Should the US buy more F-22 Raptors?

[Pruitt]

Originally Posted by Achtung Baby

The F-22 was designed to be much better in reliability and maintainability, which means less manpower and less aircraft to support a deployed squadron. With the claimed reduced maintenance this means more efficiency, less time on the ground and more time in the air. The F-22 is said to exceed current fighter sortie surge rates with a reduced support structure, so less planes can do the same job.

That may well be in the specs, but how is it doing, real world? Are we using regular USAF personnel to maintain them, yet, or are there a bunch of "company reps" on hand to "help"? Does USAF maintenance have to send major parts back to the factory for rebuild? Any time someone claims a piece of equipment can be so productive it can do the work of several older pieces of equipment, I take it with a grain of salt. No matter how you slice it, 12 Raptors can't be in as many places as 18 or 24 Eagles.

Sure we have to replace aircraft, but the Transport Fleet is in worse shape than the Fighter Fleet. Where is the anguished groans and moans to replace the tankers and B-52's? What we get is the same old political bickering.

Pruitt

[sickpup]

Originally Posted by Pruitt

Sure we have to replace aircraft, but the Transport Fleet is in worse shape than the Fighter Fleet. Where is the anguished groans and moans to replace the tankers and B-52's? What we get is the same old political bickering.

The age of the aircraft is a much more important factor in fighters because of the stresses to their airframes during maneuvering. The transport aircraft and, typically, the bombers fly essentially the same straight and level profile for each mission, which means their airframes can accumulate more hours without the danger of in-flight failures.

[comm. waffle]

Originally Posted by sickpup

The age of the aircraft is a much more important factor in fighters because of the stresses to their airframes during maneuvering. The transport aircraft and, typically, the bombers fly essentially the same straight and level profile for each mission, which means their airframes can accumulate more hours without the danger of in-flight failures.

But what if most of the transport fleet reaches their point of repair due to all those years of service? Right now we're fine, but give or take half a decade and there our new problem lies.


I got tired of catching up and reading all of the posts, but the last thing I saw was sometihng about air superoity to support the ground attack aircraft. This is obviously right... if you can't fly the skys, you're pretty much screwed for support, unless you're near a firebase somewhere. but here's the thing. During GW and the GWI, it wasn't F-22s that beat the crap out of the Iraqi air force, it was current existing aircraft. Iran is the closest in the area so I'll use them as an example.

The current existing and unclassified aircraft used by the IIAF, are:

-50 F-14s. Believed to be poorly maintained. No/little AAM, gun only.
-6 MiG-29s. Believed to be capable, but have heavy costs for maintance.
-35 F-7Ms. Believed to be capable.
-260 F-4D/Es. Believed to be in very poor condition due to parts.
-260 F-5E/FIIs. Believed to be in very poor condition due to parts.
-30 Su-24s. Believed to be the best in condition in Iran.
-7 Su-25Ks. Possibly capable, but doubtful.
-24 Mir-F1s. Possibly capable, but doubtful.
http://www.milnet.com/Iranian-Military.html (near the bottom of the page)

Thats probably the most advanced air force the US needs to worry about. Most of is advanced stuff... in the late 80s. Given that their air defense is actually pretty decent, I say resort to my other plan...B-s escorted by some F-22s we already have. We have 141(?) right now? We can spare 25 or so for a few sorties. other than that, our current planres can take that crap out without that much trouble.

[SethP]

Originally Posted by Jefffar

If America can't afford the Raptor in suitible quantities, why do people think that Japan or Israel can?

People think that because Japan and Israel have said that they can, and will procure if given the opportunity.

The reality is neither country mentioned above is interested in anything near the volume the US was looking at.

Japan and Israel have both said that they'd be interested in a squadron or two to start with, irregardless of the price. This is nothing close to what the US already has.

[Exorcist]

So, once again, they are trying to tell us what we need in the future based on current assessments, and flawed ones.

So, what advanced fighters are under development in Russia and China?
Well?

I am sure that the men we had flying P-51s over Germany were very happy with their machines.... right up to the moment they were blown away by Me-262s.

Anyone remember why the Me-262s failed to prevent our bombs from falling?
They were out-numbered.

Simple math guys. God really does favor the bigger battalions.

[the_redstar_swl]

Originally Posted by Exorcist

So, what advanced fighters are under development in Russia and China?
Well?

The Sukhoi PAK FA and J-XX program respectively.

[Pruitt]

Originally Posted by the_redstar_swl

That was fixed a while ago, IIRC the initial solution involved relaying the data to the E-3 which then downgraded it and sent it to the F-15s/F-16s. Now they've installed a dedicated link on the F-22. Upgrading the E-3 and E-8 wouldn't be a problem, From all the photos I've seen they're basically designed so you can just unbolt the consoles and replace them. As far as I know the E-3/E-8 never had a problem linking with the F-22.

This dedicated link you are speaking of, does it communicate directly with older model Aircraft? The contract calls for direct communication between the F-22 and the F-15's and F-16's. If they can't do it then the F-22 is failing to live up to its contract. If you have evidence to show to the contrary, go ahead and present it.

If I did not know better some of the "Fighter Mafia" would seem to be "fixing" this problem by calling the old fighters inadequate and then replace them with new F-22's thereby avoiding the problem of communication!

