Why the Nighthawk is back from the dead

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 2,3 тис.

  • @Taskandpurpose
    @Taskandpurpose  11 місяців тому +129

    Big thanks to Ridge for gifting me their product and supporting the channel! Here’s the site if you want to check them out! > ridge.com/taskandpurpose

    • @187thRecon2010
      @187thRecon2010 11 місяців тому +9

      Ill take a pair of pants.

    • @stevenseibel9216
      @stevenseibel9216 11 місяців тому +3

      sooooooo fucking kooooooooooool

    • @Taskandpurpose
      @Taskandpurpose  11 місяців тому +7

      @@187thRecon2010I’ll see if ridge is down to make a prototype pair

    • @KarlChilders-bt3hf
      @KarlChilders-bt3hf 11 місяців тому +1

      Why doesn’t ridge make a task and purpose version? They have a Chael Sonnen bad guy inc version.

    • @Alejandro-f8o
      @Alejandro-f8o 11 місяців тому

      Or....thats what they tell.... beacause they allways tell the truth about secret poroyects..... they can find a UFO..... Or a dinosour fart..... they will never tell the truth.....

  • @TomFynn
    @TomFynn 11 місяців тому +1751

    An aircraft so stealthy, even its operators don't know if they're still using it or not.

    • @warblerblue
      @warblerblue 11 місяців тому +27

      lol good one.

    • @thegreyhound1073
      @thegreyhound1073 11 місяців тому +70

      Hell the F-35 is so stealthy that the Marines lost 2 of them.

    • @amazin7006
      @amazin7006 11 місяців тому +24

      @@thegreyhound1073 Thats pretty damn good considering the f16 had 17 crashes in a single year back when it was new

    • @thegreyhound1073
      @thegreyhound1073 11 місяців тому +36

      @@amazin7006 I really wasn't really joking about them crashing. I meant when they completely lost them. Like they had no idea where they crashed.

    • @Foenem521
      @Foenem521 11 місяців тому +4

      Epic comment.

  • @mikeynth7919
    @mikeynth7919 11 місяців тому +794

    Here's a theory: It is still good enough for some missions, and why risk an F-22 or B-2 when you have an available, paid for, platform, one whose loss wouldn't jeopardize any cutting edge tech? Edit: And that's the conclusion the video comes to.

    • @SpruceMoose-iv8un
      @SpruceMoose-iv8un 11 місяців тому +1

      The F22 and F35 rely heavily on radar absorbing paint, the F117 is much less so, it was specifically designed to redirect radar, now if you take modern stealth paint and put it on the F117, you are talking like the RCS of a fucking toothpic.

    • @NoobNoobNews
      @NoobNoobNews 11 місяців тому +101

      It is also true that the f117 is arguably less visible than a f22 or f35. It is just old, and and also lacks on board stealth radar. It's only obsolescence is in regards to electronics and on board systems. If they upgraded everything beneath the hood, it is essentially a super cheap f35.

    • @carlosandleon
      @carlosandleon 11 місяців тому +7

      You have the outdated F22 for that

    • @SVSky
      @SVSky 11 місяців тому +16

      F-117 should be a UCAV

    • @jackofthecoke
      @jackofthecoke 11 місяців тому +19

      For the missions it's going to fly, it's probably going to be completely unmanned in our lifetime. They'll just come up with drones without a cockpit onboard touchscreens or life support systems.

  • @joshwilson7486
    @joshwilson7486 11 місяців тому +1721

    The only reason the one got shot down is because they flew the same route over and over and got too predictable. Allowing the air defense operator to position and get a lucky shot.

    • @doujinflip
      @doujinflip 11 місяців тому +275

      And only by an experienced air defender who violated the standing order to energize their radar no more than twice before packing up and moving locations to minimize the risk of HARMs headed their way.

    • @vicdiaz5180
      @vicdiaz5180 11 місяців тому +37

      Rookie pilot move

    • @Mortablunt
      @Mortablunt 11 місяців тому +157

      Air defense also got clever and decided to experiment with different radar bands until they found one that worked. They also set up a decoy target so they could be certain of approach for the very brief time needed to use the targeting radar.

    • @everettputerbaugh3996
      @everettputerbaugh3996 11 місяців тому +32

      @@doujinflip Also, the responsible party was an experienced Russian operator...

    • @GamesOfficialYouTube
      @GamesOfficialYouTube 11 місяців тому +13

      I want number of your dealer

  • @repatch43
    @repatch43 11 місяців тому +83

    While most military aircraft these days are not aerodynamically stable and need lots of computer assistance to stay in the air, the F-117 was one that just looking at it you immediately thought: there's no way that thing can fly, right? Such an amazing looking aircraft

    • @feldamar2
      @feldamar2 Місяць тому +12

      Want to know something amusing? I built lots of folded paper airplanes as a kid and once built a very rough mockup of the f117 using a bit of tape and scissors. It actually flew really straight which totally surprised me too.

    • @peterturnham5134
      @peterturnham5134 29 днів тому +6

      I flew in real life with an ex F117 Pilot and asked about flying the plane because like you I thought weird looking plane must be weird to fly. He was definitive in his answer - It flys beutifully and easily.

    • @michaelsherman6492
      @michaelsherman6492 24 дні тому +8

      A brick can fly… just put a bigger engine on it!!… the F4 is a prime example lol

    • @For_What_It-s_Worth
      @For_What_It-s_Worth 7 днів тому +1

      @@michaelsherman6492
      Phantom: Hot Rock

    • @stone-hand
      @stone-hand 2 дні тому +2

      Most modern fighters are unstable on the pitch axis.
      The F-117 was unstable on three, so they used three fly-by-wire computers from the F-16 (at least as a start).
      Still, I suspect that the Lockheed team did a better job in specifying the plane's needs to its programmers than Boeing did on the MCAS thing.

  • @turinturambar347
    @turinturambar347 11 днів тому +4

    Not many B2s in service, but my good friend and neighbor is one of the pilots. They do practice runs over our neighborhood sometimes. It's a beautiful plane.

  • @Solidus__
    @Solidus__ 11 місяців тому +991

    Possibly one of the coolest looking planes ever created.

    • @deonngregory9808
      @deonngregory9808 11 місяців тому +35

      I saw one as I was passing Camp Shelby in Hattisburg. One was flying low over hwy 49 because it was landing at the army base. It was cool realizing it was right overhead.

    • @mikefallwell1301
      @mikefallwell1301 11 місяців тому +25

      Especially so from the ground near the nose . It looks like something from Stargate SG-1

    • @Solidus__
      @Solidus__ 11 місяців тому +7

      @@deonngregory9808 wow that must've been wild to see.

    • @Solidus__
      @Solidus__ 11 місяців тому +4

      @@mikefallwell1301 oh yeah I never even put those two together, yea I see it. Between the F117/B2/SR71 I think we really nailed it with those designs.

    • @Nathan-vt1jz
      @Nathan-vt1jz 11 місяців тому +4

      I like how it looks, but also have a lot of favorites I like more. The SR71 Blackbird is my top pick.

  • @kinch613
    @kinch613 11 місяців тому +189

    I loved my time with the 117! So happy to see them still flying. Makes me feel not as old. 37 TFW rocked! We really did “own the night”! It had to had the F designation. Because at the same time we were developing and funding a B-2. No way would we be able to fund two bombers. Even though their missions were completely different! Also standing alone it wasn’t completely stealth. Several things had to be retracted and removed to aid in its low RCS!

    • @billotto602
      @billotto602 11 місяців тому +4

      You sound like you worked on them. That being so, this thing looks like it had a wicked jet exhaust blast. I've stood behind Navy bombers & fighters & at idle, they weren't too bad. But with the size of the openings on the F-117, how was it ?

    • @kinch613
      @kinch613 11 місяців тому +21

      @@billotto602 wasnt bad at all. Most of the thrust exhaust was directed upwards by the duckbill type exhaust which kept heat signatures down. It had material similar to the space shuttle tiles that was meant for cooling. You used to walk under them to check certain gauges etc on EOR ( End of Runway) checks.

    • @davidweikle9921
      @davidweikle9921 11 місяців тому +3

      ​@kinch613 very cool. Thank you for adding to the comments.

    • @bear_hunter1334
      @bear_hunter1334 3 місяці тому +3

      @@kinch613 I did the midnight flight on the C-5 in 82 😎

    • @kinch613
      @kinch613 3 місяці тому +1

      @@bear_hunter1334 thats awesome man!

  • @GrantChina
    @GrantChina 11 місяців тому +699

    Very nice overview of the F-117 but I was disappointed that you didn't mention its capability to deploy a team of special ops troops onto a 747 while in flight.

    • @ronjon7942
      @ronjon7942 11 місяців тому +39

      Brilliant.

    • @mrbaab5932
      @mrbaab5932 11 місяців тому +46

      In Hollywood, anything can happen.

    • @thelandofnod123
      @thelandofnod123 11 місяців тому +100

      It was an Executive Decision to leave that information out.

    • @TigerHawX
      @TigerHawX 11 місяців тому +14

      ​@@thelandofnod123thank you was tryna remember the movie

    • @virginialoverproductions
      @virginialoverproductions 10 місяців тому +6

      ​@thelandofnod123 This and the OP's comment are absolutely perfect 😂

  • @lightspeedvictory
    @lightspeedvictory 11 місяців тому +86

    According to a colleague at work who was an F-117 pilot (and knows the guy who got shot down IIRC), the one that got shot down was because of complacency of the chief mission planner who was forcing the pilots to fly the same routes over and over, in some cases with little support. This allowed an air defense operator to get lucky with that famous shot

    • @LordDirus007
      @LordDirus007 11 місяців тому

      Wasn't that over Iraq back in the 90s?

    • @lightspeedvictory
      @lightspeedvictory 11 місяців тому +12

      @@LordDirus007 balkans, not Iraq

    • @necronoverlord2306
      @necronoverlord2306 11 місяців тому +9

      There was more to it than that. First there was a spy in Italy that was passing info to the then yugoslavians about the routes they were taking. Secondly at the time of that deployment there was always heavy jamming in place by EA-6 prowlers but on the night of said shoot down said prowlers were grounded. thirdly, when the shoot down happened they got EXTREMELY lucky to have their search radars on at the exact moment said pilot opened his bomb bay to drop his bombs. Yes, and lastly due to poor mission planning not changing their ingress routes all lead up to that event. But that being said I do believe there were double digits of Nighthawks in the air at that time and only the one was unluckily hit by a sam.

    • @antonioarroyas7662
      @antonioarroyas7662 10 місяців тому

      There is speculation that they got a radar hit when its bomb bay doors were open.

    • @zmajooov
      @zmajooov 7 місяців тому +4

      @@necronoverlord2306 bullshit. we didn't get extremely lucky, our guys used a HF radar with wavelengths of 10 meters, it illuminated that tincan easily and it got shot down. I dont understand the need to make up crazy stories when in reality it was just a group of guys with a bit of good old fashioned ingenuity.

  • @scottnijssen6703
    @scottnijssen6703 11 місяців тому +8

    I really love your videos and I know your target audience is mainly from the US and that is great! For a European man myself its hard to convert every feet, inch, mile etc. to the metric system (to fully comprehend everyting). It would make it a lot easier to follow if you could mention the metric measurements next to the empirical ones if you could! Love your channel and keep up the good work!

    • @Taskandpurpose
      @Taskandpurpose  11 місяців тому +5

      I’m going to make sure this is I’m going forward !

    • @hazonku
      @hazonku 11 місяців тому

      Yeah, I watch a lotta tech and engineering related UA-camrs & this is just kinda standard practice, you just run your usual script but have both on screen.

  • @agent74113
    @agent74113 11 місяців тому +552

    Cappy: "Why is the Air Force deploying a decades old platform to combat in the middle east?"
    B-52: *probably bombing someone somewhere right now."

    • @nosajimiki5885
      @nosajimiki5885 24 дні тому +52

      If Russia has taught us anything, you can never have too many old Cold War Era weapon systems... just in case everything goes to shit and it's all you have left.

    • @PSC4.1
      @PSC4.1 22 дні тому +13

      ​​@@nosajimiki5885not wrong, at all. I mean I wouldnt be surprised if the US has a boat load of Pattons (M48s) and 113s lying around in a boneyard somewhere with the cannons in pieces for quick repair and deployment in case of an invasion.

    • @bostonrailfan2427
      @bostonrailfan2427 21 день тому +16

      @@PSC4.1Pattons are long gone, but the US does actually have a stockpile of M113s that have been slowly dwindling due to donations to Ukraine but are far from being depleted
      hell, there’s still Sabres in the USAF inventory!

    • @bostonrailfan2427
      @bostonrailfan2427 21 день тому +7

      @@nosajimiki5885hence the boneyard these were kept in, and all of those stored and then donated tanks and APCs sent to Ukraine

    • @machineenvyllc437
      @machineenvyllc437 20 днів тому +4

      if the KID finds out he's gonna be pissed.....

  • @scottboyer8450
    @scottboyer8450 11 місяців тому +30

    Fun Fact; The mathematics that made the modeling and simulation of RCS data possible was developed years prior by a Soviet physicist and mathematician named Pyotr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev. His work, largely ignored in Soviet Russia, caught the attention of Denys Overholser, a stealth engineer at Lockheed. So once again the Lockheed Skunkworks gets to pulled one over on the Soviets, just like they did with the SR-71 when they purchased the Titanium used to construct the plane from the Soviets, the worlds largest supplier at the time.
    Anyone interested in this topic should read "Skunkworks" by Ben Rich, the lead at Skunkworks after Kelly retired.

    • @Nr15121
      @Nr15121 11 місяців тому +1

      Not exactly, that scientists work was a derivation and while the U.S. did use some of it they were already developing stealth far before that

  • @Chuck_Hooks
    @Chuck_Hooks 11 місяців тому +420

    Stealth is more than about shape.
    Stealth is also about electronics, radar, improvements in coatings.
    And for all we know, the F-117 may have aggressively upgraded electronics, radar, coatings on a level with F-35s, making its true current stealth status unknown, except to those authorized to know.

    • @JD96893
      @JD96893 11 місяців тому +48

      Agree, with new electronics and a stealth coating it would be just as viable now as it was 40 years ago. The F-117 does have an advantage over the F-35, that it's heat signature is smaller. I think a smaller, easier to maintain and repair aircraft is why we are seeing these return. For special missions i could see it having uses. Also lets not forget that the F-35 can't go super sonic without ruining it's coating. If the F-35 were to replace the Nighthawk in it's role, it would have to be a set number of airframes that could never go super sonic to maintain the stealth coating integrity. Just a theory, but it would make sense. Often weird and usually cost effective solutions are what we see for very specific SF missions.

    • @vicdiaz5180
      @vicdiaz5180 11 місяців тому +16

      I don’t see why not the A-10 got a significant electronics upgrade. It communicates directly to F-35s and F-22s and acts as a communications network with the rest of the aircraft

    • @JIMJAMSC
      @JIMJAMSC 11 місяців тому +18

      Shape/electronics/coatings etc are a lot of the "stealth" but the pilots/planners need to fully understand how stealth works, its limitations and know the radar systems employed against it. You then plan/fly the aircraft so the radar's weaknesses can be exploited.

    • @Steamrunner
      @Steamrunner 11 місяців тому +17

      I thought stealth was about standing perfectly still so nobody can see me... Dammit Drax!

    • @koolaidpapi7674
      @koolaidpapi7674 11 місяців тому +6

      @@vicdiaz5180stealth ma’boy what about a aircraft that’s named “warthog” with a giant canon sticking out sounds stealthy to you. A10 is good for uncontested skies

  • @soarabove337
    @soarabove337 10 місяців тому +3

    I keep hearing "Good evening Lasers & GBUs, this is your Captain speaking..." with the short-sleeved aviator in the PC sim @4:37. "Please settle in and enjoy the flight, where we'll be flying over Baghdad and for those of you seated on the left side of the aircraft can see 'shock & awe'...."

  • @snipes503
    @snipes503 10 місяців тому +4

    I'm 100% willing to believe that the military is using some modified/updated Nighthawks. That jet was my obsession when I was 11.

