Heartbreaker....
#1
Thread Starter

My Feedback: (15)
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Roseville, CA
As a former F-15 crew chief (and tax payer [:@] ), these photos just kill me!
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...sok=&photo_nr=
http://www.airliners.net/open.file?i...sok=&photo_nr=
#7
Thread Starter

My Feedback: (15)
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Roseville, CA
ORIGINAL: p51robert
y does it kill you?
y does it kill you?
#10
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
What's really sad is that the calculator I have can't even display enough digits if I were to venture into doing the math for the approximate cost of all the aircraft displayed on this photo. This is what I pay so much taxes for? Ridiculous is not the word....
#12
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: MLaCoste
Because most of those aircraft were still serviceable until they were stripped and stacked out there. It has to be one of the biggest wastes of US money. It only happens because some stupid politicians made a deal with the former axis nations (SALT II), in an attempt to keep an even playing field [:-]
ORIGINAL: p51robert
y does it kill you?
y does it kill you?
I also thought the military generally only put aircraft in the boneyard for good reasons...either they had too many of them, or the type is obsolete, or the airframe is worn out. Have not heard of a lot of perfectly good aircraft thrown into the desert just as waste, as I understand it, all the stuff out there is out there for a good reason, and it has nothing to do with stupid politicians making a deal with former axis(Japan? Germany? Italy? Those were the Axis forces...you mean Warsaw Pact forces?) nations, in an attempt to keep an even playing field.
The F-15 first entered service, in what, 1973? Perhaps those aircraft out there are THIRTY FOUR years old. We tend to forget that many of these "modern" types have been around for a while.
The F-14 is being phased out by the FA18 and others, too. I would guess the ones in the pic are the first squadrons that were retired?
The T-38, been in service a long time, or no? Dates back to the early sixties? Awful lot of training time on those airframes out in the desert, yes? Bet those ones out there have been replaced by other trainers...
Maybe your right, though, it's just stupid politicians. Probably liberals.
#13
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: FalconWings
It is sad. But come to think of it, what is the US supposed to do with all those airplanes? Ship them to Japan as junk? They are junk, sad but true.
It is sad. But come to think of it, what is the US supposed to do with all those airplanes? Ship them to Japan as junk? They are junk, sad but true.
#15
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: tomcatman
What's really sad is that the calculator I have can't even display enough digits if I were to venture into doing the math for the approximate cost of all the aircraft displayed on this photo. This is what I pay so much taxes for? Ridiculous is not the word....
What's really sad is that the calculator I have can't even display enough digits if I were to venture into doing the math for the approximate cost of all the aircraft displayed on this photo. This is what I pay so much taxes for? Ridiculous is not the word....
#16
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Easytiger, you have a very valid point there. Yes, it is true that many of these aircraft types entered service literally decades ago. They may very well be some of the first to fly. I guess that when you consider the amount of tax dollars our government wastes, it's hard to look at a pic like this with an open mind. Thanks for pointing that out.
#17
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
ORIGINAL: EASYTIGER
I dunno about that. Would you rather our current boys still be flying F-100's? Just because they still have a few hundred hours of useable time left on them? Things get old, things become obsolete.
ORIGINAL: tomcatman
What's really sad is that the calculator I have can't even display enough digits if I were to venture into doing the math for the approximate cost of all the aircraft displayed on this photo. This is what I pay so much taxes for? Ridiculous is not the word....
What's really sad is that the calculator I have can't even display enough digits if I were to venture into doing the math for the approximate cost of all the aircraft displayed on this photo. This is what I pay so much taxes for? Ridiculous is not the word....
True that, but we're not talking about F-100's. Look at this pic....There are many of these aircraft types still in use today, but like you said, they may have been some of the first to fly when they entered service so many years ago. Anyway, not like there's much we can do about in either case. Regards,
Richie
#18
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: tomcatman
Easytiger, you have a very valid point there. Yes, it is true that many of these aircraft types entered service literally decades ago. They may very well be some of the first to fly. I guess that when you consider the amount of tax dollars our government wastes, it's hard to look at a pic like this with an open mind. Thanks for pointing that out.
Easytiger, you have a very valid point there. Yes, it is true that many of these aircraft types entered service literally decades ago. They may very well be some of the first to fly. I guess that when you consider the amount of tax dollars our government wastes, it's hard to look at a pic like this with an open mind. Thanks for pointing that out.
But I don't know if this is a good example.
I always forget, too, how many of our most modern types are not modern at all! How many F-15s and F-16s are now in "second line" Air Guard squadrons? In my MIND, these aircraft are still new, just like you are thinking. I would bet the ones down there in the desert have reached the end of their airframe life.
Can you buy one for your garden?
Well, a freind of mine has a Grumman Albatross he is flying, that came out of the desert after some 20+ years of storage. The gobmint charged him a FAIR price, they did not give it away....
#20
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: tomcatman
In that case. I'll take an F-14 please....
(I wish)
In that case. I'll take an F-14 please....
(I wish)
Down in Florida, there is a company that already does it...they fly A-4s. Nice gig, mixing it up with Navy squadron guys, and getting paid for it.
Flightsafety, who does work with instrumentation testing, has several F-100s and A-4s they use on a routine basis, they have cool white and blue paint jobs. Once did a YA A-4 in the Flightsafety scheme.
Fellow I know works for a company that was just given an Apache on loan, so he could test power-line avoidance systems they are developing.
There were some nice Mig-29s for sale on ebay, all crated up and here in the states, ready to be delivered, on ebay, a few years back. Pretty good deals, too!
#22
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Oh yea, Dale's story was the inspiration that drove my decision for the avatar. I will always be a diehard Tomcat fan. I hate that it's being phased out, but what can we do about it? The idea of being able to go to my local airport and fire up a couple of turbines to my OWN Tomcat would definitely be the multi million dollar dream for me. Until then, I'll keep on dreamin baby!!! Iceman out.... Regards,
Richie
Richie
#23
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
ORIGINAL: Shok
I remember when you could get a crated Mig 15 for $12k
I remember when you could get a crated Mig 15 for $12k
Richie
#24

