Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Hi - I just became a new member on this forum.

I've pretty much made reading on the Raptor a hobby of mine. Even though the production is capped/killed off at 187, the move reminds me somewhat of the Carter Administration's move on the B-1 only to be revived by Reagan as a more potent weapon.

Anyone out there think there is a possibility with the next non-Liberal administration could revive the program. It seems pretty cutting edge and probably will be for the next 10-15 years for air warfare.

F-16.net Sponsor

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

Well considering it was axed during a non-Liberal administration, I'd say "fat chance"...

Even that Administration was liberal Sad

Where is Ronnie when you need him? Crying or Very sad

Without President Regan seeing the need for a new strategic bomber we wouldn't have the Bones around today.

We can only hope a gun toting president takes over soon... Preferably before another air force starts to punch out Gen V or VI fighters!?!

I'd officially call this one "slim chance". (Not none at all)

You never know? Shrug

TEG

mongo wrote:

Hi - I just became a new member on this forum.

I've pretty much made reading on the Raptor a hobby of mine. Even though the production is capped/killed off at 187, the move reminds me somewhat of the Carter Administration's move on the B-1 only to be revived by Reagan as a more potent weapon.

Anyone out there think there is a possibility with the next non-Liberal administration could revive the program. It seems pretty cutting edge and probably will be for the next 10-15 years for air warfare.

I am by no means a liberal. I am also old enough to remember when there where very real threats to the US and when things where very bad in this country. In short I remember Carter killing the B-1A (in hindsight not such a bad thing), the real threat of the Soviets rolling through the Fulda gap, crouching under my desk at school during air raid drills, the economic malaise of the 70 and early 80s and the Iran hostage debacle.

Lets remember that a military is only as strong as the economy that supports it. We should be careful not to go the way of the Soviets by spending ourselves into oblivion.

The US currently has by far the top three air forces in the world in the USAF, USN Carriers and Marine Air. No one single nation or combination of nations come close to fielding the number of modern fighters and weapons systems that we do, but just to be sure we will have close to 200 F-22s whose capabilities are such that not only do they utterly dominate any potential adversary but they also act as force multipliers that make a force of legacy aircraft operating with them even more potent.

Unfortunately the teen series fighters are starting to wear out. Large numbers of them will need to be replaced soon. By its very nature the F-22 is not economically or technically suitable to replace all of these aircraft. The F-35 is, further it was designed so that it would have not equal in air to air combat apart from the F-22. Do you realistically think that the Russians, Chinese or Europeans will come up with anything close to being the F-35s equal in the next 25-30 years? Do you really think that even if they could will they be able to field and support a force of them large enough to overcome a force of F-35s backed up by a smaller force of F-22s?

The only way the F-35 is going to get bought in the numbers needed is if it gets developed and produced as quickly as possible. Capping production of the F-22 frees up the money to do so.

The only hope I see is that an export version is developed that will keep the production line alive until a new administration. Slim hope there. We know members of Congress from both parties have expressed interest in such as well as misgivings about shutting production down. This includes members from states without economic interest, such as Sen Inoye.

Some sort of unforeseen conventional military contingency (Wow, has that ever happened?) could open some eyes.

I fear Gates will try to have the tooling destroyed - that would be terminal (not to mention criminal).

Let's be frank about this. The window for producing the F-22 is over. Once the production lines begin to shut down (and production of long lead-time items has already been terminated), the cost of replacing all of the tooling, and recertifying the production processes will become prohibitive. The Raptor's story ends at 187 aircraft.

I was sorry to see them close up shop - and I am not yet convinced that in twenty years (when we start running short on flightworthy airframes), that we won't be wishing that we had produced 100 aircraft more. But I do understand why the decision was made. There's only so much budget to go around - and in coming years there's going to be mounting pressure to cut the defense budget to pay for all the new social programs that are being promised. The F-35 is the one aircraft program that all branches of the armed services can rally around. Ending the F-22 saga was a necessary trade that had to be made, however disappointing it was.

