U. S. Defense Budget

[spacearrow99]

"The DoD only has two carrots to entice somebody to stay 20, 30, 40 years in uniform, and that is the immediate receipt of military retirement pay, and reasonably inexpensive health care for themselves and their spouse for the rest of their lives," says Joe Davis, national spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Troops deserve subsidized benefits due to the taxing tempo of military life, he says. Constant relocation hampers earning equity on a purchased home, and precludes military spouses from developing a steady career. Service members reentering the workforce after decades in the military have less of an edge over younger civilians applying for the same jobs, he says. Raising these costs will take a toll on the military leadership at both the enlisted and officer levels.

"The impact is not so much recruitment, but it will impact retention," he says. "What you could have in the end isn't the best qualified, it's the last person standing."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/05/30/hagel-may-cut-benefits-for-veterans

The paragraph above is from the article I found today. Military personnel are paying more or the system will go bankrupt.

 

[Ulysses31]

Why doesn't the US listen to its people?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...use-assess-feasibility-moon-sized-weapon.html

 

[vodkazvictim]

The B-1B has a variable-seep wing, so the B-1B is much more suited to the low level penetrator role.

Horseshit.
Variable sweep has little advantage in that role when you consider that both aircraft are subsonic on the deck.
Cram all the electronics of a B1 into a B52 and it'll do the same low level penetration mission way, way cheaper.

The B-1 has a lower cost per flight hour than the B-52; they can also carry a much heavier weapons payload than the Tu-160 and B-52. The B-1B can operate from shorter airfields than B-52. The

Source on it being cheaper to fly per hour please. And on it carrying a heavier payload than Tu160 or B52.
Yes, it can operate from shorter fields. B52 is a runway crusher, so B1 is better suited to a more frontal role. That being the case, isn't the F15E even better suited to such a role?

I already know about the high maintenance cost of the F-22 and F-35. The maintenance cost of aircraft usually increase per generation. The Next Generation Bomber maintenance cost should be lower since the program will be using current stealth technology. I hope Boeing and Lockheed Martin can keep the program on budget.

Why doesn't the US listen to its people?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...use-assess-feasibility-moon-sized-weapon.html

No country listens to it's people. The politicians take their wages for granted, view them as "living on rations" and proceed to chase "campaign donations".

 

[spacearrow99]

Horseshit.
Variable sweep has little advantage in that role when you consider that both aircraft are subsonic on the deck.
Cram all the electronics of a B1 into a B52 and it'll do the same low level penetration mission way, way cheaper.Source on it being cheaper to fly per hour please. And on it carrying a heavier payload than Tu160 or B52.
Yes, it can operate from shorter fields. B52 is a runway crusher, so B1 is better suited to a more frontal role. That being the case, isn't the F15E even better suited to such a role?

The B-1B has a big advantage on the B-52, on the deck especially during a low level penetration mission in a mountain valley. The variable-sweep wing in the forward position gives the B-1B far more maneuverability than the B-52.

There are numerous sources on the payloads of those three aircraft. One B-1 can carry 24 JASSM internally, which is far more than the 16 carried by next closest aircraft the B-2. That one B-1B's external payload is still greater than the payloads of two F-15E. The B-1 and B-2 were made in much fewer numbers than the B-52, so maintenance costs should be much higher for those two aircraft. There are B-52 bone yards that are filled with spare parts of decommissioned B-52s.

Look at the blue chart in the article. (source cheaper to fly per hour )
http://www.theatlantic.com/national...e-air-force-build-an-affordable-plane/254998/

 

[CptHa]

Maybe, but F5s will be the quickest thing the US can build to even the odds and even if, by some miracle, Chinese jets work half as well as claimed, they don't have combat experience

Not to nitpick vv, but the F-5 has been long obsolete, to the point where even the T-38 Talon (a two seat F-5 trainer variant) is being retired. If they are going for quick builds and realtively low costs for a fighter, the US Air Force would be much better served by acquiring F-15E or SE types as well as F-16 Block 60s. They are proven platforms and would not require as much training for ground crews, or require all new ground equipment.

