Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Check this one out guys: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/09/30/f-22s ... amp;rank=2

Quote:

Yes, you read it correctly, Marines flying F-22s. One Marine is making the case for just that.

Writing in this month’s Marine Corps Gazette, Maj. Chrisopher Cannon, argues that it’s time the Corps begins looking at a plan B for the short take-off and vertical landing B-model– which has suffered numerous cost and schedule delays and was placed on a two year probation by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates last spring.

Any credence to this or just a case of, "fighter envy?" Wink

F-16.net Sponsor

weez wrote:

Check this one out guys: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/09/30/f-22s ... amp;rank=2

Any credence to this or just a case of, "fighter envy?" Wink

Yeah I know ret USAF guy who told me this a few days ago. But I don't know where he gets his second hand info from... It's also now on Defensetech.org. Could be something to this... and taking into account that Boeing is working on new wing skins for the Raptors.... cross your fingers ladies that this pans out.

For what it would cost the USN/USMC just to restart F-22's production line alone, the USMC could probably buy 150 Super Tucano plus all equipment and weapons - actually PUTTING enemy forces TO sleep in their fox holes (in worse case scenario, if called into battle).

Yet, regardless of the F-22 probably being put into production before it's time, the F-22 line was indeed prematurely killed. Production could have very well been argued to have been continued... the airframes to have been updated and enhancements integrated into an additional 60-100 units.

That's a separate issue however and one the USAF might debate for decades to come.

As far as USMC aviation options are concerned though, Marines apparently need to replace 40-50 hornets (those which are reported as being required for a very expensive and risky 10k hr-operable SLEP upgrade).

I'd personally vote for USMC to buy 50x block 2.5 F-18E w/ next-gen Litening SE pod (and ATDIRCM), retire the hornets, and with the money saved in retiring the AV-8B, buy 100 Super Tucano modified for LHD/LHA operational capability. Call it a day.

With massive budgets cuts coming, this will never happen...

So, geogen, I'm assuming you're a Super Tucano guy over the AT-6 II?!? Wink

I honestly don't know enough about those two airframes to weigh in myself, though AT-6 makes sense since guys (and gals) may have already trained on T-6 II.

Regarding the Raptor, I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks ending production was a good idea! I wonder, if it would be a good fit for the Marines, though. The cap on Raptor production happened because of the here and now concerns with the current War on Terror and questioning the need for so many expensive air dominance fighters in such an unconventional war. Short-sighted to say the least IMHO. I think Russia and China are still far behind us but the gap in fighter technology is definitely becoming narrower with advanced Flankers and the two new, "5th gen," kids on the block.

I'm still holding out faith that a new administration in Washington could do something to re-start Raptor production, but I don't see it happening for the Marines. All in all, I think the cap was irresponsible and leaves us ill prepared for a serious conventional threat if complete domination of enemy airspace is still integral to our war fighting strategy.

weez wrote:

So, geogen, I'm assuming you're a Super Tucano guy over the AT-6 II?!? Wink

I honestly don't know enough about those two airframes to weigh in myself, though AT-6 makes sense since guys (and gals) may have already trained on T-6 II.

Regarding the Raptor, I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks ending production was a good idea! I wonder, if it would be a good fit for the Marines, though. The cap on Raptor production happened because of the here and now concerns with the current War on Terror and questioning the need for so many expensive air dominance fighters in such an unconventional war. Short-sighted to say the least IMHO. I think Russia and China are still far behind us but the gap in fighter technology is definitely becoming narrower with advanced Flankers and the two new, "5th gen," kids on the block.

I'm still holding out faith that a new administration in Washington could do something to re-start Raptor production, but I don't see it happening for the Marines. All in all, I think the cap was irresponsible and leaves us ill prepared for a serious conventional threat if complete domination of enemy airspace is still integral to our war fighting strategy.

Couldn't have said it better myself. However, unless these Raptors would be permanently based in Japan or something, I fail to see how they're going to be any different from buying a few more US-based airframes for the USAF. Either way, I'm all for anything resulting in more Raptors.

southernphantom wrote:

Couldn't have said it better myself. However, unless these Raptors would be permanently based in Japan or something, I fail to see how they're going to be any different from buying a few more US-based airframes for the USAF. Either way, I'm all for anything resulting in more Raptors.

Let the USMC buy a couple dozen to replace their aging F-18s. They could really use them. Then when the F-35 starts showing up on the ramps, sign over the "titles" to the USAF. Who knows what will happen with a new administration in a little over a year from now...... Yeah, yeah, some items are about a years lead time from the time the suppliers get the purchase order, to delivery of certain components, but hopefully there were some people smart enough to bank up some of these long lead time items; in fact, I'd be certain of it because of the "strategy" that was laid out years ago regarding -22 production. Mostly its just the damned composites and how they are layed, cured, etc etc... Everything has to begin with an idea, and now the idea is out there, and hopefully its germinating, invisible, under the ground, and hopefully something can spring forth from the ground with this idea. I don't know why the idea is so far fetched as to be impossible. The Marines used to fly some pretty fancy F-4 interceptors back in the old days.

C'mon guys, please... the USMC F-22 editorial was not even worth a serious discussion, it was an expression only as a dissenting voice. First of all, what USMC needs now is some semblance of a new, mixed CAS and armed recon capability, to replace the 50-60 old hornets + Harriers.

Now take one's dream budget in mind and reduce it by 50-75%, now go to work replacing those stressed assets with fresh airframes. Be creative and think outside the box, otherwise fail.

weez wrote:

or just a case of, "fighter envy?"

The USMC's view of the F-22, a REAL fighter aircraft, has always been:

southernphantom wrote:

weez wrote:

So, geogen, I'm assuming you're a Super Tucano guy over the AT-6 II?!? Wink

I honestly don't know enough about those two airframes to weigh in myself, though AT-6 makes sense since guys (and gals) may have already trained on T-6 II.

Regarding the Raptor, I think you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who thinks ending production was a good idea! I wonder, if it would be a good fit for the Marines, though. The cap on Raptor production happened because of the here and now concerns with the current War on Terror and questioning the need for so many expensive air dominance fighters in such an unconventional war. Short-sighted to say the least IMHO. I think Russia and China are still far behind us but the gap in fighter technology is definitely becoming narrower with advanced Flankers and the two new, "5th gen," kids on the block.

I'm still holding out faith that a new administration in Washington could do something to re-start Raptor production, but I don't see it happening for the Marines. All in all, I think the cap was irresponsible and leaves us ill prepared for a serious conventional threat if complete domination of enemy airspace is still integral to our war fighting strategy.

Couldn't have said it better myself. However, unless these Raptors would be permanently based in Japan or something, I fail to see how they're going to be any different from buying a few more US-based airframes for the USAF. Either way, I'm all for anything resulting in more Raptors.

Well, I'll say it better. The OV-10X will be better for the USMC than the Texan II or Super Tucano. The USMC needs to just chop the F-35B and make up the difference with more AH-1Zs and OV-10Xs.

The OV-10 has a considerably longer range than either the Tucano or the T-6. It also seems to have a larger payload, has greater redundancy, and aside from its annoying ditching issue, is combat-proven in multiple conflicts over 30 years with multiple countries in COIN operations.

OV-10X, AT-6 or Tucano won't be any more survivable today than the Marine OV-10's were when they were hurriedly retired after suffering heavy losses during Desert Storm.

We can't plan on always fighting foes that don't shoot back.

Mike

They will be fine IF they are used in the right area. Desert storm was a medium to high intensity conflict as opposed to COIN which is where they are best used.

BTW, they only lost two OV-10s to SAMs (most likely MANPADS). Throw a DIRCM on them and that problem goes away for the most part.

I'm not sure what the answer is going to be, but we're coming to a period where we're not going to have the luxury of having different aircraft for use in COIN vs. higher intensity conflicts. We need to make sure that if the equipment isn't a perfect fit that at least the mismatch falls in our favor.

Better to carry a gun to a knife fight than vice versa.

Mike

For some historical perspective, in Vietnam the Marines wanted to trade in some of their F-4s for more OV-10s (due to them being more effective in doing what the Marines needed.. CAS).

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Raptors for the USMC?!?