
New Video of F-117s Flying Out of Tonopah Despite Their Fates Being Sealed - molecule
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22487/new-video-of-f-117s-flying-out-of-tonopah-emerges-despite-their-fates-being-sealed
======
a_d
One of the closest experiences to flying this thing came in 1991, in the form
of "F-117A Stealth Fighter" PC game, made by MicroProse. It was a masterpiece
for its time in terms of the detailed console one had to learn to fly this. If
you never play the game, you should just consider flipping through the
incredible manual:
[http://www.abandonia.com/files/extras/25631_game_extra_1.pdf](http://www.abandonia.com/files/extras/25631_game_extra_1.pdf)

The game and the manual had a ton of jargon that one had to learn to play the
game, adding to the feeling of being in a real sim :) The section on evasion
and defense systems was especially charming (Basically, this game was a dream
for a kid who was into PC games and flying sims). The paper version that came
with the box explained tons of small details about the plane e.g. how radar
absorption paint works (I learned later from a documentary that F-117 had to
be repainted after every mission, making maintenance very expensive).

Two highlights of the gameplay were: a) landing on an aircraft carrier and b)
learning capabilities of different types of missiles and how to deploy them
(i.e. one was forced to read the manual!).

When I hear about F-117, I can't help remember this hidden-gem PC game.

Relevant links:

1) Steam:
[https://store.steampowered.com/app/328920/F117A_Nighthawk_St...](https://store.steampowered.com/app/328920/F117A_Nighthawk_Stealth_Fighter_20/)

2) Wikipedia:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-117A_Nighthawk_Stealth_Fight...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-117A_Nighthawk_Stealth_Fighter_2.0)

~~~
acranox
There was a similar game with the F/A-18. It had a 250 page manual. I read
that whole thing. It was probably the most I read when I was 14.

~~~
rurounijones
If you still interested in that kind of thing. Digital Combat Simulator (DCS)
recently released the F/A-18C Hornet:
[https://www.airdailyx.net/article/f-a-18c-hornet-released-
fo...](https://www.airdailyx.net/article/f-a-18c-hornet-released-for-digital-
combat-simulator-world/)

Here is a video of a tutorial on CASE 1 carrier landings in the Hornet:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuigBLhtAH8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuigBLhtAH8)

Some of the DCS planes are study sim level (The A-10C Warhog, The KA-50
BlackShark, Mirage 2000, Viggten etc.) and the Hornet is going to join them
(It is currently in beta and not complete).

"Study Sim" here means that you could learn the game using the real life
documentation for the real aircraft. (Although they do have game specific
guides).

A cheap'ish HOTAS (EDIT: See llimllib's comment below, the last link has
examples. A Thrustmaster T-16000M is about 100 bucks ) is all you need harware
wise.

~~~
toomanybeersies
I played DCS A-10C a few years ago. It's such an incredibly detailed sim that
I barely managed to do anything more than get the plane started and in the
air.

It would've been much easier if I had a couple of touch screens to simulate
the cockpit controls. Trying to click on all the buttons or remember the
keyboard shortcuts was impossible.

~~~
rurounijones
Most of us just use the mouse and click around the cockpit (Along with a HOTAS
Joystick / Throttle setup).

When it comes to keyboard shortcuts I think the only one I use is the G key to
raise / lower the landing gear.

There are simple aircraft (Known as FC3) that don't have clickable cockpits
and can be started up with like 5 keyboard buttons.

I would still say you need a Joystick and Throttle though.

~~~
toomanybeersies
I did have a joystick and throttle at the time from playing FSX, MS Combat
Flight Simulator, and Battlefield 3. I just found it a bit overwhelming to try
and fly and click on all the cockpit buttons at the same time.

------
DanCarvajal
Got to see one in person at an airshow with my dad back in the late 90s. It
was in an random hanger we were checking out. The main door was opened maybe
five feet with a gate in front of it and guards were supervising people
looking in. We had no idea what to expect. I will never forget looking around
the door and there it was, gave me chills. It was the coolest thing I have
ever, or will ever see.

As is hackernews tradition, I will now recommend "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich,
fantastic book.

~~~
EvanAnderson
I saw one at EAA Airventure 1991. It was flanked by armed guards and, if I
recall properly, portions were covered with tarps. It was quite a thing to
see. The guard detial definitely made for a vivid memory.

~~~
dingaling
I was at the big RIAT air show in England earlier this month and the pair of
USAF F-15s had armed guards whereas the Special Operations Wing Herk, Osprey
and Pave Hawk were open for public viewing. That seemed somewhat back-to-
front.

------
toomanybeersies
A bloke I was talking to had an interesting theory as to why it was labeled
the F-117, despite being a ground attack aircraft rather than a fighter, and
the number being out of sequence (everyone was expecting an F-19.

Around the same time as the F-117 aircraft was being developed, Pratt &
Whitney PW2000 engine was being developed, which went on to be used in the
C-17. The PW2000 was designated by the USAF as the F117 engine. By labelling
the F-117 aircraft with the same designation, they were able to hide the
development in plain sight. If anyone heard or saw anything about the F-117,
they'd assume it was related to the engine, rather than the secret stealth
aircraft.

I've never read anything on the internet regarding this theory, but it's an
interesting theory nonetheless.

