User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13176
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 5:33 pm

As stated in this Washington Post article, the Pentagon is going to support the Air Force request for additional F-22s. The Air Force has consistently stated they need 381 F-22s to replace the 400 + F-15s in service, the additional F-22 buy is taking on even more urgency in light of recent groundings of F-15s due to fatigue. This would reverse the planning set forth by former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that 183 F-22s would suffice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2007/12/03/AR2007120301827.html

381 F-22s would allow the Air Force to deploy F-22s in a manner that may look like this..

Langely AFB; 72 F-22s
Lakenheath; 24 F-22s
Tyndall AFB; 72 F-22s
Holloman AFB; 72 F-22s
Elmendorf AFB; 48 F-22s
Hickam AFB; 18 F-22s
Kadena; 48 F-22s
Nellis AFB; 24 F-22s
Edwards AFB; ?
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 6:35 pm

That's a lot of money, especially for an aircraft that suffers from interpersonal communication problems...

PAGE 40, "MISSING LINK" DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY DECEMBER 2007

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aw/dti1207/
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:18 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):
That's a lot of money, especially for an aircraft that suffers from interpersonal communication problems...

PAGE 40, "MISSING LINK" DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY DECEMBER 2007

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aw/d...1207/

O.K. Give us the jist of it. What are the problems?
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
FlagshipAZ
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:25 pm

It's about time. But even now I wish the USAF would request at least 600 F-22s. IMHO, this remarkable fighter is a "one-size-fits-all" kind of aircraft. It'll probably replace the F-16 as well as the F-15.
Also, thru a reliable source I can't divulge...the USAF will be getting at least 244 F-22s, even tho 183 is the "official" number. Rumsfeld has no say in the matter any more...thank God.
Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
N74JW
Posts: 514
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 12:31 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:44 pm



Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 3):
Rumsfeld has no say in the matter any more...thank God.

Really... That is one dude, I will not miss.

Good, glad to see the USAF is getting what they need.
rm -r *
 
texl1649
Posts: 328
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:02 pm

I imagine daily there are about 10-20 Rumsfeld decisions being fixed/corrected at the Pentagon.
 
AGC525
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:50 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:12 pm

Is there any chance of the Thunderbirds switching to the F-22?
American Aviation: From Kitty Hawk to the Moon in 66 years!
 
Oroka
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:36 pm



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 6):
Is there any chance of the Thunderbirds switching to the F-22?

They are lucky they are getting F-16Cs in 2009. The USAF will NEVER hand over a Billion dollars worth of aircraft to a air demonstration team.
 
echster
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 4:01 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:38 pm



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 6):
Is there any chance of the Thunderbirds switching to the F-22?

Heck no. Too expensive and too great a combat asset to put a squadron of aircraft on a flight demo team.



If the USAF ends up procuring a larger amount of F-22s than 183, what happens to the aircraft that are replaced? Prior airframes got pushed down to AFR/ANG units, but what of the F-15 airframe problems?
 
TaromA380
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sat Dec 08, 2007 8:46 pm

Never say never.

The F-16 was brand new, sophisticated and expensive in the 70's, nobody would have given a couple to a demo team. However, time went by, F-16 is now a basic design, used by demo teams.

The F-22 is now the state-of-the-art, of course it's hard to imagine it doing demos teams. Let's talk in 30 years.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6670
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:29 am

Lets say the congress does agree to fund these 381 aircraft, exactly how many years will it take to build and deliver these a/c, what type of production rate / numbers are they talking about?
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:53 am



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):
especially for an aircraft that suffers from interpersonal communication problems...

So find the aviation equivelent of Cesear Romero do have a 1-1 counciling sesion and get on it. One nice thing about having a larger purchase is that you will now be able to spread the development costs over more airframes which will reduce the "Per Airplane" price.

Quoting TexL1649 (Reply 5):
I imagine daily there are about 10-20 Rumsfeld decisions being fixed/corrected at the Pentagon

I don't think the number is that low. He did more damage to the miliary then Robert McNamara.

Quoting TaromA380 (Reply 9):
Never say never

Agreed, They where flying F-4's for a while.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
AGC525
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:50 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:40 am

Sorry, I forgot about them switching to the F-16C's. But I guess like you said, way down the road I guess it's a possibility. I just figured being a demo team the AF would like to show off it's premier fighter in the future.
American Aviation: From Kitty Hawk to the Moon in 66 years!
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 1:01 pm

I think the fact the're not flying F-15's says a lot
 
wvsuperhornet
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:18 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 6:43 pm



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 6):
Is there any chance of the Thunderbirds switching to the F-22?