  • @darthhodges
    @darthhodges 11 місяців тому +53

    The fact that some of these older designs won't die fits a broader pattern many militaries fall into. Equipment designed to be disposable or used for a limited number of years gets used far beyond that. Sometimes it's because the thing intended to replace it falls way behind schedule in development or ends up not being better enough to actually buy. In this case a new need is articulated and someone thinks the old thing about to be thrown away would suit it, saving a lot of money and time over making another new thing.

    • @davidvines6498
      @davidvines6498 11 місяців тому +5

      I think there might still be a Sherman still operating in Africa or South America

    • @hazonku
      @hazonku 11 місяців тому +5

      Or like posited by the "It's still active" conspiracy, new toys are just too expensive to risk sometimes. Same reason we had mostly SMAW-D & AT-4 on us during the Iraq invasion despite having perfectly capable Javelins as well. The CLU & the rounds are not light by any means nor are they cheap. So we often left them with HQ platoon or weapons squads in support by fire positions. We very rarely actually carried that thing in the rife squad because it was the fancy new toy & we knew damn well a SMAW-D or AT-4 could take out all of Saddam's old Soviet armor.

  • @MiddleOutdoorsman
    @MiddleOutdoorsman 11 місяців тому +137

    I think the Air Force has always been super secretive about the F117. I did see one once while in tech school in late 92 early 93. My class was on T shift, which meant our normal duty hours were at night. We marched the same route to and from class every night. One night, there it was, in a hanger far away from the road, way in the back. We all could see it though, and knew what it was. Next night, it was gone, never to be seen again.

    • @notthecracker5816
      @notthecracker5816 11 місяців тому +16

      My dad was an F117 crew chief in the early 90’s.

    • @L33tSkE3t
      @L33tSkE3t 11 місяців тому +3

      @@notthecracker5816That’s incredible, that must have been an awesome job!

    • @skillfulsteak847
      @skillfulsteak847 11 місяців тому +2

      ​@@notthecracker5816shall we grovel before you? So?

    • @nomercyinc6783
      @nomercyinc6783 11 місяців тому

      correct. they were flying missions for a decade before the dod even announced it to the public. just proves that people thinking they know whats currently being tested or flown is way off based and way out of touch. the military has equipment from the future we have no idea about. civilians dont know anything at all regarding classified things. if its on google its obsolete in practice

    • @pike100
      @pike100 11 місяців тому +2

      ​@@skillfulsteak847 Don't be rude. His father served our great country.

  • @Chef-Chad
    @Chef-Chad 11 місяців тому +115

    The remaining airframes entered climate-controlled storage at Tonopah, with several being maintained in flyable condition for the Air Force Flight Test Center. I worked with the F-117 at Holloman AFB from 2000-2004, and the little parachute that came out the back cost well over $10,000 buck for just one.

    • @kewinhollingsworth6557
      @kewinhollingsworth6557 11 місяців тому +8

      Correct. They still test new equipment in them and are hangared when not in use.

    • @arthas640
      @arthas640 11 місяців тому +7

      Sounds about right for military spending

    • @StoccTube
      @StoccTube 11 місяців тому +15

      Military procurement is the equivalent of telling the cake shop you’re buying it for a wedding…

    • @kinch613
      @kinch613 11 місяців тому +6

      I was at TTR. The fact was when they first went to Holloman they were kept outdoors just under overhead shelters. I will ALWAYS be convinced that it was that caused the catastrophic wing failure at the airshow. At least my ACESII worked!

    • @hitchmille
      @hitchmille 11 місяців тому +1

      @@kinch613 Your ACES II, as in you maintained them or you were sitting in it?

  • @_hanz73
    @_hanz73 11 місяців тому +4

    That thing still looks absolutely iconic and looks so unreal if seen from the ground

  • @JeffWhite417
    @JeffWhite417 7 днів тому

    Nice video...I used to work at Tonopah Test Range when the main project was the F-117a/"Black Jet". I was an air traffic controller, working in the control tower at the time. Thanks for giving me a great reminder of the good old days.

  • @mclew1234
    @mclew1234 11 місяців тому +35

    Its probably still in use because it is still a serviceable aircraft that can be used as a training aircraft and test bed for newer stealth technology while also being used in combat areas where the US wants to intervene without risking newer more valuable aircraft because as you mentioned if lost and unrecoverable it limits the amount of technology lost to near peer militaries.
    And at the end of the day the newer stealth aircaft face the same issues the F-117 did all those years ago, its hard to mass produce things you want to keep secret, so best to have these F-117s around as they are something that is good enough to at least achieve some task and better than having nothing at all should something bad kick off

    • @The88Cheat
      @The88Cheat 11 місяців тому +5

      Right? Why dismantle a perfectly good airplane if it still has use?

    • @tobiasrietveld3819
      @tobiasrietveld3819 11 місяців тому

      @@The88Cheatbecause it's a really expensive aircraft to maintain that doesn't offer anything that the F35 can't do just as well or a B2 can do way better.

    • @AbyssWatcher745
      @AbyssWatcher745 11 місяців тому +2

      ​@@tobiasrietveld3819The F-35 has more tech that could be reverse engineered if shot down and the B-2 is way more expensive

    • @everypitchcounts4875
      @everypitchcounts4875 11 місяців тому

      The F117 nighthawk was still flying in September 2021 two nighthawks were part of a exercise in Fresno Ca.

    • @goldenhate6649
      @goldenhate6649 11 місяців тому +1

      Its also possible whatever part you are making is irrelevant to the integrity of the secret portions of the craft.

  • @brooksfriess3139
    @brooksfriess3139 11 місяців тому +51

    Quick clarification. The delta wing was part of the stealth design but that is not enough to shrink the radar cross-section. The facets all over the air frame are a major factor. Also, it was unstable but had an advanced fly bi wire system to make it easier for pilots to fly.

    • @billkilbourne6409
      @billkilbourne6409 11 місяців тому +8

      F-117 used off the shelf parts where it could. The FBW system was from an F-16

    • @bluemarlin8138
      @bluemarlin8138 11 місяців тому +4

      @@billkilbourne6409Yes, this was to avoid drawing attention to the program. Same reason it got an F designation when it was really should have had a B or A designation.

    • @johnnunn8688
      @johnnunn8688 25 днів тому

      *possible for pilots to fly.

  • @iansanchez331
    @iansanchez331 11 місяців тому +59

    The F-117 was always my most favorite aircraft growing up. It just looks so damn cool and futuristic and it's invisible (not as cutting edge nowadays of course)??? Til this day I still bust nuts over how sick this thing looks

    • @curtish2541
      @curtish2541 11 місяців тому +1

      Did you notice once the widespread use of the aircraft was seen and pictured, that cars began to mimic those lines? Particularly the smaller sports cars had the razor corner edges of the stealth aircraft. Clearly you weren’t the only one who liked the aesthetic nature of the F117. 😊

    • @cruisinguy6024
      @cruisinguy6024 11 місяців тому +1

      You should definitely check out the USAF museum if you haven’t already. Being up close and personal with one of these beautiful machines is an experience that can’t be described.

    • @derpynerdy6294
      @derpynerdy6294 3 місяці тому

      According to sandboxx, the F117 is stealthier than J20 and SU57.

    • @Frankie5Angels150
      @Frankie5Angels150 23 дні тому

      You need a girlfriend, dude.

  • @nairbvel
    @nairbvel 11 місяців тому +10

    It wasn't the delta wing that dispersed radar energy to the side. The faceted shape does much of that (even the edges of the canopy are "sawtooth" to keep energy bouncing off at odd angles). The plane also has a coating of special material that absorbs radar energy, further minimizing the amount of energy returned to any emitter. A regular off-the-shelf delta wing can have a radar cross section that screams, "HERE I AM SHOOT ME" without these other design features.

  • @BigTrain175
    @BigTrain175 4 дні тому

    My brother was in the Air Force and was assigned to the F-117 unit in 1983. They were based at Tonopah Nevada. He was an enlisted logistics specialist. he would remain with the unit for seven years. After the program was publicly revealed they moved to Holloman AFB in New Mexico. After retirement the F-117s moved back to Tonopah for storage.

  • @tobiasfunke3357
    @tobiasfunke3357 11 місяців тому +12

    I saw one of these flying in Duluth, MN. Around August of this year, I saw them 2 days in a row.

