I hope I'm this active when I'm "retired"

“Retired” has always been a strong word.

“Retired, you believe that?” - John Wick 2014.

They wouldn’t go through the cost and time to do this it we haven’t found a new use for the aircraft. This warms my heart.

It’s also because the F-117 has a similar profile to low flying cruise missiles. Really good as a training unit

SR-71 retired in 1989 reactivated then again retired in 1998.About F-117, most probably with F-117 RCS they can simulate new Chinese stealthy fighters since they maybe kinda share the same material technology coming from 82-0806.

There's been a ton of Nighthawk sightings for years now. It's been an open secret for ages. Seems since the pandemic the Air Force knows this and just stopped caring as well, since then it's just been flying them out in broad daylight in populated areas for everyone to see.

I was on patrol in my jurisdiction when I spotted a USMC MC-130 refueling 2 CH-53E Super- Stallions at no more than 2000 feet. Each was fed from the hose/reel pods on the outboard wings. I wanted to make a model diorama of the scene, but finding kits in the scale that's practicable seemed impossible. It reminded me of a similar scene from a Marine Corps publicity photo of 2 CH-53s, with LAV-25s carried as slung loads, being refueled by a MC-130.

We (at Kaiser Electronics) were proud to supply the flight displays for the F-117 (2 multipurpose display indicators and the HUD, both adapted from the then F-18). When I first saw an F-117 looking down on the production line I couldn't envision how the engine exhaust was routed or how that odd-shaped thing would fly. We developed a software environment (hardware and software) that supported Lockheed's development of the display software. As often reported Lockheed were masters of reuse: F-18 displays, F-16 flight computer (as I recall), and I'm certain many other borrows. All our in-house work was designated as support for a "Logistics Trainer". Only a few of us had program access. Spent 37 years working on a long line of military aircraft; really miss those days.

F-117 is cover for certifying KC--46 refueling Airwolf.

The USAF gave Boeing a set of specifications for the new boom design of the KC-46. Boeing actually went to the USAF and said they didn't think the specs were right for certain aircraft. The USAF said no, those are the specs. Boeing built to those specs, which turned out to be incorrect for some aircraft, including the A-10. The A-10 does not have the excess thrust that would be required to revise procedures, so this required some redesign, for which Boeing did charge the USAF.

I would have thought that the only requirement to refuel from a tanker with the 'boom' as opposed to the 'basket' would be that the receiving aircraft can fly as slow as the tanker and still maintain straight and level with relative ease.

Always thought that the F-117 was retired....and....it's ALIVE

Or, it could be that the USAF was just kidding when they said the F-117 was retired? Sort of like the Air Force saying that they have no replacement for the SR-71?

I’ve heard them used on pacific range fleet exs and various test stuff. Since a lot of that is supported by tankers, just seems like a ‘why not’ type of thing. It’s not a huge deal to cert them, but I’m sure people will read huge things into it.

You can still do volunteer work when you're retired 😉

What is dead may never die

So everything that hooks up to an Air Force tanker has to be certified to that specific MDS. They have to determine things like the rendezvous, refueling and overrun speeds and if there are any envelope limitations. The A-10s require the -135 to be under 200k or 210k gross weight and we would have to roll flaps 20 degrees to keep from stalling, FL180 with a combat loaded hawg was sporty. F-16s and -22s are restricted to only 25 degrees (instead of 20) elevation due to the receptacle location and the canopy and the C-17s have a 35 degree (instead of 40) lower limit if we don’t have all 5 units of trim in the boom because we would not have enough authority to get proper alignment for disconnect below that. A friend of mine who is a retired KC-135 hydro troop told me that the extend/retract mechanism on the -46 boom is too “stiff” and the fighter type aircraft are having issues overcoming the pressure. On the -135 when in contact the hydro system allows the boom to basically free float with the receiver’s movements and we only kept our hand near the telescoping handle in case of an unplanned disconnect.

KC-135 would toboggan sometimes, not all the time, A/R with A-10's and AC-130's. It helped with the thrust limited receivers. As for A/R KIAS, if memory serves me, around 210-220 KIAS (check the current -3 T.O.). Problem is, roll control authority is limited in the KC-135 at those speeds, like most airliner type aircraft, without any flaps down (ie outboard ailerons locked out). You put flaps down (min is 20), then there is big downwash issues for the receivers (which makes the whole thrust limit thing worse). In flying KC-135 A/D/E/R's, I may have tobogganed maybe a handful of times. Most notably, 2 AC-130's (older non pressurized ones) deploying trans pacific, as they got filled up (heavier) they just couldn't hang. However, we are only talking about 200 FPM descent.

Type 1000 storage doesn't seem like a fully retired status

So i was wondering with the majority of the f117 in storage does the airforce keep a certain amount of personel certified to fly and maintain these aircrafts as well?

The KC30A doesn't have issues with the remote boom.

I see f117 I click

The way the US does A2A Refueling absolutely crazy to me. You would think someone would have figured out a system that works for everyone and they would stop doing all this male/female probe stuff, and having to equip tankers differently. But then again, the US military is a shell of it's former self. I keep wondering when people are going to notice, it'll probably be right after "it's to late".

Talked to a boom operator last year. Says he had refueled the F-117 recently and a number of times in the last few years. A-10 certification failure...by design? AF wants to get rid of it, this may be a good reason or add to the list of why they want to retire it.

(Insert a Letter)C-135 and B-52... the air force has really struggled to replace those two platforms... and they have actively tried to replace both Boeing cant make a 737 Max but they sure af know how to make those two platforms😂

The USAF has a long history of using retired and even prototype aircraft for testing stuff just to give the tests some variety

The A-10 has difficulty to get through the larger tanker bow wave on the KC-10 and KC-46.

For a plan well retired it’s getting more use than the F-22/35 combined.

I thought f117 was adversarial training

I really wonder why it still is in service, despite "retirement". I thought it would be better to use F-35 or this weird stealth drone to train against potential chinese fighters after all. My initial thought was, that the F-117 might resemble the J-20´s stealth the most of these aircraft. But I really don´t have a clue...

The f117 might have disposal problems such as toxic long lasting chemicals which are fine when in solid form. As a possibility that it is currently impossible to break down the aircraft for environmental reasons they may be using it because just storing it is also expensive and if one crashes, well it has been disposed of. Do you remember when the first harriers crashed and no one knew how to deal with the crash site contaminantion?

When you get “too old to get it in” it is definitely time to retire. 😂

Isnt the nighthawk defuct now though? The F22 and F23 outclass it in just about every way do they not?

Why does an airplane already certified need to be re-certified.

F-117 platform would make a potent stealth attack drone with remote/automated piloting.... Just sayin'

Wasnt F35 stealth 😂😂😂

USAF wanted the A330 and Congress blocked it… Go from a hugely more capable aircraft to that museum piece.

The TTR has plenty F-117’s stored in climate controlled hangars just waiting to come back and play if needed. Retired? Kinda

Enough of this conspiratorial nonsense. The USAF has been having so many problems with the T-7 Red Hawk that obviously they need to reactivate the Nighthawk as an aerial refueling trainer.

It’s all because one shot down air force one in season 4 of 24

*sends F-117s to Ukraine* 😂

That thing still flies? Twelve years ago I saw remains of one in Serbian museum. The plane got shot down like twenty-five years ago. 🙂

So they have @45 of the F-117s. The official word is they are using them for training. But, there is zero doubt it could be pressed into real service if needed. Why not certify it? But it’s disgusting that the KC-46 is such a POS.

Maybe we need C-130 tankers 😉🤣