F/A-22: To Fly High or Get its Wings Clipped

[Crusader2000]

TVC is only fitted to F22A, and some flanker varients. Its not a widespread fit on 4/4.5/5G planes. Yes, the Fulcrum varient will also have it (SMT ?) that are not even in production. The overall lack of numbers of plans with TVC again rases the issue of its utility.

As for the F-22 and the cost the american put into it, i think it occured because it was cutting edge technology at ther time and the Red's were also developing it, and yes it does improve performance somewhat. Do not get me wrong, I perfer to see it on Typhoon/JSF/Rafale. I just do not think it as "sexy" as some people thought it would be.

I doubt the TVC is a substite for wrap round staring IR senors. This wrap round technology you will see more and more.

Thankyou for your thoughts.

Agreed.......it will be interesting to see how it developes in the future? If, memory service me right. I believe the USAF original interest in TVC. Had more to do with short landing and take off performance. More than out right agility during ACM.

 

[Dr Phobus]

The ability for planes to have short take off ability was important in both NATO and the warsaw-pact, due to the heavy attacks the air bases would come under. So TVC was indeed to assist short take offs. Swing wings also improved short take off i think, and of course a load of interest in VSTOL. It was the flavor of the 70-80's

Still, back too the F-22A with only 7 operational squardons, it better be as good as they say, i wonder what its kill to loss ratio would be against the others 4.5/5G planes coming on line.


:bazooka

 

[Crusader2000]

The ability for planes to have short take off ability was important in both NATO and the warsaw-pact, due to the heavy attacks the air bases would come under. So TVC was indeed to assist short take offs. Swing wings also improved short take off i think, and of course a load of interest in VSTOL. It was the flavor of the 70-80's

Still, back too the F-22A with only 7 operational squardons, it better be as good as they say, i wonder what its kill to loss ratio would be against the others 4.5/5G planes coming on line.


:bazooka

Well, the current F-15 has something like 101 to 0! Also, many believe the gap between the F-22 and F-15 is bigger than the F-15 and the F-4 during the 70's! WOW :bazooka :jump

 

[Dr Phobus]

Well that sounds nice, i wonder how they come up with those ratio's, also, missle technology is more on a par that is was in the past. Also, 7 squadrons it so few, still, the American;s are know to over-inflate things a little.
:hul

 

[Aussie Digger]

101 to 0 is the F-15's actual combat record for air to air combat kills, I believe, not a theoretical kill ratio...

 

[Dr Phobus]

Yes, i agree about F-15 kill ratio, its a well know fact. I was refering to the hyperthectical situation where the 7 squadrons of F-22 are up against 4.5G/5G warplanes. It comes back to the issue of "is the F-22 really that good " to justify so few.

:nutkick

 

[Crusader2000]

Yes, i agree about F-15 kill ratio, its a well know fact. I was refering to the hyperthectical situation where the 7 squadrons of F-22 are up against 4.5G/5G warplanes. It comes back to the issue of "is the F-22 really that good " to justify so few.

:nutkick

Well, just like the F-22 Raptor itself. You want to stack everything in your favor! So, I guess the short answer to your question would be "NO"! That said, personally I believe the USAF will find ways to purchase more F-22's. She could cancel the F-35A and order landbase F-35C's. Another possiblity (remote) is she could place a order for a second batch combined with orders from two or three other partners. (i.e. Australia, Japan, etc.) Thereby bring the unit price down for each Raptor............

 

[Dr Phobus]

Well, just like the F-22 Raptor itself. You want to stack everything in your favor! So, I guess the short answer to your question would be "NO"! That said, personally I believe the USAF will find ways to purchase more F-22's. She could cancel the F-35A and order landbase F-35C's. Another possiblity (remote) is she could place a order for a second batch combined with orders from two or three other partners. (i.e. Australia, Japan, etc.) Thereby bring the unit price down for each Raptor............

austraila is going to buy the JSF. Japan, well, if any one going to buy it, they will/can, if the americans will export it, which in its fully equiped verison maybe questionable. I have never hweard from them marketing the F-22 have you ? I agree that they will find some more some how, and many people have said cutting the JSF buy is the way to go, or even loss some of the bomber fleet (yes i know a totally different capability, but i am talking about saving $$$)

 

[Whiskyjack]

I think the issue for the US is development costs. The 'fly away' cost for a F-22A is US$130m, but they charge development cost when selling overseas. Add this and a potential customer is looking at US$250m+, which is a lot of money.