  • @AlexLuthore
    @AlexLuthore 11 місяців тому +13

    The advantages of avoiding GPS jamming for both navigation and munitions is huge, particularly as countries get better at jamming or spoofing gps

  • @donovanchau3483
    @donovanchau3483 11 місяців тому +7

    Ever since I saw one of these as a kid when it was still in service it’s remained my favorite jet and I’m so glad they’re still around. I hope I’ll see another one in person one day.

  • @evanacey1414
    @evanacey1414 10 днів тому

    The F117 Nighthawk has been my all-time favorite airplane from a strictly aesthetic point of view from the moment I first saw one in a picture as a young boy in the early 90’s.

  • @bret9741
    @bret9741 23 дні тому +1

    The main reason she was retired was military spending reductions. The platform still is very capable but needs about $35,000,000 in updates. Lockheed Martin did some initial research on updating the aircraft but that was 15 years ago. Basically she needs : (1) 0 time the airframe, flight control’s gear. (2) newer version of its engines to increase range and thrust. (3) updated internal munitions rack to cary mix of air to ground and air to air . (4) replace the cockpit avionics/weapon/sensor controls with the F-35’s. (5) it needs all new sensors and it really needs an effective radar and defensive EW CAPABILITY. The F-117 doesn’t have an air to air or a radar system like the F-35 which would require the nose a new radome capable of an effective radar. (6) it needs defensive systems similar to the F-35.
    Could the platform be updated for less? Yes but it would be limited to combat in areas where air superiority was largely gained or it would need to be accompanied by the F-22 or F-35.
    The advantage the f-117 has over the F-35 and F-22 is range. Its combat range is almost 300 miles greater than the F-35/22. With updated engines it could achieve 20% greater range.
    I don’t think the AF will spend the $$$$$. It’s better to just buy more B-21’s.

  • @jamieaulbach5120
    @jamieaulbach5120 11 місяців тому +26

    Type 1000 storage is flyable storage. So you have to fly them every once in a while. Also its used for testing in the Air Force.

    • @yikemoo
      @yikemoo 11 місяців тому +1

      I've actually always been very curious about what happens in type 1000. Are there really scheduled maintenance flights?

    • @jamieaulbach5120
      @jamieaulbach5120 11 місяців тому +6

      @@yikemoo They sure are. The F117 sits in the hangars with wings removed and periodicaly they pull them out put the wings back on and fly them around. Also the pilots who fly them have currencies they have to fly that you cannot get on maintenance flghts so some have to be good to go and ready to fly at all times. One of the not acknowledge testing the did was in Syria. They wanted to see if Russian fighter jets could see the F117 and fly to intercept. This operational combat testing is important to gain intel on Russian capabilites. Just like all the stuff we are giving to Ukraine it is just operational testing against their tech. Im sure we are getting a ton of captured equipment as part of the deal.

    • @yikemoo
      @yikemoo 11 місяців тому +1

      @@jamieaulbach5120 There's a pic floating around social media of a T-80 on a flatbed trailer in Louisiana, iirc, from about a year ago

    • @JLeYang
      @JLeYang 11 днів тому +1

      ​@yikemoo it was a T90A going to Aberdeen Proving Grounds

    • @jamieaulbach5120
      @jamieaulbach5120 10 днів тому

      @@JLeYang Yup it is part of all the munitions we sent Ukraine. We get copies of all captured Russian equipment. The biggest steal we received was russias newest electronic warfare truck. It was the size of a semi trailer. It was more than likely flown directly out to area 51 since that is where all the stealth training is done. They have the facilities to completely test its capabilities. Most don't know but it is an Air Force base but all the services do the most classified plane, helo, and EW testing. The helo that crashed in the bin laden raid was stored there.

  • @caseyjazz7256
    @caseyjazz7256 11 місяців тому +23

    What I find cool, in the book Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy, he describes this jet in certain detail. Not all correct obviously, as the book was released in 1986. Recommend the read if anyone hasn't yet.

    • @guitarninjarick8179
      @guitarninjarick8179 11 місяців тому +5

      Good book, Tom Clancy was on the cutting edge of that stuff for quite some time. Also there's another one that I haven't read but heard about where he describes an Ageis like system intercepting a ballistic missile heading for the east coast. Pretty cool!

    • @erichammond9308
      @erichammond9308 11 місяців тому +2

      Actually no, the aircraft he described in "Red Storm Rising" was based on a Revell model of the fictional F-19 (a design which remains classified to this day)

    • @deanwilliams433
      @deanwilliams433 11 місяців тому +1

      Read "Skunk Works: A Personal Memoir of My Years at Lockheed" by far the best book on the F117 and its development from people that actually built the plane and not some civilian.

  • @runi5413
    @runi5413 11 місяців тому +29

    "giving new meaning to the term: silent, but deadly"
    should've been the slogan for the entire USAF stealth program

  • @endlesskurko
    @endlesskurko 12 днів тому

    The first sim game I played in the 90’s was the F-117. It’s a model close to my heart

  • @RedBeardTheFirst
    @RedBeardTheFirst 11 місяців тому +16

    Being a contractor working on aircraft a $10k hammer is 100% believable, the cost of some of our tools still astounds me

    • @58singleman
      @58singleman 23 дні тому +2

      I sold "Jet engine Repair tool sets" for GE Aircraft. Engines. (Example: the tool set for repair/rebuild a jet engine fuel pump.) These tool sets were sold to the US Airforce and US Navy customers. The Tool sets were sold with one part number and price for each set. Sometime later the customers decided they needed a part number for each item in the tool set. ( to replace a missing tool ) GE was not asked to do the recatalog . Air Force or Navy Catalogers who were not familiar with some of the special tools were not able to price the tools. Soooooo. They took the price of the tool set and divided the price by the number of tools in the set. Each tool in the set had the same price. A 10k hammer makes a lot of sense to me.

    • @JLeYang
      @JLeYang 11 днів тому

      Beryllium Copper Tools?

  • @nj1255
    @nj1255 11 місяців тому +36

    The most impressive thing about the B-2 project IMO, is the insane leap in stealth technology they made. The F-117 looks like it was developed in the 70's, while the B-2 still looks like it could have been developed today, and the maiden flight of the B-2 was only 8 years after the F-117's maiden flight. Both of them had ofc been under development for many years before that, but still.... Northrop must have been stealing tech from the future when designing the B-2. Just saying.

    • @Eihort
      @Eihort 11 місяців тому +14

      Read a book on this exact thing. Northrop used a more holistic approach with the design of the B-2, where, I kid you not, the Radar engineers ate, slept, and breathed the equations for RCS, they were able to design by steps (i.e. design, build, test, wash, rinse, repeat) with smooth curves instead of relying purely on a computer model that could only do flat surfaces as Lockheed did with the F-117. Both programs were so secretive, that it was a case of parallel development.

    • @nj1255
      @nj1255 11 місяців тому +5

      @@Eihort Absolutely nuts. It's a technological and engineering marvel, to say the least. I'd definitely place it alongside things like the Saturn 5 rocket, the SR-71 Blackbird, and the International Space Station.

    • @aionarkhe5260
      @aionarkhe5260 11 місяців тому

      Still is being developed today, if you look at China.

    • @nj1255
      @nj1255 11 місяців тому

      @@aionarkhe5260 What do you mean?

    • @aionarkhe5260
      @aionarkhe5260 11 місяців тому +4

      Just being a smart ass, the stealth bomber they've been showing off in development is a clear ripoff of the B-2.

  • @mawnkey
    @mawnkey 11 місяців тому +12

    The only thing more shrouded in secrecy than a stealth aircraft is their operations. I'm not surprised if we have official channels saying "Oh yeah, we retired that thing" while we most certainly haven't. It's an aircraft designed to operate entirely around deception.
    Also: when most of the conflicts we've dealt with for a past 20 years have involved old hand-me-down Soviet-era electronics and weapons, of _course_ we're going to keep using a system designed to defeat them.

    • @miriamweller812
      @miriamweller812 11 місяців тому

      US fascism mainly bombs third world countries who can't fire back anyway.
      Meanwhile its more and more certain that the us army is more about a giant money laundring scheme than anything else.

  • @verdebusterAP
    @verdebusterAP 11 місяців тому +30

    The F-117 proved the concept of stealth can work and also proved the limitations of stealth

    • @CheekyMenace
      @CheekyMenace 11 місяців тому +5

      The limitations of stealth for that aircraft and time anyway. I'm sure they have learned some new tricks that went into the B-2 and now B-21.

    • @verdebusterAP
      @verdebusterAP 11 місяців тому +8

      @@CheekyMenace
      No the F-117 was a lot of lessons for the USAF
      The F-117 was designed for maximum stealth so it lacked a lot EW and ECM the F-22 and F-35s has
      It also highlighted the USAF/USN shortcomings with SEAD
      Serbian defense survived because the AGM-88 at the time could only home on actively transmitting radar
      The newer models of the AGM-88 can home even if the target is cold. Additionally it can track moving targets as well target items beside the radar
      The EA-18G has datalink so it can transmit target info to closer assets. Thanks to better targeting pods technology, those assets can engage targets up close and at long range
      Both stealth and SEAD has advanced a lot from the F-117s lessons

    • @CheekyMenace
      @CheekyMenace 11 місяців тому +2

      @@verdebusterAP No what?? You're going into way more than you initially said. You only mentioned stealth. I agreed and said that they learned the limitations of stealth for that aircraft and time anyway, but it wasn't a permanent limitation as they have incorporated what they learned into further advancements of new stealth aircraft.

    • @verdebusterAP
      @verdebusterAP 11 місяців тому +2

      @@CheekyMenace
      The B-21 isnt about stealth
      The B-21 is about functionality
      B-2 is stealthy but expensive
      B-1 is fast but drinks fuel
      B-52 has great versatility but its very old
      How do you take their best qualities but still make a bomber for modern and future warfare
      Sure there are some lessons from the F-117s

  • @johnnycaps1
    @johnnycaps1 11 місяців тому +3

    Wow! What an amazing story about a "retired plane" that perhaps isn't quite retired yet. Also it's clearly it is still more capable than a Walmart greeter. Thanks for great look at ground breaking engineering.

  • @ImInLoveWithBulla
    @ImInLoveWithBulla 11 місяців тому +2

    The light grey blue is much harder to see at night than black. Hell, they knew that for ages.

  • @danielescobar7618
    @danielescobar7618 11 місяців тому +23

    Not to divulge anything too deep, but it uses a LOT of the same parts and avionics systems from the F16. It was later integrated with the maintenance lines and even more of those same parts. Its more stealth from some angles than others when it comes to detection. Needs a lot of intel of where radar sites are in advance to fully interdict under stealth. The most expensive parts in the past, when it was "retired" was the coatings and storage. There has been lots of advances to bring that tech price down now, glad to hear they can bring it back.

    • @chrissmith7669
      @chrissmith7669 11 місяців тому +7

      It was a parts bin special other than the stealth bits.

    • @danielescobar7618
      @danielescobar7618 11 місяців тому +10

      @@chrissmith7669 hell yeah. The solutions already existed for every issue they ran into. It's closer to a highly specialized F-16 than anything else. Part of the pipeline for becoming a maintainer (mechanic) on 117s internal systems was first going to the F-16 school, then going to a second school to just learn the differences. The outside parts was compartmentalized entirely separately.

    • @ryshellso526
      @ryshellso526 11 місяців тому

      ​@danielescobar7618 thanks for info. But opsec my bud...

    • @chrissmith7669
      @chrissmith7669 11 місяців тому +1

      @@jawndoekck it’s not relevant

    • @danielescobar7618
      @danielescobar7618 11 місяців тому

      @@jawndoekck no we need to stop locking in on democrats and republicans in office. Bipartisan system is still a single party state. Less Democrats though is ok short term

  • @frodowiz
    @frodowiz 11 місяців тому +22

    i remember buying the game f117 nighthawk a few years after it came out. included was a book of facts and trinkets of trivia. it seems microprose actually got investigated after the game was released. the pentagon wanted to know how accurate the flying and controls were because the plane was still very secret and its speck certainly werent published. eventually it was chalked up to luck and educated guesses on the programmers behalf.

    • @bigal3055
      @bigal3055 11 місяців тому +4

      Those old Microprose flight sims were a labour of love. The instruction books alone were like a novel.

    • @jamedmurphy4468
      @jamedmurphy4468 11 місяців тому +2

      M1 TANK platoon was the first real computer game to make a serious attempt at small unit level grouns combat

    • @glennpeterson1357
      @glennpeterson1357 11 місяців тому +1

      I loved MicroProse and Project Stealth Fighter was my favourite! Good old C64 wireframe graphics and all! 😂
      The instructions and keyboard overlay were awesome!

  • @damongraham1398
    @damongraham1398 11 місяців тому +53

    Like Habitual Line Crosser said. "Detecting is not that same as targeting". I wonder how many switchblades missiles could fit in a Nighthawk bomb bays? Also air to air missiles?

    • @billykorando
      @billykorando 11 місяців тому +12

      Like Cappy said, the F-117 lacks its own radar. Some air-to-air missiles have their own radar, but the pilot wouldn’t be able to really tell the missile which target, to well target.
      There might be ways of getting something to work, but likely not without compromising the F-117d stealth capabilities, and also the question of “why?” when you have platforms like F-22 and F-35.

    • @cruisinguy6024
      @cruisinguy6024 11 місяців тому +1

      I can’t imagine a scenario where a F117 would be used with the switchblade. A stealth drone would be a better launch vehicle. That’s why we have stealth drones after all.

    • @damongraham1398
      @damongraham1398 11 місяців тому +3

      @@cruisinguy6024 What if the target area has been saturated with signals that deny any gps or control signals to a drone. As far as we know no drone have been sent on a mission completely controlled by A.I.

    • @damongraham1398
      @damongraham1398 11 місяців тому

      @@billykorando which would be more economical? The same way the A-10 was given modification so can the F-117. Make it a A-117. Give a data link and a wing man drone. Also what is the most missiles a Predator drone can carry? F-117 are in the inventory now. Why not modify and use them?

    • @Quetzalcoatl_Feathered_Serpent
      @Quetzalcoatl_Feathered_Serpent 11 місяців тому

      @@billykorando Price.
      The F-117 is cheaper to deploy than the F-35 and F-22 both who fulfill fighter roles, and far more expensive. The F-117 is a dedicated attacker in a fighter frame. Its the scalpel to the F-35 knife and the F-22 Hammer.

  • @brodie29a
    @brodie29a 9 місяців тому +1

    Funny thing about the 117 it’s actually a bomber and not a fighter, but because of the Genova convention to put a new bomber in we had to take one out but we had a few open fighter slots open so we basically went ok that’s a fighter that only dose bombing missions

  • @andrewbevan4662
    @andrewbevan4662 11 місяців тому +1

    9:50 "instead of a traditional GPS? .." GPS was only coming on the scene in the early 90's..

  • @lookythat2
    @lookythat2 11 місяців тому +21

    The F-117 may be obsolete in terms of stealth technology, but is it easier to defeat than, say, that enormous F-15 Strike Eagle? Than a Super-Hornet? Both of which are current front line attack jets, and neither having any appreciable stealth capability. Than a B-52?
    My guess is that they're still more than capable of performing any number of missions for the USAF.

    • @Teampegleg
      @Teampegleg 11 місяців тому +4

      As the F-35 comes online the tactical stealth strike role can be handled by it, it doesn't require nearly the same level of upkeep that the F-117 needed to maintain the stealth coating. With the added benefit of the more advanced systems that allow the pilot to detect and deal with pop up SAM threats (like the one that took out Vega 31).
      And there are more F-35As delivered to the USAF than total F-117s built.

    • @Farweasel
      @Farweasel 11 місяців тому

      A squadon of F-15s or F-18s has a smaller radar return than *ONE* BUFF
      But B-52s aren't *expected* to go so deep into harm's way anymore

    • @Nr15121
      @Nr15121 11 місяців тому

      Yes but unless you spend a ton on newer more durable stealth coatings it’s a mute point, the f117 needs super specific and expensive logistical support to be mission capable far beyond even a b2

    • @Nr15121
      @Nr15121 11 місяців тому

      @@Farweaselyeah it’s just a cruise missile truck, a big badqss cruise missile truck

    • @Nr15121
      @Nr15121 11 місяців тому

      @@Teampeglegthis also the f35 is stealthier has better datalink systems ew capabilities air to air self defense, more payload etc

  • @probegt75
    @probegt75 11 місяців тому +6

    I remember in 9th grade school stopped and they played live footage of the gulf war and showed the f-117....it was almost like seeing a ufo...still love that plane almost as much I love the sr71

  • @turtle1723
    @turtle1723 11 місяців тому +4

    For a super high value target they would make the ultimate drone. No point in destroying them with that option can be used at a later date.

