js43+@andrew.cmu.edu (James William Stepanek) (04/04/91)
From: James William Stepanek <js43+@andrew.cmu.edu> One interesting piece of information someone told me (it is from a briefing in ROTC I assume not secret) was that the F117's flew 30% of the bombing missions. This is an outrageous amount of flights for only around fifty planes (yes that's all we have). The ground crew must have had one hell of a time at it. [Hmm, half of 65,000 sorties times 30% divided by 40 days and 24 planes is a sortie rate of 20 per plane per day. If you halve the number of sorties again to represent bombing sorties and double the number of planes to 50 that's still 5 missions per plane per day. Doesn't sound credible to me, especially since they supposedly only fly night missions. A mission every 2 hours? They'd have to be based inside Iraq! Perhaps I've overestimated the total number of bombing sorties? --CDR] -- James Stepanek
madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Max Abramowitz) (04/06/91)
From: madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Max Abramowitz) In <1991Apr5.091656.7511@amd.com> mr. moderator writes: > [ Perhaps I've overestimated the total number of bombing > sorties? [1/4 of 65000] --CDR] your mistake IS overestimating the total number of bombing sorties. remember, that the military counts a sortie as a single plane on a single mission (I think), which means that the 65,000 sorties includes refueling missions by tankers, AWAC patrols, F-15 flights to protect AWACS, etc. Which raises another question: How many of the sorties were involved dropping bombs on Iraqi positions throughout the theatre of operations? max abramowitz madmax@gargoyle.uchicago.edu I have opinions...and they're mine
stevew@uunet.UU.NET (Steve Wilson) (04/06/91)
From: wyse!stevew@uunet.UU.NET (Steve Wilson) >From: James William Stepanek <js43+@andrew.cmu.edu> >One interesting piece of information someone told me (it is from a >briefing in ROTC I assume not secret) was that the F117's flew 30% of >the bombing missions. I think the correct number was something like 40 % of the "Strategic" missions, i.e. against missions against hardened sights like command and control, et al. There were apparently two major reasons for this. The plane has an enormous advantage over other aircraft. It doesn't need any escorts, it just goes into the target alone( actually I think they fly in groups of 2 or 4 per mission....) but point being tht you don't need the CAP, nor the AAA supression that a normal attack sequence would require. The other advantage the plane had was something like a 100% availability rate. These two factors combined to make the F117 a real star (IMHO) Steve Wilson
amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) (04/06/91)
From: amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) In article <1991Apr5.091656.7511@amd.com> js43+@andrew.cmu.edu (James William Stepanek) writes: >... told me (it is from a... was that the F117's flew 30% of >the bombing missions. This is an outrageous amount of flights for only >around fifty planes > [Hmm, half of 65,000 sorties times 30% divided by 40 days > and 24 planes is a sortie rate of 20 per plane per day. > If you halve the number of sorties again to represent bombing > sorties and double the number of planes to 50 that's still > 5 missions per plane per day. .... --CDR] Now, don't everybody jump down my throat, I'm not listening... I saw this 'figure' as it was being 'created' day after day during the 'war'. I as many others watched CNN & Network, but along with only a few others, also got to see the entire briefings on C-SPAN every day (There were 3 briefings per day, and the broadcast media was only allowed to carry 1 {after complaints by the print media}, and the others became snipletts for the headline's and broadcast media. C-SPAN however, being a non profit government service was NOT restricted from carrying all 3, complete. Now, that all said... I agree with our stand in moderator that the numbers don't add up to any kind of reality. That means that the figures are a construct of govern-speak. Thinking in this vein, I have constructed the following model. CLAIM: (well...) the f117 flew 30% of all bombing sorties. 1. Define a sortie as a 'strike' on 1 specific location. [No way --CDR] (The f117 can carry 4 devices, drop 1 device on 4 different sites. That inflates the f117 sortie by a factor of 4). 2. Define all combination fighter(air-superiority/defense/whatever)-bomber sorties such that all combination missions become fighter sorties not bomber sorties. Example: A F16/F4/F14/F18/whatever leaves on a bomber sortie. The plane is equiped with some sort of non-bomb weapon (a a-a missle or a-g missle or even machine gun), and on route to drop the bomb load, encounters some kind of resistance, and uses it's alternate weapon to neutralize said resistance. If it continues on to the bomb site and completes it mission OR is unable to (for whatever reason...), that mission is now redefined as a fighter mission. Since most/all f117 missions were done at night and from high (er) altitudes, few if any it's missions would be affected by this ... er.... definition. If both of these 'rules' were implemented, and a redinition rate of 25% were done under rule #2. I estimate that this would lower the calulated mission rate to 1 sortie per plane per day. If 2 sorties were actually flown (both at night and very possible), that allows a possible down time of 50% for the plane due to.....(everything). al -- Al. Michielsen, Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, Syracuse University InterNet: amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu amichiel@sunrise.acs.syr.edu Bitnet: AMICHIEL@SUNRISE
deichman@cod.nosc.mil (Shane D. Deichman) (04/09/91)
From: deichman@cod.nosc.mil (Shane D. Deichman) >>... told me (it is from a... was that the F117's flew 30% of >>the bombing missions. This is an outrageous amount of flights for only >>around fifty planes Personally, I recall hearing that the F-117, constituting some 1.7% of the air OoB, took out 30% (40%?) of the strategic TARGETS. The fallacy with CDR's logic, if this is indeed the case, is that each target more than likely had more than one sortie assigned to it (except in the case of the 117). An average of three such sorties per target would then decrease the above "outrageous" amount of missions to a very realizable two per plane per day. -shane
brian@uunet.UU.NET (brian douglass) (04/13/91)
From: edat!brian@uunet.UU.NET (brian douglass) >From: deichman@cod.nosc.mil (Shane D. Deichman) >>>... told me (it is from a... was that the F117's flew 30% of >>>the bombing missions. This is an outrageous amount of flights for only >>>around fifty planes >Personally, I recall hearing that the F-117, constituting some 1.7% of >the air OoB, took out 30% (40%?) of the strategic TARGETS. I don't know where everyone else is getting their numbers, but what I read was "Though we accounted for less than 2% of the total aircraft inventory, we took out 47% of all strategic targets" Quoted from the Las Vegas Review Journal from an interview with a returning F-117 Nighthawk Fighter Pilot. There was nothing about number of sorties or CEP of those sorties. But judging from the videos of bombs going down air shafts, etc., when the system was working, it was really working. -- Brian Douglass brian@edat.uucp