 

[vodkazvictim]

The B-1B has a big advantage on the B-52, on the deck especially during a low level penetration mission in a mountain valley. The variable-sweep wing in the forward position gives the B-1B far more maneuverability than the B-52.

OK. I'm prepared to conceed that. All my other points still stand.

There are numerous sources on the payloads of those three aircraft. One B-1 can carry 24 JASSM internally, which is far more than the 16 carried by next closest aircraft the B-2. That one B-1B's external payload is still greater than the payloads of two F-15E. The B-1 and B-2 were made in much fewer numbers than the B-52, so maintenance costs should be much higher for those two aircraft. There are B-52 bone yards that are filled with spare parts of decommissioned B-52s.

Look at the blue chart in the article. (source cheaper to fly per hour )
http://www.theatlantic.com/national...e-air-force-build-an-affordable-plane/254998/

Well, would you look at that; somebody on FO provided a source.
Now if you'll excuse me I have to go outside and shoo a flying pig away as it's eclipsing my beautifull view of the lovely blue moon.
I hardly expected that the B1 would be cheaper to fly than the B52. I stand by the merits of the B52 that I mentioned earlier, though.

Not to nitpick vv, but the F-5 has been long obsolete, to the point where even the T-38 Talon (a two seat F-5 trainer variant) is being retired. If they are going for quick builds and realtively low costs for a fighter, the US Air Force would be much better served by acquiring F-15E or SE types as well as F-16 Block 60s. They are proven platforms and would not require as much training for ground crews, or require all new ground equipment.

Has it now?
In the same way that the f22 is absolutely perfect?
While the F16 would be quick and cheap to build, the F5 would be quicker and cheaper.

 

[CptHa]

Has it now?
In the same way that the f22 is absolutely perfect?
While the F16 would be quick and cheap to build, the F5 would be quicker and cheaper.

The 22 is far from being a godsend and is a red herring for the point I was trying to make. Meanwhile, you are still neglecting to take into account that the infrastructure, support equipment, and personnel (both to maintain and pilot) are all in place for both the F-15 and F-16. Outside of some contractors and pilots, practically no current AF personnel have ever touched an actual F-5 (not the T-38). Without the right amount of trained pilots, and especially without experienced maintainers, it would be completely pointless to start making more F-5s.

 

[vodkazvictim]

The 22 is far from being a godsend and is a red herring for the point I was trying to make. Meanwhile, you are still neglecting to take into account that the infrastructure, support equipment, and personnel (both to maintain and pilot) are all in place for both the F-15 and F-16. Outside of some contractors and pilots, practically no current AF personnel have ever touched an actual F-5 (not the T-38). Without the right amount of trained pilots, and especially without experienced maintainers, it would be completely pointless to start making more F-5s.

While your infrastructure point is valid, the F5 was designed specifically for low indrastructure and budget countries.
It should be no problem for even a fall superpower such as the 'states to put the infrastructure in place for it (a good deal of which should be already in place for other jets like the F16).
The F5 is famously easy to maintain and fly. Since many of the current pilots and maintenance crew trained with the T38, which is essentially a 2 seat F5...
I'm sorry but I believe my point stands.

 

[Mayhem]

While your infrastructure point is valid, the F5 was designed specifically for low indrastructure and budget countries.
It should be no problem for even a fall superpower such as the 'states to put the infrastructure in place for it (a good deal of which should be already in place for other jets like the F16).
The F5 is famously easy to maintain and fly. Since many of the current pilots and maintenance crew trained with the T38, which is essentially a 2 seat F5...
I'm sorry but I believe my point stands.

It does stand. The above points about infrastructure are absurd. It's like not trusting an F1 driver to take your Toyota for a spin in a mall parking lot.

And I will say again, too much gets concentrated on the tool and not the operator. Save money on the planes and spend money on state-of-the-art simulators and flight time. That's the key.

 

[vodkazvictim]

It does stand. The above points about infrastructure are absurd. It's like not trusting an F1 driver to take your Toyota for a spin in a mall parking lot.

