Not having air superiority in the next major war (China?) a decade or two down the line will cost us a lot more.
HELL NO!!!
I'm no expert but my good friend who flys F-18 hornets is. He is a huge advocate for the F-22 and everyone is dying to get out of the hornet and into the Raptor.... if given the chance.
NO. The F-15 and F-16 are now over 25 years old each. We now need a new fighter to counter not only current threats (MiG-29, Su-30), but any future air threats. The F-22 is the finest fighter ever designed.
The JTF-35 is a non-starter, and will in all likelihood be killed, as it is too heavy, and cannot be fixed. Unmanned aircraft are nowhere nearly advanced enough to take up the slack.
The US simply MUST remain well ahead of all others, period.
As for the cost, that would be considerably less had Congress not short-sightedly cut the number in the order. Had the aircraft been ordered at the original number of over 700, the unit cost would have been far lower.
The V-22, which you mentioned, is NOT a fighter, it is a cargo and assault aircraft.
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.
Are you the President of Boeing?
Well, I work for Lockheed so get lost.
Oh, W. Won.
/john
No. The more than thirty five year old F15 is already obsolete and being regularly trounced by 15 year old Soviet designs, let along what the Russians and French (our historic enemies) are selling to the world today.
The F22 is the minimum aircraft we need for air superiority.
Unless, of course, you are in favor of that 5 year "Manhatten Project" effort to produce the F43? I didn't think so.
Raptor (Lightening II) it is, until THOR clears the skys and the ground of our enemies.
Live with it. Freedom isn't free.
Our planes are getting too old and the military needs this plane. What you been smoking to ask such a foolhardy question???
Yes. The F/A-22, however, should continue apace.
Yes cancel it, lets spend our money on "flying spitwads".
Like I ALWAYS say, 14, 15, 16...whatever!
The F-22 can fly rings around everything else out there; Ergo, BUFFs will fly another 50 years.
Yes, cancel it. Air dominance doesn't need to cost so much.
If you can catch an F-22...you can cancel it.
Go ahead....try it.
And, if you're old enough, no doubt you were against Pres. Reagan's "Star Wars" program which has now begun to be deployed. You're a really big thinker, Haro, wrong but big.
War with China is a foreseeable conflict. War with France is a foreseeable conflict. War with Iran is a forseeable conflict. War with Mexico is a forseeable conflict. War with the Blue States is foreseeable.
All of the foreseeable conflicts listed will require air dominance for infantry forces to kill as many ragheads, chinks, specs, frogs, and idiots as possible.
Hmmm... "Christian zealot" (how many Christians call themselves zealot, a perjorative term?) shows up on third day calling for the Kerry position of killing the F-22. Something here smells funny.
Air superiority is the most critical factor in war, now and in the future. I hope they fully fund the F-22 and that they're already working on its successor.
Ok brain surgeon, what is the foreseeable conflict this aircraft is not suited for?