On Jan 20, 11:25*am, John Szalay
wrote:
jkochko68 wrote :

Wow how is scrapping a plane going to get rid of a warehouse of parts?
The government must not have heard
of a semi-truck and a empty hanger that could maybe just maybe store
something other than aircraft. *This is such
an infantile attitude the U.S. took about this F-14 parts situation,
as if another country has never wanted something
we have that they want and we are acting like its the 1st time
somebody might try to steal or buy it through obscure
channels.

SUPPOSEDLY all critical F-14 parts are being accounted for..both off the
airframe and in the parts inventory..

YEA I know it ain't going to happen, BUT they do not want ANY F-14 parts to
get to Iran.. *The F-14 is an obsolete aircraft, difficult to maintain
and expensive to fly.. the Navy brass wants them out of the inventory
and to not become a threat again.. the F-14s even went to a special
scrapping unit to insure the parts headcount...

The AirForce beancounters wants to do the same thing to the U-2 as they did
to the SR-71, since they cost too much to maintain and "don,t fit the
gunfighter hotshot pilot image
but the end-users need the output of the Elint U-2 so it stays in the
invetory for 2 more years, until one of the UAV gets the Elint upgrade.
the battle for money goes on..

The F-14 was hard to maintain and costly, as well. Part of that cost
is probably a reflection of systems reliability. I recall reading
that unlike other two-seater aircraft, press people who flew the
airplane needed to be trained on certain systems (beyond ejection
seats) because the backseater had things to do in order for the plane
to ready to fly. I suspect it was more than just sensors because you
don't need to run the radar to demo the plane to a VIP or a
journalist.

If the plane's reliability is dicey, then how willing are you to shoot
the thing off over the Gulf of Mexico and hope it will make it to the
range. The real answer is probably that despite the amount of
hardware just sitting somewhere, it would cost more than other
alternatives without offering anything particularly unique.

Take care all . . .

John