Posted on 08/05/2009 6:12:23 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
It's a quote, so if it's not accurate, my apologies. But assuming it's accurate, that's not even a C-3!!! And on a brand new airframe with full contractor support?
I agree with you about how NRE is amortized. I understand that the number is down from 750 to 184, so you have a point. But still, that is a HUGE amount to spend on a FIGHTER, much less on a ground attack aircraft. They are designed to mix it up, not like a B-2. Any operational mission will have losses, it's just the math.
Here’s the problem; You cannot fight China (and several other countries) with F15s or F16s. You can’t do it, period dot, end of story, this is my job (and has been my career for over 18 years), there is no debate, etc. etc. etc. The SA 10 surface to air missile system and all its derivatives have taken that option off the table. It would be a slaughter. And that system is proliferating like wild fire.
I agree that the F-15, F-16, F/A-18 are hopelessly obsolete. I used to have to fly in the former tailgunner position on some "special" B-52 missions in a previous life. I understand how difficult it is to integrate current technology into an old airframe. So upgrades are constantly going to have limitations. And I understand that while we've been fighting brush wars, our potential enemies have been upgrading their fleets.
For all the folks about to yell “Get UAVs!”, please choke yourselves. Just kidding. The tech isn’t there yet and won’t be for a long time. It is the future. It’s not here yet.
I agree that they aren't there yet. But it's a world better than when the Tomahawk was first introduced. The Predator is not the answer. Grandson of Predator might be.
While we dither, disarm, and allow our Air Force to decay under the leadership of a Chicago pol community organizer, the Russian and Chinese air forces continue to modernize and prepare for the next air war.
Let's bring back the P-40 while we're at it. State-of-the-art, schmate-of-the-art! If it was good enough for Chennault and the Army Air Corps, it's good enough for us.
“The unavoidable and inconvenient truth is that terminating the F-22 Raptor program at 183 airframes guarantees the future defeat of the U.S. Air Force in high intensity combat, and a high probability of annihilation as a result.”
This of course is the result that Hussein and Gates intend. Same for the Navy.
Reasonable disinformantion... And no not in the US. Russia in planning stage for 6th gen - US no plans.
An one Russian jamming system will put them all into the ground, while the UAV’s signal is tracked back to its source by a Russian made missile.
Carpet Bombing with General Purpose Bombs was Not Effective and it was only a change in tactics by General Curtis Lemay that Proved that Incindiary Bombs would be More Effective.
Other than that If not for the development and expense on the B-29 we would not have had bombers with the range to attack the Japanese mainland in the first place.So Planning ahead is very Important as is spending on development of aircraft if its done wisely.
Even after the B-29 we still had to Conquer a little Japanese Held Island known as Iwo Jima so we could turn it into an Emergency Airfield so the Damaged B-29’s would have a place to go instead of ditching in the ocean.
But this time, we’ll know that the Russkies, Chicoms or some other enemy in the future we’d face will be equipped with the latest Flankers and PAK FAs.
No We don’t really know what we will be facing in Air Combat in the Next decade or longer untill our enemies take there Air Craft out and face us.The only thing we do know is what the opposition wants us too know and most of that is disinformation. The same way with our Military Services.
Thanks for the informative post on the F-22. I’d judge the plane as currently designed as unacceptable. It occurred to me that stealthiness is a feature that the older fighters don’t have. What other useful advantages does it have?
Regarding our bombers getting shot down by 5th generation enemy fighter planes, is the major threat to our bombers the fighter planes or is it missles launched either from the ground or other planes, and if from other planes I’m picturing the planes being sufficiently far away from the bombers that dogfighting abilities aren’t important.
Stealthiness may be the only advantage of a “new generation” fighter over older ones, and maybe that’s an extremely important advantage. Perhaps it is because a lot of our new military flying machines are stealthy. But improved missle guidance systems and unmanned aircraft seem like the big game changers.
Your comments are spot on! I agree, unfortunately, with most everything you’ve said and hated the F22 for years due to its gutting of forces. But now we’re stuck with it, and an average start to IOC of 20 years dooms any new fighters (the UAVs most certainly will be up to snuff for SEAD and air to air by then) to replace it. I have seen the inevitable and it is the F22, as much as it saddens me to say that.
“Spot on”? The major points of the Washington Compost article have already been refuted, if you’d bother to read it. And I don’t understand your comments about the F-22 being responsible for the gutting of forces. Do you have any comment about a Congress and president that is ramming trillion dollar bailouts and a national healthcare system that will make our country officially broke? Oh no, it’s the F-22’s fault!!
+1000
I know how I would feel, thankful.
I didn’t respond to the Washington Post article, I responded to what was posted from it and the commentary. The F22 was responsible for the gutting of forces as we raided the Operations and Maintenance budgets to pay for it when Congress undercut it in the mid 90s. I am an F16 pilot, I was there when they did it, we still feel the results now. To avoid competition, they killed the F16 thrust vectoring program, AESA upgrade to the radar, reduced MX support buys, delayed CUPID and other mods, slowed down the Link16 mods... Do I need to go further? And that’s just my aircraft, I don’t know what they did to the F15 or A10.
As far as the program overall you should read the rest of my posts; I am supporting the F22, but only because it is the only option. We killed other viable programs due to this aircraft though, and I cannot disregard that. I will not forget the poor decisions our leaders made either. That includes civilian and military.
Yes, 184 aircraft is too few by half, and its a joke that we spent billions on the cash for clunkers, over $700B on the TARP program and wouldn’t cough up a few $B for six or so more. Read my posts, you might learn something lol....
Oh you would feel thankful that a bunch of guys defending this country to the best of their ability would get blown to kingdom come ... or is it that if you were one of the controlers that got blasted, you’d be thankful?
Troll.
I would be thankful that I wasn’t in the plane that got blasted. Why would you think that I would be thankful that Americans were killed defending this country? I used to fly an A-4 in Vietnam, and I served 30 years in the military. I don’t know how anyone could draw the conclusion that you did.
So, let me get this straight. You are upset because the USAF cut funds from upgrades to a 4th generation fighter in order to design and manufacture a 5th generation fighter that surpasses these "upgrades" in just about every way? I understand that you have a great love and loyalty to your airframe, but let's look at this analytically.
Are you seriously going to argue that F16 thrust-vectoring is a more valuable AAC investment than super-cruise and low-observable radar composition?
Assume for just a moment that the F16 got all of the upgrades you desire. What would the kill ratio be for an F22 vs F16 then? Would one F22 only be worth 5 F16s (instead of 10+, as every report of test engagements I've seen points out)? And this is what you are arguing for?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.