Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F/A-22 Raptor Now F-22A Raptor  
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4233 times:

Thank (insert pet deity here.) The aircraft has been redesignated the F-22A instead of the F/A-22.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123013520


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

After first changing it from F-22A to F/A-22 a few years ago...
When will they make up their minds? Big grin



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5395 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4199 times:

Next thing you know they'll change the name from Raptor back to Lightning II (something I wouldn't mind seeing happen)


South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4022 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4182 times:

I'm shocked! Such an efficient fighter-bomber!  Yeah sure

I don't want to offend anyone but I just realized that attempting to make the Raptor an F/A-22 would be similar to Hitler ordering the Luftwaffe to use the Me-262 as a ground attack aircraft (which happened during WW2).

P.S. - before I get flamed, I am NOT comparing the USAF top brass to Hitler...



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

I think the AG role for the F-22 was always meant as a ruse to deflect political pressure to develop the aircraft into a multirole system, never intended as a serious attempt  Wink


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11447 posts, RR: 75
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4098 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I wonder what the Air Force crews are going to actually call the plane.

The Falcon is the Viper

The Thunderbolt II is the Warthog

The Stratofortress is the BUFF

The Thunderchief was the Thud

take it Navy and the Hornet is the Bug with the Superhornet being the Rhino or SuperBug

What are they going to call the Raptor? I don't really see "Lighting II"



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5395 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4096 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 4):
I think the AG role for the F-22 was always meant as a ruse to deflect political pressure to develop the aircraft into a multirole system, never intended as a serious attempt

I'll agree with this. It seemed the USAF was overly concerned that Congress wouldn't be as willing to invest in a pure air superiority fighter as they would be to invest in a multirole fighter what with the question of "Whose air force is honestly enough of a threat that we need a pure fighter?" Not that I hope to see war with India ever occur, but maybe Cope India provided enough of a wake-up call to Congress to show that air superiority fighters are still needed.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4068 times:

I doubt it will, especially seeing the reduction to now under 200 aircraft for the F-22 order.
That's down by 90% over the original estimates of needed airframes, and those were meant 90% for continental air defense...



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4066 times:

Actually the first thing that came to my mind was the FB-22. Maybe this is the first step towards that aircraft as there have been rumors of it being purchased as a B-52 replacement. That way Congress can see exactly what role the aircraft are being purchased for and not be afraid of the Air Force spending money on something they didn't appropriate for.

24 F-22A (Air to Air)
12 F-22B (Air to Ground)



"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineGarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5395 posts, RR: 53
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4040 times:

Quoting CX747 (Reply 8):
FB-22

As someone who's slightly anal retentive about aircraft designations, I hope that designation never comes to fruition. Goodness knows they already pissed on the Tri-Service System enough with KC-767s, F-35s, FB-111s, and F/A-18s. BF-22 would work, or AF-22, but not FB-22.



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4032 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 7):
I doubt it will, especially seeing the reduction to now under 200 aircraft for the F-22 order.

Under 200?!?!? how many F-15s do we have? Our whole military doctrine is based around air superiority, how do we attain that without an air superiority fighter?

Congress is balking at the price tag of the F22, but Lockheed/Boeing won't sell them at a loss, the development costs are fixed, if they would order more then the price per unit would come down.


User currently offlineBushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3947 times:

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 3):
I don't want to offend anyone but I just realized that attempting to make the Raptor an F/A-22 would be similar to Hitler ordering the Luftwaffe to use the Me-262 as a ground attack aircraft (which happened during WW2).

I think your %100 right, its a political decision and not a smart one. I had it explained to me by my ex fighter pilot uncle in terms of using the flat head of a hatchet to pound nails instead of cutting wood. Use the right tool for the job.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

Quoting NorCal (Reply 10):
Under 200?!?!? how many F-15s do we have? Our whole military doctrine is based around air superiority, how do we attain that without an air superiority fighter?

Yes, under 200. The current plan calls for just 189 F-22s to be delivered to the USAF. These will be designated for continental air defense only (at least under the latest plans I've read about), so to NORAD assigned units.

Whether the F-15 will soldier on for another 20+ years to make up the shortfall or this will be the end of air superiority outside US territorial airspace for the USAF I don't know.
I'd not be surprised if there's another "joint" program in which the USAF would supply ground attack capacity under a USN fighter umbrella just like the misguided retiring of the EF-111A which was supposedly no longer needed because the USN could just supply E-6Bs on demand (never mind that the EF-111 could escort the strike force while the E-6 can only provide barrier jamming because of its lower speed).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3801 times:

The F-15Cs that are kept will be upgraded to "Golden Eagle" status. If the current order number stands, 1 squadron of F-22A Raptors will be available to each of the AEF wings.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineWickster From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 21 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3655 times:

What Will a Golden Eagle upgrade look like, Like the Test Aircraft F15 at Edwards or better? The F15 is a Great Looking Plane, will its upgrade look and perform to SU30MK levels.


None
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

I'd also like to know how many F-15C/D's are going to be kept from the current inventory, in terms of numbers.

I would also like to think that the AF will keep many of our existing F-15E's to implement a ground attack capability.

Otherwise, reducing the F-22's to such low numbers seems to be shafting the AF, even considering that the F-35 is supposed to come on line to replace the F-16. (And the F-35 versus F-16 debate is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.)


User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1095 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 8 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3048 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 12):
Yes, under 200. The current plan calls for just 189 F-22s to be delivered to the USAF. These will be designated for continental air defense only (at least under the latest plans I've read about), so to NORAD assigned units.

I have never seen a more ignorant statement in my life. The raptor is designated for any use including deployments anywhere/anytime. Furthermore, NORAD defense units typically use only F-15A MSIP's and F-16/ADF variants...just using those as examples as that is what NEADS is comprised of. Stop putting out info you have no idea about...


-Check


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic F/A-22 Raptor Now F-22A Raptor
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
F-22 Raptor Crashes At Nellis AFB posted Tue Dec 21 2004 05:14:16 by Wmupilot
Photo Op: F/A-22 Raptor At BFI... posted Thu May 13 2004 17:05:56 by Ulfinator
A Two Seat F/A-22 Raptor? posted Mon Feb 9 2004 04:03:33 by CX747
F-22 Strike Raptor? posted Sun May 19 2002 18:44:56 by J.mo
Raptor Fully Funded/Lightning Partially Funded! posted Wed Sep 27 2006 23:57:51 by MCIGuy
Raptor : Slow, Gas-guzzling, Vulnerable, Expensive posted Mon Aug 14 2006 22:08:14 by Keesje
Monk After Raptor posted Sun Mar 5 2006 10:26:31 by DEVILFISH
US Air Force Clears F-22A Raptor For Combat posted Sat Jan 14 2006 19:14:35 by MidnightMike
US Marines Were Out To Get & Kill The F22 Raptor posted Tue Jan 3 2006 22:28:24 by Keesje
Any Chance To Spot A Raptor Off Andrews AFB? posted Sat Dec 10 2005 02:16:13 by Bushpilot

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format