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

It was not a necessary trade and a most foolish decision. The F-35 is no substitute for the F-22, like the F-16 is no substitute for the F-15.

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

lampshade111 wrote:

like the F-16 is no substitute for the F-15.

Ohhh hell no you didn't! Razz

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

It was not a necessary trade and a most foolish decision. The F-35 is no substitute for the F-22, like the F-16 is no substitute for the F-15.

I would like to add the point that we would have had real difficulties over the past decade without the B-1B's (unless you assume that B-2 production would have been far greater) and should be thankful for Reagan. Unless the F-22 tooling is destroyed (which would not happen until after the end of production), the next competent administration could indeed resurrect the Raptor at great cost. It would probably be an improved "B" model.

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

It was not a necessary trade and a most foolish decision. The F-35 is no substitute for the F-22, like the F-16 is no substitute for the F-15.

You would have been more correct if you said the F-22 is no substitute for the F-35. I would like to see you or anyone else state what required capability the F-22 has that the F-35 does not in order to dominate the air battle. There is nothing now or on anyone's drawing board that would realistically have a snowball's chance in hell against an F-35 in A2A combat. In fact I would argue that with the addition of DAS and the helmet mounted sight the F-35 would have a better than even chance of beating the Raptor at close range. Better to adequately fund one program than inadequately fund two.

Thumper3181 wrote:

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

It was not a necessary trade and a most foolish decision. The F-35 is no substitute for the F-22, like the F-16 is no substitute for the F-15.

You would have been more correct if you said the F-22 is no substitute for the F-35. I would like to see you or anyone else state what required capability the F-22 has that the F-35 does not in order to dominate the air battle. There is nothing now or on anyone's drawing board that would realistically have a snowball's chance in hell against an F-35 in A2A combat. In fact I would argue that with the addition of DAS and the helmet mounted sight the F-35 would have a better than even chance of beating the Raptor at close range. Better to adequately fund one program than inadequately fund two.

You hit the nail on the head..... Wink

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance.

Yes, I remember the B-1B. But we need to get our minds out of the realm of fantasy.

Producing an F-22 - with all of the production tooling in place, all of the suppliers under contract, and all production processes fully certified - requires two years from start to finish. Once that production line shuts down, tooling will be scrapped, suppliers will find other jobs to work on, and production processes would need to be recertified. Assuming that anyone had the resources to waste, you can plan on doubling your production turn around time - between finding new suppliers, securing contracts, replacing tooling, and relearning and recertifying the old production methods.

I've seen first hand what it takes to pull an old blueprint out of mothballs, and attempt to produce spare parts when none of the tooling is available, and none of the old suppliers is still around, or wants the job. Even for "simple" spare parts - for designs decades old, you can plan on a year-long cycle just to get components that conform to the old standards. Now imagine multiplying that a thousandfold to produce an entire airframe, its electronics suite, and engines.

Yes, in some fantasyland, it would be possible to put the F-22 back into production again. But no one is going to spend those kind of resources. The reason why we have the Joint Strike Fighter - one airplane for all three armed services - is because we can no longer afford to develop unique aircraft that meet everyone's distinctive needs. There are no spare billions lying under the mattress to restart the F-22 production line once its shut down. And you can bet that the Pentagon would fight tooth and nail to prevent resources from being drained from other purposes to restart the airplane they spent the past five years trying to shut down. Like it or not, the F-22's production story is over.

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

Maybe an F-22B? just like the B-1 was brought back as the B-1B.

History has been known to repeat itself.

07763 wrote:

lampshade111 wrote:

tmofarryl, the B-1B was resurrected in even more unlikely circumstances. It is certainly possible, although a very slim chance. We would some competent leadership for a change.

Maybe an F-22B? just like the B-1 was brought back as the B-1B.

History has been known to repeat itself.

I would say "extremely" unlikely. Yet, I think they should have put in a clause stating that the F-22 Tooling could not be destroyed! As the Government has a bad habit of doing so. With types that it wants to just ago away. With the recent demise of the Tomcat coming to mind. Shocked

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Is there any chance of a resurrection or reboot for the F-22