Forum: F-22A Raptor

And Oh-by-the-way, North Korea's rocking the boat. Did you hear about their missile tests? Yeah, I know they won't win a war against us. But Kim Jong Il sure seems crazy enough to try.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 97,00.html

China is a North Korean ally. China has nukes and a very big army. Translation: I think we better hurry up and get the Chinese on our side.

F-16.net Sponsor

This subject is going nowhere. The F-35 is the only acft on the table right now. Analyze all you want, but in the end the F-35 is going forward, for better or worse. Nothing anyone says here will change that... The F-22 is a lesson learned on how not to run a program. Too many chiefs and not enough Indians if you ask me. Politics is what doomed the f-22, not the people who were truely involved and really cared about it........

geogen wrote:

edwin,

I have to say those are some of the 5 most decisive and insightful posts (out of 5) I've ever seen on any forum for that matter re: related F-22 issues. Very interesting contributions. Your out-of-nowhere comments regarding Rafale/EF, while very basic, were actually pretty brilliant and relevant.

Appreciate the intellect and open-mindedness.

Thank you for the compliment Smile

I'm just another aircraft enthusiast hoping for a good, thought provoking debate on a favorite subject.

cywolf32 wrote:

This subject is going nowhere. The F-35 is the only acft on the table right now. Analyze all you want, but in the end the F-35 is going forward, for better or worse. Nothing anyone says here will change that... The F-22 is a lesson learned on how not to run a program. Too many chiefs and not enough Indians if you ask me. Politics is what doomed the f-22, not the people who were truely involved and really cared about it........

Sadly, that seems to be the case...

Tinito_16 wrote:

Tell me ONE country that won a war without Air Superiority in the last 50 years.

North Vietnam.

OL

DarthAmerica wrote:

Don't forget to add in an Alien invasion too!

Sadly, it's backwards thinking like this that is going to be the downfall of America. Keep basing out force structure on the potential one nation buildup of a soviet sized military while dozens of smaller ones all over the globe are sharpening their swords and bideing their time.

People like DA are nothing but a new version of the old school style of thinking with a fresh coat of paint. Everyone, including those that hate us have figured out the Russians are not coming. It's the die hards like DA that still dream about a soviet size/style military as the threat/potential threat. When the reality is the enemy is more deadly/dangeorus then they ever were and they ARE going to come after us when the time is right. The process has already begun actually and we and the likes of DA are playing right into their hands.

So yea, cut some more. WE don't need it because there is no Soviet size military out there. How brain dead can people be?

Beazz

outlaw162 wrote:

Tinito_16 wrote:

Tell me ONE country that won a war without Air Superiority in the last 50 years.

North Vietnam.

OL

Did we have air superiority over the whole of North Vietnam? I thought the ROEs prevented us from going all out... which is not really air superiority. Air Superiority is using everything you got as far as fighters downing enemy a/c and bombers dropping ordenance on all targets available. I thought the US did not go all out because we thought if we did it could escalate into WWIII...

But I do admit I'm not 100% sure of that. Anyways, a 2 to 1 kill ratio (like the US had against NV) is not Air Superiority by any measure. Thuds getting bounced by MiGs and B-52's downed by SAMs... That's why it's important to have quality stealth aircraft these days.

Think air superiority like we had in the Gulf War, where it was so unfair Iraqi pilots fled to Iran instead of putting up a fight. Air superiority is about having your enemy cornered and scared.

Let me just elaborate for a moment here. If Air Superiority is defined ONLY as having dominated enemy fighters, then what I mean by "Air Superiority" is not the same thing as the previous definition. What I mean by that term is 1) having such dominance over enemy fighters that they're ineffectual, 2) Destroying most if not all of the IDS (SAM's, AA, Communications, Command and Control) so that slower bombers can come through with impunity, and 3) conducting effective CAS in order to help ground troops. When those three things come together, it makes it almost impossible for an enemy to respond and put up a fight. They cannot respond in kind with their a/c, they cannot communicate and make plans. For the first part you need an air superiority fighter. The second part can be taken care of with attack a/c and bombers. The third part is the domain of a/c such as the A-10. So you need a mix of planes, not just one. The F-22 can take care of the first two, because it has proven effective as a fighter (as far as we know at least) and is stealthy enough to attack advanced SAM sites to break down the wall and allow other, less stealthy a/c through. It can also penetrate deeper into an IDS and attack high value targets, hindering the ability of the enemy to coordinate a response.

That is what I meant.

Beazz wrote:

When the reality is the enemy is more deadly/dangeorus then they ever were and they ARE going to come after us when the time is right. The process has already begun actually and we and the likes of DA are playing right into their hands.
Beazz

Were you by any chance wearing a tinfoil hat when you wrote that?

Seriously, what enemy do you have in mind?

To be fair I don´t remember seeing the Iraqi army crossing the US border. That was a war the US/UK choose, not the other way round. I´m not saying it was necesarily wrong but it´s hard to argue that the western powers were forced into that one. At the same time, if the sh*t really hit the fan the US could withdraw "instantly" to free up forces if really needed, sure, it´d leave Iraq in chaos probably but they don´t really pose a threat to anyone else right now after being smashed not once but twice...

