Did the F/A-22 Raptor turn the corner in 2003?

"SteveM8597" wrote in message
...
AV-1 is Northrop's airframe, I do not know of any upgrade for that bird.
AV-2 thru AV-6 were ungraded to production version, about that time.

Not true. The final B-2 production run was to be 20 planes after the
program
was cut from 132 then to 75 and finally 20. AV--2 thru -6 were to be
flight
test assets

AV-2 thru AV-6 were flight test assets and were always intended to be
brought up to production configuration; I have the complte set of crew
shirts. Including my wife's, "ship from hell", crew shirt.

but when the cut to 20 came, they were included as part of the 20
iin SAC's Bomber Roadmap with plans to upgrade them to final production
configuration. AV-1 was so different than the others that it was
warranted to
not be worth the cost of upgrade.

No ****.

At that time Northrop-Grumman was quoting
$350 MIllion. Then the $550M long lead initiative came along. the AF
took
the position that It couldn't afford to support another 20 and the $550M
got
diverted to upgrading AV-1 to operational configuration. Interestingly,
the
cost for the upgrade rose from $350M to $550M at the same time. It was
the
final B-2 out of 21 delivered. It is flying at Whiteman today.

Geeze, they had to rip the entire flight deck and ebay to make that work.

2001(IIRC), the non flying structural test article was recently delivered
to the AF Museum.
Pilot shortages were not the issue with a 40 plane fleet.

Pilot jobs are, pay attention and try not to take the most rediculess
interpretation of your own misreadings.

At 150+
maintenanace manhours per flight hour, there weren't enough greensuiters
at the
time to maintain a larger fleet. I trust that number has gone down some.

Body and fender work is not so skilled.

Not true. The final B-2 production run was to be 20 planes after the
program
was cut from 132 then to 75 and finally 20. AV--2 thru -6 were to be
flight
test assets

AV-2 thru AV-6 were flight test assets and were always intended to be
brought up to production configuration; I have the complte set of crew
shirts. Including my wife's, "ship from hell", crew shirt.

Still wrong. Under the 132 and 75 plane programs, pre 1991, they were the
pre-production LRIP (Limited Rate Initial Production) planes to be used as
life cycle flight test assets. Possibly AVs 5 - 6 could be made operational
because they were close to the rate production configuration but the AVs 2-4
and especially AV-1 were so far from the production configuration that they
wouldn't be supportable as they were. At the time the program was cut back the
third time at the fall of the Soviet Union, the government wanted to curtail
the program but the cost of accepting 20 was the same as contract termination
costs. The program went forward and made the decision in 1990 to proceed with
a 20 plane fleet that included the upgrade of AV 2-6 to near production
configuration. Thise six planes all have their own separate support
requirements because of their vaying uniqueness.It was run as a separate
program within the government and the contractor. How do II know this? I
worked in the B-2 System Program Office at Wright-Patt in the 90s and did some
of the anaylsis on these planes myself.







but when the cut to 20 came, they were included as part of the 20
iin SAC's Bomber Roadmap with plans to upgrade them to final production
configuration. AV-1 was so different than the others that it was
warranted to
not be worth the cost of upgrade.

No ****.

At that time Northrop-Grumman was quoting
$350 MIllion. Then the $550M long lead initiative came along. the AF
took
the position that It couldn't afford to support another 20 and the $550M
got
diverted to upgrading AV-1 to operational configuration. Interestingly,
the
cost for the upgrade rose from $350M to $550M at the same time. It was
the
final B-2 out of 21 delivered. It is flying at Whiteman today.

Geeze, they had to rip the entire flight deck and ebay to make that work.

2001(IIRC), the non flying structural test article was recently delivered
to the AF Museum.
Pilot shortages were not the issue with a 40 plane fleet.

Pilot jobs are, pay attention and try not to take the most rediculess
interpretation of your own misreadings.