In my opinion the US govt needs to think on a couple of points re this issue.

1. Is it desirable for key US allies to operate this plane and,
2. How can they recover costs if no one can afford the plane?

Therefore maybe make the plane more affordable, keep the production line ticking over making it easier for the USAF to order more aircraft in the future.

Maybe adapt the F-22 for carrier operations as well, although my understanding is that the USN has already rejected this.

And for the record I think Stealth is overrated in the future networked battlefield, research and development is already underway with some technologies to overcome the stealth advantage.

 

[Dr Phobus]

Japan is the only nation with the link and money to afford it, and i have heard zip about them wanting it. I agree about stealth, look too distributed radar net-works and improved super senitive IR and UV sensors creating a passive network. Saying that, it does and will have it uses and everyone flying a plane I am sure wished it was as steathly as F-22 with i understand with 3 times steathler than Typhoon, saying that, Rafales IRST can track planes at 80 miles distant, i wonder what priate (made by the italians) can do ?

 

[Crusader2000]

austraila is going to buy the JSF. Japan, well, if any one going to buy it, they will/can, if the americans will export it, which in its fully equiped verison maybe questionable. I have never hweard from them marketing the F-22 have you ? I agree that they will find some more some how, and many people have said cutting the JSF buy is the way to go, or even loss some of the bomber fleet (yes i know a totally different capability, but i am talking about saving $$$)

Currently, the RAAF is scheduled to receive the JSF. Yet, many in Australia are concern over the many Flanker sales in the Region.!:unknown Also, while the JSF is a fine replacement for the F/A-18 Hornet. It doesn't have the payload and range to replace the F-111! Japan on the otherhand has not express interest in the F-22 publicly? Yet, many believe with the growing PLAAF with its very capable fleet of J-10's & J-11's. That could change anytime.............. As for cutting JSF's to get more F-22's. I don't consider that likely. At least not on any grand scale. Cutting back on the JSF will just drive up the cost. In some ways the F-35 is more important than the F-22. As the JSF will replace very large numbers of F-16's, F/A-18's, A-10's, and AV-8's. To name just a few.........Further, this would up-set many of the JSF Partners. Which, want to keep the cost of the program down. If, the JSF Program is to remain viable. The US needs all the partners and orders it can fine!

 

[Dr Phobus]

Currently, the RAAF is scheduled to receive the JSF. Yet, many in Australia are concern over the many Flanker sales in the Region.!:unknown Also, while the JSF is a fine replacement for the F/A-18 Hornet. It doesn't have the payload and range to replace the F-111! Japan on the otherhand has not express interest in the F-22 publicly? Yet, many believe with the growing PLAAF with its very capable fleet of J-10's & J-11's. That could change anytime.............. As for cutting JSF's to get more F-22's. I don't consider that likely. At least not on any grand scale. Cutting back on the JSF will just drive up the cost. In some ways the F-35 is more important than the F-22. As the JSF will replace very large numbers of F-16's, F/A-18's, A-10's, and AV-8's. To name just a few.........Further, this would up-set many of the JSF Partners. Which, want to keep the cost of the program down. If, the JSF Program is to remain viable. The US needs all the partners and orders it can fine!

Well the JSF will not need the range of the F-111, in flight refulling along with JASSM with give the RAAF the strike range they require. Yes, the F-22, JSF threads are all talking about the ability of JSF to go toe to toe with Flanker variants. I can not conceve a day when the RAAF will buy F-22. Not that the aussies are as hard as nails because they are.

 

[Crusader2000]

Well the JSF will not need the range of the F-111, in flight refulling along with JASSM with give the RAAF the strike range they require. Yes, the F-22, JSF threads are all talking about the ability of JSF to go toe to toe with Flanker variants. I can not conceve a day when the RAAF will buy F-22. Not that the aussies are as hard as nails because they are.

You bring up some good points. Yet, many Australians I've spoken to aren't so convinced? They would like to see the F-22 or FB-22 if it becomes available. As for a Flanker/JSF match-up...............no contest! JSF



FLY NAVY

 

[Aussie Digger]

This is 1 Aussie that would sacrifice 50 per cent of our current JSF order, to fund a "Silver Bullet" F-22 acquisition.

