U.S. to make final decision on future F-22.

[zeven]

yeah i read today, OBama will put the money on the army, (increase it with 70 000) and so on.

however, F-22 and F-15 atm will do the job just fine. and SH will still be superior for sometime as well

i really cant see the rush. some cleaning in DOD might not hurt either.

 

[Feanor]

Well if the USAF does not get the 381 F-22s which is most likely and they need to replace some 700 F-15s and counter the possible SU-35 threat then 12 internal AAMs would be a good idea.

The Su-35 is hardly a threat. The US and Russia aren't going to war, and Russian customers (save India and China) can't put up enough of a fight regardless of what airplanes they buy.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The Su-35 is hardly a threat. The US and Russia aren't going to war, and Russian customers (save India and China) can't put up enough of a fight regardless of what airplanes they buy.

I don't think a resurgent Russia is just something you ignore my friend that would be foolish and naive.

 

[Feanor]

MAD is still the main deterrent. And in terms of a conventional engagement, Russia still doesn't have much to bring to the table. Not to mention that even with limited number of internal AAMs, it's not like Russia has a giant airforce that can win by having more planes then the other side has missiles. Currently there are 7 Flanker regiments. No more are disbanded, then that's at most 7 Su-35 regiments (or western style squadrons). Even a 183 strong Raptor force would match them in numbers.

Then there is the matter of 5 Fulcrum rgts. and 5 Foxhound rgts. but no replacement for either one of those is in sight until the PAK-FA, and as far as we know no modernization progs. If the Algerian SMTs get purchased, that's 1 rgt. of upgraded Fulcrums to worry about.

Again, the Su-35 isn't a threat at this time. I'd be more worried about S-400, Tor-M2, and other advanced SAMs. Their proliferation is far more dangerous because they are less logistically intensive, and require far less expertise then fighters. Morever even a small number of advaced SAMs if organized properly can be a pain to an attacking force.

EDIT: Just out of curiosity am I correct in assuming that the F-22 is more VLO then the F-35?

 

[zeven]

Yes you're

(not that i think its a difference worth taking into account)

F-22 size like an insect.
F-35 like a golfball

 

[Totoro]

wasn't that like a marble versus like a golfball? with no details given. (marbles come in different sizes, radars may be looking from various angles at various times, etc, etc) Using just one figure doesn't really tell us much.

 

[Salty Dog]

wasn't that like a marble versus like a golfball? with no details given. (marbles come in different sizes, radars may be looking from various angles at various times, etc, etc) Using just one figure doesn't really tell us much.

A golfball is aerodynamically superior to a marble. Sorry folks, probably irrelevant to the current discussion, but I just couldn't pass this up.

 

[zeven]

wasn't that like a marble versus like a golfball? with no details given. (marbles come in different sizes, radars may be looking from various angles at various times, etc, etc) Using just one figure doesn't really tell us much.

ok sorry for not being more specifc..

 

[F-15 Eagle]

MAD is still the main deterrent. And in terms of a conventional engagement, Russia still doesn't have much to bring to the table. Not to mention that even with limited number of internal AAMs, it's not like Russia has a giant airforce that can win by having more planes then the other side has missiles. Currently there are 7 Flanker regiments. No more are disbanded, then that's at most 7 Su-35 regiments (or western style squadrons). Even a 183 strong Raptor force would match them in numbers.

Then there is the matter of 5 Fulcrum rgts. and 5 Foxhound rgts. but no replacement for either one of those is in sight until the PAK-FA, and as far as we know no modernization progs. If the Algerian SMTs get purchased, that's 1 rgt. of upgraded Fulcrums to worry about.

Again, the Su-35 isn't a threat at this time. I'd be more worried about S-400, Tor-M2, and other advanced SAMs. Their proliferation is far more dangerous because they are less logistically intensive, and require far less expertise then fighters. Morever even a small number of advaced SAMs if organized properly can be a pain to an attacking force.

EDIT: Just out of curiosity am I correct in assuming that the F-22 is more VLO then the F-35?

How many Su-27s are in each regiment? I thought Russia had more than 180 or so Su-27s?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

F-35 breaks the sound barrier!

By the way this might be a little off topic but the F-35 Lightning II just flew supersonic for the first time accelerating to Mach 1.05 or 680mph. LM plans on pushing the F-35 to Mach 1.6 over time with more testing. The F-35 pilots continue to be impressed with the F-35s acceleration and power.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Lockheed-Martin-F-35-Lightning/story.aspx?guid={DE4B9542-5DC5-4DC7-B1A5-688561C62A37}

Sorry your going to have to copy and paste the URL.

 

[Feanor]

How many Su-27s are in each regiment? I thought Russia had more than 180 or so Su-27s?

Sure. More like iirc 300 of them. About half sitting in long term storage as far as I know.

There are two squadrons of 12 planes per regiment. So 24x7=168.

 

[gf0012-aust]

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/11/12/



The Pentagon plans to buy four more F-22s in the next supplemental spending bill and Young announced Wednesday that he has approved Air Force spending of as much as $50 million for advance procurement.


“This ADM allows for the procurement of parts support for 4 aircraft beyond the 183 total F-22’s that DoD has already contracted for,” Young’s spokesman, Chris Isleib, said in an email.


Young pointed out in a statement that the draft Pentagon budget for 2010 does not include money for F-22s. The newly approved ADM provides “a bridge to a January decision by the next administration” on whether and how many more F-22s to buy, up to the congressionally mandated ceiling of $140 million for up to 20 F-22.


But Wynne, a committed supporter of the F-22, said he did not think the decision reflected either what Congress wanted or what the the defense secretary wanted. “To some this responds to what the SecDef said, but reflects neither his nor Congress’ intent,” he said.


Before spending the new advance procurement money, the President must certify the country’s need for the new planes, as required in section 134 of the 2009 National Defense Authorization Act.


---------------------------------------------------------------------


4 x F-22's isn't exactly a stellar display of commitment. In operational terms (on this block( it would only mean 2 operational at any point in time - granted that they will be absorbed into the "fleet majeur" - but still, pretty ordinary.


Of note is the lack of funding for 2010 as well as the fact that these 4 are not guaranteed either.

 

[merocaine]

Thanks for your considered opinion GF, given the scale of US commitments and programs, any cutting of budgets is going to be like slashing unemployment benefits in a downturn, noisy and painful....

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Will 4 additional F-22s be enough to keep the production line going until president-elect Obama can make a decision on whether or not to build more? I thought they needed long lead items for 20 Raptors to keep it going not just 4 actual F-22s.

 

[METEORSWARM]

Cost for upgrades in f-22


http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3833832&c=FEA&s=CVS

Mod edit: One-liner posts and/or linking to articles without providing ones own input or thoughts are against the forum rules. There have been recents posts where this has occurred. If this continues, Warnings will be issued.
-Preceptor

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Lockheed seeks quick decision on F-22.

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE5067LD20090107

Lockheed Martin hopes that a final decision on whether or not to make more F-22s will be made soon in order to reduce to risk of the increase of costs. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has allowed 4 additional F-22s to be built as a bridge until a decision can be maid by President-elect Obama.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

JASDF is out of the hunt

Looks like the Japanese have given up on perusing the F-22A because they doubt the platform will remain in production.

Japan is likely to drop its attempts to buy state-of-the-art U.S. F-22 Raptor stealth fighter planes since it expects the United States to stop producing them, a newspaper reported Dec. 28. The Japanese government had been trying to persuade the United States to sell it F-22 Raptors to replace its own aging F-15 fleet, despite Washington's reluctance.

Tokyo, however, is now abandoning the plan amid signs that U.S. President-elect Barack Obama's new administration may halt production of the aircraft, the Daily Yomiuri said, quoting government sources.

"We have a firm impression that its production likely would be halted," a high-ranking official at the defense ministry was quoted by the daily as saying.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, reappointed to stay in the post under Obama, has said publicly that he favors halting production of the F-22.

Washington is also said to be skeptical about continuing production of the expensive planes due to the financial crisis and declining tax revenues.

U.S. law prohibits export of Raptors as Congress remains anxious over the possible leaking of details of the Raptor's state-of-the-art technology. They are built to evade radar detection at supersonic speeds.

Japan's possible alternatives are the Eurofighter Typhoon, jointly developed by NATO members Britain, Italy, Spain and Germany, said the English version of the Yomiuri Shimbun.

Among other candidates are the U.S. fighter F-15FX and the F-35 Lightning II, produced by the United States, Britain and other countries, it reported.

Some ministry officials favor the F-35, a high-performance fighter with sophisticated bombing capabilities, but this plane has not even been deployed so far by U.S. forces, the daily said.

Japan has been officially pacifist since its defeat in World War II but has one of the world's largest defense budgets and is gradually expanding its military role.

http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3879007&c=AIR&s=TOP

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Even if the F-22 remains in production the Japanese are still not going to get it because of a U.S. law. They would have given up regardless if the U.S. builds more F-22s or not.

 

[ChEB]

Looks like the Japanese have given up on perusing the F-22A because they doubt the platform will remain in production.



http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3879007&c=AIR&s=TOP

Well not according to Janes
http://www.janes.com/news/defence/air/jdi/jdi090107_1_n.shtml

Although given the current economic situation i doubt the Obama administration will fund additional aircraft. If the law does get changed, which isn't all that likely, I would guess they might reconsider since the per unit cost goes down with every aircraft produced. I guess we'll just have to see what happens over the next couple of months.

 

[SkolZkiy]

May be it is an off-top but I've read this
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3898005&c=AME&s=AIR
here is said about possible lack of navy fighters in USN. And there possible to increase part of F-22 according to this fact - 1 F-22 versus 3-4 F/A-18.
Or may be it's a just a trick from Boeing to get a new order in this financial crisys??