I wonder what else is not working well?

Granted most Fighters we have bought for the Air Force over the years have been more to fulfill political bargains, but most of them have been made to work. Some have done very well, but for every F-16 and F-15 we seem to have an F-104 and F-14.

When I see a program that has taken over 20 years of design and production and billions of dollars, I say it is hard to just up and cancel it. Something is not right.

Pruitt

[the_redstar_swl]

Originally Posted by Pruitt

This dedicated link you are speaking of, does it communicate directly with older model Aircraft? The contract calls for direct communication between the F-22 and the F-15's and F-16's. If they can't do it then the F-22 is failing to live up to its contract. If you have evidence to show to the contrary, go ahead and present it.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...618/#more-5618

BACN provides a high-speed, Internet protocol (IP)-based airborne network infrastructure that that extends communications ranges, bridges between radio frequencies, and “translates” among incompatible communications systems – including both tactical and civil cellular systems. Using BACN, a Special Forces soldier on the ground could use a civil cell phone to speak to a fighter pilot in the cockpit. BACN supports seamless movement of imagery, video, voice and digital messages, with support for waveforms that include SINCGARS, DAMA, EPLRS, SADL, Link 16, and IP-based networking connectivity using TTN, TCDL technology, CLIP, and 802.11b. Northrop Grumman’s joint translator/forwarder (JXF), originally developed for US Joint Forces Command, is to accomplish digital-message transformation.

...

There are even reports that BACN may be installed in the F-22 Raptor as a communications gateway that would solve some of that platform’s issues; releases concerning the JEFX 08 exercises were vague on this subject.

[Half Pint John]

Originally Posted by SethP

People think that because Japan and Israel have said that they can, and will procure if given the opportunity.

The reality is neither country mentioned above is interested in anything near the volume the US was looking at.

Japan and Israel have both said that they'd be interested in a squadron or two to start with, irregardless of the price. This is nothing close to what the US already has.

Any to Israel we would still be paying for.

Any for Israel and that is a sure attack on Iran.

Any for Israel is all but a guarantee of a major war breaking out in the middle East.

IDF's F 15's and pilots are a match for any of their neighbors.

US defence aid to Israel currently stands at $2.4bn a year - the new package would amount to a 25% increase.

Mr Olmert said the aid had been agreed at a meeting with US President George W Bush in Washington last month.

[galland]

This dedicated link you are speaking of, does it communicate directly with older model Aircraft? The contract calls for direct communication between the F-22 and the F-15's and F-16's. If they can't do it then the F-22 is failing to live up to its contract. If you have evidence to show to the contrary, go ahead and present it

..this is technically correct, Link 16 is the latest data link used by fourth and four and a half gen fighters and tankers and transports in bot the US and a lot of other western air forces. The raptor can only use a advance version of this datalink , which allows them to link only with other raptors, plus any AWACS that they may liasing with. The brand new Link 22 system is meant to address these shortcomings , at least until the F-35 becomes fully operational....

[sickpup]

Originally Posted by Pruitt

This dedicated link you are speaking of, does it communicate directly with older model Aircraft? The contract calls for direct communication between the F-22 and the F-15's and F-16's. If they can't do it then the F-22 is failing to live up to its contract. If you have evidence to show to the contrary, go ahead and present it.

Still harping on that issue, I see...

The comms problems (actually, nearly all comms problems) can now be solved via BACN - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlef...ons_Node_(BACN)

[The Doctor]

Originally Posted by the_redstar_swl

The Sukhoi PAK FA and J-XX program respectively.

Are the F-22's going to defend Europe against the Sukhoi PAK FA's and Taiwan against the J-XX's?

Are the F-22's going to be flying long-range penetration missions into Russia and/or Red China? Is so... From where?

If we went to war with Iran or North Korea, we would need carrier-based aircraft capable of establishing air superiority and penetrating their respective air defenses. Are F-22's going to fly missions into Iran from the UK? Are we going to base F-22's on the Korean Peninsula? Or will they be flying from Kadena or bases in Japan?

I would rather see money spent on long range, stealthy strike aircraft for the Navy - 21st Century-style Tomcats and Intruders – and long-range/long-loiter time attack aircraft for the Air Force - 21st Century-style Warthogs and Spectres. The F/A-18 is a great multi-role fighter and I'm sure the F/A-35 will be a fine strike aircraft - But they are both dependent on aerial refueling for long-range missions. That said, the Hornets & Lightning II's are better suited to potential conflicts with Iran or North Korea than the Raptors are... Because they don't need land bases. And the Air Force has a greater need for attack planes and gunships than it does for high-end fighters.

The current inventory of F-22's gives the USAF a pretty decent high-end component. Hopefully our gov't will allow for an export version and limited future production run for replacement aircraft. That'll keep the assembly line alive.

[Mountain Man]

Latest word over the weekend was that the F-22 program was canceled by PORKUS.

[bass_man86]

Originally Posted by Mountain Man

Latest word over the weekend was that the F-22 program was canceled by PORKUS.

That is correct, the program has indeed been canceled, and good riddance. They should cancel that silly Navy LCS while they are it.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/...f22/index.html

[Half Pint John]

Thank you Sen McCain and Sec Gates.