And I will say again, too much gets concentrated on the tool and not the operator. Save money on the planes and spend money on state-of-the-art simulators and flight time. That's the key.

You and I are agreeing... perhaps an implosion will now occur.

 

[CptHa]

And I will say again, too much gets concentrated on the tool and not the operator. Save money on the planes and spend money on state-of-the-art simulators and flight time. That's the key.

Yet, no one pays attention to the people that actually put the thing together. It takes time for ground crews and pilots to familiarize themselves with a new (or in this case old) aircraft. You guys about simulators and flight time to train pilots. Well, we DO have state of the art simulators and we fly the crap out of both the F-15 and F-16, at least we were prior to budget cuts. Infrastructure isn't just the buildings and ramp, it's the people you have working on and operating these aircraft. Literally, everything in place for new Eagles and Falcons, not F-5s. All that has to happen is for the DoD to buy the jets and fly them where they are wanted, all without missing a beat.

Since many of the current pilots and maintenance crew trained with the T38, which is essentially a 2 seat F5...

I can tell you right now vv, that you're wrong about the maintenance crews. No USAF maintenance personnel are being trained to fix F-5s, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone currently enlisted that has.

I get you guys are looking at cheap, and the unit cost of an F-5 is way low, but I don't think you guys are factoring in the hidden costs of training personnel and setting things up for a jet that isn't in the inventory, as well as the time and money spent on necessary upgrades. Also, at some point, you're not getting a fair trade for performance to cost. I don't believe that even the latest Tigers are going to be able to measure up to what the 15s and 16s can offer a pilot.

 

[Mayhem]

If you are a crew chief for an F15, what is it about an F5 that's confounding you?

 

[spacearrow99]

I forgot about Russia's R-33/37 family of missiles; they are designed to kill AWACS at extremely long ranges. F-15 perform at the F-22 is training exercises has been horrible. The F-22's AESA radar and stealth make it unbeatable in BVR aerial warfare against 4.0 and 4.5 generation aircraft. The Chinese and Russian stealth fighters will be very good aircraft. The F-35 program will not be cancelled. The F-35 order will be reduced because of the increasing costs of the program.

 

[Mayhem]

I'm not trying to be argumentative but since the F15 is never going to fight the F22, comparisons between the two are pointless.

Until China and Russia invent a stealth airfield, I'm not going to worry. And that's not even a factor to the most relevant point, which is that we are never going to go to war with Russia or China. Period. Superpowers fight wars by proxy. That is, quite simply, not going to change.

 

[spacearrow99]

I'm not trying to be argumentative but since the F15 is never going to fight the F22, comparisons between the two are pointless.

Until China and Russia invent a stealth airfield, I'm not going to worry. And that's not even a factor to the most relevant point, which is that we are never going to go to war with Russia or China. Period. Superpowers fight wars by proxy. That is, quite simply, not going to change.

The F-22 has dominated the F-15 in Red Flag training exercises. My comparison of the two aircraft, is on the basis of how the F-15, would perform against a Russian and/or Chinese fifth generation fighter. On two occasions war could have occurred between the U. S. and the Soviet Union. The two occasions were the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. Its highly unlike that U. S. will ever go to war with Russia or China, but we cannot fall behind those countries in fighter technology. If the Air Force cancelled the F-22 and F35 programs, American fighter contractors would lose much now how on designing and build fighter aircraft. A possible sixth generation fighter would have many more problems than the F-35 program.

 

[CptHa]

If you are a crew chief for an F15, what is it about an F5 that's confounding you?

I'm a 16 crew chief, actually. My point comes from the ability for both of jets being able to substantially out lift the F-5 when it comes to an ordinance load, not to mention that they can carry those loads farther and faster. The Tiger simply can't do what the 15 and 16 can, even with all of the upgrades. Then there's the fact that Tiger production stopped 26 years ago (something that will raise the cost of each plane), whereas Falcon and Eagle production lines will be going through 2016 and 2018, respectively. Not much sense in bringing an old and inferior jet back to life when there are combat proven jets still being made.

