Forum: F-22A Raptor

Well first of i'm new here so whats up every body. But anyways i found some good videos about F-22s at Northern edge. so here they are

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR95DeRf ... p;index=30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B02DrUpA ... re=related

I also here the AN/AGP-81 radars peformed really well recently at Northern edge

F-16.net Sponsor

Kind of old news... Wink

I'm not new here, but this is my first post... Go figure.

The problem IMHO with this Northern Edge exercise was that it did not clearly represent a realistic modern or future scenario. Did anyone else notice the F-15s and F-22s out on the open Tarmac?

There appeared to be no asymmetrical threat element to this exercise training unfortunately. I.E., in a hypothetical future scenario, medium/long-range CM could be popped off at random or in concert from either the air or sub-surface.

This total-scenario exercise is too relaxed overall for my liking, I'm sorry, although it's OK for actual flying skills practice, sure. Overall I give it a C.

And I'm sorry but 13 soties within the first 24 hrs (from 12 jets) and 8 sorties a day on avg ratio, under this best best case scenario, produced from a 12 jet deployment is OK, but it can only give added argument for the strategic need for 60+ more block 35 capable Raptors.

In real-life, uncertain and unpredictable combat where initial enemy tactics WILL surprise, missile PK rates drop off considerably and Fog of war and FUBARS are the rule, perhaps a 60 sortie/day in the first 48 hrs deployment capability in ONE Theatre, with 20 kills/day to unknown loss/day over first 48 hrs scenario is a realistic factor as to the equation determing how many Increment 3.2 F-22s should be required for a hypothetical future strategic airpower deterrence, by say 2018?

IMO, under a strategic airpower deterrence MINIMUM, 150 Increment 3.2+ Raptors (with sufficient, current number 3.1 Increment units in reserve (e.g., ANG detachments)) should be fielded for long-term deterrence role. That is 150, not 187. Forget the 187 number. Indeed distracting..

geogen wrote:

The problem IMHO with this Northern Edge exercise was that it did not clearly represent a realistic modern or future scenario. Did anyone else notice the F-15s and F-22s out on the open Tarmac?

There appeared to be no asymmetrical threat element to this exercise training unfortunately. I.E., in a hypothetical future scenario, medium/long-range CM could be popped off at random or in concert from either the air or sub-surface.

This total-scenario exercise is too relaxed overall for my liking, I'm sorry, although it's OK for actual flying skills practice, sure. Overall I give it a C.

And I'm sorry but 13 soties within the first 24 hrs (from 12 jets) and 8 sorties a day on avg ratio, under this best best case scenario, produced from a 12 jet deployment is OK, but it can only give added argument for the strategic need for 60+ more block 35 capable Raptors.

In real-life, uncertain and unpredictable combat where initial enemy tactics WILL surprise, missile PK rates drop off considerably and Fog of war and FUBARS are the rule, perhaps a 60 sortie/day in the first 48 hrs deployment capability in ONE Theatre, with 20 kills/day to unknown loss/day over first 48 hrs scenario is a realistic factor as to the equation determing how many Increment 3.2 F-22s should be required for a hypothetical future strategic airpower deterrence, by say 2018?

IMO, under a strategic airpower deterrence MINIMUM, 150 Increment 3.2+ Raptors (with sufficient, current number 3.1 Increment units in reserve (e.g., ANG detachments)) should be fielded for long-term deterrence role. That is 150, not 187. Forget the 187 number. Indeed distracting..

Interesting thought - EXERCISES like Northern Edge and Red Flag have different objectives - Most of the time - these exercises are for aircrew generation and are aircrew centric.. they are not for air base survivability. That being said that those scenarios you invision are done mostly during ORIs. And again those are done to see how the Fighter Wing as a whole can do their missions which encompasses the fighter wing and the support structure - not to figure out how many F-22s we need. There are also less publicized wing surge days where they generate as many sorties as they can - again those are also done during ORIs as well. SO measuring the generation rate for something like Northern Edge doesnt back up any notion of adding more F-22s as there are more things that the air force does than Northern Edge.

I agree with the previous post, though I do think more F-22s are in order, and that canceling further production of them is a waste of national resources.

Off Topic: I find it a little disturbing that Scientology is advertising on this forum, to say the least. Is it just because Tom Cruise was in Top Gun?
WTF

Why would you base - a strategic deterrance on the number of tactical fighters??? The deterrence of the United States has never been based on fighter planes - its always been based on nuclear armed bombers, missiles, and submarines?

As far as offensive punch - your going to be using alot more than F-22 jets .. carrier battlegroups, submarines, bombers ... UAVs... a whole bunch of conventional armaments....

geogen wrote:

And I'm sorry but 13 soties within the first 24 hrs (from 12 jets) and 8 sorties a day on avg ratio, under this best best case scenario, produced from a 12 jet deployment is OK, but it can only give added argument for the strategic need for 60+ more block 35 capable Raptors.

Didn't they say that their goal was 8 sorties per day, but that during the exercise they only missed one sortie? I'll have to watch the clip again to make sure I heard that correctly.

Siesta: You are exactly right. I've never heard of a fighter plane deterring war. Not even the F-22.

Just realized that the videos are for Northern Edge 2007 where Langley deployed - since that time there's been a Northern Edge 2008 and just recently in June - Northern Edge 2009 .. so it is old news!

He probably just found out about it and wanted to share his new found enthusiasm. Can't really say I blame him.

...

For what it's worth, from one newbie to another, welcome to the forum. Just keep in mind that most of the guys here are old hands when it comes to this sort of information, and there's a pretty steep learning curve.

Cheers

Siesta/wrend - thanks for the follow up insights and for the data on video in particular. Yes, I'm a critic.. but for better planning, preparedness and readiness. Points taken.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22 and Northern edge