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

[sunjerem]

So far, there is no plan for an F-22C. The USAF would like more F-22s, but Congress has not authorised the money for more production or a new version, & neither appears in the Pentagons plans.

You're free to speculate, but at the moment your speculations have no evidence to support them.

BTW, what you say about F-16 & F-18 is completely wrong. The F-18 was not a successor to the F-16, nor based on it, but a naval aircraft (the F-16 being land-based) based on the YF-17 (built only as a prototype) & has been built in far smaller numbers than the F-16. The original F-18 ceased production years ago, but the F-16 is still in production.

I meant the F-16A was the limited production version and the F-16C was the main production version, the F/A-18A was the limited production version and the F/A-18C was the main production version. Also, you think F-22 will stop at F-22A? No way, F-22C would have DSI. Again, I'm beginning to sound like a Chinese person or a Pakistani person, all speculative with J-14, J-10C, JF-17 block II.

 

[DarthAmerica]

I hope your right on that. Please tell me the DOD is not that stubborn to not allow the Air Force more F-22s and keep 25 year old F-15 in service for who knows how long. What about the PAK-FA? Clearly the F-15 can't match the PAK-FA, maybe the F-35 can but still no less than 250 F-22s in my opinion. Congress has shown strong support for the F-22 recently, ever since the U.S. F-15 Fleet has been grounded since November. I mean come on you have to be an idiot if you believe the USAF can maintain air supremacy with 25 year old jets for another 20-30 years and not allow more new jets in times like this.

Don't think of this in terms of platform vs platform. That isn't how war works. PAK-FA doesn't even exist. It's not even prototyped. It will be 10 to 15 years before its even operational at the earliest and then only in small numbers in a military that is fundamentally weaker across the board and incapable of deploying abroad in significant numbers.

Research any conflict in the last 20 years and you will see that most aircraft are destroyed by weapons with GBU, MK or AGM rather than AIM designations. The days of massed air to air engagements are ending if not gone. Air Combat in in the equivalent of 3rd Gen warfare.

I'd suggest that we refrain from using the word idiot to describe USAF plans or mandated congressional procurement until an analysis of the facts and doctrine is made. Facts like the USAF will have procured over 1000 F-35's within 20 to 30 years to compliment the Eagles, Raptors and USN Super Hornets in their air superiority duties. Not to mention the F-16 fleet. No current airforce or projected future airforce that the USA would face or even hypothetically face is capable of beating it solely based on procurement.

Understand that within the next 20 to 30 years enemy air will be falling to DEWs and faster deadlier AAMs if they even make it into the air at all. There are programs in R&D right now that would allow for the DoD to strike enemy aircraft on the ground from CONUS or Sea in less time than it takes for the enemy pilots to put their gear on and get their planes in the air. I don't want to digress or thread jack but the point is not to look at just the platform level. War is a team sport or system level event.

-DA

 

[sunjerem]

F-22C (I assume that's what it's gonna be called because no two-seat F-22B is required since F-22 pilots all use simulator training) should add DSI, EO/IRST, F-35's engines with TVC, HMD and integrated touch display.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

That's my interpretation.

MYP = Multiyear Procurement contract (2007/08/09).

Good, they should get more F-22s. The Air Force has to use F-16s until the F-15s get back in the air and the F-16 is not meant for long range interdiction and air superiority, the F-15 and F-16 have two different missions and roles. In Alaska they are having the Canadian Air Force CF-18s to fill in for the F-15s. The Air force wants and really needs 200 more F-22s to replace the 450 F-15 A-D, well the rest of the F-15 A-D will be replaced by the F-35. As for the F-15E I don't know what its replacement is I thought is was the FB-22. In my opinion the Air Force should have the following:
400 F-22
1800 F-35
220 FB-22
94 B-52
21 B-2
67 B-1B
100-200 2018 bomber.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The USAF would like more F-22s, but Congress has not authorized the money for more production or a new version, & neither appears in the Pentagons plans.

Congress has been supporting the F-22 ever since the Nov. 2nd crash of an F-15. They even wrote a letter to the Pentagon saying it would be ill advised and premature to shut down the F-22 line given the aging F-15 fleet, the number of jobs at stake, and counties with better fighter jets such as the SU-30 and SU-35.