Very doubtfull too expensive. Maybe the F-35 is 15-20 years but I doubt you will see them in F-22's at least in our lifetime.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:36 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 13):
I think the fact the're not flying F-15's says a lot

The Thunderbirds never were planned to fly the F-15. They changed types after the T-38 accident, and went to the F-16A/B. But, IIRC, the T-38A accident had nothing to do with the change, it had been planned for a while.

It is just like the Blue Angles were never planned to fly the F-14. They changed from the A-4s to the F/A-18s.
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:40 pm



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 12):
Sorry, I forgot about them switching to the F-16C's. But I guess like you said, way down the road I guess it's a possibility. I just figured being a demo team the AF would like to show off it's premier fighter in the future.

The Thunderbirds have been in F-16C Block 32s for a bit; they're switching to the Block 52 for the 2009 season. And you're right, they used to make a point of getting their hands on the newest birds in the inventory. F-100Cs in 1956, the F-105B in 1964 and the F-4E in 1968. Recruiting isn't the only thing the T-Birds do; they also demonstrate the qualities and capabilities of our aircraft, so being equipped with the F-22A isn't completely out of the question, though it's clear getting the first line units (or enough units to meet the immediate need) equipped will come first. The team's use of the F-22A would have the potential for an aerial demonstration that would be nothing less than a mind blowing experience. I, for one, hope it happens. The American people and air show fans the world over would be very impressed.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Sun Dec 09, 2007 9:06 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
The Thunderbirds never were planned to fly the F-15.

indeed, same reason they will never be planned for the F-22, as the F-15 was the topline fighter, and the F-22 is now.
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:14 am



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):
That's a lot of money, especially for an aircraft that suffers from interpersonal communication problems...

Why even bring this up?? The main concern is that it can communicate with other Raptor's which it does just fine.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
They are lucky they are getting F-16Cs in 2009.

Huh??? They converted to C/D's in 1992 bud...
 
User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13176
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:30 am



Quoting TexL1649 (Reply 5):
I imagine daily there are about 10-20 Rumsfeld decisions being fixed/corrected at the Pentagon.

I have a tremendous amount of respect for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, he is exactly the type of person the position of Defense Secretary requires. He is correcting some misguided decisions put into place by the former Secretary, without being overt about it.

The most important policy decisions Gates is revisiting from the former Secretary is the level of forces in Europe, specifically the US Army. In 2002 there were about 60,000 US troops in Europe mostly based in Germany, former Secretary Rumsfeld decided to slash that down to a projected 20,000 (two brigades, 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vincenza Italy and the 2nd Stryker Regiment at Vilseck Germany).

If reports that have come out are accurate (I really hope they are), Defense Secretary Robert Gates has decided to stop the draw down of troops in Europe. The current force level of 40,000 troops will be maintained, as will four Army Brigades (the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team in Italy; the 2nd Cavalry (Stryker) Regiment from Vilseck, Germany; Schweinfurt, Germany-based 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division; and the Baumholder, Germany-based 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division).

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...ion=104&article=57934&archive=true

I strongly feel having these troops remain in Europe is vital to both the US and NATO countries, it allows easier training amongst units in Europe, allows US Service members to serve in cultures outside of the United States which will allow greater education and familiarity with various cultures than could be achieved at Stateside bases. Plus Europe is much closer to the Middle East, Africa and South Asia than bases in the Continental US, making military or humanitarian responses much quicker and effective.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:43 am



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 18):
Why even bring this up?? The main concern is that it can communicate with other Raptor's which it does just fine.

While given enough time and money LM will eventually iron this out, but it's not exactly a small point; but of course we are talking about an aircraft that took so long to get into the air that the computers initially intended for it were rendered obsolete and not even available before it even entered service causing millions more that had to be allocated to the program...
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:37 pm

I'm glad they took their time with it...it turned out a success! With only one airframe loss in the F-22A program, you'd have to agree I would think.
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:49 pm

If they really want to save money and have a more capable force, the USAF should eliminate the CTOL F-35 and use the money for the full buy of 700+ F-22's.

With the F-15 and F-16 mixed buy it was different because the F-16 was arguably the equal of the F-15 in terms of Air to Air, whereas the F-22 is far superior to the F-35 in every respect, and F-35 cost is closing in on F22 cost. Also the USAF couldn't afford an all F-15 fleet of 1500 aircraft. The Air Force has no such numbers requirement anymore, which makes me wonder why the Air Force even wants to buy the F-35, which save for stealth and minimal internal weapons carriage is no improvement over the F-16, in fact, its actually slower in top speed.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:03 pm



Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 22):
If they really want to save money and have a more capable force, the USAF should eliminate the CTOL F-35 and use the money for the full buy of 700 F-22's.

you forget there are some international partners that need this aeroplane as well.. BTW, this is the largest chunk of all JSF's and without themthe USAF wont have a proper frontline strike capability
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:06 pm

This is a vital step in the right direction. 400 Raptors provide for much greater staying power and cast a disproportionally longer "global shadow", even taking account of surprise losses due to unforeseen events.

Keeping the peace is so much cheaper than fighting it out, but when push comes to shove, we had better own the air.

Furthermore, buying more Raptors not only cashes in on all the money spent, but also spreads the cost of future enhancements over more frames, all the while reducing risk from over-reliance on the F-35.

Finally, I couldn't agree more with above opinions regarding the previous and current Secretaries of War, er, Defense.
 
Thorny
Posts: 1508
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 8:44 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:13 pm



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 6):
Is there any chance of the Thunderbirds switching to the F-22?

No, certainly not anytime soon. But there will probably be an F-22 demonstration team (one plane that goes around to air shows), like there is for the F-15 today (or at least a few years ago, the last time we had an air show at Goodfellow.)
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6670
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:59 am

If the Air Force eventually use the F-22 it will be a long way down the road, after the kinks in its numerous electronic systems are ironed out. Like the F-15 when it first entered service, there were bugs to get over, these can be show stoppers when it relates to air shows, which today are numerous, and bad pr if an a/c cannot fly due to some minor technical issue which would not prevent flight on a combat mission, but with safety at air shows a prime concern, will in that environment.
However, for that same pr effort, you might actually see another variant of the F-22, one that is stripped down for the air show circuit, it would mean that the a/c could not easily transition to a combat squadron, but one must have priorities.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:50 am

Everyone seems to be forgetting the possibility of a F/B-22 and how an extension of the current F-22 production line might allow this to occur. Seems to kill two birds with one stone! More fighters and the USAF's next bomber.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:07 pm

The F-22 will make a lousy bomber. Will need a lot of redesign and will then only be able to do what a JSF can do for a lot less money.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:40 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 28):
The F-22 will make a lousy bomber. Will need a lot of redesign and will then only be able to do what a JSF can do for a lot less money.

I'm specifically talking about the delta wing F/B-22 concept, which is a far cry from a single engine short range half-stealth aircraft.

http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-4-04/strike-bombers.htm
A future derivative called the F/B-22 is currently considered by the air force, as it will be able to carry about 30 small diameter bombs (SDB). With a range of about 1,600 miles, and stealth capability that enables persistence behind enemy lines, penetration of sophisticated air defenses and supercruise, self protection and maneuverability, to expand the USAF long range strike capabilities.

http://www.af.mil/library/airforcepolicy2/january/march.asp
It is a bomber variant of the F/A-22, which would give it dramatically greater range -- somewhat short of the B-2 Spirit -- but still it's able to fight and depart quickly," Secretary Roche said. "A problem with our very large bombers is they don't have the ability to fight on their own and, given where we're thinking of using very stealthy systems, the ability to escape a particular problem -- or to shoot back and scoot out -- is very important."

The secretary admitted that the F/B-22 would not be able to carry as much ordnance as heavy bombers, but the use of precision-guided munitions would more than make up the difference. The F/B variant of the Raptor would also have larger wings than the F/A model.

"We now have weapons that are so ... precise, that instead of talking about how many aircraft do we need to attack a target, it's how many targets can we attack with one flight of the airplane," he said.

"In the case of the F/B-22, we are looking for something that can complement the F/A-22, which will be a deep-strike system," Secretary Roche said.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Wed Dec 12, 2007 10:28 am



Quoting TaromA380 (Reply 9):
The F-16 was brand new, sophisticated and expensive in the 70's, nobody would have given a couple to a demo team. However, time went by, F-16 is now a basic design, used by demo teams.

The F-22 is now the state-of-the-art, of course it's hard to imagine it doing demos teams. Let's talk in 30 years.