I misread nothing See above. I was a senior analyst on the program when
twahe dscisis made. It had absolutely nothing to do with pilot shortages. In
fact, at that time the AF was banking pilots and scaling way back on
Undergraduate Pilot Training slots because there were too many pilots for the
cockpits that were available. We were flying KC135s with two crews at once
just so everone could get enough time to stay current. Twenty B-2s soaked up
more maintenance assets than an entire wing of fighters. 40 B-2s would have
cost two fighter wings. At that time the fighter mafia had wrested control of
the AF from the old SAC types and were working hard to increase the number of
fighter wings. Sorry but you can't fly fighters or anything else without
green suiters.






At 150+
maintenanace manhours per flight hour, there weren't enough greensuiters
at the
time to maintain a larger fleet. I trust that number has gone down some.

Body and fender work is not so skilled.



Wrong again. Had anybody work done lately?

"Smartace11" wrote in message
...
Not true. The final B-2 production run was to be 20 planes after the
program
was cut from 132 then to 75 and finally 20. AV--2 thru -6 were to be
flight
test assets

AV-2 thru AV-6 were flight test assets and were always intended to be
brought up to production configuration; I have the complte set of crew
shirts. Including my wife's, "ship from hell", crew shirt.

Still wrong.

No, the conversion of the 5 airframes to production configuration was
planned from the very beginning.

Under the 132 and 75 plane programs, pre 1991, they were the
pre-production LRIP (Limited Rate Initial Production) planes to be used
as
life cycle flight test assets. Possibly AVs 5 - 6 could be made
operational
because they were close to the rate production configuration but the AVs
2-4
and especially AV-1 were so far from the production configuration that
they
wouldn't be supportable as they were.

The Government had no way of knowing that AV-1 would be drasticly different,
until after first flight. You are shoveling bull****, my friend.

"Smartace11" wrote in message
...
Not true. The final B-2 production run was to be 20 planes after the
program
was cut from 132 then to 75 and finally 20. AV--2 thru -6 were to be
flight
test assets

AV-2 thru AV-6 were flight test assets and were always intended to be
brought up to production configuration; I have the complte set of crew
shirts. Including my wife's, "ship from hell", crew shirt.

Still wrong.

No, the conversion of the 5 airframes to production configuration was
planned from the very beginning.



Beginning of what? I don't need to argue the pount becaue I was there when
the decision was made. You are free to believe whatever you want. In truth
they are not production configuration to this day. They are opeational but are
in varying degress of difference from the rest of the fleet, AV- being the most
different. Mainly structural differences. Therefore they are not the final
approved (meaning accepted at the milestone called the Critical Design Review)
"prduction configuration". Ditto with the early LRIP/test models of most
planes, including the B-1, F-117, and F-22, several of which are now at the AF
Museum because thier configuration isn't easily supported. We had planned to
either use AV-1 as a part task trainer at Whiteman or turn it over to the AF
Museum. Theother planes were made operational because of cost - too expensive
to use strictly as test assets.

Under the 132 and 75 plane programs, pre 1991, they were the
pre-production LRIP (Limited Rate Initial Production) planes to be used
as
life cycle flight test assets. Possibly AVs 5 - 6 could be made
operational
because they were close to the rate production configuration but the AVs
2-4
and especially AV-1 were so far from the production configuration that
they
wouldn't be supportable as they were.

The Government had no way of knowing that AV-1 would be drasticly different,
until after first flight. You are shoveling bull****, my friend.

Youi obviously know little about the weapn system acquisition process. The
plane went through numerous design reviews and flight test readiness reviews
long before it flew and each change from AV to AV went through a configuration
control review board so the design of AV-1 and changes incorporated in in each
subsequent AV was well known as they were being built.

"Smartace11" wrote in message
...
"Smartace11" wrote in message
...
Not true. The final B-2 production run was to be 20 planes after
the program
was cut from 132 then to 75 and finally 20. AV--2 thru -6 were to
be flight
test assets

AV-2 thru AV-6 were flight test assets and were always intended to be
brought up to production configuration; I have the complte set of crew
shirts. Including my wife's, "ship from hell", crew shirt.

Still wrong.

No, the conversion of the 5 airframes to production configuration was
planned from the very beginning.

Beginning of what?

The decision was made before AV-1 ever flew that the next 5 airframes would
be converted to production. I know this because my wife took delivery of
the first three at Palmdale. She, having bought south base at Edwards as a
Captain, was then instrumentation FTE and instrumenter for AV-3, as a civil
servant.