  • @jcsmith725
    @jcsmith725 12 днів тому

    Next to the SR-71 the F117 is my favorite plane of all time. I had the pleasure of manning a AN/SPS-40g radar in the middle of the Bering Sea and watched something VERY quickly traveling from West to East covering the distance my radar covered in no time. Think that was the coolest thing I ever witnessed in CiC. Scariest thing to experience in CiC is middle of the night on mid-watch and you're pinged.. It's very loud. Is it ours is it Russias? As one of the watch standers goes over to the sonar and tries to remember the 30 minutes of training we got on it.. Man I miss being at sea.

  • @G31M1
    @G31M1 7 днів тому

    This video and all the information makes me really nostalgic about playing Command and Conquer: Generals where I could build the Nighthawks as units that would shake the ground with their bombs and destroy infantry and vehicles with ease.

  • @iamtesting3824
    @iamtesting3824 11 місяців тому +31

    I still remember the desert storm. It was impressive. This lady was the very first airplane I heard Radar Cross Section. The original thesis was written by , ironically , a Russian mathematician.

    • @yikemoo
      @yikemoo 11 місяців тому +5

      is this a AI-generated comment?

    • @Evirthewarrior
      @Evirthewarrior 11 місяців тому +5

      That is just a myth. the Russian Mathematician did something that was only tangentially related to stealth technology, it had nothing to do with the 117 or any other stealth aircraft's development.

    • @just9911
      @just9911 11 місяців тому +10

      ⁠@@Evirthewarriorit wasn’t tangentially related - it was how electromagnetic waves bounce off of a surface. It is literally the underpinning of the concept that you can defeat radar with geometry. The guys at skunkworks directly cited his work if I remember correctly.
      He didn’t build anything or develop technology. He worked out the theory.

    • @just9911
      @just9911 11 місяців тому

      @@Evirthewarriorand why do you seem pissed off by the mere suggestion that a Russian person did something great? Just because the country has been run by complete shitbags for over a century does not mean all Russians are shit bags. And I’ve got plenty of reason to not be a fan of Russians- my family is Polish, Ukrainian, and Hungarian. Unfortunately, most of my family that stayed behind in Europe didn’t make it through the middle decades of the 20th century for obvious reasons.

    • @Evirthewarrior
      @Evirthewarrior 11 місяців тому +1

      @@just9911 That seems pretty tangential to the development. Having nothing to do with the development and only contributing a part of the massive whole that is stealth technology.
      The way most people tell the myth it is like saying Ernest Rutherford built the first atomic bomb.

  • @croatoansounds
    @croatoansounds 11 місяців тому +4

    Man when I was a kid, this was the COOLEST jet ever. I had a bunch of hot wheels versions, posters all kinds of stuff haha.
    It was just so futuristic to me (I had no idea it was more than a decade old lol). I never really knew when it was made or utilized, but I do remember as a kid it defintiely was just so different from other jets, I couldn’t imagine how it wasn’t somehow sent back in time 😂

    • @Kicker.E36
      @Kicker.E36 11 місяців тому

      As a kid who grew up with all the fancy tech
      Its still too futuristic

  • @willpugh8865
    @willpugh8865 11 місяців тому +11

    Ferrari testarossa, Scarface amounts of cocaine and this bad boy are the quintessential 80s items you cant live without

  • @orangelion03
    @orangelion03 11 місяців тому +2

    Regards R-2508 complex: I regularly hike and camp in the upper Kern. One of my favorite spots is a granite dome near the Needles, which gives me a great view of the approach to it, overlooking a valley. It's a veritable airshow some weekdays. Mostly F-18s from Lemoore and China Lake, but plenty of 16s and 15s, and in June saw a pair of 35s. Not seen a 117, but might have heard them as there is a surprising amount of activity at night in that corridor.

  • @Vanessa-c6z
    @Vanessa-c6z 11 місяців тому +1

    When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you.

  • @stevenr8606
    @stevenr8606 11 місяців тому +9

    💡 the 'F' in F-117 {Wobblin’ Goblin} was to attract pilots, the none scared type😮 The plane was, as you said, never a fighter... More a bomber. A very stealthy bomber. 👍🏼

    • @Egilhelmson
      @Egilhelmson 29 днів тому

      There were FB-x designated aircraft, so that theory is incomplete.

    • @fromYAHUSHAreborn91
      @fromYAHUSHAreborn91 5 днів тому

      Treaty workaround

  • @Shore215
    @Shore215 11 місяців тому +5

    My understanding is that although low frequency radar can detect stealth aircraft the fact that they are low frequency equalts to a largely diminished precision required to guide anti aircraft missiles to their target. So yes while it (a well as 5th gen) stealth aircraft are detectable with LF and VLF radar that's not the same as saying they're at risk of being targeted.

    • @deanwilliams433
      @deanwilliams433 11 місяців тому +1

      Modern radars are far more capable than the 60's tech the Serbs used.

    • @perryallan3524
      @perryallan3524 11 місяців тому

      @@deanwilliams433 you miss the point. The F-117, F-22, and F-35 are designed to not be visible to high frequency radars that fit into missiles and fighter jets. They have never been stealthy to low frequency radars which require very large antenna.
      Thus a ground based radar with a large antenna can say that a stealth aircraft is in an area and provide an approximate location and vector. Anti-aircraft missile radars cannot lock onto these aircraft because their small size restricts them to high frequency radars which cannot detect these aircraft untill they are exceedingly close, which means that radar guided missiles never get fired as they never get a missile lock at normal engagement distances.
      The F-117 was immune to infrared (IR) sensor missiles in its day even for missiles fired from behind a F-117 (and all but the latest generation of todays IR missiles). The F-22 and F-35 can easily be seen and targeted by almost all IR missiles of the last 60 years that are fired from behind these aircraft as their jet engine exhaust is not shielded and cooled.

    • @nerd1000ify
      @nerd1000ify 18 днів тому

      @@deanwilliams433 But the laws of physics apply to all radars. Look up the diffraction limit; basically even with a 100% perfect antenna you will face a physical limit to your resolution that scales with the wavelength- bigger waves have less resolution.

    • @nerd1000ify
      @nerd1000ify 18 днів тому

      ​@@deanwilliams433 I'm not an expert on this area, but here's the basics. Because light (and radio) is a wave, it has weird wavey behaviour when you look at the fine detail. One of the knock-on effects of this is that your best possible resolution (in terms of being able to distinguish two objects next to each other) is related to the wavelength of the light (in our case, the radio waves sent by the radar) and the size of the 'lens' being used to collect the reflection from the target (in our case, the 'lens' is actually the radar dish). The function is Theta = 1.22*(Lambda/D) for a circular dish, where Theta is the angular resolution in radians (objects with less angle between them from the radar's perspective will blur together), Lambda is the wavelength, and D is the diameter of the dish.
      So for a example: Let's say we have a radar with 10m wavelength (for detecting stealth jets) and a circular dish with a diameter of 20m. Theta will equal 0.61 radians, which equals 34.95 degrees. You can also translate that to a separation distance at a given range: At a range of 50 km, the radar will not be able to distinguish objects less than 30km apart from each other. That's obviously nowhere near good enough to guide a missile, we need to be able to distinguish the missile from the target at least until the target is within the lethal radius of the warhead. We can improve the situation by using a larger dish, a smaller wavelength or a bigger warhead. Unfortunately our 20m diameter dish is already rather impractical to be carrying around. We also probably don't want to use a strategic nuke as the warhead of our air defense missile, so the bigger warhead probably isn't an option either. So we decrease the wavelength... but then we can't see stealth jets as easily any more. Quite the dilemma.

    • @deanwilliams433
      @deanwilliams433 16 днів тому

      @@nerd1000ify You should look at defense in depth and realize that no single radar is used in detection of objects. No aircraft with a vertical tail is undetectable by VHF radar. When all these sensors are connected and thanks to advancements in real time AI data analysis, stealth aircraft are not hard to detect, they are harder to guide a missile to... for now at least

  • @drpepperr
    @drpepperr 10 місяців тому +10

    Good one, Chris. Thank you! I especially appreciated "mothball to fireball."

  • @0bserver416
    @0bserver416 11 місяців тому +2

    Unarguably one of the most futuristic and stellar design from aesthetic POV.

  • @mutantryeff
    @mutantryeff 11 місяців тому +8

    The first one I ever saw was is the mid-80s. I was driving at about 125mph on US50 westbound past Fallon Naval Base around 3am when one passed me just as it touched down. It was dark, but clear enough to realize that was a strange plane.

    • @richarddietzen3137
      @richarddietzen3137 11 місяців тому

      “Officer, I was just driving that fast as a stealth military aircraft target.” I, myself, had such an experience with A-10s in SC.

    • @davidspencer7254
      @davidspencer7254 11 місяців тому

      "I used to be a badass, now I just have one."

  • @sgtNACHO
    @sgtNACHO 11 місяців тому +7

    Always liked the Nighthawk. Felt like the perfect future plane. Angled, black, sharp, stealthy. Great combo

  • @douggroulx1525
    @douggroulx1525 11 місяців тому +20

    In my opinion the F-117 is still incredibly amazing!

    • @thespacemanfil
      @thespacemanfil 11 місяців тому

      F-117

    • @lee.as.in.l.e.e.7394
      @lee.as.in.l.e.e.7394 11 місяців тому +1

      @@thespacemanfilto be fair a lot of ppl generally refer it as the F one seventeen

    • @WarPigstheHun
      @WarPigstheHun 11 місяців тому

      ​@@lee.as.in.l.e.e.7394he means the Formula 1, driver #17, duh 🙄

    • @douggroulx1525
      @douggroulx1525 11 місяців тому

      I am very sorry for the miss pronunciation, I don’t claim to be an aviation expert by any means I just think it is really cool. But thank you for educating me it’s always appreciated.

  • @whiskey6964
    @whiskey6964 17 днів тому +1

    my heart skipped a beat when i saw F-117 documents were leaked, thinking "already?" with warthunder releasing the F-117 into the game.

  • @j887276
    @j887276 14 днів тому +1

    My father took my brother and me to an airshow in Middle River back in the 90's and we saw one of these crash. As everyone was panicking I took advantage of the chaos to jump the line for pilot autographs & free posters 😅

  • @toweringhorse2054
    @toweringhorse2054 10 місяців тому +4

    Nothing makes me more excited than to see old aircraft that should’ve been completely replaced used competitively. The Douglas DC3, Nighthawk, old MIGS, and even this cyberpunk looking birb

  • @Anime-117
    @Anime-117 11 місяців тому +5

    7:33
    Soviet Union: Radar's Clear
    F-117 Nighthawk: Hi *Drops payload*
    Soviet Union: Welp, I really called Murphy on that one huh?

  • @Lizardforce
    @Lizardforce 11 місяців тому +7

    This channel keeps getting better ❤

  • @thedarkside13
    @thedarkside13 11 місяців тому +2

    Waiting for the Serbs "Sorry, we didn't know it was invisible" in 3, 2, 1...

    • @mmmmburgerz9442
      @mmmmburgerz9442 11 місяців тому

      They even tried to say to they downed 21 of them 🤣🤣🤣 including a B-2. Sad little Serbs, still butt hurt years later. Maybe if they could tell planes apart they would avoid shooting down their own migs. They puff their chest until you talk about air to air combat. The crickets get real loud in that moment.

  • @JoeOvercoat
    @JoeOvercoat 20 днів тому +1

    The big deal about the delta wing is that the way vertices will form naturally at the leading edge, allowing the wing to go to a greater angle of attack then it would otherwise. That greater angle allows for greater lift and slower landings. Delta wings can also carry a lot of gas.

  • @mikefallwell1301
    @mikefallwell1301 11 місяців тому +6

    A recently discovered principal of stealth is that size does not matter. The Navy discovered this while designing stealth systems for ships. Large objects can be stealthy at lower frequencies🎉🎉🎉

  • @jzachar12
    @jzachar12 11 місяців тому +5

    "Giving new meaning to the term.... Silent but deadly." COME ON DUDE! That one killed me! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • @devyn.n05
    @devyn.n05 23 дні тому +4

    I know why the F-117 is back from the dead, it's because Gaijin Entertainment is adding it to War Thunder and the massive popularity it raised convinced the USAF to remove the Nighthawk from retirement for furthermore service! (Please see the irony in this! if this is even ironic idk)

    • @derf5045
      @derf5045 14 днів тому

      ​@@greyfish7907 not how stealth works.
      For the ir:
      the video doesnt tell you it was invisible, it tells you that IR trackers of the time would have trouble with it.
      All aspect missiles are much more sensitive, and the f117 does indeed still produce heat, it will be harder to lock, but it wont be invincible, nothing is invincible.
      For the radar:
      Put a triangle half in water, and watch as the waves hit it, they won't bounce back towards the source of the waves, but if you move the traingle around, suddenly some start bouncing back. besides, its still pretty stealthy head on even against the most modern radars in WT, if you want to keep it stealthy then you need to fly it as such

  • @BigBadJohn
    @BigBadJohn 3 дні тому

    I served on the F117, you can't see them and when you hear them they aren't where your ears tell you they are. Breaking the sound barrier would have caused problems with it's coatings. The IR turrets were not in the belly they were up front and can be clearly seen in these videos. The traditional INU was replaced with a more dependable but less precise Ring Laser Gyro more than 20 years ago. Avionics were similar to the F16 in theory but very different from the F16, it was these fundamentals that caused the program to source Avionics personnel from the F16 career field but not APG, E&E and Weapons. Around the 12 minute mark the video is tail 84-0826 from the 415th TFS in the video, when I worked on it the Aircraft was part of the 9th Fighter SQ. The last time I saw it was the 2002-2003 timeframe and I get a little misty thinking about life then and now.

  • @JakHazen
    @JakHazen 11 місяців тому +1

    It isn't the delta wing that gives the f-117 it's stealth, it's the faceting. The 1960's MIG-21 had a delta wing, and was not at all stealthy. The 1970's computers they used didn't have the processing power to design smooth contours like the f-22 so it was designed with a faceted exterior like a diamond, that's how it got the moniker the flying diamond. When radar energy hits the faceted surface it's redirected and some is absorbed by the R.A.M. (Radar Absorbing Material) coating that the aircraft is painted with.

  • @ylhoony
    @ylhoony 11 місяців тому +5

    when I see Cybertruck, it reminds me of Nighthawk

    • @R.Sole88109
      @R.Sole88109 11 місяців тому +4

      When I see a Cybertruck, I see a child that got a participation award 😆

    • @everettputerbaugh3996
      @everettputerbaugh3996 11 місяців тому +1

      The difference is that the Cybertruck is slightly bullet proof.

    • @Taskandpurpose
      @Taskandpurpose  11 місяців тому +1

      Underrated comment

  • @Bryster51
    @Bryster51 11 місяців тому +5

    The loss of that F117 was mostly due to using the same route area all the time, and radar operators noticed odd reflective radar signatures on each inbound pass. That heightened the tracking ability for shootdown....

    • @AA-xo9uw
      @AA-xo9uw 11 місяців тому +1

      The primary reason was chair force arrogance which resulted in the canceling of the ATOs for the EA-6Bs, F-16CJs and F-15Cs that were to escort the F-117s south. LtGen Michael C. Short USAF should have been relieved, demoted and forced to retire over that screwup.

  • @lkjh00on89
    @lkjh00on89 11 місяців тому +28

    I never understand why the air force retires aircraft when you know the Marines would gladly take them.

    • @jasonpeacock9735
      @jasonpeacock9735 11 місяців тому +36

      They can’t transfer these to the Marine Corp because the maintenance and operation manuals were never made in the form of coloring books

    • @everettputerbaugh3996
      @everettputerbaugh3996 11 місяців тому

      @@jasonpeacock9735 I heard that we hired translators to work with Crayola (color commentary) and DC comics (original author) to get the manuals into Marine Speak from the current Candy A** Speak...

    • @AllTradesGeorge
      @AllTradesGeorge 11 місяців тому +4

      I can see the Marines being interested in something like the A-10...lots of firepower, good for CAS, durable to the point that almost anything shy of a direct hit to the fuselage won't take it down quickly...
      But I think the Nighthawk loses on the operational cost vs benefit ratio for USMC operations. I could be wrong...but if the Marines are headed into a situation where stealthy first-strike capabilities are needed, they're going to be so far from friendly territory that a ground-based attack plane (whose offensive capabilities are limited to two laser-guided bombs each) would require so many logistical hoops to jump through that they'd just have the USAF fly a couple of bombers over the area and hit all the same targets in one pass, as opposed to a few dozen sorties.
      The Nighthawk really isn't designed for the kinds of conflicts the USMC deploys to.

    • @JoeOvercoat
      @JoeOvercoat 11 місяців тому +3

      @@matchesburn The USMC will have to make do with F-35Cs. 😉

    • @Whiskey11Gaming
      @Whiskey11Gaming 11 місяців тому +4

      The USMC got rid of their tanks to buy F35B and F35C aircraft... I think they are far better off without this platform, which requires land bases, than with it.

  • @Markanimation-t2v
    @Markanimation-t2v 5 днів тому +1

    Let peace prevail on Earth ✌🏼🕊️🕊️

  • @jesterlead
    @jesterlead 4 місяці тому

    In late 1990, while we were on a company "leisurely jog" around Ft. Eustis on an early Tuesday morning an entire squadron of (8) Nighthawks flew over us on final into Langley AFB. They were incredibly quiet, and of course 30+ years ago, was an awe-inspiring design to see first hand (and of course they were only "rumored" even then)...

  • @Karma-wb7et
    @Karma-wb7et 11 місяців тому +9

    I could possibly see the US Airforce turning its old F-117 Nighthawks into essentially drones. Using them as a distraction for a near peer adversary. Although I could also see them being put into airforce museums.

    • @galvinstanley3235
      @galvinstanley3235 11 місяців тому +4

      Training aircraft for other stealth fighters to fight.

  • @Khobotov
    @Khobotov 11 місяців тому +4

    I know the Nighthawk is from 1981, but it still looks scifi to me.

  • @PEDROv0311
    @PEDROv0311 11 місяців тому +4

    Awesome video! Keep it up!

  • @somedude9316
    @somedude9316 9 місяців тому

    I like that you mentioned the Yugo incident. The pilot that was shot down was flying someone else's plane too. It's written on the side of the cockpit. This story is interesting on its own as there is a lot involved, including the fact that before that day the sorties were ran on different flight paths, while this time they used the same one. And the Yugoslavian's were expecting them. They had a lot of planning on their side, and a little bit of luck. If I recall, it had something to do with the bomb bay doors being open, being a vulnerable point in the F-117's stealth.

    • @zmajooov
      @zmajooov 7 місяців тому

      no, it had everything to do with the fact that HF radars operating on 10m wavelengths can spot them. after a few nights the AA figured it out and it got shot down. it's as simple as that.

  • @brucepaxton2471
    @brucepaxton2471 День тому

    After retiring from the aerospace industry a few years ago, I had always heard rumors of the F-117 jets being kept in "flyable storage" at The Ranch. Rumors were also flying around about using them as bogies in war games scenarios.

  • @spackle9999
    @spackle9999 11 місяців тому +3

    I mean, it's basically got the guts of an F-16, so replacement parts aren't an issue. If it's used to launch cruise missiles at standoff distances, even Chinese low frequency radar won't see it.
    If they can replace the expensive first gen coating with something more permanent and less expensive, it's still very viable.

  • @Soravia
    @Soravia 11 місяців тому +5

    F117 has a hatch on bottom to connect to top opening of passengers airliners. I saw it in a movie, OK? And Steven Seagal has the most powerful martial arts moves.

    • @ashscott6068
      @ashscott6068 11 місяців тому +2

      But did YOU know...passenger jets have a hatch on them to connect them to the F117

  • @lkjh00on89
    @lkjh00on89 11 місяців тому +4

    So cool that the air force has Chat GPT flying these now on totally unmanned missions.

  • @ownedpilot4324
    @ownedpilot4324 11 місяців тому +2

    I think the funniest part of the story of F117 is that the mathematical theory the design program is based on is derived by a Soviet Engineer. However, due to the limiting computing power of USSR, the higher up did not pay close attention to this and published the result an academic achievement. Skunkworks at that time was having a hard time improving their design until they see this result. The rest is history.

    • @roderickxuan4573
      @roderickxuan4573 11 місяців тому +1

      Actually, the real story is that during the Soviet Union years, practically everything 'scientific' has to be reviewed by the military to see if there is any military value. What Pyotr Ufimtsev did was mathematically formalized the behaviors of reflecting EM waves. Nothing about designing radar evading bodies. The Soviet government determined Ufimtsev's work had no military value and allowed him to publish. The rest is history.

    • @marksadler4104
      @marksadler4104 23 дні тому

      The basics started with the Nazi Horten Ho229

  • @JohnJ469
    @JohnJ469 21 день тому

    Reading "Skunkworks" they had a massive problem trying to ground test radar invisibility. The radar echo from the pylon the test mock up sat on gave a reflection that swamped the aircraft. So they had to design a "Stealth Pylon" to sit the aircraft on top of. Once that was done, a sewing pin stuck into the nose had a higher radar signature than the aircraft and pylon combined.

  • @GUCciSkies
    @GUCciSkies 11 місяців тому +4

    Gotta watch it before they ban it!😢

    • @YoursUntruly
      @YoursUntruly 11 місяців тому

      Why would they do that?

  • @Boondoggle996
    @Boondoggle996 19 днів тому +1

    The F117 is my favorite fighter/bomber

  • @michaelwineberger6910
    @michaelwineberger6910 21 день тому

    Honestly, I liked that you said giving A new meaning to the phrase, silent but deadly!

  • @_Addi_
    @_Addi_ 11 місяців тому +1

    13:17 It wasnt an actual classified leak. That manual was already available online. Ive had it for quite some time.

  • @jimwinchester339
    @jimwinchester339 День тому

    And in addition to everything you discussed, it JUST LOOKS COOL.

  • @jonavery4978
    @jonavery4978 11 місяців тому +1

    Can confirm I've seen these bad boys flying into JBER in Anchorage.
    Would make a lot of sense to slap some F-35 stealth coating on these guys to bring their RCS down even smaller because I don't think the F-35 can LAZ a target without an external pod either and because it's a subsonic jet, you won't have the trouble of it stripping the stealth coating.
    ALSO it's much stealthier to Infrared detection which is more widely available on Chinese and Russian planes right now.
    Always loved the hell out of this thing. This and the Warthog. What can I say, I have a soft spot for the ugly planes that get the job done.
    F-16 is flashy, F-22 is sexy, F-35 got that brazilian thing going on, but nighthawk look like she showed up to work.
    A-10 is like, "Step aside Mam" BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT

  • @KlipsenTube
    @KlipsenTube Місяць тому +1

    The F-117 has a swept wing, not a delta. The F-102, F-106 and several Mirages have delta wings, why, even the F-16 is a delta wing fighter, just not a tailless delta.
    The difficulty designing the F-117 was not making it invisible to radar, but to also make it fly.

  • @denim_ak
    @denim_ak 11 місяців тому +1

    I don’t think humor is normally your focus with these videos, but this is probably the funniest video I’ve seen from you. Imo

  • @DarthDrakken
    @DarthDrakken 11 місяців тому

    My cousin and I got buzzed walking around white sands monument at night back in 2005. All of a sudden this black triangle zooms close over our heads. Amazing plane.

  • @jasonreisenberger1285
    @jasonreisenberger1285 11 місяців тому

    What I find humorous is that in the original Star Trek movie's of the 80's , Klingons had stealth technology. Fast forward a decade and there are these aircraft flying over our forward positions in Saudi when Desert Shield became Desert Storm .
    I watched those movies in the theater as a young teenager. I still think the music sound track for when the Klingons show up is awesome. Had it in my head during many long, night,dismounted, movement to contact training missions in the 90's.
    RAKKASAN!