My Feedback: (57)
The problem is WE ALL LOVE AVIATION, that's why we are here right? These two or three boneyards collect 40~50 years of muscle power, which of course breaks our pasionate heart.
If we could compile all the stuff we've put on car junkers for the past 40 years, we could probably have enough steel and aluminum to rebuild Manhattan completely.
Face it guys, it hurts becaus we love airplanes.
If we could compile all the stuff we've put on car junkers for the past 40 years, we could probably have enough steel and aluminum to rebuild Manhattan completely.
Face it guys, it hurts becaus we love airplanes.
#25
Banned
My Feedback: (119)
ORIGINAL: Shok
I remember when you could get a crated Mig 15 for $12k
I remember when you could get a crated Mig 15 for $12k
Friend of mine wanted one, he was serious, and has the flight skills and such.
The problems, as he found out, with the Mig-15, were that the FAA was pretty much set against that particular plane flying in the USA. Very poor build quality, it was a semi-disposeable airplane. The engines have a fifteen hour TBO...they were supposed to send the engine back to the factory for service after only fifteen hours. The factory would strip them down completely, and toss a lot of worn parts, and rework the rest and build new engines out them, something like that. It was not designed to last, it was not designed to be serviced, it was designed to be flown for fifteen hours and then rebuilt in total. That's what my friend found out, and that's why the prices were(and are) still low.
Saw a Mig-21, which is built to a better standard, for $125k.
There are a lot of pretty advanced aircraft out there selling for cheapo prices, like F-100s and Mig-21s and such, but the planes you actually see guys FLYING are stuff like the L-39, planes that are built to a high standard, and that they can actually afford to fuel and maintain. Sabres, you see a bunch of them, too. And Hunters. But my guess is that the number of airframes around greatly exceeds the number of guys who can actually afford to fly them, and have the skills to fly them, so that's why you see Bonanzas often selling for more than jet fighters!



