USAF Plans to sell F22's to "trusted allies" very soon
- Thread starter Sea Dog
- Start date
Its logical for the F-22's to be where the combat is. No point leaving your best asset at home.
Regarding the controlling of airspace over iraq. A dozen F-22's could easily do the job of 100 aircraft.
No need for seperate ground attack and air defence aircraft so that reduces the number of required aircraft from say 100 down to 50.
No need for escorts due to stealth that drops the number of aircraft needed down to 25.
So basically a chain reaction has started. Now theres a quarter the aircraft, so even less inflight refueling is required which means less escorts for the tankers and less need for AWAC's to protect the slow aircraft.
This is the thinking which makes the US want more F-22's. With a fraction of aircraft required the amount of support crew on the ground would be only a few percent of what is currently required.
Thats Billions of dollars worth saved, which would then go towards more F-22's.
I know which i'd rather have above my head.
5 F-22's.
Or
4 F-15C's. - air defence
3 F-16C's - escorts
2 F-15E's. - strike ground targets
1 inflight refueler
1 AWAC
Capability wise they are very similar.
Regarding the controlling of airspace over iraq. A dozen F-22's could easily do the job of 100 aircraft.
No need for seperate ground attack and air defence aircraft so that reduces the number of required aircraft from say 100 down to 50.
No need for escorts due to stealth that drops the number of aircraft needed down to 25.
So basically a chain reaction has started. Now theres a quarter the aircraft, so even less inflight refueling is required which means less escorts for the tankers and less need for AWAC's to protect the slow aircraft.
This is the thinking which makes the US want more F-22's. With a fraction of aircraft required the amount of support crew on the ground would be only a few percent of what is currently required.
Thats Billions of dollars worth saved, which would then go towards more F-22's.
I know which i'd rather have above my head.
5 F-22's.
Or
4 F-15C's. - air defence
3 F-16C's - escorts
2 F-15E's. - strike ground targets
1 inflight refueler
1 AWAC
Capability wise they are very similar.
Last edited:
Yeah, there's a big airborne threat over Iraq!rjmaz1 said:
Seriously, I don't agree with your assessment. Firstly, why would you have "air defence" and "escorts" with F-15Es? The F-15E is quite capable of self-escorting, ESPECIALLY over such a benign airspace like Iraq! And why would you send a $150m airplane into a harsh environment like Iraq to patrol the skies when air-supremecy has alsready been established for over three years?
There are ONLY two possible reasons I can think of for deploying Raptors to Kuwait - either as a PR exercise so the tax payers can see their dollars at work on the nightly news, or so the aircraft can be tested more thoroughly under deployed conditions.
Langley is about to send the 27th FS plus elements of the 94th to Elmendorf, Hill and Tyndall for 6-8 weeks while the runways at Langley are re-sealed. The Elmendorf deployment in particular is being conducted as if it were a combat deployment with only minimal spares.
I'd actually rather have an F-15E on hand for multi-role strike ops in an assymetric environment such as Iraq or Afghanistan, than an F-22 in its current configuration. The F-22 can carry and shoot AIM-9M, AIM-120C-5 and GBU-35/38 JDAMs....that's it! It cannot operate with LGBs, WCMDs, or stand off weapons such as GBU-30, and does not have any EO/IR sensors such as the awesome Sniper pod and its associateddatalink pod as carried by the F-15E.
If you're sending out F-22s in their current form, you're still going to need the refuellers AND an AWACS.
Magoo
just in case US attacks Iran, than there is a threat to Iraqi air-space since US will most probably be operating from there rather than Turkey or Afghanistan.
However, even in such a case I dont see the need for the deployment of F-22. Iran has nothing that can not be brought down by F-16C/D, F-18E/F and the 15E.
However, even in such a case I dont see the need for the deployment of F-22. Iran has nothing that can not be brought down by F-16C/D, F-18E/F and the 15E.
contedicavour
New Member
F-22 sales to "reliable" governments
No doubt selling F-22s to governments such as Australia would be ok since they are reliable allies (widely proven even recently). However I really hope the US isn't planning to export it at all.