I don't need to argue the pount becaue I was there when
the decision was made.

You know what you were instructed at the point where you needed to know.
Outside that criterion, you knew nada.

You are free to believe whatever you want. In truth
they are not production configuration to this day. They are opeational
but are
in varying degress of difference from the rest of the fleet, AV- being the
most
different.

Sure, they were full scale the development vehicles, as planned from the
beginning.

Mainly structural differences. Therefore they are not the final
approved (meaning accepted at the milestone called the Critical Design
Review)
"prduction configuration". Ditto with the early LRIP/test models of most
planes, including the B-1, F-117, and F-22, several of which are now at
the AF
Museum because thier configuration isn't easily supported. We had planned
to
either use AV-1 as a part task trainer at Whiteman or turn it over to the
AF
Museum. Theother planes were made operational because of cost - too
expensive
to use strictly as test assets.

The museum was the best place to go, as it would have been cheaper to
assemble another ship from the already delivered parts.

Under the 132 and 75 plane programs, pre 1991, they were the
pre-production LRIP (Limited Rate Initial Production) planes to be
used as
life cycle flight test assets. Possibly AVs 5 - 6 could be made
operational
because they were close to the rate production configuration but the
AVs 2-4
and especially AV-1 were so far from the production configuration that
they
wouldn't be supportable as they were.

The Government had no way of knowing that AV-1 would be drasticly
different,
until after first flight. You are shoveling bull****, my friend.

Youi obviously know little about the weapn system acquisition process.
The
plane went through numerous design reviews and flight test readiness
reviews
long before it flew and each change from AV to AV went through a
configuration
control review board so the design of AV-1 and changes incorporated in in
each
subsequent AV was well known as they were being built.

Let me say it for you once more, Lt. Col Couch rejected the 5 tube EFIS
Hughes delivered with AV-1 after first flight. There was no possibility for
Northrop, or Hughes, to have know that information in advance. The four and
four configuration is something we discussed after Couch made a presentation
to Reserve Officers at a dinner at Edwards. You may have found out what the
deal was the next day, but you cold not have known what Couch was going to
do, until after he did it. Deliver the package sinerios invalidated Hughes'
airliner type system.

The decision was made before AV-1 ever flew that the next 5 airframes would
be converted to production. I know this because my wife took delivery of
the first three at Palmdale. She, having bought south base at Edwards as a
Captain, was then instrumentation FTE and instrumenter for AV-3, as a civil
servant.

Then how come they never were? They were upgraded to full operational
capability but not full production configuration. AV-1 flew in 87when SAC was
planning a 132 plane fleet and 2 - 6 were to be assigned to EDW.

Don't recall ever meeting your wife on my trips to the CTF for test readiness
not at Plant 42 at the DPRO when the planes were accepted. I guess her
signature wold be on file in SPO records though, sonething that I could check
if I knew her name. Kind of unusual because the other planes were bought off
by MG Ralph Torino, the program director.

Lets quit. You have twisted my pea brain around enough. Interesting to see
how far you will go though.

Thanks for the laughs...

"Smartace11" wrote in message
...


The decision was made before AV-1 ever flew that the next 5 airframes
would
be converted to production. I know this because my wife took delivery of
the first three at Palmdale. She, having bought south base at Edwards as
a
Captain, was then instrumentation FTE and instrumenter for AV-3, as a
civil
servant.

Then how come they never were? They were upgraded to full operational
capability but not full production configuration. AV-1 flew in 87when SAC
was
planning a 132 plane fleet and 2 - 6 were to be assigned to EDW.

Money.

Don't recall ever meeting your wife on my trips to the CTF for test
readiness
not at Plant 42 at the DPRO when the planes were accepted. I guess her
signature wold be on file in SPO records though, sonething that I could
check
if I knew her name. Kind of unusual because the other planes were bought
off
by MG Ralph Torino, the program director.

Those 6 were bought off by instrumentation, long before Torino stamped off
on them.

Lets quit. You have twisted my pea brain around enough.

Odd that you would not know, unless you are one of those pico coffee bean
chewers.