 

[Mayhem]

The F-22 has dominated the F-15 in Red Flag training exercises. My comparison of the two aircraft, is on the basis of how the F-15, would perform against a Russian and/or Chinese fifth generation fighter. On two occasions war could have occurred between the U. S. and the Soviet Union. The two occasions were the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. Its highly unlike that U. S. will ever go to war with Russia or China, but we cannot fall behind those countries in fighter technology. If the Air Force cancelled the F-22 and F35 programs, American fighter contractors would lose much now how on designing and build fighter aircraft. A possible sixth generation fighter would have many more problems than the F-35 program.

Well, it's a good thing that all our public schools are state-of-the-art and that we have such a huge surplus to our budget so that we can spend all this money on bullshit that we'll never need.

All military contrators are thieves and leeches and that's the only thing driving an arms race that doesn't exist.

 

[vodkazvictim]

Yet, no one pays attention to the people that actually put the thing together. It takes time for ground crews and pilots to familiarize themselves with a new (or in this case old) aircraft. You guys about simulators and flight time to train pilots. Well, we DO have state of the art simulators and we fly the crap out of both the F-15 and F-16, at least we were prior to budget cuts. Infrastructure isn't just the buildings and ramp, it's the people you have working on and operating these aircraft. Literally, everything in place for new Eagles and Falcons, not F-5s. All that has to happen is for the DoD to buy the jets and fly them where they are wanted, all without missing a beat.


I can tell you right now vv, that you're wrong about the maintenance crews. No USAF maintenance personnel are being trained to fix F-5s, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone currently enlisted that has.

I get you guys are looking at cheap, and the unit cost of an F-5 is way low, but I don't think you guys are factoring in the hidden costs of training personnel and setting things up for a jet that isn't in the inventory, as well as the time and money spent on necessary upgrades. Also, at some point, you're not getting a fair trade for performance to cost. I don't believe that even the latest Tigers are going to be able to measure up to what the 15s and 16s can offer a pilot.

1: F5s are very low maintenance
2:Are you claiming to be a pilot?
3: It really should not be hard to train someone to maintain an F5. Are you familiar with the jet? It was designed way back when to be simple, cheap and easy to maintain... for 3rd world countries... WAY back then.
4: The F5 minimises those hidden costs.
6: I believe the F5 performs well as a dogfighter (it's combat raison d'etre).

Allow me to restate my case for the F5:
Cheap to buy
Easy and cheap to maintain and fly.
Lightweight, agile dogfighter.
The F5 is cheap to buy and quick to build. In a USA-China conflict the F5 will allow the US to quickly boost her combat aircraft numbers. It's ease of flying will aid this.

I forgot about Russia's R-33/37 family of missiles; they are designed to kill AWACS at extremely long ranges. F-15 perform at the F-22 is training exercises has been horrible. The F-22's AESA radar and stealth make it unbeatable in BVR aerial warfare against 4.0 and 4.5 generation aircraft. The Chinese and Russian stealth fighters will be very good aircraft. The F-35 program will not be cancelled. The F-35 order will be reduced because of the increasing costs of the program.

Those missiles are an argument for F5s; a protective screen of F5s should protect the AWACS.
So the f22 performs well in excercises? It's not like the american military ever has or ever will doctor a training excercise to favour a preferred weapons system... right?
You're sounding like an advert for the f22 now. It's a hangar queen and if I remember correctly Indian Sukhoi aircraft took it down in a joint training excercise.
As for the Russian stealth aircraft that will be so unstoppable... lets have a look at Russia's recent aircraft efforts:
Su37 Terminator: Produced - then converted back to Su35.
Su47 Berkut (meaning golden eagle: Prototype produced. Aircraft declared officially in service. Project cancelled.
MiG 1.44 Raptor Killer: (No, I'm not trolling, that was the name they gave it) Prototype produced. Project abandoned due to extreme cost of aircraft.
Sukhoi Pak Fa: Prototype produced... When will it be cancelled?

