Think the FA-22 is too expensive and not worth it? Read this...

[TexasPatriot8]

Think the FA-22 Raptor is over priced and not worth it? Might want to read this below. I got this from an olf Army friend of mine, who corresponds with a Air Force pilot he's talked to for many years. He felt the same way about the FA-22 until he was involved with the testing and training involved with the FA-22 a couple years ago. The comments made by this guy are pretty striking. The more of these in the Air Force arsenal the better, especially with the looming threats from China, North Korea, Iran, and now Venezuela with their military build up.

The FA-22 is literally a plan that just one squadron of 15 of them could, given time for refuling and rearming, destroy a small nations entire air force and navy single handedly, not to mention ait strips, docks, fixed army targets and tanks and other armored vehicels. A couple hundred FA-22s can do what it would take two or more thousands of F-15s, F-16s, and FA-18s to do. That's how good this plane is. How do you put a price tag on that? The cost of the plane is cheap when you consider that one FA-22 is better then five or ten older planes, which would cost more for that number of planes, then one F-22. So price is relative to capability and ability to force project and improve on America's already established air superiority.

NOTHING in the air comes close to the FA-22 in any area. It makes the most advanced fighter/interceptor/bomber any opposing nation has, obsolete overnight. The truth of this is not being recognized by its critics. But don't take my word for it. Take the word of a test pilot who went in skeptical of the FA-22. That says it all.

"Global Hawk ... Les- I worked on Global Hawk several years ago during it's OT&E out of Edwards. It has really long legs- can stay up for almost 2 days at altitudes above 60k. They flew it via satellite control to Australia, and we flew missions during OT&E that went from Eddy to upper Alaska and back non-stop."

"I also got the chance to work as pilot debriefer and test evaluator on the FA-22 OT&E summer before last at EDW. I was totally blown away by the airplane. Unless you have ever watched them go 2 or 4 V many on the big electronic game board, you have no idea what stealth brings to the battle. Basically, they come into the fight at a high mach # in mil thrust, start killing people way out with AMRAAMS, and continue doing that until everyone is dead, and no one ever sees them or paints them on radar. There is practically no radio chatter because all the guys in the flight are tied together electronically, and can see who is targeting who, and they have AWACS direct input and 360°situational awareness from that and other sensors. The aggressors had a morale problem before it was all over. The only shots that I ever saw taken on a 22 were when someone screwed up and popped up high enough to leave a contrail. I went in a skeptic and came out a true believer. It is to air superiority what the jet engine was to aviation."

[kiriath_jearim]

It's better to have one plane like the Raptor to do a multitude of things rather than several fighter planes in limited roles. Hope this plane proves itself when and if the going gets tough.

[Young Werther]

Unmanned Air Vehicles can do the mission. Without a human on board the vehicle can be built outta cardboard and balsa wood. As a last resort they can be Kamikasi Kritters!

[msnimje]

I remember a F-22 pilot saying they can destroy the enemy before he even knows the F-22 is in the area.

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail.

[JamesP81]

It's better to have one plane like the Raptor to do a multitude of things rather than several fighter planes in limited roles.

The Raptor's not really intended for multi-role warfare. Granted, they built some of that capability into it, but it's first mission, and what it was designed primarily for, is to find enemy aircraft and shoot them down without being shot down in return. The F-35 is the new multi-role aircraft and while it's a fine machine, it cannot engage in air to air combat nearly as effectively as a Raptor.

[Thunderchief F-105]

......interesting article, but at about $318 million
per copy, is the F-22 really worth it...??
I saw an actual F-22 at an air show recently, and spoke
with some of the "bird's" maintainers.... they were
refreshingly candid in their comments..... there are a
lot of problems with that aircraft that have not
been made public... all we as "the great unwashed"
read is what is fed to us by Air Force and military
PR types... I don't trust anybody in the military
any longer, and I say this as a 28-year veteran....

[kiriath_jearim]

"I don't trust anybody in the military
any longer, and I say this as a 28-year veteran...."

***

I was only in for 4 years (USMC, 3rd Marine Air Wing), but I understand what you mean.

[zipper]

The F-22 uses less fuel at 59,000 plus feet mach 1.95 than it does at 30,000 feet mach .95.

Supercruise!