 

[swerve]

I meant the F-16A was the limited production version and the F-16C was the main production version, the F/A-18A was the limited production version and the F/A-18C was the main production version. Also, you think F-22 will stop at F-22A? No way, F-22C would have DSI. Again, I'm beginning to sound like a Chinese person or a Pakistani person, all speculative with J-14, J-10C, JF-17 block II.

My mistake.

But the F-16A/F-16C designations are pretty meaningless, in any case, even without taking into account the F-16A MLU in W. Europe. The difference between an F-16A & the first block of F-16C is less than the differences between F-16C blocks. Even within blocks, there can be enough difference that in the past they'd have been given new mark designations. If the USA & LM had followed past practice, we'd be running out of letters for different models of F-16s by now.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The U.S. Air Force is likely to get at least 40 additional F-22 Raptors in 2009 and 2010 above 183 to a total of 223 F-22s. Unfortunatly some people think the F-22 is a remencent of the Cold War, but clearly the U.S. will not only face Taliban only wars but adversaries like China and Russia. They think the U.S. should only have the F-35 but the USAF needs the
F-22. It looks like the F-15 is nearing the end of its operational service life, and more F-22s are needed and the Air force needs to build the F-35 at a faster rate. I find it sad that the Clinton and Bush administrations did not increase the Air force budget, they have been short of funds for over 20 years. The U.S. only spends 3.7% of GDP on defense but many of the Joint Cheifs of Staff think the U.S. should spend at least 4% for defense, and I agree with them.

 

[sunjerem]

5000 F-22's can be built every month during world war times. Computer simulation training means thousands of pilots can be well-trained in weeks.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

5000 F-22's can be built every month during world war times. Computer simulation training means thousands of pilots can be well-trained in weeks.

5000 f-22s? That to me is like a Utopia.

 

[sunjerem]

5000 f-22s? That to me is like a Utopia.

Yep. You better believe it. Any country wishing to take America on is in a BIG hole.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Yep. You better believe it. Any country wishing to take America on is in a BIG hole.

Still 223 F-22s and 2443 F-35s and 460 F/A/-18 E/F is a powerful force that no one can mess with. Plus I think the F-15E will remain in service since they are newer and they have the bomber role that the F-22 can't match, but if not there is still the 2018 bomber, as well as the B-52, B-2 and B-1B.

 

[sunjerem]

Still 223 F-22s and 2443 F-35s and 460 F/A/-18 E/F is a powerful force that no one can mess with. Plus I think the F-15E will remain in service since they are newer and they have the bomber role that the F-22 can't match, but if not there is still the 2018 bomber, as well as the B-52, B-2 and B-1B.

Not really. Given WWII experience, both UK and Germany can both pump out at least 2000 EF-2000 Eurofighters every month in world war times.

But, they would have a harder time training their pilots. EF-2000 relies primarily on two-seaters for training, unlike America which uses simulation training.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Not really. Given WWII experience, both UK and Germany can both pump out at least 2000 EF-2000 Eurofighters every month in world war times.

But, they would have a harder time training their pilots. EF-2000 relies primarily on two-seaters for training, unlike America which uses simulation training.

You cant produce modern fighters at a rate that they did in WWII. Fighters were a lot less sophisticated then they are now, today its takes 10-20 years to develop and build a modern fighter jet. Today they are a lot harder to build then they were back in the 1940s. It would be nice but that will never happen.

 

[swerve]

5000 F-22's can be built every month during world war times. Computer simulation training means thousands of pilots can be well-trained in weeks.

Soooo - you think that 60000 F-22s could be built in a year? Care to explain how you arrived at that figure? Do you realise that's worth considerably more than the annual value of US manufacturing production at present?

 

[Sea Toby]

Who dreams these numbers up? I learned that during WWII the United States' arsenal of democracy did some numbers, building large numbers of ships and aircraft. Whether the United States could do it again is suspect. While the USAF would be happy with six hundred, six thousand might be built during World War III. But I think the aircraft with the larger numbers would be the F-35, not the F-22.

 

[sunjerem]

Who dreams these numbers up? I learned that during WWII the United States' arsenal of democracy did some numbers, building large numbers of ships and aircraft. Whether the United States could do it again is suspect. While the USAF would be happy with six hundred, six thousand might be built during World War III. But I think the aircraft with the larger numbers would be the F-35, not the F-22.

The biggest difference between fighters now and fighters of WW2 is that modern fighters require titanium for high performance such as supersonic flight. Titanium seems to be relatively rare, so digging for them may be harder. Other than that, the greater sophistication of modern fighters can be offset by more efficient automated production lines using, for instance, robotic arms. The biggest headache would be to obtain rare resources such as titanium. But, with recycling technologies of today, lost fighters can be brought back for recycle and the rare resources can be obtained efficiently by recycling.

 

[Scorpion82]

Todays aircraft need much longer to produce despite all the automatic factories, these aircraft are much more complex and there is still a good bunch of work required to be done by humans.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Bush administration leaves F-22 in air for next president

After months of open disagreement between the Air Force and leaders in the Pentagon over the size of the nation’s F-22 Raptor fleet, the Bush Administration has opted to leave the decision up to the next administration.As expected, President Bush’s $515.4 billion defense budget funds the last 20 F-22s under a multi-year purchasing plan but does not include money to shut down production of the Lockheed Martin fighter plane.
The Pentagon leadership has insisted for months that the production line should be closed after 2011, but Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England eased away from that position recently by telling members of Congress that the line would stay open to build a few F-22s to replace warplanes destroyed in combat.
The Pentagon had maintained that production should be capped at 183 while Air Force leaders contended that the service needs at least 381 to maintain U.S. air superiority.
In unveiling the defense budget on Monday, Pentagon comptroller Tina Jonas said the Defense Department hasn’t changed its view that the fleet should be capped at 183 aircraft.
But she added: ``I do believe, though, that the next administration will have to make the call on what they want to do ultimately.’’
The Pentagon’s latest approach gives breathing room to the Lockheed Martin-led manufacturing team and its supporters in Congress.
More than 1,800 Lockheed workers in Fort Worth build the center fuselage, the largest section, and Boeing workers in Seattle construct the tail and rear section.
The fighter is assembled at a Lockheed Martin plant in Marietta, Ga., which also builds the forward fuselage.
Maj. Gen. Larry O. Spencer, who oversees the Air Force budget, said the service is ``continuing to make our case’’ for 381 F-22s.
The budget, which would go into effect for the 2009 fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, calls for $4 billion to build the final 20 Raptors to complete a 60-aircraft purchase that began in 2007.
Money that would have financed the shutdown of production will be used to help fix the Air Force’s troubled F-15 fleet, said Vice Admiral Steve Stanley, director for force structure, resources and assessment for the Defense Department’s joint staff.
Keeping the Raptor line open, he said, would leave ``a decision about F-22 to the next administration, which will have to execute the program either way it goes.’’

 

[SlyDog]

The biggest difference between fighters now and fighters of WW2 is that modern fighters require titanium for high performance such as supersonic flight. Titanium seems to be relatively rare, so digging for them may be harder. Other than that, the greater sophistication of modern fighters can be offset by more efficient automated production lines using, for instance, robotic arms. The biggest headache would be to obtain rare resources such as titanium. But, with recycling technologies of today, lost fighters can be brought back for recycle and the rare resources can be obtained efficiently by recycling.

Canada, South Africa and Australia have huge amount of Titanium. Thats not the problem. The purifying process and treatment etc is more problematic and expensive.


By the way, why all this urge for more F-22:s . Is it realy such a harry?
I mean, F-15 upgraded by AESA-radar should be sufficent in 99 of 100 cases...or?

Isn't it possible to start up the production again, after let say 7-8 years and in that way pehaps sync it (the 2:nd round of production) with an upgrade of "the old" ones.

I'm just speculating

Regards from Sweden

 

[Salty Dog]

Tendency in US military budgets is to increase the numbers of aircraft instead of cut. This will be more apparent as the 183 mark gets closer for the F-22. No Congressman wants to see his/her state loose jobs and parts for defense industry projects are well spread across the USA.

Lockheed Martin is already feeling the crunch as F-16 manufacturing will slowly end before the F-35 begins.

With the current problems facing the F-15 fleet (due to age) and F-117 retiring, it is even more critical that greater numbers of the F-22 come on line.

It would also be more interesting should the US concede the F-22 to Israel and Japan.