Frankly, I'm not aware of one piloted aircraft that Russia has developed in the 20 odd years since the fall of Communism from a clean sheet that has been successful.
Just as in the waste you pay arms manufacturers a pretty penny and get nothing (I'm looking at you, UK military resourcing, which has the tax payer pay for new Nimrod aircraft and carriers even though

I'll get back to this later

I'm not trying to be argumentative but since the F15 is never going to fight the F22, comparisons between the two are pointless.
I can't believe you're saying that anything chinese built will be good

Until China and Russia invent a stealth airfield, I'm not going to worry. And that's not even a factor to the most relevant point, which is that we are never going to go to war with Russia or China. Period. Superpowers fight wars by proxy. That is, quite simply, not going to change.

The F-22 has dominated the F-15 in Red Flag training exercises. My comparison of the two aircraft, is on the basis of how the F-15, would perform against a Russian and/or Chinese fifth generation fighter. On two occasions war could have occurred between the U. S. and the Soviet Union. The two occasions were the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. Its highly unlike that U. S. will ever go to war with Russia or China, but we cannot fall behind those countries in fighter technology. If the Air Force cancelled the F-22 and F35 programs, American fighter contractors would lose much now how on designing and build fighter aircraft. A possible sixth generation fighter would have many more problems than the F-35 program.

I'm a 16 crew chief, actually. My point comes from the ability for both of jets being able to substantially out lift the F-5 when it comes to an ordinance load, not to mention that they can carry those loads farther and faster. The Tiger simply can't do what the 15 and 16 can, even with all of the upgrades. Then there's the fact that Tiger production stopped 26 years ago (something that will raise the cost of each plane), whereas Falcon and Eagle production lines will be going through 2016 and 2018, respectively. Not much sense in bringing an old and inferior jet back to life when there are combat proven jets still being made.

Well, it's a good thing that all our public schools are state-of-the-art and that we have such a huge surplus to our budget so that we can spend all this money on bullshit that we'll never need.

All military contrators are thieves and leeches and that's the only thing driving an arms race that doesn't exist.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet, no one pays attention to the people that actually put the thing together. It takes time for ground crews and pilots to familiarize themselves with a new (or in this case old) aircraft. You guys about simulators and flight time to train pilots. Well, we DO have state of the art simulators and we fly the crap out of both the F-15 and F-16, at least we were prior to budget cuts. Infrastructure isn't just the buildings and ramp, it's the people you have working on and operating these aircraft. Literally, everything in place for new Eagles and Falcons, not F-5s. All that has to happen is for the DoD to buy the jets and fly them where they are wanted, all without missing a beat.


I can tell you right now vv, that you're wrong about the maintenance crews. No USAF maintenance personnel are being trained to fix F-5s, and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone currently enlisted that has.

I get you guys are looking at cheap, and the unit cost of an F-5 is way low, but I don't think you guys are factoring in the hidden costs of training personnel and setting things up for a jet that isn't in the inventory, as well as the time and money spent on necessary upgrades. Also, at some point, you're not getting a fair trade for performance to cost. I don't believe that even the latest Tigers are going to be able to measure up to what the 15s and 16s can offer a pilot.

1: F5s are very low maintenance
2:Are you claiming to be a pilot?
3: It really should not be hard to train someone to maintain an F5. Are you familiar with the jet? It was designed way back when to be simple, cheap and easy to maintain... for 3rd world countries... WAY back then.
4: The F5 minimises those hidden costs.
6: I believe the F5 performs well as a dogfighter (it's combat raison d'etre).

Allow me to restate my case for the F5:
Cheap to buy
Easy and cheap to maintain and fly.
Lightweight, agile dogfighter.
The F5 is cheap to buy and quick to build. In a USA-China conflict the F5 will allow the US to quickly boost her combat aircraft numbers. It's ease of flying will aid this.

I forgot about Russia's R-33/37 family of missiles; they are designed to kill AWACS at extremely long ranges. F-15 perform at the F-22 is training exercises has been horrible. The F-22's AESA radar and stealth make it unbeatable in BVR aerial warfare against 4.0 and 4.5 generation aircraft. The Chinese and Russian stealth fighters will be very good aircraft. The F-35 program will not be cancelled. The F-35 order will be reduced because of the increasing costs of the program.

