Skip to comments.
Should The F-22 be cancelled?
26-nov,2004
| Me
Posted on 11/25/2004 6:44:38 PM PST by Haro_546
Yes. This type of aircraft has no place in the modern battlefield and Foreseeable conflicts. The money could be put into more usefull sistems (each unit cost about $235 million for 239 planes) Whats your opinion?
TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: airforce; duersdrool; f22; foxmuldermark; freepersrule; imaduer; kerrylover; tinfoilhatter; troll; ufo; xfiles; yes; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 621-636 next last
To: Andrew LB
Its a cool plane, but useless in the modern battlefield. Modern missiles will blow it to bits.
61
posted on
11/25/2004 7:07:35 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: Haro_546
The thing about these systems is that I am not an expert, so I must pick among experts' opinions.
With respect, I do not believe you are an expert.
62
posted on
11/25/2004 7:07:36 PM PST
by
Petronski
(New York London Paris Munich Ev'rybody Talk About Mmm Pop Music)
To: Haro_546
I disagree, Haro_546. There is no substitute for a fighter in the sky to sweep the sky clean, unless there is a theater defence that can be construed in a way to clean the skies (like AWACS aircraft armed with cannisters of AAAMRAM missles or something like that.
63
posted on
11/25/2004 7:07:47 PM PST
by
rlmorel
To: rlmorel
Oh I agree but the original post was about the F22. The 35 probably will be scrapped and we will be left with the F18 Super, the B1,2 and the BUFFS. The Air Force might stretch the F16 ground attack variant well into the future but that platform has limitations also. Of course these are the same guys that wanted to scrap the Warthog. It out performed everything in GW1.
64
posted on
11/25/2004 7:07:58 PM PST
by
mad_as_he$$
(Off to the store for Marlboro reds and Miller High Life. NSDQ)
To: rlmorel
Air dominance is better insured by better missile/bomb/satellites than by Ultra advance and expensive planes
65
posted on
11/25/2004 7:08:11 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: Haro_546
Ultra advance and expensive planes that can be easily destroyed. Uuh no. The F22 won't be easily destroyed in battle.
To: Quix
We've had UFO platforms for decades ... Evidence??
67
posted on
11/25/2004 7:08:25 PM PST
by
topcat54
To: Haro_546
UCAVs (Uninhabited Combat Air Vehicles) will eventually be able to do anything a piloted fighter can do, plus they can be designed to be more aerodynamically efficient and stealthier than piloted aircraft because you don't have to design around the cockpit, plus they will be able to maneuver in ways that would generate too many G-forces for a human pilot to survive. Once a UCAV can outmaneuver a human-piloted fighter, the day of the human-piloted fighter will be over.
Instead of airmen who must train thousand of hours at a cost of millions of dollars and risk their lives on every mission, you can have computer geeks sitting behind consoles tens of thousands of miles away from the theater of operation and take out bad guys and their installations at the click of a mouse.
Combat fighters are a proud lot with a long and honorable tradtion, but just like everybody else, they are going to be replaced by computers.
The Predator is just the beginning.
68
posted on
11/25/2004 7:08:37 PM PST
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
To: Long Cut
They will buy one. The russians probably have something in the works. Missiles can be deliverd from many platforms.
69
posted on
11/25/2004 7:09:37 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: CasearianDaoist
70
posted on
11/25/2004 7:10:01 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: Haro_546; Pukin Dog; Poohbah; hchutch; All
"The thing with the F-22 is that it will be easily countered by missile technology. Air dominance is better insured by better missile/bomb/satellites than by Ultra advance and expensive planes..." Given this, and other statements like this poster has made, it is clear that he has absolutely NO idea what he is talking about, no experience in military aviation, and thus, no credibility on this issue.
Nothing to see here, move along.
71
posted on
11/25/2004 7:10:36 PM PST
by
Long Cut
(The Constitution...the NATOPS of America!)
To: Haro_546
Plus the Chinese probably have a barrage of missiles for it. Not if they can't see the F22.
To: Haro_546
Are you the President of Boeing?
Well, I work for Lockheed so get lost.
To: E. Pluribus Unum
My point. The F-22 should be canceled.
74
posted on
11/25/2004 7:11:16 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: Long Cut
The F-22 is the finest fighter ever designed. Exactly. And I say the USA should continue to rule the skies.
75
posted on
11/25/2004 7:11:37 PM PST
by
Jorge
To: Ptarmigan
Don't laugh--DARPA is looking into Zeppelin technology.
Question: What happens when you don't build a new fighter for 30+ years?
Answer: Not much--you've likely lost your industrial base.
76
posted on
11/25/2004 7:11:40 PM PST
by
rbg81
(a)
To: Long Cut
77
posted on
11/25/2004 7:11:49 PM PST
by
Haro_546
(Christian Zionist)
To: Haro_546
My opinion is that if your country sells any more nuke technology to that OTHER country... after we stop the OTHER country... we'll deal with you. Wait your turn in queue.
Oh, W. Won.
/john
78
posted on
11/25/2004 7:12:00 PM PST
by
JRandomFreeper
(D@mit! I'm just a cook. Don't make me come over there and prove it!)
To: Haro_546
Air dominance is better insured by better missile/bomb/satellites than by Ultra advance and expensive planes that can be easily destroyed.Do you have a modern day example?
79
posted on
11/25/2004 7:12:03 PM PST
by
Doe Eyes
(Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life.)
To: Long Cut
Question:
I don't understand?
I thought that both f22 and jtf-35 where in production and that nothing can stop it now????
Are they in Development ? if so when will they be in production?
Who would cancel the project(s)?
What phase will they be in 4 years from now??
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 621-636 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson