Did we ever get the Straight Dope?
Was it downed by the Serbs, or was it supposedly some other equipment problem?
It was downed by the Serbs, but not because they found it.
It was shot down on the third or fourth night of missions to that area. It complacently flew the same route and altitude, at approximately the same time each night. The serbs just guessed right (or wrong, depending on your allegiance) and blanketed that area and altitude with SAMs. Lucky strike.
This is borne out by the fact that not one F117 was lost in subsequent missions during the balance of the conflict.
VB
Cowabunga Buffalo Bob!
It was shot down by a surface-to-air missle.
For that matter, lots of planes may have been downed by the Serbs. NATO and the US have admitted to a few more losses since the war (F-15’s, F-16’s, and a boatload of unmanned spy drones), but I’ve found a few websights that suggest that NATO is concealing somewhat heavy losses. Granted, these sights are all pro-Serbian, so you have to be suspicious, but it’s really not a hard claim to believe. After all, the airstikes were far less effective than NATO propagandists (coughJamie Sheacough) claimed. Shea said that 80% of oil refineries were destroyed, but the real number was closer to 30%. 50% of Serb MiGs were not destroyed. A handfull were downed in air-to-air combat, but most were safely tucked away in underground armored bunkers and hangers, which Yugoslavia has alot of, and which are a bitch-and-a-half to crack. Also, the enemy air defenses were far better than NATO anticipated (thank the Russians for giving them the best radar available a few years ago). Most of the more dangerous missions were carried out with cruise missles, which I personally have a deep moral problem with (It’s a cowardly way to fight a war. I’m glad we’re almost out of the old 2000-pound ones) Remember that it was the threat of a ground war that ended the conflict, not the airstrikes. And, lastly, if the Serbs could shoot down stealth aircraft, doesn’t it stand to reason that normal aircraft were in far more danger?
–It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
On the contrary, it’s a very hard claim to believe. There are people in the media and elsewhere who, just for the chance of catching something like this, count aircraft departing and returning from airbases. There are aircraft buffs who know the tail numbers of all a/c in various squadrons, and can check claims of losses against future sightings of those aircraft. There are family members who would know if the crew was lost with the a/c (which would tend to happen sometimes with heavy losses). There is public accounting of each and every airframe, that will tell you whether the a/c still in active service or was lost, and hell to pay if the military can’t account for an a/c it claims to have in service. There are too many people both inside and outside the military who would have to keep quiet. You don’t just lose many a/c costing tens of millions each and hush it up.
There have been many preposterous claims floated such as B2s shot down over Serbia, but the proposted tail numbers were later seen quite intact in bases in the US by aviation buffs. The US a/c losses were very light, but then we had virtually unopposed air superiority.
–
peas on earth
I’ve heard this rumor. Was one of those serial numbers AV-8 88-0329, the “Spirit of Missouri”? This sight claims that plane is strewn over Yugoslavia somewhere. This page also has an interesting FAQ at the top, in which the author answers questions like “Why isn’t Serbia showing more wreckage pictures?”
BTW, this is an article that’s been floating around ever since the war. It can be found on various “truth in media”-type websights. I’m notvouching for anything in it, but just so you know what non-NATO people are saying:
[quote]
The International Strategic Studies Association
Press Statement: For Immediate Release
NATO’s “Other” Yugoslavia Losses and POWs Still Not Acknowledged
Alexandria, Virginia: May 4, 1999
NATO forces, including the United States, have lost numerous aircraft and have already suffered significant loss-of-life among ground troops in the Yugoslavia conflict,
according to a report published today by the journal which in 1994 predicted the Kosovo war.
“Strategic Policy”, the monthly journal of the “Defense & Foreign Affairs” division of the worldwide International Strategic Studies Association (ISSA), a non-governmental organization (NGO) for senior national security officials from some 165 countries, said that NATO forces may have lost, up until April 20, as many as 38 fixed-wing aircraft and six helicopters in the Kosovo conflict. As well, it said, as many as 50 NATO ground troops --officially not acknowledged even to be in the conflict-- may have lost their lives. The journal, in December 1992, said that (then) President-elect Bill Clinton “will be tempted to take fast, populist decisions on the Balkans crisis, and these could be fatal for any chances for peace there.” In the February-March 1994 edition of “Strategic Policy”, staff writer T. W. (Bill) Carr wrote: “Other areas, perhaps with even greater potential for ethnic conflict [than northern Serbia], are Kosovo and the Sanjak
region of Yugoslavia. Here the problem is an explosive mixture of religion and nationalism with roots reaching back in remote history and the Tito era. Adjacent to Kosovo is Muslim Albania from whence came 95 percent of the present day population of Kosovo.”
ISSA in April this year put together the fact-finding mission which took US Congressman Jim Saxton (R-NJ) to Belgrade. The journal, which has been covering the
Balkan wars and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in detail since the early 1990s, said in today. s report, written by ISSA President Gregory Copley, who is editor of the journal: “It is clear from the amount and quality of intelligence received by this journal from a variety of highly-reputable sources that NATO forces have already suffered significant losses of men, women and materiel. Neither NATO, nor the US, UK or other member governments, have admitted to these losses, other than the single USAF F-117A Stealth fighter which was shown, crashed and burning inside Serbia.”
“The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff had denied, about a month into the bombing, that the US had suffered the additional losses reported to Defense & Foreign
Affairs.” “By April 20, 1999, NATO losses stood at approximately the following: 38 fixed-wing combat aircraft; Six helicopters; Seven unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs); “Many” Cruise Missiles (lost to AAA or SAM fire).” “Several other NATO aircraft were reported down after that date, including at least one of which there was Serbian television coverage. The aircraft reportedly include three F-117A Stealth strike aircraft, including the one already known. One of the remaining two was shot down in an air-to-air engagement with a Yugoslav Air Force MiG-29 fighter; the other was lost to AAA (anti-aircraft artillery) or SAM surface-to-air missile) fire.
Given the recovery by the Yugoslavs of F-117A technology, and the fact that the type has proven less than invincible, the mystique of the aircraft --a valuable deterrent
tool until now for the US-- has been lost.”
“At least one USAF F-15 Eagle fighter has been lost, with the pilot, reportedly an African-American major, alive and in custody as a POW.” “At least one German pilot
(some sources say two men, implying perhaps a Luftwaffe crew from a Tornado) has been captured.” “There is also a report that at least one US female pilot has been
killed.” “In one instance in the first week of the fighting, an aircraft was downed near Podgorica. A NATO helicopter then picked up the downed pilot, but the helicopter
itself was then shot down, according to a number of reports.” “Losses of US and other NATO ground force personnel, inside Serbia, have also been extensive.”
“A Yugoslav Army unit ambushed a squad climbing a ravine south of Pristina, killing 20 men. When the black tape was taken from their dog-tags it was found that 12
were US Green Berets; eight were British special forces (presumably Special Air Service/SAS). This incident apparently occurred within a week or so of the bombing
campaign launch.” “It is known that other US and other NATO casualties have, on some occasions, been retrieved by NATO forces after being hit inside Yugoslavia.
At least 30 bodies of US servicemen have been processed through Athens, after being transported from the combat zone.”
“At least two of the helicopters downed by the Yugoslavs were carrying troops, and in these two a total of 50 men were believed to have been killed, most of them (but
not all) of US origin.” “Certainly, the US has lost to ground fire and malfunction a number of Tomahawk Cruise Missiles. At least some of these have been retrieved
more or less intact, and the technology has been immediately reviewed by Yugoslav engineers. More than one told this writer that the technology was now readily able
to be replicated in Yugoslavia.”
The journal. s 17-page report also details the extent of the drug-money financing of the KLA and the impact of the Cox Committee report . detailing White House links
to Chinese intelligence funding . on the Clinton Administration. s decision to continue the war against Yugoslavia. As well, the report outlined the dangers to the West of
a protracted conflict in Yugoslavia, not only from the war there, but also because of the chance that it would trigger other conflicts, including a Chinese invasion of
Taiwan and a North Korean invasion of South Korea. The report said that the drawdown on US standoff weapons and other military assets heightened the risk of
opportunistic attacks being undertaken by countries which felt that the US could no longer deter their action.
The report also said that the loss of US and NATO prestige as a result of the Yugoslav adventure would also make future global stability more difficult to sustain. For
further information, and complete text of the article, please visit the website of the Association at: www.StrategicStudies.org
BELGRADE, May 5 (AFP) - Serbian television showed late Tuesday
what was said to be the remains of a US A-10 ground attack aircraft
shot down over Kosovo.
RTS television gave no date for the crash of the plane but the
screen showed May 2, 1999.
The television said that two aircraft preparing to attack in an
area where the army commander in Kosovo, General Vladimir Lazarevic,
was inspecting troops, were hit by anti-aircraft fire.
An RTS reporter showed what he said was one of the two engines
of the A-10, displaying the impact of the shell which hit it, along
with a radiator.
The television showed a plaque bearing the figures and letters
A-10a, A 40662 and 77751.
The
Yes. That particular aircraft was on public display in 1999 at Grissom AFB for the rollout ceremony of a new B2, who’s name I cannot recall at the moment. If my memory serves correctly, it is stationed at Whiteman AFB. They’d be awfully surprised to discover they didn’t have it!
There aren’t very many B2’s, period - you couldn’t really cover up the loss of one. You’d read about it in Avleak. Heck, the media was all over the loss of an F117 by the end of the same day.
I didn’t dig through the large mass of text you posted so I can’t comment on the rest of it, sorry…
–
peas on earth
If they shot one down (a B2), don’t you think that the Serbs would be very apt to trumpet that fact and show proof?
Hmm… only 21 B-2’s in existance? I guess I’d have to agree that it would be pretty hard to hide the loss of one. Still, the war may well have “shot them down” in another sense. The Pentagon has no more plans to ever build any more B-2’s. It’s my suspicion that the war proved that stealth technology was drastically over-hyped, or at least it isn’t worth the extreme cost. Does anyone know if F-117’s are still in production?
–It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
I don’t know whether it is worth the cost or not, but if anything, recent wars have shown that stealth technology works very well - better than was initially expected, in fact. Some level of low RCS is a requirement for most newer combat a/c such as the F22 and the JSF. RCS lowering measure are also being employed for ships. It isn’t a magic bullet, but it’s much better to have it than not to have it, and it seems to go a long ways towards reducing vulnerability to the other side’s air defense network.
I’d tend to agree that the B2 money could have been better spent elsewhere, but the reasons I think that have nothing to do with it being a stealth a/c.
The loss of the F117 over Serbia was caused by other factors, BTW.
–
peas on earth
Specifically, by the existance of so-called “anti-stealth” radar systems. It was no accident that that SAM hit that plane. What do you think the chances of an unguided missle hitting a plane in flight are? They’re astronomical. The Serbs were able to track that F117, no question about it. Before you blindly accept the Pentagon’s version of that event, remember that they are not an unbias source. It is in their interest to make the plane look as good as possable. The Serbs and Russians, of course, want the plane to look as crappy as possable. Obviously, the truth is somewhere in the middle: stealth technology has some use, but it’s far from the magic shield it was presented as.
Actually, this shows that stealth technology has some value, but not enough to design an aircraft or ship specifically around it, as was done with the F117 and B2. My guess is that you will continue to see stealth technogy being used in conjunction with other defenses, but that you’ll never see another “stealth aircraft” like B2’s or F117’s.
BTW: remember back to the Gulf War. The military would have you believe that the Patriot missles were shooting down SCUDs left and right. In fact, it’s been proven that Patriot missles were completely ineffective againt incoming missles! Patriots are anti-aircraft missles. They don’t have the speed or maneuverability necessary to be anti-missle missles. The only reason our troops weren’t hit harder by SCUDS is because those missles were absolute crap. The Russians off-loaded the oldest, worst-maintained missles on the Iraqis, and saved the good stuff for themselves and the Eastern European countries. Most of those SCUDS just exploded in mid-air (cracked engine casings or something along those lines), and half of the ones that didn’t landed way off-course, because their guidance systems are about on par with V-2’s. (Man, did Hussein get gyped or what? :))
–It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
No, that had nothing whatsoever to do with it. You greatly misunderstand the situation.
There will be, if by “stealth a/c” you mean one who’s shape and materials are specifically designed to reduce RCS. The F22 has internal weapons stowage for just this reason - this is no small thing. The frontal hemisphere RCS of the F22 is comparable to that of the F117, which should certainly qualify it as a stealth aircraft. The rear hemisphere RCS is a fair amount larger, as is the IR signature, due to the requirement for higher overall performance and agility, meaning (among other things) afterburning engines, no ducted outlets, and sizeable tails. But stealth (along with supercruise) was definately a primary design objective.
They were originally anti-a/c missiles only, but PAC-1 and PAC-2 Patriots have anti SRBM capabilities.
The situation with Patriots in the Gulf war is much more complex than most people realize, and is not well characterized by the simplistic assessments floating around such as yours above, or for that matter the ones in the media. But it is a discussion I’ve had many times before and I’m not really sure I can muster up the enthusiasm to have it again.
–
FYI for Diceman- the term “website” or “site” refers to a “location” on the WWW. “Sight” refers either to a visual impression or the ability to have visual impressions. And just for completeness, “cite” means to quote or reference.