So in sum, the program was a failure?
I would image that the same logic was used when they retired the F-117.
“By comparison, the F-35A (land-based variant) has an air-to-air combat radius of 760 nautical miles”
Although the fact that the F-35 cannot hope to fill the role of air superiority regardless of range.
Maybe next time there will be no halting production prematurely.
A different view point:
The Air Force top brass are a bunch of bean counters that believe they can build and operate one aircraft that can meet the mission requirements of multiple roles.
However, the problem with an aircraft that can perform multiple roles is that it does not perform any one role very well.
“Why does the U.S. Air Force want to retire the F-22 Stealth Tactical Fighter Aircraft ?”
Because they have orders to divert funds and resources to equity and inclusion endeavors. As a bonus it will weaken the US military.
Because they keep losing it because it is so stealthy, and have to xpend more time looking for it then flying it.
So the F-22 is obsolete but the B-52 will be flying into the 2060’s. SMH, chair force.
And the F-35 will magically deliver as:
* A light bomber
* A ground attack platform
* A combat fighter
* A close in air support platform
* An anti-satellite platform
* An anti-submarine platform
* Pizza delivery platform
My big huge warning sign with the F-35 is it’s over-promised by its proponents. But it might be okay for pizza delivery.
What is this “F-22’s NGAD successor” of which you speak?
I’m wondering if the military has determined that in the new integrated battle systems, air superiority can be achieved by less expensive means.
I was thinking about a defense system with 5000 cheap autonomous wireless self recharging drones whose only job is to carry a small rod of titanium and put up a wall in front of a high value target. One gets sucked into an engine, there goes a hundred million dollar plane and a five million dollar pilot.
The F35 is not stealthy from behind, so it gets one punch.
To summerize the headline.
They want to replace it because it works.
If anything works, the government wants it eliminates.
That's why they didn't give F-4 Phantoms guns. Well, until a few months of actual combat over Vietnam changed the minds of the geniuses.
This whole defense industry crap is such bullshit
Nomatter the plane, Tommy Cruise will save us.
So we can update F-15’s but not F-22’s? F-35’s are to direct F-15 firepower as F-22’s provide cover. What will take over the F-22 role?
The F22 is the most advance, most effective aircraft in the arsenal. It is a true Gen5 aircraft. They want to keep the joint strike fighter instead?
Makes zero sense. Hell, give it to the Navy. The Air Force. What a joke. A military branch in search of a mission. There’s some savings available right there.
Not that there is any chance of that happening soon /s
... its combat radius of approximately 590 nautical miles (less with any use of supercruise) is not ideal for a war with China. This is because jets may need to be flying from locations like Guam ...
which will be a glowing hole in the ocean as Rocket Man likely has orders to nuke it from NK as part of the opening salvo against Taiwan. Then we'll have to decide whether to nuke China or simply resolve the Korean War once and for all.
Being very old, I’m still pissed about shutting down the P-47, Gruman Hellcat, P-38 Lightning, Liberator, B-17, and B-29...☹