You never know what could happen... as the 1978 sale of F-14s to Iran shows. Once the US sells F-22s to Australia, how could it explain to other supposedly allied countries that they are not reliable enough to buy F-22s... say Saudi Arabia wants them (and they can afford them with the oil 75 dollars a barrel :mad ) how do you manage to say no without offending them ?
Besides, other than USAF, no other air force needs to rule the skies in such an unequivocal way as to find 135-million F-22s. Typhoons and JSFs are enough already (put in some Rafales to make Dassault happy: ) !
cheers:
No doubt selling F-22s to governments such as Australia would be ok since they are reliable allies (widely proven even recently). However I really hope the US isn't planning to export it at all.
You never know what could happen... as the 1978 sale of F-14s to Iran shows. Once the US sells F-22s to Australia, how could it explain to other supposedly allied countries that they are not reliable enough to buy F-22s... say Saudi Arabia wants them (and they can afford them with the oil 75 dollars a barrel :mad ) how do you manage to say no without offending them ?
Besides, other than USAF, no other air force needs to rule the skies in such an unequivocal way as to find 135-million F-22s. Typhoons and JSFs are enough already (put in some Rafales to make Dassault happy
: ) !cheers
:Consistency In Approach
There is at least one other, Magoo - Iran!Magoo said:
Don't you think that is the biggy?
An intriguing and somewhat courageous statement.
Not sure the Vice Commander of USAF PACAF, Lt Gen David Deptula, would agree with your assessment, particularly as he is in a position to know.
However, even if your assessment of the F-22 were to be true, according to Dr Alan Stephens in his recent testimony before a parliamentary committee, in response to the question as to what budget change would be required to give the F-22 the ISR capabilities of the JSF, his response was, "Very small".
FYI, the 'awesome sniper pod' along with the LITENING Pod capability are being incorporated on the A/A0-10C, along with a considerable number of capability enhancements, as part of the current and fully funded upgrade program. This spiral tier 1 program has been contracted to Lockheed Martin, as integration lead, at the princely sum of around US$300m for some 350 aircraft. The other enhancements include an EFIS cockpit, HOTAS, MIL-1760 with new stores management system, doubling the DC power, and a new low altitude terrain avoidance and targeting system. All reports say that this will see the A-10 fleet operated through to at least 2028.
So much for the JSF replacing the A-10 capability in any time soon.
By the way, given the A-10 has twice the endurance and twice the weapons load currently planned for the JSF, then how many JSF's will it take to replace one A-10 for the CAS/BAI mission?
While on the subject of the JSF, what war fighting capabilities does the JSF have today?
More precisely, when do you expect the JSF will be fully operational, complete with the war fighting capabilities many who post on this forum seem to think it has, today?
Please excuse my apparent cynical tone, but the more I read into these matters the more sceptical I become.
Who is saying this?
Who is saying the US won't make the F-22 capability available to Australia? Given the long standing, special relationship between our two countries, I would have great difficulty believing this to be true.
Who ever is saying this must not have Australia's interests at heart and nor, when you think about it, those of the relationship between the USA and Australia. There would be a lot of people who would be quite angry if this were to be the case.
According to what I have read and heard from associates in Washington and the US aerospace industry, the US DoD were prepared to offer the F-22 to the RAAF back in 2001. However, this was not taken up by the RAAF bosses.
As to cost, the latest released Selected Acquisition Report (SAR December 2005) puts the unit procurement cost (which includes all you need to put the aircraft on the flight line - training, documentation, ground support equipment, initial spares, etc) for the last four F-22s of the current production at around US$126m per copy.
The latest GAO Report No GAO-06-356 of 15 March 2006 on the JSF lists the currently estimated unit procurement cost for the low rate initial production (LRIP) Phase 4/Block 1 aircraft in 2011 at around US$125m per copy.
It would seem that the US$45m that Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston and Air Commodore John Harvey have been saying when asked what is the price of the JSF is not quite correct. As it turns out, this figure was actually the Average Unit Recurring Fly Away Cost for the whole of the total production run of CTOL JSFs back in 2002. Being in 2002 dollars you have to add in the escalation due to economic factors.
FYI - The independent study into the US tactical fighter force ordered by US Undersecretary of Defence, Gordon England, has recommended an additional 40 to 80 F-22s for the USAF (over and above the current production run of 185).
Also, latest advice from the States is that JSF LRIP is likely to slip about a year due to slow down of Congressional funding. Monies requested in 2007 budget for long lead time item buys for the early 8 x CTOL and 8 x STOVL LRIP birds have been cut by Congress. The reason goes to the risks identified in the GAO report.
buschy said:apparently the RAAF has already been considering making a bid for the F22 but havent because they werent for sale (unfortnatley
Who is saying the US won't make the F-22 capability available to Australia? Given the long standing, special relationship between our two countries, I would have great difficulty believing this to be true.
Who ever is saying this must not have Australia's interests at heart and nor, when you think about it, those of the relationship between the USA and Australia. There would be a lot of people who would be quite angry if this were to be the case.
According to what I have read and heard from associates in Washington and the US aerospace industry, the US DoD were prepared to offer the F-22 to the RAAF back in 2001. However, this was not taken up by the RAAF bosses.
As to cost, the latest released Selected Acquisition Report (SAR December 2005) puts the unit procurement cost (which includes all you need to put the aircraft on the flight line - training, documentation, ground support equipment, initial spares, etc) for the last four F-22s of the current production at around US$126m per copy.
The latest GAO Report No GAO-06-356 of 15 March 2006 on the JSF lists the currently estimated unit procurement cost for the low rate initial production (LRIP) Phase 4/Block 1 aircraft in 2011 at around US$125m per copy.
It would seem that the US$45m that Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston and Air Commodore John Harvey have been saying when asked what is the price of the JSF is not quite correct. As it turns out, this figure was actually the Average Unit Recurring Fly Away Cost for the whole of the total production run of CTOL JSFs back in 2002. Being in 2002 dollars you have to add in the escalation due to economic factors.
FYI - The independent study into the US tactical fighter force ordered by US Undersecretary of Defence, Gordon England, has recommended an additional 40 to 80 F-22s for the USAF (over and above the current production run of 185).
Also, latest advice from the States is that JSF LRIP is likely to slip about a year due to slow down of Congressional funding. Monies requested in 2007 budget for long lead time item buys for the early 8 x CTOL and 8 x STOVL LRIP birds have been cut by Congress. The reason goes to the risks identified in the GAO report.
Can you elabroate and state your source please?buschy said:apparently the RAAF has already been considering making a bid for the F22 but havent because they werent for sale (unfortnatley
Magoo
In the event of action in Iran an F-22 sq. stationed in the middle of the Indian Ocean would be the least effective place to put a theatre aircraft. It would tire the pilots making them less efficient, it would raise operational costs, increase logistics and decrease sortie rates of an aircraft very few in number. The best and most logical place for this aircraft is in a forward deployed base.Magoo said:
Hi Magoo,
As to the A-10C and its enhanced capabilities plus the plans for the fleet to remain operational through 2028, this is directly relevant to the JSF Program and further considerations which flow across to whether Australia should be going for F-22s instead of JSFs.
Would very much appreciate yours and other people's thoughts on these metrics.
Do not agree with you on this one. The costings are directly related to the F-22 since most people have been saying we (Australia) can't afford the F-22. However, the US budgetary data shows that, in the timeframe of Australia's interest, the costs of the F-22 and the JSF will, at the very least, be on parity.
As to the A-10C and its enhanced capabilities plus the plans for the fleet to remain operational through 2028, this is directly relevant to the JSF Program and further considerations which flow across to whether Australia should be going for F-22s instead of JSFs.
Would very much appreciate yours and other people's thoughts on these metrics.
slightly related. I'm including an excerpt from an email from a colleague in USAF involved with TAC Planning and specifically suppressing IADS. We've been having discussions about F-22, JSF, SHornet, A-10 etc for the last 18 months. I've had to cut a lot out of this, but hopefully there is enough left to demonstrate some coherence. btw, I'm not "Dick". Dick is a US veggie who was lamenting the loss of the A-10 because of what he was reading in the general news media.Occum said:Would appreciate your thoughts/input on the costings and the A-10C situation.
Magoo,
FYI - the $68bn (or rather $62.6bn, presently - December 2005 SAR) is the total program budget. It has not all been spent, as yet. I think you are referring to the RDT&E budget used to fund the EMD (the F-22 SDD). That is now a sunk cost, but there are still jets to build under the Procurement Budget which makes up part of what you are referring to as the '$68bn'.
start a "RAAF F-22 or JSF" thread, this doesn't belong here.Occum said:Hi Magoo,
Do not agree with you on this one. The costings are directly related to the F-22 since most people have been saying we (Australia) can't afford the F-22. However, the US budgetary data shows that, in the timeframe of Australia's interest, the costs of the F-22 and the JSF will, at the very least, be on parity.
As to the A-10C and its enhanced capabilities plus the plans for the fleet to remain operational through 2028, this is directly relevant to the JSF Program and further considerations which flow across to whether Australia should be going for F-22s instead of JSFs.
Would very much appreciate yours and other people's thoughts on these metrics.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
As to the F-22 targetting pod issue. WHY would you want an EXTERNAL pod fitted to the F-22. It would only decrease it's stealth capability. F-22 has space for an internal EO/IR targetting system, just like JSF has, only the F-22 is not funded for one due to the extraordinary cost of it's development.
AS to long range strike missions, the F-35 will have a (slightly) longer range than F-22. It is a lighter aircraft, carries more fuel and only has one engine, that is itself a development of the F-119. What do YOU think is likely to go further?
The problem for Australia is that F-22 does not cover the broad range of roles required by the RAAF. USAF does not suffer from this, because of the broad range of aircraft it operates, covers any need it will have. Australia does not.
Australia needs an aircraft that can do A2A, A2G, SEAD, long range strike, maritime strike and ISR missions from the get go. F-22 is never likely to perform this entire range of missions. The F-35 SHOULD provide this to us.
F-22A is a superb aircraft and I'd want it in the RAAF, given any realistic chance of a massive budget increase, but within our existing budget, it's simply too specialised, for our needs. It could only be in the RAAF, as part of a "2 tier" force with the JSF or some other advanced tactical fighter.
As to the MRTT comment I saw someone make earlier. 5x A330-200 MRTT's are being bought to replace our original fleet of 4x B-707 tankers, of which only 3 are now operational. MRTT will provide greater range and fuel offload capability as well as greater passenger and cargo carrying capability than 707, plus will be equipped with "boom" refuelling in addition to hose and drogue. 707 ONLY operates "hose and drogue".
It will be a significant capability enhancement over the B-707 fleet, though probably not exactly what the RAAF will require in a wartime situation. Another 3-5 would be nice, please Mr Costello....
AS to long range strike missions, the F-35 will have a (slightly) longer range than F-22. It is a lighter aircraft, carries more fuel and only has one engine, that is itself a development of the F-119. What do YOU think is likely to go further?
The problem for Australia is that F-22 does not cover the broad range of roles required by the RAAF. USAF does not suffer from this, because of the broad range of aircraft it operates, covers any need it will have. Australia does not.
Australia needs an aircraft that can do A2A, A2G, SEAD, long range strike, maritime strike and ISR missions from the get go. F-22 is never likely to perform this entire range of missions. The F-35 SHOULD provide this to us.
F-22A is a superb aircraft and I'd want it in the RAAF, given any realistic chance of a massive budget increase, but within our existing budget, it's simply too specialised, for our needs. It could only be in the RAAF, as part of a "2 tier" force with the JSF or some other advanced tactical fighter.
As to the MRTT comment I saw someone make earlier. 5x A330-200 MRTT's are being bought to replace our original fleet of 4x B-707 tankers, of which only 3 are now operational. MRTT will provide greater range and fuel offload capability as well as greater passenger and cargo carrying capability than 707, plus will be equipped with "boom" refuelling in addition to hose and drogue. 707 ONLY operates "hose and drogue".
It will be a significant capability enhancement over the B-707 fleet, though probably not exactly what the RAAF will require in a wartime situation. Another 3-5 would be nice, please Mr Costello....
GF -
How is it that our people don't seem to know about what is (and has been happening) with the A-10C program? This all started as a number of smaller programs some 4-5 years ago.
Maybe you can help me out with the question on how many JSFs will be required to replace one A-10C in the CAS/BAI mission?
How is it that our people don't seem to know about what is (and has been happening) with the A-10C program? This all started as a number of smaller programs some 4-5 years ago.
Maybe you can help me out with the question on how many JSFs will be required to replace one A-10C in the CAS/BAI mission?