Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

kagiannoulis wrote:

The only thing that nobody gives me a straight answer is why they cancel it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axbaGuOF52Y

(Starting at around the 4:40 mark.)

Rewind and repeat until it finally (hopefully) sinks in, m'kay? Good.

Also, I'd elaborate on the "Madcow," but the language I'd have to use would likely get me banned from here. Cool

F-16.net Sponsor

[Link pending approval]

Is this true?

Some of it yes, most of it no. It is extremely biased and obviously pieced together by someone with absolutely no knowledge of the thing. The part about the canopy is wrong. I know the pilot and some of the maintainers that were involved in that incident. The Raptor DOES have a manual open, although it takes 3,000 turns to open it. The electronics were not destroyed. The cockpit was vaccumed out and inspected for FOD. Canopy and actuator replaced and it was good.

Feeding time still not over?

Raptor DCTR, last I have heard readiness rates have been steadily improving and maintainence has gotten easier as the guys on the ground get more experience with the thing. And in light of it's combat capabilities I hardly think it is a POS even though it is going to be tougher to maintain than a F-15.

A manual open crank that requires 3000 turns? Is it the same for other modern fighters or did some engineer cut a corner there?

MC rates can be doctored by the powers at be to look good. The worst part about maintenance is the stats chasing. It's more important to pro sup and the Lt to get a jet off the ground than fixing it right. The maintenance concept on the raptor is completely stupid. Yes as we learn more about the jet it gets easier to fix, but as often as we fix it, that doesn't really matter. Also, supervision is always against tearing into L.O. even if you can PROVE a system failure using tech data. Yes it can do some cool things once it gets off the ground, but that's the problem. Engineers cutting corners on a modern fighter???? hahahahahahahahahaha you have no friggin idea.........I can't even begin to explain to you how much I hate engineers and every single maintainer will tell you the same thing. These things (all fighters) are a hodge podge of corner cutting. I forget the exact number of turns it takes on a viper (been a few years since I worked them) but it was not even close to 3,000. I remember opening many a canopy manually on vipers. All it took was a speed handle.

Quote:

MC rates can be doctored by the powers at be to look good. The worst part about maintenance is the stats chasing. It's more important to pro sup and the Lt to get a jet off the ground than fixing it right. The maintenance concept on the raptor is completely stupid. Yes as we learn more about the jet it gets easier to fix, but as often as we fix it, that doesn't really matter. Also, supervision is always against tearing into L.O. even if you can PROVE a system failure using tech data. Yes it can do some cool things once it gets off the ground, but that's the problem. Engineers cutting corners on a modern fighter???? hahahahahahahahahaha you have no friggin idea.........I can't even begin to explain to you how much I hate engineers and every single maintainer will tell you the same thing. These things (all fighters) are a hodge podge of corner cutting. I forget the exact number of turns it takes on a viper (been a few years since I worked them) but it was not even close to 3,000. I remember opening many a canopy manually on vipers. All it took was a speed handle.

Sounds like the makings of a high attrition rate and a new precedent in poor leadership.

I posted a comment and it's pending approval. I have the opposite opinion of Maddow, so I'm sure it won't be posted judging by all of the other anti-Raptor posts. I think the video is pretty much a giant lie. Once this thing is used in anger, all the critics will be silenced. People like her are very ignorant of history and have no clue as to how American maintains military dominance.

The reason they canceled the F-22 seems pretty straightforward to me. The F-35 is cheaper than the F-22, and is a better bomber.
The administrator and congress found it difficult to justify spending money on stealth air superiority fighters under the current (nuclear deterrence) climate.

If there's a Taiwan campaign, they'll regret their actions. Nukes didn't deter war in Vietnam or Korea, so I don't see how they'll deter China attempting "[Link pending approval];

geogen wrote:

The real reason the F-22 was prematurely kneecapped was because it was needed to spend every available Tacair relevant procurement appropriations dollar on the F-35 program.

6 long days have passed without you showing any proof to back up this wild claim.
So, are you going to continue to ignore it or back it up with something substantial...?

It still seems strange to me that the Raptor with its kinks worked out (or getting worked out) was cancelled in favor of the F-35 that still has not reached the numbers the F-22 has already when it comes to deployment. Too many political hands in the defense systems cookie jar..

mongo wrote:

It still seems strange to me that the Raptor with its kinks worked out (or getting worked out) was cancelled in favor of the F-35 that still has not reached the numbers the F-22 has already when it comes to deployment. Too many political hands in the defense systems cookie jar..

It wasn't a matter of either/or. We need both types, as they compliment one another.

I agree. Both would be an incredible force to be reckoned with in both air-to-air and air-to-ground scenarios.

mongo wrote:

It still seems strange to me that the Raptor with its kinks worked out (or getting worked out) was cancelled in favor of the F-35 that still has not reached the numbers the F-22 has already when it comes to deployment. Too many political hands in the defense systems cookie jar..

I'm sorry, but was Zeke speaking gibberish in the vid I posted above? For the umpteenth time, THE F-22 PROGRAM WAS NOT CANCELLED! Its total procurement was capped at 187.

The RAH-66 program... Now THAT one was cancelled. See the diff?

shep1978 wrote:

geogen wrote:

The real reason the F-22 was prematurely kneecapped was because it was needed to spend every available Tacair relevant procurement appropriations dollar on the F-35 program.

6 long days have passed without you showing any proof to back up this wild claim.
So, are you going to continue to ignore it or back it up with something substantial...?

Sorry, I truly haven't browsed this thread in a few days and missed your response.

That above quote is made by intuition and logical deduction, Shep.

It is pretty evident that F-35A procurement as of FY10 has become the only new-build Tactical procurement allocation afforded by USAF.

There was simply NO additional procurement budget available to procure both 20 +/- F-22 units along with the potential number of F-35A procured by USAF for FY10.

But with F-35A in fact being the stay the course Procurement, decided on by the policymakers, and with not enough budget to procure both, the F-22 had to go by default!

It really isn't more complicated than that and perhaps I am over-simplifying the situation, but that pretty much sums it up (and I'm sure Congress and DoD would largely agree). So I'm actually surprised such a challenge is made re: this issue.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Cancellation