The best weapons money can buy (F22 Vs F35)

Los Angeles Times ^ | August 13, 2005 | Lawrence Korb

[F14 Pilot]

ACCORDING TO MEDIA reports, the Defense Department is considering canceling two supersonic jet fighters that are on the Pentagon's drawing board: the Air Force's F/A-22 Raptor and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

There is no doubt that even with the defense budget at historical highs, the Pentagon cannot afford the $1.5 trillion worth of weapons that the military services would like to purchase. However, although the Defense Department is correct in trying to slash the F/A-22, it is dead wrong in trying to save money by canceling the Joint Strike Fighter.

The F/A-22 Raptor is the most unnecessary weapon system being built by the Pentagon. In fact, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld tried to do away with it in the summer of 2002 but backed off when his Air Force secretary threatened to resign over the issue.

It was originally designed to achieve air superiority over Soviet fighter jets, which will never be built. In 1985, the Air Force claimed that it could build about 750 of these stealth fighters for $26 billion. Over the last 20 years, the cost of the total program has continued to grow even as the number of planes to be purchased has declined. Just a year ago, the Air Force said it could purchase 275 Raptors for $72 billion. Now, the Pentagon says it can buy 179 planes for about $64 billion, raising the price per plane by about $100 million — for an unnecessary aircraft.

The performance of the current generation of Air Force fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq makes it clear that the Air Force already has the capability to achieve air superiority against all enemies. The Taliban, Al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents do not have jet fighters for the Raptor to conquer.

[F14 Pilot]

ping

[nwrep]

Pictures, please.

[DoughtyOne]

Of course, if the truth be told, the LA Times has never seen a defense expenditure that was necessary. While we're on the subject of un-necessary items though, it should be noted that the LA Times is worthless at any price.

[F14 Pilot]

[forYourChildrenVote4Bush]

This, I do NOT understand...

Is this wishful thinking on the part of LA times or will the planes be canceled?

I thought that all the tests were complete and now production was set to start in the very near future.

I always keep reading conflicting reports on this situation??

The US cannot AFFORD to do away with these projects.

It will force other countries to spend money it does not have to try and close the GAP between them and the US.

[F14 Pilot]

F35

[FormerACLUmember]

F-35

F-22

[F14 Pilot]

Wishful thinking!

We need F22 to deal with future threats like Iran, China and well who knows... Russia!

F22 is a stealth fighter and it is an important aspect of this pretty aircraft!

[SunTzuWu]

This is nuts. The F-22 is already operational and squadrons already exist. The LA Times never saw a military expenditure that was "necessary".

[forYourChildrenVote4Bush]

When are these machines going to come into the arsenal of US military?

Before 2008?

[adorno]

The performance of the current generation of Air Force fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq makes it clear that the Air Force already has the capability to achieve air superiority against all enemies. The Taliban, Al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents do not have jet fighters for the Raptor to conquer.

The people at the LA Times must think that the American people are so stupid. So, according to them, we don't need to build the FA-22 simply because the terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq don't have comparable capabilities? I guess the LA times thinks the only dangers to the U.S. comes from the middle east and China and Russia and North Korea and a host of other unfriendly countries don't have the capabilities or would never build the capabilities to counter our air forces.

The LA times should be sued for sheer stupidity.

[A.A. Cunningham]

F22 is a stealth fighter and it is an important aspect of this pretty aircraft!

Which antiquated Barlock radars can still detect. The money wasted on the F-22 would be better spent on EW, for one. There are other, cheaper alternatives to the F-22 but what else do you expect from an outfit that spends a billion+ on a bomber that can't deploy without an environmentally controlled hangar.

Korb isn't up to snuff on some of his claims in this piece.

[F14 Pilot]

F22 is now in service

F35 will be in service some time between 2008-2012

[nuconvert]

And it's neat looking, too!

[F14 Pilot]

Remember one of the USAF F-117s shot down by ground fire over Serbia in late 90s?!

It wasnt supposed to happen but it happened.

F-22 is still a reliable fighter!

[RightWhale]

The BRAC closure of Eielson AFB and Galena is predicated on the procurement of the F-22.

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[Oztrich Boy]

The performance of the current generation of Air Force fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq makes it clear that the Air Force already has the capability to achieve air superiority against all enemies

Irau was pretty much stuck at the 1991 Gulf War tech level, and a lot of aircraft from that time are on long term "loan" to Iran, and the Taliban tech was a decade older - not a good indication of how a nation who had access to the latest Russian equipment would fare.

[M Kehoe]

Off topic, but I wonder how man LA Times reporters are Veterans?

My uneducated guess would be, none.

5.56mm