On a diffrent note in reference to future threats. In the long run China and Russia are far more likely enemies than allies against the US. At the moment there are som co-op between them but that is out of necessity, not that they´re particularly fond of each other. In all likelyhood it´s only a matter of time before Russia is dwarfed by China in almost every way if that´s not even the case today. What Russia got is resources and space, the two things China lacks the most n´are, or at least will, be in desperate nedd of, and they share a land border. You do the math...

The most likely "high-endish" threats in my book would be a revolution in Pakistan that´d install something like the leadership Iran have or even worse, the Taleban. That would in all likelyhood draw India in, how China would react is harder to say. It´d be a bloody mess though.
The other would be change of regime in Riyadh. The royal family is not that popular and the Saudi´s have pretty much every modern western defense-system (oil) money can by including F-15´s and Typhoons. I don+t know how capable they are at using them but they sure got the money to practice if needed.

Just my two cents.

Prinz_Eugn wrote:

Beazz wrote:

When the reality is the enemy is more deadly/dangeorus then they ever were and they ARE going to come after us when the time is right. The process has already begun actually and we and the likes of DA are playing right into their hands.
Beazz

Were you by any chance wearing a tinfoil hat when you wrote that?

Seriously, what enemy do you have in mind?

Sorry Prince, but seriously, if you even have to ask such a question as that, then It is you I would submit is wearing the tinfoil hat bro. Don't worry Prince, the USA is well liked by all. yea right. I got a cheap bridge for sale as well. You interested?

Just out of curiosity, do you actually watch the news, read the paper, read magazines? If you did you'd notice one thing in all of em. It's the anti American, venom spewing, hate filled, American flag burning radicals of the world from one corner to the other shouting death to America and any other slogan of ill will you can come up with towards us. They are quiet real and what they are not is a off the cuff radical handful. They number in the hundreds of millions and for the most part have the words MUSLEM/ISLAM associated with them.

Beazz

muir wrote:

To be fair I don´t remember seeing the Iraqi army crossing the US border. That was a war the US/UK choose, not the other way round. I´m not saying it was necesarily wrong but it´s hard to argue that the western powers were forced into that one. At the same time, if the sh*t really hit the fan the US could withdraw "instantly" to free up forces if really needed, sure, it´d leave Iraq in chaos probably but they don´t really pose a threat to anyone else right now after being smashed not once but twice...

On a diffrent note in reference to future threats. In the long run China and Russia are far more likely enemies than allies against the US. At the moment there are som co-op between them but that is out of necessity, not that they´re particularly fond of each other. In all likelyhood it´s only a matter of time before Russia is dwarfed by China in almost every way if that´s not even the case today. What Russia got is resources and space, the two things China lacks the most n´are, or at least will, be in desperate nedd of, and they share a land border. You do the math...

The most likely "high-endish" threats in my book would be a revolution in Pakistan that´d install something like the leadership Iran have or even worse, the Taleban. That would in all likelyhood draw India in, how China would react is harder to say. It´d be a bloody mess though.
The other would be change of regime in Riyadh. The royal family is not that popular and the Saudi´s have pretty much every modern western defense-system (oil) money can by including F-15´s and Typhoons. I don+t know how capable they are at using them but they sure got the money to practice if needed.

Just my two cents.

Well I agree with most aLL you say here. All those threats are real but they are not the only thrests. As for withdrawing from Iraq instantly. Depends on what you mean by *instant* I reckon. Only way we could literally withdraw instantly would be to leave behind literally billions of dollars worth of equipment which we are not gonna do. It has taken us 6+ years worth of building and importing our equipment there and it would take months to come close to getting it all out.

What you say about SA could not be more true. They are always a wake up away from a regime change over there just like every single one of those arab nations we are arming to the teeeth with our best stuff. The mid east is slam full of US F15, F16 and now Typhoons and owned by nations that could become our enemy over night just like happened with Iran back in the 70s. Those who dismiss that possiblity are living in an outright fantasy fairytale world. The populations of all those countrys for the most part cannot stand the US, especially our governent. Throw all those US haters in with the likes of Russia and/or China and the NK's and Chavezs of the world and the USA could find itself damn hard pressed to keep up. Matter fac t, I'd bet we couldnt because we do not have the numbers to handle em all.

Beazz

If you read your own posts, you should be able to understand why "they" can't stand us.

Just in case, I will lock my door tonight.

OL

This is going to sound political (maybe because it is) but I really like how Obama approched the Muslims and went to Cairo to do a speech... I think this kind of outreach is what is needed to maintain the peace. We need dialogue to understand each other, because our beliefs are very different. But to me peace should be what is strived for - at all costs before wars.

There were some people who said Obama wasn't reacting with enough "diplomatic force" against what is happening in Iran. I was personally outraged at the Neda video. It is a graphic example of what happens when people become religious or political fanatics. However I have to side with the prez on this one - that is not our fight. It is the Iranian people's fight.

Yes I am sort of a pacifist but I do also believe in the old latin saying, Si vis pacem, para bellum - If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

Beazz - I put instantly within citationmarks, what I meant was as fast as possible. As for the kit, most of that could be stored in camps guarded by a small portion of those there today, which in time, if necessary could be replaced by reserves or national guardsmen until forces can return or whats wanted could be shipped out. Some of it might be flogged to the Iraqi government if needed.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22 vs. Congress