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

[F-15 Eagle]

The U.S. Congress will vote this October on weather to continue production of the F-22 from 183 to past 2011 to 381 fighters. This will be a major showdown between Raptor supporters and critics.

Here is a link with more details: http://www.unionleader.com/article....rticleId=3212757a-83e8-442e-9146-649d065ef2c0

 

[Sea Toby]

No one knows for sure how the Congress will vote, and its interesting the Congress plans to vote again, but I do not see this Congress voting to buy more. It will take another war somewhere to change many minds. The more the Raptor clan promote their very expensive aircraft, it seems the more support the Lightning IIs gets. And as for the price, the last batch ran over $180 million each, one can assume the next batch will run over $200 million each. I seriously doubt whether Lockheed can build newer planes for $50 million less each. The old figures are just that, old figures.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

No one knows for sure how the Congress will vote, and its interesting the Congress plan to vote again, but I do not see this Congress voting to buy more. It will take another war somewhere to change many minds.

The article says they will vote on wether or not to extend the production line, they have not voted for it yet but they will. Which means if they extend it then they will buy more F-22s. The F-22 has a lot of support in Congress and there is still a good chance that they will buy more F-22s. Maybe they just need to find more cracks and ground them again even though they have been grounded 3 or 4 times then that might change the Pentagon's mind....or maybe not!

 

[Sea Toby]

The F-22 program has not met the requirements set by the USAF for a multi-year buy, not even close. Six organizations have to give the green light, none have done so. Therefore, its up to a year to year congressional acquisition process. While the Raptor received orders under a Republican congress, it didn't last year under a Democratic congress, which continues. Unfortunately, it don't look good for the F-22 when the conservative newspapers have given up. Read this from a New Hampshire newspaper:
http://www.unionleader.com/article....rticleId=3212757a-83e8-442e-9146-649d065ef2c0

Simply put, the USAF and Lockheed failed to control the F-22s price.

And then you wonder whether any aircraft can survive these news:
http://gizmodo.com/373205/f+22-raptor-airframes-falling-apart-due-to-bad-glue

It appears the new Raptors aren't built any better than the Eagles.

And you wonder why the Pentagon and the Congress don't want to spend another penny on the program.

Frankly, there are other threads to replace naval aircraft, to replace tankers and transports. While the Raptor may be a great interceptor, there is another aircraft that is a better overall fighter-bomber. And its the Lightning II, although in the long run it might cost more, it will surely do more.

If you could get just one of those six organizations to agree with the USAF and Lockheed, I might give the program another look. Unfortunately, despite one organization's report, its leader said otherwise, and is now under criminal investigation. To put it simply, after the SCANDAL this plane is as dead as an ugly duck.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The F-22 program has not met the requirements set by the USAF for a multi-year buy, not even close. Six organizations have to give the green light, none have done so. Therefore, its up to a year to year congressional acquisition process. While the Raptor received orders under a Republican congress, it didn't last year under a Democratic congress, which continues. Unfortunately, it don't look good for the F-22 when the conservative newspapers have given up.

What difference does it make between Republicans and Democrats? Half of the Raptor supporters are democrats. The Bush administration and his cabinet are republicans but their the ones trying to cap F-22 production at 183 fighters.

I'm sorry if this brakes the no politics rule but in this case politics will have a big impact on the future of the F-22 production line.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

I keep on saying it but they should build just a 2 engined version of the f-35 make it much bigger then the F-35 have the same avionics and it will be cheaper, did i mention something like this would make it look like the eagles? Another thing they can do is use heavily modified F-15, or both of my ideas.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I keep on saying it but they should build just a 2 engined version of the f-35 make it much bigger then the F-35 have the same avionics and it will be cheaper, did i mention something like this would make it look like the eagles? Another thing they can do is use heavily modified F-15, or both of my ideas.

That would be too costly and they don't have the funding for it.

Besides they already have the F-35 to pay for not to mention new bombers, tankers and transports to build.

 

[Dr Freud]

History show that USA never start a war with someone that has a good airforce.

So why building a fighter if you arent gonna use it ?

OTOH a bomber with a couple of just-in-case amraams fits right in, and since there won't be any enemy fighters, the bomber dont have to be fast.

Sounds like an F35 to me.

 

[Mystic]

History show that USA never start a war with someone that has a good airforce.

So why building a fighter if you arent gonna use it ?

OTOH a bomber with a couple of just-in-case amraams fits right in, and since there won't be any enemy fighters, the bomber dont have to be fast.

Sounds like an F35 to me.

Modern (aviation) history has a long way to go before you can realistically justify that statement.

 

[Sea Toby]

How can we blame the Chinese for wrecking last Christmas' toy sales with leaded paint, when Lockheed can't even use the correct glue for a Raptor? Its one thing reading about 30 year old used aircraft falling apart, its another when you read about bad glue for new aircraft. Is there any quality control out there?

 

[Dr Freud]

Modern (aviation) history has a long way to go before you can realistically justify that statement.

I believe the Congress came to this same conclusion, and thats why they pulled the plug.

 

[Dr Freud]

How can we blame the Chinese for wrecking last Christmas' toy sales with leaded paint, when Lockheed can't even use the correct glue for a Raptor? Its one thing reading about 30 year old used aircraft falling apart, its another when you read about bad glue for new aircraft. Is there any quality control out there?

I will have to quote Colonel35 on this one.
http://gizmodo.com/373205/f+22-raptor-airframes-falling-apart-due-to-bad-glue

In Lockheed's defense, each delivered plane goes for only $135M. You can't honestly expect them to go all out with SuperGlue for that kind of budget.

 

[SlyDog]

Bad glue. I mean shit happens. Even the stars have spots. I see that thing more like a "misshappen". I read somewhere on Internet, that "glue problem" where limited to a "part of a batch". Is that correct? But is there more technical problem with F-22?

 

[F-15 Eagle]

History show that USA never start a war with someone that has a good airforce.

So why building a fighter if you arent gonna use it ?

OTOH a bomber with a couple of just-in-case amraams fits right in, and since there won't be any enemy fighters, the bomber dont have to be fast.

Sounds like an F35 to me.

Now what makes you come up with that conclusion? The USAF is considered the most advanced and most powerful air force in the world so if they have to go up against say Russia or China then they will be able to do so.

Also the F-35 is not just a bomber with a couple of AMRAAMs. In fact both the F-22 and the F-35 are multi-role aircraft and they both can do air superiority and ground attack missions. The F-35 can carry more air to air missiles and bombs then the F-22.

How can we blame the Chinese for wrecking last Christmas' toy sales with leaded paint, when Lockheed can't even use the correct glue for a Raptor? Its one thing reading about 30 year old used aircraft falling apart, its another when you read about bad glue for new aircraft. Is there any quality control out there?

The glue problem is not that big of a deal and they will just fix it. Will it cost money yes but thats a fact of life in the USAF. I remember they had a similar problem with the F-22 that affected 80 or so airframes though it was not glue but I think it was something wrong with the airframe. They fixed that too so they will easily fix a simple glue problem in the 30 F-22s. There will always be glitches in some air craft and theres no way around it, they just have to fix the problem in order to solve it.

 

[Dr Freud]

But is there more technical problem with F-22?

This link is a good briefing, and actually really good music! anyone know the name of the artist and album please tell me

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E&eurl"]YouTube - The real F-22 Raptor - a high-flying Enron[/ame]

 

[Feanor]

In response to the last question in the video..... I need more information. Does anyone know how good the stealth capabilities of the Raptor are? Because the F-117 was easily detected by the Serbian's with outdated SAM's.

 

[Dr Freud]

Now what makes you come up with that conclusion? The USAF is considered the most advanced and most powerful air force in the world so if they have to go up against say Russia or China then they will be able to do so.

USA arent going up against Russia or China, simple as that.

Also the F-35 is not just a bomber with a couple of AMRAAMs. In fact both the F-22 and the F-35 are multi-role aircraft and they both can do air superiority and ground attack missions. The F-35 can carry more air to air missiles and bombs then the F-22.

An executive for a competing fighter program, speaking at the conference, said that the six-missile capability would be a major improvement for the JSF. Until now, competitors have criticised the JSF because it carries only two AAMs - supporting only a single engagement - in stealth mode.

Courtest of Bill Sweetman's ARES blog.

Coz in USA's case, only a couple of just-in-case amraams is needed, simple as that.

 

[Waylander]

Easily?
IIRC it took a French traitor, at least 3 prearranged SAM sites, preplanned interceptor vectors, the bad habit of NATO to use the same route again and again and daylight to take down 1 F117.
That's not what I would call a war winning situation...

 

[Dr Freud]

I guess F22 is better...

 

[F-15 Eagle]

This link is a good briefing, and actually really good music! anyone know the name of the artist and album please tell me

YouTube - The real F-22 Raptor - a high-flying Enron

That video is very biased! I know the F-22 is the best fighter jet in the world and nothing comes close to it....except for maybe the F-35.

USA arent going up against Russia or China, simple as that.



An executive for a competing fighter program, speaking at the conference, said that the six-missile capability would be a major improvement for the JSF. Until now, competitors have criticised the JSF because it carries only two AAMs - supporting only a single engagement - in stealth mode.

Courtest of Bill Sweetman's ARES blog.

Coz in USA's case, only a couple of just-in-case amraams is needed, simple as that.

I never said the U.S. was going to war against Russia or China. I said they would go to war only if they have to and the USAF is more than capable of doing that job, you misread my post!

As for the F-35 that article is not completely accurate and for the most part wrong. The fact is the F-35 will be able to carry 10 AAMs not 2 as its says. Up to 4 AMRAAMs can be carried in the internal bays plus 4 more AMRAAMs and 2 AIM-9s externally.

The F-35 will be used in the air superiority role along with the F-22 in air combat. If the upgrade is used then the F-35 will carry 12 AAMs instead of 10. Simple as that.