The F-16 was designed as a low cost but effective alternative to the expensive F-15. The F-22 is taking inflation into account far more expensive than the F-15 ever was and even more expensive than the F-16 ever was.
Due to the USAF getting limited numbers of F-22s there is no way they would use them for demo teams for at least another 15 years if not 20. They are simply too useful at their mission and who needs a stealth fighter for air stunts? The only reason why the USAF does the occasional stunt with the F-22 at the moment is to show some of its abilities and to create some public support for the fighter and also for the USAF as a whole.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:52 pm



Quoting Ozair (Reply 29):
I'm specifically talking about the delta wing F/B-22 concept, which is a far cry from a single engine short range half-stealth aircraft.

lol! you are calling the JSF half stealth and short ranged? nevertheless it is the latest stealth aircraft and has far greater range than the strike aircraft it is replacing: the F-16

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 30):
The F-16 was designed as a low cost but effective alternative to the expensive F-15. The F-22 is taking inflation into account far more expensive than the F-15 ever was and even more expensive than the F-16 ever was.

 checkmark 
 
Ozair
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:55 am



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 31):
lol! you are calling the JSF half stealth and short ranged? nevertheless it is the latest stealth aircraft and has far greater range than the strike aircraft it is replacing: the F-16

Take the time to research the design and capabilities of both the F-22 and the JSF. You might be surprised with what you find....
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:49 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 28):
The F-22 will make a lousy bomber. Will need a lot of redesign and will then only be able to do what a JSF can do for a lot less money.

It was never designed as a bomber. Although its air to ground performance is excellent, so I wouldn't call it lousy. There will be no F/B-22...not sure why anyone thinks there will. Current and recent requirement updates for the future bomber would exclude the F/B-22 design anyways.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:43 pm



Quoting Ozair (Reply 32):
Take the time to research the design and capabilities of both the F-22 and the JSF. You might be surprised with what you find....

I'm quite well aware of their capabilities, are you? I think you are too much influenced by that crazy retired air marshall of yours

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 33):
It was never designed as a bomber. Although its air to ground performance is excellent, so I wouldn't call it lousy.

You are correct, it wasn't designed as such. Main thing is, the most important munitions (2000 lbs) won't fit in it;'s internal bomb bays.

Do you have more info on it's "excellent" air to ground performance?
 
DeltaGuy
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:25 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Thu Dec 13, 2007 7:37 pm



Quoting STT757 (Thread starter):
381 F-22s would allow the Air Force to deploy F-22s in a manner that may look like this..

Langely AFB; 72 F-22s
Lakenheath; 24 F-22s
Tyndall AFB; 72 F-22s
Holloman AFB; 72 F-22s
Elmendorf AFB; 48 F-22s
Hickam AFB; 18 F-22s
Kadena; 48 F-22s
Nellis AFB; 24 F-22s
Edwards AFB; ?

What about us other Guard guys?  cry 

DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
 
User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13176
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:30 pm



Quoting Deltaguy (Reply 35):
What about us other Guard guys?

The Hawaiian ANG will be the only all Guard Unit flying the F-22s from Hickam, the Virginia ANG is in the process or has already turned in their F-16s and closed down Richmond ANG Station to move to Langley and become an associate Unit (or whatever it's called) to active duty Squadrons flying the F-22.

The ANG is benefiting from active duty squadrons converting from F-15C's to the F-22, this allows ANG Units to switch from F-15A's to the freed up F-15C's.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
DeltaGuy
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:25 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 1:07 am

Virginia Guard got screwed in alot of respects with the "merger", most of their people had to go away completely, just giving some resources/money to Langley's already large stash. You'll see more of this combining of braintrusts though, unfortunately.

As for benefiting from the freed up F-15C's, we just got a boatload of them and can't fly them! So I'm not sure what kind of benefit they are right now  Wink Most are 78-79 builds, a huge leap from our 75 models  Wink

DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:29 am



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 34):
You are correct, it wasn't designed as such. Main thing is, the most important munitions (2000 lbs) won't fit in it;'s internal bomb bays.

Do you have more info on it's "excellent" air to ground performance?

LoL!!! You're right...those 'little' thousand-pounders are useless arn't they! Not...

Of course I have info on its excellent AtG performance, but surely you can look that info up online yourself!

Also...lets not forget the SDB's!
 
wvsuperhornet
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:18 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 5:02 am



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 34):
I'm quite well aware of their capabilities, are you? I think you are too much influenced by that crazy retired air marshall of yours



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 34):
You are correct, it wasn't designed as such. Main thing is, the most important munitions (2000 lbs) won't fit in it;'s internal bomb bays.

Do you have more info on it's "excellent" air to ground performance?