~~~
rurounijones
I remember seeing a documentary that had an interview with someone involved in
the development who said it was designated F (Fighter) instead of B (Bomber)
because it handled more like a fighter than a bomber so they wanted fighter
pilots rather than bomber pilots.

No fighter pilot would have applied for the B-117 so F it was.

Don't really believe it but it is a funny thought.

~~~
toomanybeersies
It is an interesting thought, with some precedence. The F-111 Aardvark and the
F-105 Thunderchief were labelled as fighter aircraft, but only ever used as
bombers.

------
PhasmaFelis
Fun fact: The F-117 looks like a low-poly model on an underpowered computer
because that's exactly what it is. Optimizing the shape to minimize radar
cross-section took a whole lot of math, and it got too complex for '70s-era
supercomputers unless you stuck with flat surfaces.

The B-2 Spirit stealth bomber was curvier because they had better computers by
then.

------
basementcat
If anyone is interested, F-117's are on display at Blackbird Park at Palmdale,
CA, Nellis Air Force Base north of Las Vegas, Holloman Air Force Base in New
Mexico, Wright-Patterson AFB in Ohio, and Nikola Tesla Airport in Belgrade,
Serbia (only portions of aircraft).

~~~
arprocter
>(only portions of aircraft)

The joke being that it was shot down

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk#Comba...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk#Combat_loss)

------
Atreus
The Chinese got something amazing out of the junk they bought from the F-117
shot down in Bosnia. This has to be something at least a little like when the
U2 went down in USSR. Whatever they got, and reverse engineered, and are
putting into their F-35 knock-offs, it has "us" worried, and we have to have
tried-and-true countermeasures in place for when China uses those against our
assets, or our allies in the next few years.

Politics and "sealed fates" are strange bedfellows.

------
Invictus0
Why is it so difficult to put them in museums?

~~~
packetized
Well, mostly the process of stripping their low-RCS paint.

[http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4729/the-toxic-death-
pa...](http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4729/the-toxic-death-paint-scheme-
was-the-f-117-nighthawks-most-outrageous)

~~~
LeifCarrotson
Soda blasting? That's a ubiquitous process being performed literally all the
time.

Yeah, blasting, grinding, cutting, forging, and dozens of other industrial
processes are nasty and messy, but that isn't the hassle. The problem here is
secrecy and finding shops with a large enough blasting bay (there are
thousands of auto body shops with bays for blasting full size trucks and other
large vehicles - literally 15 on Google Maps within half an hour of me) and
having laborers with top-secret clearance to do the work. All so 1970s tech
can stay a secret.

~~~
stonemetal
I didn't realize full size trucks had gotten over 60 feet long and 40 feet
wide.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
They're not but the point was that the size isn't all that special. A shop
that blasts and paints bulldozers could do it.

------
walrus01
For those who haven't heard of them before, people might find the Janet
flights interesting:

[https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=jan...](https://www.google.com/search?client=ubuntu&channel=fs&q=janet+flights&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

DoD commuter flights between Las Vegas and Groom Lake.

------
gchokov
The web page you were trying to visit is not accessible in your country. What
a shame. I live in Bulgaria, Europe.

~~~
icebraining
That's curious, loads fine in my EU country, there's only a GDPR interstitial.

------
mobilemidget
geoblocked here :( getting redirected to
[https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-
access.h...](https://geoscripts.meredith.services/public/html/no-access.html)

------
mr_overalls
As a child of the 80s and 90s, I sort of miss the public unveiling of secret
aircraft. It seems like there hasn't been anything matching the mystery of the
B-2 or F-117 in a long time.

~~~
stillsut
Yeah today it's PRISM and Stuxnet.

But less sarcastically, there was that stealth helicopter destroyed during the
Bin Laden raid, but I haven't seen much talk about it since.

------
raverbashing
So, what's with the retirement of proven older aircraft in spite of the F35?

~~~
mannykannot
I would guess that anti-stealth technology has also developed since it first
flew. I wonder if the recovery of the wreckage of the F117 shot down over
Bosnia can be assumed to have revealed ways to counter its technology?

------
sgillen
My guess is that they are still a useful platform to tear new radars against.

~~~
toomuchtodo
That is the thesis explicitly put forth in the middle of the article.

------
steven2012
Have these planes ever been used in real combat?

~~~
greedo
Desert Storm, Bosnia, and Panama IIRC.