Those missiles are an argument for F5s; a protective screen of F5s should protect the AWACS.
So the f22 performs well in excercises? It's not like the american military ever has or ever will doctor a training excercise to favour a preferred weapons system... right?
You're sounding like an advert for the f22 now. It's a hangar queen and if I remember correctly Indian Sukhoi aircraft took it down in a joint training excercise.
As for the Russian stealth aircraft that will be so unstoppable... lets have a look at Russia's recent aircraft efforts:
Su37 Terminator: Produced - then converted back to Su35.
Su47 Berkut (meaning golden eagle: Prototype produced. Aircraft declared officially in service. Project cancelled.
MiG 1.44 Raptor Killer: (No, I'm not trolling, that was the name they gave it) Prototype produced. Project abandoned due to extreme cost of aircraft.
Sukhoi Pak Fa: Prototype produced... When will it be cancelled?

Frankly, I'm not aware of one piloted aircraft that Russia has developed in the 20 odd years since the fall of Communism from a clean sheet that has been successful.
Just as in the waste you pay arms manufacturers a pretty penny and get nothing (I'm looking at you, UK military resourcing, which has the tax payer pay for new Nimrod aircraft and carriers even though

I'll get back to this later

I'm not trying to be argumentative but since the F15 is never going to fight the F22, comparisons between the two are pointless.
I can't believe you're saying that anything chinese built will be good

Until China and Russia invent a stealth airfield, I'm not going to worry. And that's not even a factor to the most relevant point, which is that we are never going to go to war with Russia or China. Period. Superpowers fight wars by proxy. That is, quite simply, not going to change.

The F-22 has dominated the F-15 in Red Flag training exercises. My comparison of the two aircraft, is on the basis of how the F-15, would perform against a Russian and/or Chinese fifth generation fighter. On two occasions war could have occurred between the U. S. and the Soviet Union. The two occasions were the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. Its highly unlike that U. S. will ever go to war with Russia or China, but we cannot fall behind those countries in fighter technology. If the Air Force cancelled the F-22 and F35 programs, American fighter contractors would lose much now how on designing and build fighter aircraft. A possible sixth generation fighter would have many more problems than the F-35 program.

I'm a 16 crew chief, actually. My point comes from the ability for both of jets being able to substantially out lift the F-5 when it comes to an ordinance load, not to mention that they can carry those loads farther and faster. The Tiger simply can't do what the 15 and 16 can, even with all of the upgrades. Then there's the fact that Tiger production stopped 26 years ago (something that will raise the cost of each plane), whereas Falcon and Eagle production lines will be going through 2016 and 2018, respectively. Not much sense in bringing an old and inferior jet back to life when there are combat proven jets still being made.

Well, it's a good thing that all our public schools are state-of-the-art and that we have such a huge surplus to our budget so that we can spend all this money on bullshit that we'll never need.

All military contrators are thieves and leeches and that's the only thing driving an arms race that doesn't exist.

 

[spacearrow99]

Those missiles are an argument for F5s; a protective screen of F5s should protect the AWACS.
So the f22 performs well in excercises? It's not like the american military ever has or ever will doctor a training excercise to favour a preferred weapons system... right?
You're sounding like an advert for the f22 now. It's a hangar queen and if I remember correctly Indian Sukhoi aircraft took it down in a joint training excercise.
As for the Russian stealth aircraft that will be so unstoppable... lets have a look at Russia's recent aircraft efforts:
Su37 Terminator: Produced - then converted back to Su35.
Su47 Berkut (meaning golden eagle: Prototype produced. Aircraft declared officially in service. Project cancelled.
MiG 1.44 Raptor Killer: (No, I'm not trolling, that was the name they gave it) Prototype produced. Project abandoned due to extreme cost of aircraft.
Sukhoi Pak Fa: Prototype produced... When will it be cancelled?

Frankly, I'm not aware of one piloted aircraft that Russia has developed in the 20 odd years since the fall of Communism from a clean sheet that has been successful.
Just as in the waste you pay arms manufacturers a pretty penny and get nothing (I'm looking at you, UK military resourcing, which has the tax payer pay for new Nimrod aircraft and carriers even though

AWACS' would get shot down if they were protected by F-5s. I know of capabilities the F-22 and those of current 4th and 4.5 generation aircraft. The F-22 can spot and shoot down those planes well before they can ever see the F-22 on radar. The F-22 has never been defeated in training exercises. Iraqi and Afghani air defenses did not warrant the use of the F-22.

The Russian did not have the money to develop the planes you mentioned. The Russian government is starting to procure the Su-35. The Russians are rearming their military and PAK-FA will not get cancelled.

 

[vodkazvictim]

I'm not trying to be argumentative but since the F15 is never going to fight the F22, comparisons between the two are pointless.

Until China and Russia invent a stealth airfield, I'm not going to worry. And that's not even a factor to the most relevant point, which is that we are never going to go to war with Russia or China. Period. Superpowers fight wars by proxy. That is, quite simply, not going to change.

china's already copied your B2, but then again, made in china...
Russia invented stealth and has produced multiple stealth aircraft, however, none are in production at current.

The F-22 has dominated the F-15 in Red Flag training exercises. My comparison of the two aircraft, is on the basis of how the F-15, would perform against a Russian and/or Chinese fifth generation fighter. On two occasions war could have occurred between the U. S. and the Soviet Union. The two occasions were the 1983 Soviet nuclear false alarm incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. Its highly unlike that U. S. will ever go to war with Russia or China, but we cannot fall behind those countries in fighter technology. If the Air Force cancelled the F-22 and F35 programs, American fighter contractors would lose much now how on designing and build fighter aircraft. A possible sixth generation fighter would have many more problems than the F-35 program.

Yeah, sure, the us military has never doctored its training exercises to favour a certain weapon system.
It's not the tech, it's everything.
You do know that f22 is terrible and F35 is worse, right?

I'm a 16 crew chief, actually. My point comes from the ability for both of jets being able to substantially out lift the F-5 when it comes to an ordinance load, not to mention that they can carry those loads farther and faster. The Tiger simply can't do what the 15 and 16 can, even with all of the upgrades. Then there's the fact that Tiger production stopped 26 years ago (something that will raise the cost of each plane), whereas Falcon and Eagle production lines will be going through 2016 and 2018, respectively. Not much sense in bringing an old and inferior jet back to life when there are combat proven jets still being made.

Ordnance load? Well if that's the measure of combat effectiveness then lets press the B52 into service as a fighter.
How much faster, given that operationally F15 and F16 are subsonic.
I'll put my cards on the table: I love the F16. But look at what I'm saying; doesn't the F5 have her plus points?

Well, it's a good thing that all our public schools are state-of-the-art and that we have such a huge surplus to our budget so that we can spend all this money on bullshit that we'll never need.

All military contrators are thieves and leeches and that's the only thing driving an arms race that doesn't exist.

:thumbsup:
:yesyes:

AWACS' would get shot down if they were protected by F-5s. I know of capabilities the F-22 and those of current 4th and 4.5 generation aircraft. The F-22 can spot and shoot down those planes well before they can ever see the F-22 on radar. The F-22 has never been defeated in training exercises. Iraqi and Afghani air defenses did not warrant the use of the F-22.

The Russian did not have the money to develop the planes you mentioned. The Russian government is starting to procure the Su-35. The Russians are rearming their military and PAK-FA will not get cancelled.

Why would they? Why can F5s not protect AWACS?
You know of the capabilities of f22? Does that include knowing of the fact that they often don't fly? That they're hangar queens? That even something as simple as the oxygen systems doesn't work properly? Could this be contractor greed?

Did you know that the Su27's Irbis E radar can detect an f22 at 5 km less than an f22 can detect it?
2 aircraft are closing on each other. One subsonic, the other supercruising.
What's 5 kilometres? The blink of an eye. Detection is down to pilot's reaction time. Su27 with Irbis E is cheaper for the same advantage.