Just look up under F-22A in a yahoo search they are easy to find. It seems that you know so much information that you dont want to do the work to look it up.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:15 pm



Quoting Wvsuperhornet (Reply 39):
Just look up under F-22A in a yahoo search they are easy to find. It seems that you know so much information that you dont want to do the work to look it up.

I think it's so laughable people still think it'sefficient to send a 400 M$ plane to send a 1000 lb bomb. Even if it hits the target flawlessly, it's a stupid concept, because there are other planes that can do it better, cheaper and more effecite.

You want an F-22 to get rid of the Flankers, nothing more, nothing less..
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:22 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 40):
You want an F-22 to get rid of the Flankers, nothing more, nothing less..

What are the F-22s going to do after they have taken out the Flankers, stand on the ground, unused?  boggled 
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:26 pm



Quoting Brendows (Reply 41):
What are the F-22s going to do after they have taken out the Flankers, stand on the ground, unused?

then the JSF's come in.. F-22 probably stay providing fighter cover..
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:29 am



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 42):


Quoting Brendows (Reply 41):
What are the F-22s going to do after they have taken out the Flankers, stand on the ground, unused?

then the JSF's come in.. F-22 probably stay providing fighter cover..

F-22 knocks the door down, F-35 comes in and trashes the house. That's how it works.

Or, the F-22 will....ok, I'm sure everyone's sick of me trotting out the Starscream photos.  Wink

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 4:03 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 40):
I think it's so laughable people still think it'sefficient to send a 400 M$ plane

I think its laughable that you think the F-22 is a $400M plane! Lets not forget that we send a $1B dollar aircraft to drop bombs and that's worked out great for us!

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 40):
Even if it hits the target flawlessly, it's a stupid concept, because there are other planes that can do it better, cheaper and more effecite.

So what fighter aircraft could slip in moderately undetected better than the F-22 right now?? We're all holding our breath on your answer!

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 42):
then the JSF's come in..

Actually there are no F-35's in service at this time...
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:03 pm



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 44):
think its laughable that you think the F-22 is a $400M plane! Lets not forget that we send a $1B dollar aircraft to drop bombs and that's worked out great for us!

the numbers are all over this forum: total programme cost divided by amount of airframes...

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 44):
So what fighter aircraft could slip in moderately undetected better than the F-22 right now?? We're all holding our breath on your answer!

Well, I have to give you the F-22 has one big advantage, and that's it range. I see perspective for a deep interdiction version, but a small one!

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 44):
Actually there are no F-35's in service at this time...

argh.. this is tiring...
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:15 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 45):
the numbers are all over this forum: total programme cost divided by amount of airframes...

Your right...people that have no clue how the numbers are supposed to be broken down would include all the R&D to come up with that number. They are wrong.
 
michlis
Posts: 696
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:13 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:52 pm



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 44):
I think its laughable that you think the F-22 is a $400M plane! Lets not forget that we send a $1B dollar aircraft to drop bombs and that's worked out great for us!

Except there are not a lot of those billion dollar airplanes in service and if they lose one or two then no one will be laughing.  Smile
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:55 pm

Look, the thing is, we need to push forward with the program. We cannot wait for the next generation of technology to come out, to finally field an aircraft in the numbers we need.

The last time we skipped a generation in aircraft, we ended up with only 21 B-2 bombers. This isn't a time where we can simply say, "Well, we can scrape by with what we got, and we'll wait until something better comes along."

All the political blustering aside, the F-22 is unmatched throughout the world. And a fleet of ~400 aircraft is a very formidable force, that ensures our dominance for the next few decades. We screwed ourselves in the 1990s by remaining static on our force growth. The Cold War was over, and no one was interested in keeping up the pressure to advance the limit of technology. So because we spent a decade sitting on our hands, we're now in a huge jam. We need to replace F-15s, F-16s. We need more C-17s. The C-5 program is in shambles. We need to urgently replace our KC-135s. In 15yrs we will need to replace a majority of our critical military satellites... and none of this is cheap.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
michlis
Posts: 696
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:13 am

RE: Pentagon To Support Usaf Request For 381 F-22s

Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:12 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 48):
Look, the thing is, we need to push forward with the program.

 checkmark 

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 48):
The Cold War was over, and no one was interested in keeping up the pressure to advance the limit of technology. So because we spent a decade sitting on our hands, we're now in a huge jam.

 checkmark 

Like most political spiels, the so-called "peace dividend" after the end of the Cold War is actually going to cost more because a lot of hard assets need to be replaced all at the same time.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests