Posted on 01/31/2011 9:15:23 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Former Air Force Secretary Mike Wynne wants the Air Force to get rid of large surveillance and reconnasisance aircraft such as AWACS and JSTARS, which are vulnerable to attack because of their huge radar cross-sections, and take the money saved and shove it into the Joint Strike Fighter program.
Wynne made his arguments on the website Second Line of Defense, run by the international defense consultant Robbin Laird. I spoke with Wynne this morning. His essential argument is that large aircraft such as these, while possessing excellent capabilities, are so vulnerable in time of war that the enormous amounts of money spent paying the large crews needed to fly and maintain these systems would be better spent making F-35s into the flying intelligence and targeting networks that they are designed to be.
The F-35s are far more survivable and therefore effective, he said. Combine F-22s and F-35s with a capability like Gorgon Stare and you would have a difficult to beat combination of highly survivable intelligence gathering and offensive capabilities.
(Excerpt) Read more at dodbuzz.com ...
Its time for your meds leave me alone you crazy man!
He thrashed my thread. You see some more.
Can you tell me the difference in the internal air to ground carriage for those two airframes?
Can you tell me the cost to buy and maintain both platforms?
“RCFlyer” as in RC-135 crewman?
Debt of Honor - Tom Clancy
yitbos
I’m surprised he didn’t cite P-51s...or maybe the planes I spent most of my career in, F-4s and F-111s. After all, the Boneyard is full of ‘em! That makes the F-35 redundant...
What is the procurement budget of the US military? How does it compare to bogus spending like welfare, medicine for seniors, Dept of Education, etc?
Bump
I agree, does he think that one or even a few pilots will be able to direct our F-22s and other fighter aircraft to intercept or protect strike aircraft and ground forces into an out of battle.
What will the military budget be after the nation is bankrupt?
Once the *interest* on our national debt exceeds annual tax revenues...no more military. So there is a hard limit to how much we can (borrow and) spend.
Plan in advance accordingly.
The Navy has the F18 and UCAVs. The rest can be handled by the F22 and B1s+B2s+A10s.
My guess would be the F-35 is going to be somewhat less than $100 million. Again DOD was shooting for $65 million a copy, but we have cut the buy, so that the R&D costs are spread over fewer aircraft.
It still doesn't change the fact that the two aircraft are not interchangeable. If you came up with some super air to air weapon you might be able to get away with using JSF for the fighter role, but there is no way in all Christendom that you are going to get a useable bomb load on an F-22.
Since you don't know the answer to my question I will answer it for you. F-22 has a small weapons bay, meant to hold air to air weapons, AMRAAM and AIM-9X. A small diameter bomb, only 250 lb. was developed that can fit in that weapons bay. The cool thing is that it has been tested in supersonic deliveries so you can huck that weapon a long way and go so fast it will be almost impossible for a SAM to get you. So what can you do with that 250 lb. bomb? Attack SAM sites.
JSF was built around carrying two 2000 lb. bombs internally. That is a first few nights of the war ability to hit well defended targets with the standard heavy ordnance. After that, you can throw bomb racks on the wings and go from stealth to a low observable bomb truck when air superiority has been established.
Cost to maintain will be cheaper on the JSF for several reasons. Single engine, more airframes which makes spares cheaper, and a diagnostic computer that is supposed to predict failures before they occur.
You’ve missed the point. We can’t afford both platforms. Pick one. F22 or F35.
If you can’t choose between them, then we overspend ourselves into financial oblivion and you’ll wind up with none.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EC-121_shootdown_incident
The EC-121 shootdown incident occurred on 15 April 1969 when a United States Navy Lockheed EC-121M Warning Star on a reconnaissance mission was shot down by North Korean MiG-17 aircraft over the Sea of Japan. The plane crashed 90 nautical miles (167 km) off the North Korean coast and all 31 Americans on board were killed.
The Nixon administration chose not to retaliate against North Korea
NEVER FORGET!
Talk about missing the point. You don't seem to understand that with the exception of the B-2 (which there are 20) all the airplanes you intend to use for strike aircraft are 30+ years old and are going to the boneyard soon. You are going to be left with some Super Hornets, some F-22s and some late model F-15E and F-16s. The UCAV is not as far through development as the F-35.
Another thing laymen seem to not understand is that while the A-10 is a great airplane for low threat CAS, you cannot take it where the enemy has SAMs. It is too slow. You can't put it in a strike package with other aircraft. It is too slow. No matter how much you like that airplane, it won't get any faster. It has a wing that is a couple feet thick.
These qualities should look familiar, I got them off your profile.
Yup. That’s what will win. Of course, you can’t go bankrupt before the battle if you want to win.
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.