|
F22s Dropping Like Flies (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| winston |
Originally posted by Krypton
| quote: | | the F22. That money could be helping college student's tuition. |
| quote: | Two contracts totaling $10.91 billion ($9.55 billion for the airframe and $1.36 billion for engines) were awarded for Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) of the F-22 and F119 to the then Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics team and Pratt & Whitney in August 1991.
Contract changes, including three Congressional budget cuts and subsequent rephases of the schedule since then have elevated the contract values to a total of $18.6 billion.
|
link |
|
|
| Omega_Blue |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
The 22 has been in "testing" for almost 20 years now. Over 10 in production level testing.
2 crashes in that amount of time is not a big deal in any flight program, testing or not.
That doesnt deny that the system is still fubar. |
+1, this doesn't even compare to the v-22 osprey debacle a few years back http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-22_Osprey#Controversy |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
the money that is being spent on the 22 came from cutting other programs in the AF.... |
Like what? From what I hear, the military sometimes has to accept weapons systems they don't even need because some Congressman wants to satisfy the defense industry in their district. The F22 is probably one of those cases. A computer should be flying the damn thing anyways. No human can withstand the true capabilities of the F22. Just more money out the window. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Like what? From what I hear, the military sometimes has to accept weapons systems they don't even need because some Congressman wants to satisfy the defense industry in their district. The F22 is probably one of those cases. A computer should be flying the damn thing anyways. No human can withstand the true capabilities of the F22. Just more money out the window. |
Actually in terms of flight characteristics the F-22 is not that different from the F-15 or the F/A-18. Humans can fly it well within its designed operating capabilities.
You are right about procurement of military systems though, and Obama mentioned last night in his press conference that it needs to radically change in the US.
The F-22 was an end of Cold War system and really has no place in the US arsenal anymore. The JSF program is a viable replacement and cheaper. The US currently does not engage on fronts that demand either fighter though and continued maintenance of existing systems is easily able to handle the current mission profiles of all the current services.
Slower procurement of the F-35 system could easily be laid out and current weapons systems extended to meet our current military demands.
Note though, any delay of the F-35 should have the ability to ramp up production quickly in case of emergency. Just because the US isn't fighting an air capable enemy right now doesn't mean it wont in the future. China has a massive air force, and even Iran could test/deplete US air superiority to a critical level. |
|
|
| Zild |
| I think we need the F22 to combat China (and others who could threaten our air superiority) specifically because there is a ban on its export and it is superior to the F35. |
|
|
| fbgdavidson |
The F-22 might be buggy but two crashes in almost 20yrs of the flying program is not unusual and almost par for the course for military jet aircraft.
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
the F22. That money could be helping college student's tuition. |
Those who want to go to college badly enough can pay for it themselves...or get a loan.
We need someone to shovel the french fries. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Like what? From what I hear, the military sometimes has to accept weapons systems they don't even need because some Congressman wants to satisfy the defense industry in their district. The F22 is probably one of those cases. A computer should be flying the damn thing anyways. No human can withstand the true capabilities of the F22. Just more money out the window. |
think of all the AF bases that have been shut down since 1989...not too mention all the people that have been "laid off" (i.e. force shaping...i.e. fired).
the AF (and i'm sure the other branches) philosophy as of late has been doing more with less people. less peopel to pay = more money for other things.
that's pretty much the c0r version. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
I think we need the F22 to combat China (and others who could threaten our air superiority) specifically because there is a ban on its export and it is superior to the F35. |
Fighting China is such a remote possibility that you have to hedge your bets, especially when engaged on two different fronts already.
The F-35 could take anything that China has right now, but it would be a war of attrition in the skies just due to the fact that the Chinese have a large air force.
Throw 3 old Mig-19 equiv. Chinese built fighters at one F-22 and you have a fairly even fight if the Chinese can get the drop on them. If not, throw 6 at them. China would also be fighting from a defensive homeland posture which is always more dangerous, especially if that is their only front.
The USAF needs to keep its priorities right now on the manned heavy bomber and using that as a missile truck, like the B-52 and B-1B and maintaining its strategic defense systems (which is basically just Minuteman right now).
The US Navy needs to make sure the Super Hornet is able to keep flying through 2020, even better 2025 and that it can keep a strategic posture with its submarine nuclear forces.
If you can corral the big guys with your nukes using deterrence then you can leave the to the rest of the branches and not worry.
I am not saying that China or Russia will never be a threat, but right now they are not, wont be any time soon, and spending money on countering them right now doesn't make sense. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
think of all the AF bases that have been shut down since 1989...not too mention all the people that have been "laid off" (i.e. force shaping...i.e. fired).
the AF (and i'm sure the other branches) philosophy as of late has been doing more with less people. less peopel to pay = more money for other things.
that's pretty much the c0r version. |
As long as you keep the pocket rockets happy and you can fly tankers for the navy... ;) |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
think of all the AF bases that have been shut down since 1989...not too mention all the people that have been "laid off" (i.e. force shaping...i.e. fired).
the AF (and i'm sure the other branches) philosophy as of late has been doing more with less people. less peopel to pay = more money for other things.
that's pretty much the c0r version. |
Well, the F22 may not necessarily be the problem. It's these unwanted weapons systems, and even more so, the useless occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, which are bankrupting us. Won't hear that in the media though... |
|
|
| L.E.N. |
| Damn I was just in that area! |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Well, the F22 may not necessarily be the problem. It's these unwanted weapons systems, and even more so, the useless occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, which are bankrupting us. Won't hear that in the media though... |
Iraq is useless, Afganistan not so much.
Too bad we (as in NATO, which shouldnt be the force there in teh first place) ed it so we wont get anything out of it now.
Afganistan and Pakistan could have yielded good results if it had been handled right. |
|
|
|
|