Unfortunately our Government seems set upon JSF's. The only good news about this (as our sole air combat aircraft) is that Government is still assessing our needs and up to 120 JSF's may end up being purchased, a considerable increase in capability even in numbers over what we have now...

On top of that, the F-35B is still being considered. If it was confirmed that we could have a squadron of F-35B's, in addition to our planned purchase of "up to 100 fighter aircraft", I'd say to hell with the F-22. If no F-35B's, than a dual F-35/F-22 force is the best way to go for Australia, split along the lines of the F/A-18/F-111 fleet now. 60-70 JSF's and 20-30 F-22's...

 

[Dr Phobus]

This is 1 Aussie that would sacrifice 50 per cent of our current JSF order, to fund a "Silver Bullet" F-22 acquisition.

Unfortunately our Government seems set upon JSF's. The only good news about this (as our sole air combat aircraft) is that Government is still assessing our needs and up to 120 JSF's may end up being purchased, a considerable increase in capability even in numbers over what we have now...

On top of that, the F-35B is still being considered. If it was confirmed that we could have a squadron of F-35B's, in addition to our planned purchase of "up to 100 fighter aircraft", I'd say to hell with the F-22. If no F-35B's, than a dual F-35/F-22 force is the best way to go for Australia, split along the lines of the F/A-18/F-111 fleet now. 60-70 JSF's and 20-30 F-22's...

_________________________________________________________________

I find this issues rasther interesting, austrailia with this limited budget will not be buying any F-22 varient. Its the most exspensive warplane about for this class in history, and yet Rafale and Typhoon is not considering an option ? Sounds a little biased ? I agree, that the F-35 will struggle against Flanker vairents, which are poliferating in the region. So the assiues need a two fleet airforce, now consider, the RAF & italy are pursuing 2 airforce fleet. Saying that RAAF is much smaller in size, like Holland.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I must say I am a bit surprised that the Rafale and Typhoon are not considered as well. These aircraft are considered the 'best of the rest' after the F-22 and would give the RAAF air superiority in the region, while the JSF would be the strike aircraft.

However if the US could un bend enough to exclude development from the F-22 price, 20-25 F-22s would not be unrealistic for the RAAF.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Just to put it into perspective the cost per unit of the F-22A is US$133m, including the development cost, the cost per unit for 180 is US$354m!!

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1413697&C=america

 

[Dr Phobus]

Hello, indeed, VERY expensive. However, I like the split fleet argument, but i doubt the RAAF will. The fleet will be too small to justify it, saying that, I remember the Norwegian AF were also thinking about a mixed fleet. F-35 and Typhoon, apparently, the mixed fleet was not radically more expensive than a single fleet ( sorry lack details on exactly how much).

Many airforces need to consider the effectivness of there future dog figthing ability.

 

[Whiskyjack]

Hello, indeed, VERY expensive. However, I like the split fleet argument, but i doubt the RAAF will. The fleet will be too small to justify it, saying that, I remember the Norwegian AF were also thinking about a mixed fleet. F-35 and Typhoon, apparently, the mixed fleet was not radically more expensive than a single fleet ( sorry lack details on exactly how much).

Many airforces need to consider the effectivness of there future dog figthing ability.

The issue the RAAF has is that the West and North of the country are VERY large, a silver bullet force of 24 odd F-22s will not really help defend that, then again 120 JSF would be stretched pretty thin.

As an expeditionary force 10 F-22s and 20 F-35s would be a potent force.

I'm not sure those above prices include training and spares either, that would usually add 25-35% onto the fly away price:shudder

 

[Dr Phobus]

The issue the RAAF has is that the West and North of the country are VERY large, a silver bullet force of 24 odd F-22s will not really help defend that, then again 120 JSF would be stretched pretty thin.

As an expeditionary force 10 F-22s and 20 F-35s would be a potent force.

I'm not sure those above prices include training and spares either, that would usually add 25-35% onto the fly away price:shudder

Yes, aus is a big place to cover, thus, you would need a supercruise ability, something that JSF does not have, and i am not sure the Rafale does either. The JSF also, has limited range. However, you will have 6 AWACS to help.

: