What do you think about the USAF Purchasing the F22 Raptor ?
- Thread starter sidewinder101
- Start date
Oops, mi scusi! Ignore what I said, I am actually a nice Italiano gatta, not Americano at all. What the Hell do I know? Molto grazie, per piacere.
ok- well, from my sig you can probably guess what I'm thinking...
First of all, you're a little behind if you're wondering whether or not we should purchase F-22s. There are already a few squadrons in service of these bad boys, and I love 'em. As kick ass as my favorite plane (guess which one) is, those air frames are getting old, and 30 year old air frames will become maintenance nightmares the longer you have them around.
The JSF, actually the F-35, has been coming along nicely, and again, is being put into service to replace a growing number of aging F-16s, F-15Es, and other attack planes that are 20-30 years old.
It's NOT a waste of money, and over time, a military does need to update itself. Unfortunately, these are not cheap, piston-engined planes with just machine guns mounted in the wings. They are, however, incredibly effective fighting machines that are going to be around for a long time.
One other point to make, coors, is that the MOAB (whether you're joking or not) is a bomb that can only be carried by a larger plane. The bomb itself is as big as a plane
From your aviation-enthusiast, non-baby-killing, tax-paying patriot who thinks war is just as much hell as it's always been said to be, and that we should avoid it as much as we can.
H
ok- well, from my sig you can probably guess what I'm thinking...
First of all, you're a little behind if you're wondering whether or not we should purchase F-22s. There are already a few squadrons in service of these bad boys, and I love 'em. As kick ass as my favorite plane (guess which one) is, those air frames are getting old, and 30 year old air frames will become maintenance nightmares the longer you have them around.
The JSF, actually the F-35, has been coming along nicely, and again, is being put into service to replace a growing number of aging F-16s, F-15Es, and other attack planes that are 20-30 years old.
It's NOT a waste of money, and over time, a military does need to update itself. Unfortunately, these are not cheap, piston-engined planes with just machine guns mounted in the wings. They are, however, incredibly effective fighting machines that are going to be around for a long time.
One other point to make, coors, is that the MOAB (whether you're joking or not) is a bomb that can only be carried by a larger plane. The bomb itself is as big as a plane
From your aviation-enthusiast, non-baby-killing, tax-paying patriot who thinks war is just as much hell as it's always been said to be, and that we should avoid it as much as we can.
H[/QUO
Props. Hope we are the same side when the shit comes down stateside.
I hope so. I wouldn't want the government to spend all that money developing a new plane it feels it needs 7 or 8 years from now the way a sports team feels it needs a new stadium every decade even though the one they are in already works.
Well, these will probably be around as long as the current crop of fighters, if not longer because of the advances in air-frame technology. But when you consider the operational life of our bombers, that's no guarantee.
Both the B-1 (1980s) and B-2 (1990s) will be outlived by the service life of the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (1950s!)
H
Ok I see that the Obama Administration may cut Funding for the F22 Raptor When I was active duty in the AF I worked on the aging F15 and really think they need to be replaced but the cost of the replacement the F22 is High you can see videos of them on You tube. so what do you think should we cut the funds off or purchase what the AF has requested.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/02/ap_pentagon_budget_021309w/
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/02/ap_pentagon_budget_021309w/
F-22 they are out dated, why waste on slow stuff.
we need flying saucers that travel at light speed which can fly at 90 degree angles and dissipate in a snap.
I've been watching UFO files and there is stuff out there right now that is not normal. So lets get on the program, USA! Super Saucers all the way!
We need to get that atom crashing thing going and make some black holes so we can travel to the other side of the universe.
Now that would be some interesting money spending! Traveling google miles an hour!
we need flying saucers that travel at light speed which can fly at 90 degree angles and dissipate in a snap.
I've been watching UFO files and there is stuff out there right now that is not normal. So lets get on the program, USA! Super Saucers all the way!
We need to get that atom crashing thing going and make some black holes so we can travel to the other side of the universe.
Now that would be some interesting money spending! Traveling google miles an hour!
Kingfisher
Here Zombie, Zombie, Zombie...
I always thought the YF-23, they called it the BlackWidow, I thought that was much cooler looking.
That lift fan is unreliable. Ask the Russians about the Yak-38 or Yak-141. The latter was a fantastic aircraft, but the lift fans were still prone to failure, and the conversion to forward flight from the lift fan is awkward at best. The best things about the 141 were applied to LM's F-35.
Some Yak-38 pilots ended up getting court marshalled when they refused to fly "The widowmaker" for the Russian navy.
The black wi dow was a fantastic airplane. Not that the F-22A isn't a fantastic airplane, but the YF-23 was amazing, and I too wish it had won the competition.
Cutting back on the F-22A program is a mistake. In case he didn't notice, Obama will be cutting *Jobs* (You know, those things he pledged to create by the million), and there's a strategic problem with this as well.
This aircraft, no matter what you may have heard, is the best air dominance fighter in the skies today. This thing is a truly amazing aircraft, and when it comes to warfare, which will ALWAYS exist, you want dominance. You don't want to have something "good enough". You want the ability to smash an ant with a sledge hammer. It's about winning, not fighting fair, and the F-22 gives the USAF that kind of advantage against anything else in the skies.
:2 cents:
H
It's more than that ...
Right now a pair (2) of F-22s are taking down two (2) dozen F-15s in mock engagements. It's not just the airframe, but the avionics and man-machine interface.
A lot of the F-22's development was outside the airframe and engine, hence the timeline to production. They are going to have to integrate that into the F-15 anyway, so might as well have a new airframe.
I think the US may eventually offer the F-22 to other nations, in addition to the F-35. Australia and a few others have shown interest. That would distribute costs.
After the F-22 and F-35, you're not going to see another manned fighter from the US. And even those two are already being purchased at much lower numbers than originally projected.
The US is spending more money in other areas, and the USAF is getting less and less consideration. Has been that way since the late '90s.
In any case, the development and tooling costs are more than the production at this point. So it's already money spent.
Some would disagree with the Su-47 and even the EF2000 in several areas, places where the F-22 does "gain back" the advantage.
Right now a pair (2) of F-22s are taking down two (2) dozen F-15s in mock engagements. It's not just the airframe, but the avionics and man-machine interface.
A lot of the F-22's development was outside the airframe and engine, hence the timeline to production. They are going to have to integrate that into the F-15 anyway, so might as well have a new airframe.
It's not a "high priority." That's why they aren't buying the original order of nearly a thousand.
I think the US may eventually offer the F-22 to other nations, in addition to the F-35. Australia and a few others have shown interest. That would distribute costs.
After the F-22 and F-35, you're not going to see another manned fighter from the US. And even those two are already being purchased at much lower numbers than originally projected.
The US is spending more money in other areas, and the USAF is getting less and less consideration. Has been that way since the late '90s.
In any case, the development and tooling costs are more than the production at this point. So it's already money spent.
Re: It's more than that ...
Yes, Australia has been on the wagon for some time, last I heard they were planning to buy 100 of them, so that our pilots can be interchangeable with the US pilots because Australia has no carriers.
Yes, Australia has been on the wagon for some time, last I heard they were planning to buy 100 of them, so that our pilots can be interchangeable with the US pilots because Australia has no carriers.
Didn't realize that. I think that the F22 is a worthwhile investment, but we probably don't need to order it in Cold War quantities. We don't have enemies with significant air power. Iran and North Korea, in my opinion, don't have anything our current inventory couldn't handle. The re-emerging Soviet Union could be a different story. For Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, I think a fresh order of A10 Warthogs could kick some serious butt. That plane is virtually indestructible.
wasslkitty
Banned
What the good Prof said is true, as good as the 15s are, they can't hang too well with the Raptor. I've heard from people at Red Flag, that they start tracking opponents on takeoff. They also have the capability acting somewhat like an AWACS, they can send data to other planes without having to engage themselves. Also, the full capability of the plane is held back by on board computers, which disallow certain moves depending on pilot qualifications. Hopefully, they don't have to see combat. But even if they didn't, that doesn't mean they aren't worth the money.
PS - I don't think that civilian corporations should make such huge profits from military contracts. I understand the point of business is to turn a buck, but the cost of keeping this country safe is getting out of hand.
PS - I don't think that civilian corporations should make such huge profits from military contracts. I understand the point of business is to turn a buck, but the cost of keeping this country safe is getting out of hand.
Similar threads