[KarlInOhio]

A wargaming mailing list I'm on had this simple game for F-22 combat:

The whole idea is to shorten the game to a playable amount of time. So at the beginning of the game, each plane on the team opposing the F-22s rolls a die and consults the following table:

Roll Result Note
0-4 Dead You have no idea what happened
5-8 Dead You know you where hit by an AMRAAM
9 Dead You managed to eject based on the feeling you were about to die and saw the F-22 on your way down

[LIConFem]

I'm convinced. Where do I send the check?

And do I get a choice of color??

[PreciousLiberty]

"......interesting article, but at about $318 million
per copy, is the F-22 really worth it...??"

Well, as one who "doesn't trust anybody", watch out for that $318 million per copy sticker price. A lot of the money is already sunk in non-recurring engineering costs. Don't forget all that money (billions) is gone even if we stop building F-22s now. Do we really want to throw away that investment? I'm guessing, but I think the per-copy cost to build a new F-22 not counting the sunk costs is probably "only" about $150 million.

If we hadn't cut the order way down from 600+ planes, the per-copy "price" would be much lower.

What we might want to look at is an unmanned follow-on that would be smaller and possibly single-engine, designed to go along in groups with a single manned F-22. Speaking of which, is there a dual-seater version of the F-22 planned?

I'm also in favor of selling the F-22 to Britain and Australia. That would give better economies of scale, making it more affordable for our military. Strengthening our allies is another nice side effect. ;-)

[TexasPatriot8]

Unmanned Air Vehicles can't dogfight with opposing fighters, and a pilot on the scene can make desicions that a ROV operator just can't make, and you can't run squadron size operations with ROVs. It's just not the same. ROVs cannot replace manned fighters operating in squadrons over the battle scene, which can be contacted short range, where as it's a long chain to travel up to for a guy on the ground trying to get the ROV over head to target a specific target he can see. The chain is MUCH shorter for a guy on the ground trying to contact a manned fighter overhead. And satellite links still fail sometimes and can be effected by weather. Pilots don't have that problem.

[Revolutionary]

This conversation is always stuck in the present or often in the past. The F-22 is about the future. The next 30 years of the future. A lot is going to change during this time frame. I used to fly F-15Es and was involved in the long range planning of more than one service. The F-22 has an extremely important role for today, that as of yet has not been exercised. In the future, the F-22 is going to have its hands full with the enemy's unmanned weapons systems (cruise missiles and UCAV/UCAS)as well as the manned threat. The unmanned threat will become the dictators weapon of choice. It will even replace future surface to air missile buys. Why? It is both offensive as well as defensive, they can be stamped out for a reasonable price (given their cheap labor), operating personnel can be monitored on the ground and it is instantly trained after the software load. In the past, training has been our biggest edge. Only recently, have we been outdistancing the potential enemies with technology. Mostly due to the money gap and our economic technology engine.

[oldbill]

Unmanned Air Vehicles can do the mission.

And your expertise is based on. . . ?

[jpl]

Our current defense spending as a share of GDP is still pretty close to historical lows, even at a time when our country is allegedly at war.

We can't realistically cut our defense any more than we already have in the last 15 years and still maintain our posture as a dominant power.

[TexasPatriot8]

Yup. No ROV can do that. Maybe 50 years from now, but not today or even a few years from now. The FA-22 is TODAY, and today is what matters.

[Prime Choice]

It's better to have one plane like the Raptor to do a multitude of things rather than several fighter planes in limited roles.

I emphatically disagree. With just one type of aircraft performing all duties, the enemy only needs to find one flaw to annihilate their opponent's entire air force. When different planes fulfill different roles, the complexity of finding the proverbial Achilles heel is raised by at least one order of magnitude.

[DungeonMaster]

Sorry but I don't buy it unless it can carry 10 times as many missles as an F15.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

The FA-22 is literally a plan that just one squadron of 15 of them could, given time for refuling and rearming, destroy a small nations entire air force and navy single handedly, not to mention ait strips, docks, fixed army targets and tanks and other armored vehicels.

In other words, it can only do one thing at a time. If you need to do two things at a time, but can only afford 1 F-22A (note that the Air Force, once they thought the money was in the bag, let go of the fiction that it was some sort of multi-role aircraft), then you have a problem.