PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Jet Crash Lands in Libya, but Crew Safe



djones520
03-22-2011, 08:54 AM
TRIPOLI, Libya -- A U.S. warplane on patrol in Libya crash-landed in Libya Tuesday after a mechanical failure, but the U.S. military says the crew of the F-15E Eagle are safe.

A U.S. official says both the crew of an F-15 fighter jet that crashed in Libya are safe and back in American hands.

The official, speaking Tuesday on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record, said a Marine Corps Osprey search and rescue aircraft retrieved the pilot. He says the second crew member, a weapon's officer, was recovered by Libyan rebel forces and is now in U.S hands.

Just after midnight local time, the jet crashed just east of Benghazi in rebel held territory.

Vince Crawley, a spokesman for the Africa Command, says both sustained minor injuries and were separated because they used parachutes to eject from the F-15E Strike Eagle jet at high altitudes, ending up in different areas.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/22/jet-reportedly-crash-lands-libya-crew-believed-safe/

Bet that was a wild night for the crew.

lacarnut
03-22-2011, 09:12 AM
I predicted shit like this would happen. We were lucky THIS time. Next time it may be a different story. WE need to get the f... out of there and let the EU handle it. BTW, Obama lied about our role in the fight.

SarasotaRepub
03-22-2011, 09:23 AM
Glad the crew got out safe.


Has Obama apologized yet??? :confused::D

Odysseus
03-22-2011, 10:00 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/22/jet-reportedly-crash-lands-libya-crew-believed-safe/

Bet that was a wild night for the crew.
Bet the maintenance chief is going to have a wild couple of days. Any idea what failed?

I predicted shit like this would happen. We were lucky THIS time. Next time it may be a different story. WE need to get the f... out of there and let the EU handle it. BTW, Obama lied about our role in the fight.

A single failure is not a reason to abandon a mission. Don't start playing the liberal game of "if the military can't do it perfectly, then we shouldn't do it." The reasons against this mission are legion, but a single equipment failure isn't one of them. That having been said, if I were the commander on the ground, I'd want to know what system failed and whether there was a risk of a repeat. The F-15 is an old airframe, and is being used well past its anticipated shelf-life. If this is a systemic failure, then we have a problem.

Wei Wu Wei
03-22-2011, 10:30 AM
A single failure is not a reason to abandon a mission. Don't start playing the liberal game of "if the military can't do it perfectly, then we shouldn't do it."

I've always hated this argument from liberals. It just shows their total moral bankruptcy. They've given up even questioning whether we should be invading countries and killing people, and the only anti-war debate that is allowed to take place is debate over the logistics of it all. If it's economically, militarily, and socially feasable for us to do that.

This should not be the "liberal" argument against war.

lacarnut
03-22-2011, 10:31 AM
Bet the maintenance chief is going to have a wild couple of days. Any idea what failed?


A single failure is not a reason to abandon a mission. Don't start playing the liberal game of "if the military can't do it perfectly, then we shouldn't do it." The reasons against this mission are legion, but a single equipment failure isn't one of them. That having been said, if I were the commander on the ground, I'd want to know what system failed and whether there was a risk of a repeat. The F-15 is an old airframe, and is being used well past its anticipated shelf-life. If this is a systemic failure, then we have a problem.

I am not a mind reader so maybe you can help me out. What is the mission? Are we in it to win or is this a half ass baked mission? If we are not in it to win, what are we doing there? Obama does not have a clue cause he stated that after all is said and done Quadaffi might still be in power. What kind of stupid shit is that. Like I said before, let these worthless bastards kill each other and we stay out of it.

Another possibility is that it was not a mechanical problem but was shot down. The government would never lie to us would it? All of the anti aircraft missiles have not been destroyed.

djones520
03-22-2011, 11:15 AM
F-15's have had a slurry of mechanical issues of late. Was just a couple of years ago that the entire fleet of F-15's were grounded for several weeks. It's a side effect of using such an old aircraft. If anything, this should just highlight the need for more spending to get our F-22 and F-35 fleets ready to take over the mission.

As for conspiracy theories about what happened, I'm just going to ignore those. A review board will be done on this and the results will be published.

Odysseus
03-22-2011, 11:26 AM
I am not a mind reader so maybe you can help me out. What is the mission? Are we in it to win or is this a half ass baked mission? If we are not in it to win, what are we doing there? Obama does not have a clue cause he stated that after all is said and done Quadaffi might still be in power. What kind of stupid shit is that. Like I said before, let these worthless bastards kill each other and we stay out of it.

Your guess is as good as mine. Explaining your actions is for people who have reasons for them. Obama had nothing against Qaddafi before he was

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-5lXGLCenzk8/TYfLu231a9I/AAAAAAAACv8/x_vNOFidA0c/s640/Muammar%2BThan%2BHe%2BBargained%2BFor.jpg


Another possibility is that it was not a mechanical problem but was shot down. The government would never lie to us would it? All of the anti aircraft missiles have not been destroyed.
Generally, the US is pretty straightforward about why a plane goes down. For one thing, it's going to impact the records of the personnel involved. An aircraft that goes down for a mechanical failure is going to roll back on the aircrew that was supposed to service it. A plane that goes down for pilot error is the same deal, but enemy fire is an honorable way to go down, and their injuries would be considered combat injuries and warrant Purple Hearts.

Also, a plane that is shot down justifies further enforcement of the no-fly zone. A plane that fails due to mechanical issues raises concerns about readiness and OR rates, which is not something that you want to have affecting morale.

fettpett
03-22-2011, 11:53 AM
the F-15 is what? 40 years old? The F-22 is done, spend the money and get them out there to replace the F-15. The F-35 needs to be reevaluated and probably cut down to just an Air Force and Navy variant and start from scratch on a V/TOL aircraft for the Marines. I'd much rather have a dedicated machine than one thats been run over budget because it's to fucking complicated.

KhrushchevsShoe
03-22-2011, 04:27 PM
Oddly enough, they were greeted as liberators. JUST SAYIN'

Odysseus
03-22-2011, 04:49 PM
Oddly enough, they were greeted as liberators. JUST SAYIN'

So?

Lager
03-22-2011, 05:02 PM
Oddly enough, they were greeted as liberators. JUST SAYIN'

The Kurds in Northern Iraq that I met while stationed there, also looked upon us as "liberators", so what's your point?

Odysseus
03-22-2011, 05:37 PM
The Kurds in Northern Iraq that I met while stationed there, also looked upon us as "liberators", so what's your point?

The same with the Shia in Iraq, although the Kurds still love us. But right now, the Libyan rebels are not killing Americans because the no-fly zone benefits them.