Pentagon to end F-22 program
- Thread starter F-15 Eagle
- Start date
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #62
Hey does anyone here know if the USAF is still planing on keeping 177 F-15Cs and 224 F-15Es until 2025?
the road runner
Active Member
The F-22 dose have 2 engines.
You may be confused with the single engine JSF(joint strike fighter)
Second that,great pic(of F-22 production line) Salty Dog
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Well secretary Gates only mentioned keeping F 15 E untill 2025 with congress..none as i'm awere on that speech mentioning on keeping F 15 C.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #67
Well they will keep them until the F-35 is in service. No sense in replacing 450 F-15s with only 187 F-22s is there?
The F-15E is rated for 16000 flight hours and will remain into the later 2020's. The F-15C's will retire in 2025-2027. Look at slide 25:
http://www.florida-edc.org/Roundtable/MGen Davis F-35 Sept08.pdf
-DA
Why not if they are 3 times more effective and much less likely to be shot down? One F16 is more effective than all the B-17's in US 8th Army Air Force during WWII. With precision guided munitions that F-16 can take out a specific target that even 1000 bomber raids during WWII missed with their saturation bombing.
localhost127
Member
bold move, but refreshing if indeed the case.
Lockheed no longer lobbying for more F-22s. Link:
http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/1331093.html
http://www.star-telegram.com/business/story/1331093.html
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #73
Can one F-22 be 3 places at once? No, I did not think so. There is no logic with a 3 for 1 replacement thats why they are accelerating production of the F-35 because 187 F-22s wont replace the F-15s, just a small portion of them.
Most of the F-15Cs and F-15Es will remain in service until 2025 when the last of them will be replaced by F-35s.
According to the attached chart (from the Sep 2008 JSF briefing), here are a few details:
Current numbers are ~1300
Drops to ~1260 in 2012
Up to ~1340 by 2014
Up to ~1360 by 2015
Up to ~1400 by mid 2023
F-X has a flying AC by 2026 (obvious wishing here since they have no idea what it will be)
Here are the Legacy AC Numbers.
----F15C&D:
1. slowly being phased out from now till 2012
2. holding steady till 2015
3. some phase out in the 2015 year
4. steady till 2024
5. gradual phaseout till all gone in 2027
----F-15E
1. steady till 2025
2. slight phaseout for two years
3. steady after 2027
----F-16
1. slight phaseout till 2015
2. accelerated phaseout till all gone by 2025
----A-10
1. steady till 2018
2. steady phaseout till gone by 2026
btw, I could not attach it as a jpg, the interface kept giving me an error but it was only 76k.
As I understand it you guys will have a few more than one - about 187 (minus the 2 that pranged). What I was suggesting is that whereas in the past you may have needed to deploy 3 squadrons, now you may only need one (thus being able to 'stretch' the numbers). The ability to supercruise means the F-22 can cover a larger piece of airspace for example. The F-35 will not be a dodo in the A2A role, so will require much less in the way of escorts.
By the way the difference between the democrats and the republicans is about the same as between labor and liberal in Australia - bugger all. A little bit of window dressing, a slightly different emphasis on one area of policy compared to another. Don't sweat it - it's not as though you guys just elected the Communist Party or the KKK.
Actually the F-35 has significantly greater range than the F-22.
So if you have too few aircraft to cover a large area the F-35 will be able to protect more area than the F-22. Then you combine that with the fact the F-35 is significantly cheaper and the F-35 will probably be able to defend twice as much land mass for a set amount of money.
In the case of Australia where we have a large area and very few aircraft then the aircraft with the longer range has a bigger advantage. Range is so important that the F-35 is a better aircraft in the air to air role. If you however were covering a small area of land the F-22 could be zipping around continuously at Mach 1.6 and would be vastly superior to the F-35.
Top US brass has already stated that you need 6 F-22's for 10 F-35's.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blog...79a7Post:4b1acff8-f05e-435a-a22f-7b32df4c9f6d
Luckily six F-22's are worth MORE than ten F-35's.
So the F-35 will provide more air to air capability per dollar.
Yep, aware of that - I was making the comparison with the F-15's that F-15 Eagle was talking about.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #79
So buying 1763 F-35s is about the same as buying 1050 F-22s when it comes to air to air capability. So you get the best bang for your buck with the F-35 which is why the pentagon decided to cap the F-22 production line at 187 aircraft and accelerate the F-35 instead.
Yes.
Well the 6 F-22 for 10 F-35's would be a number pulled out of thin air based on a typical air to air mission coverage covering an average area.
If the mission required a larger than average area to be patrolled the longer range of the F-35 may mean that you need 8 F-22's for every 10 F-35's. Alternatively if the area being covered is quite small the F-22's can now supercruise everywhere giving it a bigger advantage meaning 4 F-22's could replace 10 F-35's. What they did to get the magic number of 6 F-22's doing the job of 10 F-35's is anyones guess.
The most imprtant thing here is that comparison is only in the air to air role. The F-35 is slightly better bang for buck as you require more of them but their cheaper cost makes them cheaper for the same capability.
If you look at the close air support role, you'd need 10+ F-22's to perform the role of a single F-35. The F-22 lacks the standoff range with its sensors and has worse situational awareness. So in this role the F-35 offers more capability at a fraction of the cost.
So on average the F-22 is a huge waste of money.