FAQ
It is currently Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:14 am


Author Message
Ascended
Post  Post subject: More F22's?  |  Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 10:43 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:59 pm
Posts: 221
Location: Over the hills and far away

Offline
Should the US government re-start production of the F22?
Five years after the program was officially shut down it seems delays to F35 program could make it
a possible stop gap measure. Also other partners of the US such as the UK and Australia may be
interested in purchasing planes, should Congress decide upon relaxing the export ban.

Some possible advantages would be that the extra funds generated could be acrued for investment in
the next generation of planes, given how the F22's current stealth technology is becoming less relevent with ongoing advances to radar systems. Equally it may allow for friendly nations to have closer integration and benefit from shared use of parts and software. Something that given recent reports suggesting that America's closest allies arn't considered a risk for technology leakage doesn't seem an impossibility.

Whilst the UK seems committed to the typhoon eurofighter project recent reductions to the total orders might suggest a chance to aquire a small number of the F22 fighters wouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Likewise Australia has discussed resovations about the F35's ability to match the latest Russian and Chinese fighters in aerial dogfights and could well be receptive to aquiring the F22 as a superior combat plane.

_________________
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm


Top
Falconer360
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 11:41 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 962
Location: Somewhere in the Great State of Washington

Offline
My best friend just got out of the Navy and he was a aircraft mechanic. They just started training and testing with the F35 about a month before he got out. He personally hated the F35. Something to do with it building up static and requiring a person to go manually out an discharge it. WHile the F22 didn't have this problem. There were other things he couldn't tell me of course. So at least from the Navy mechanics view, they would much rather continue using the F22 than the F35.

_________________
"For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson
"It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down" - Yagyu Munenori


Top
billvon
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 11:51 pm

Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:23 pm
Posts: 86

Offline
Falconer360 wrote:
My best friend just got out of the Navy and he was a aircraft mechanic. They just started training and testing with the F35 about a month before he got out. He personally hated the F35. Something to do with it building up static and requiring a person to go manually out an discharge it.

You have to do that on all aircraft; that's nothing new. There has to be more to it than that. (I know that the F35 has had a lot more problems than static.)


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 12:08 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5500
Location: Austin, Texas

Offline
Good planes help quite a lot to assert force and maintain battlefield advantage, but IMO we have plenty of those advantages already, these F22 & F35 planes would IMO provide only marginal added benefit, and I'd rather see these funds invested in cyber or making the grid more modern / immune from simple hacks.

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Ascended
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 5:45 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:59 pm
Posts: 221
Location: Over the hills and far away

Offline
Falconer360 wrote:
My best friend just got out of the Navy and he was a aircraft mechanic. They just started training and testing with the F35 about a month before he got out. He personally hated the F35. Something to do with it building up static and requiring a person to go manually out an discharge it. WHile the F22 didn't have this problem. There were other things he couldn't tell me of course. So at least from the Navy mechanics view, they would much rather continue using the F22 than the F35.


Interesting, my father worked on the old Vulcan's when he was in the RAF. They were mothballed back
in the 70's. Be interesting to know what he would have made of the F22.

I actually thought for a long time that the F35 was going to be the best plane, but it seems plagued with
problem after problem, no wonder your friend prefers the F22!

One thing I'm not sure about though is conflicting reports suggesting the F22's landing speed is to high
for use on carriers, be interesting to know if there is actually a carrier variant.

_________________
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm


Top
Ascended
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 5:47 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:59 pm
Posts: 221
Location: Over the hills and far away

Offline
iNow wrote:
Good planes help quite a lot to assert force and maintain battlefield advantage, but IMO we have plenty of those advantages already, these F22 & F35 planes would IMO provide only marginal added benefit, and I'd rather see these funds invested in cyber or making the grid more modern / immune from simple hacks.


Now that's though provoking. I would have actually thought that surely the US must already have
enough combat ready planes in service, but reading one article suggested there is a shortage of the
F22's, something like only 187 actually produced and the majority of squadrons still reliant on 4th
generation F15's.

If the defence budget is refocused towards maintaining smaller numbers of squadrons/less advanced aircraft and heavier investing towards cyber warfare would it not then perhaps embolden the Chinese to stake a claim for greater control over the South and East China Seas, or allow the Russians to invade further territory in Europe maybe.

_________________
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Tue May 17, 2016 6:18 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5500
Location: Austin, Texas

Offline
If missiles start firing between the US and China, then I suspect having F15s instead of F22s is going to be the least of our concerns. This is a whole new world. Our economies are more interlinked than ever before. All sides generally want to avoid conflict and keep the money flowing, though I concede that China's posture against our allies in the South China Sea lately (not to mention the man made islands they're creating for runways and bases) is a bit alarming and we'll need our best in the region to help if it escalates (again, I'm not certain planes will be the dominant factor even then given our naval might).

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
billvon
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 3:37 pm

Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 5:23 pm
Posts: 86

Offline
Ascended wrote:
One thing I'm not sure about though is conflicting reports suggesting the F22's landing speed is to high
for use on carriers, be interesting to know if there is actually a carrier variant.

There have been several programs that have attempted to adapt land based aircraft to modern carriers - and all have failed. The forces on the landing gear and structure of carrier based aircraft are just too high to be able to use aircraft that are not designed for those forces.

However, there was a program to develop a carrier F22 variant from the beginning - so the F22 may have been designed with carrier landings in mind. If I recall correctly, to reduce their takeoff/landing speeds sufficiently for carrier operations, they needed to go to a swing-wing design, and the massive effort that would entail wasn't considered worth it.


Top
Falconer360
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 4:11 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 962
Location: Somewhere in the Great State of Washington

Offline
billvon wrote:
Falconer360 wrote:
My best friend just got out of the Navy and he was a aircraft mechanic. They just started training and testing with the F35 about a month before he got out. He personally hated the F35. Something to do with it building up static and requiring a person to go manually out an discharge it.

You have to do that on all aircraft; that's nothing new. There has to be more to it than that. (I know that the F35 has had a lot more problems than static.)


First I need to make a correction on my initial statement, he was talking about liking the EA-6B (Prowler) and hated the new EA-18G (Growler). The Prowler had an attachment of some sort that discharged the static build up automatically so no one had to go out with the "squeegee," and discharge it manually. He had no beef with either the F22 or the F35. So I was wrong in my initial statement, I had incorrectly recalled our conversation.

_________________
"For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson
"It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down" - Yagyu Munenori


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: More F22's?  |  Posted: Thu May 26, 2016 4:37 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5500
Location: Austin, Texas

Offline
Seems the F-35 continues to struggle and has encountered yet another delay.

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-setback-2016-5
Quote:
America's most expensive weapons system ever just hit another snag.
The F-35 Lightning II, Lockheed Martin's fifth-generation fighter jet, is expected to miss another crucial deadline on its march to combat readiness.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon acknowledged that the jet would stumble pass its operational testing phase.

"The target was the middle of 2017, but it's clear we're not going to make that," Frank Kendall, the Pentagon's top acquisition officer, said.

The new schedule date, according to Kendall, is likely to occur in 2018.

The mid-2017 target was itself a postponement because of setbacks with the F-35's sixth and final software release, referred to as Block 3F.


It's not like we've already spent a half a trillion dollars on it, or anything. :roll:

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Print view

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Jump to:   
cron

Delete all board cookies | The team | All times are UTC


This free forum is proudly hosted by ProphpBB | phpBB software | Report Abuse | Privacy