during or after Kosovo war . Still, is it correct that previously an F-117 was rumoured/claimed damaged by birdstrike during that time ?:confused: Thanks.
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 16th June 2011 at 00:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You really need to refer to what you posted? Here it is in full.
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1707094&postcount=45
As already pointed out that 'grainy night photo' and article will only be a search away in the library. The one you refuse to make to back up your claims. You are also making the claim that a 'F-117/B-2' made an emergency landing in Greece based on your Norwegian media story.
So what was the image of the 'US bomber' that you saw in the Norwegian media? As already pointed out lots of dodgy images were posted during the conflict that individuals and media misrepresented. You still haven't provided a date for this Norwegian story. Images such as an F-15 venting fuel (misrepresented as smoke streaming from the wing) and an A-10 deploying flares (The flare was claimed to be a SAM about to hit the A-10). There was also a combat jettisoned F-15 fuel tank misrepresented as part of a MiG-29. These types of images have been pointed out to you in previous posts and all it would take is for you to source the article in the library. You already made your excuse on that matter. Not my fault that you can't be bothered.
That matter aside I have made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request via the USAF in reference to the F-117 update on the history timeline. I have limited it to all releasable information as requests can be denied on classification grounds. One of the requests is a serial of the F-117 and if the update was completed on official information or from open source. I should receive a reply within a 20 day timeframe.
http://www.foia.af.mil/
TJ
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 16th June 2011 at 00:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hi,
Apologies for the late reply. There was an F-117 on test and evaluation in the US that was reported in Air Forces Monthly as damaged on April 21st 1999.
April 21 An F-117A 86-0837/'OT' of the USAF 422nd TES "suffered extensive damage in an unspecified landing accident, details unconfirmed, but reported as a Class A accident." (source: Air Forces Monthly, August 1999, p. 74)
http://www.f-117a.com/Javaframe.html
Individuals and groups at the time tried to link it to a combat loss during Allied Force with the accident as a cover up. 86-0837 was in the US at the time. Images of 86-0837 post conflict.
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=86-0837
TJ
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 18th September 2011 at 16:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No joy on my request for an F-117 serial number. After several transfers between various USAF bases I have finally received a reply to my Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, Case 2011-05080-F.
All documents are classified and not releasable... Your case is now considered closed.
TJ
Posts: 2,114
By: mack8 - 18th September 2011 at 16:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sorry if i missed an earlier post , but you asked them about that second combat damaged F-117( as per USAF website ) serial number, right ? :confused:
Thanks.
Posts: 2,318
By: TEEJ - 18th September 2011 at 16:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes. Five documents were retrieved on the search, but all are still classified.
TJ
Posts: 4,951
By: MadRat - 18th September 2011 at 17:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Its not really that important of matter, fellas, the documents should be open for discussion in another eighteen years.