Forum: F-22A Raptor

Where does he get this stuff? Geez!

F-16.net Sponsor

Quote:

Skipr
since fixed-wing aircraft did the bombing of Zarqawi, and that PGMs from said platforms are the preferred form of support, then fixed-wing aircraft do the majority of work.

The removal of a high value/time sensitive targets of opportunity will be performed by whatever platform is available at the time.

Predators have taken out terrorists in Somalia and Afghanistan. You may also recall that it was AH-64's that took out some of the first early warning radar sites in Iraq during the opening stages of GWI.

Quote:

Skipr
Hey, I like the A-10... but you cant be naive and think it will: A. last forever, and B. be replaced with something comparable.

2028 is a long way off. Who knows what technology will change.

Quote:

Skipr
Even so, we dont need just a CAS platform, but a precision strike one as well.

Already have it. F-22. Just as the F-15 was modified as the F-15E. There was a reason why the F-16XL was not chosen for the role and they are very much the same reasons why the F-22 would make a better IDS bird than the F-35.

Quote:

skipr
2028 still isnt lasting forever. And there has already been a major shift in CAS.

2028 is a long way off. You are clutching at straws here. There are close to 800 A-10 airframes. I am sure they can either come up with a way to keep them flying past 2028 or come up with something much better to perform CAS than the JSF by 2028.

Please enlighten me about this major shift in CAS. Ask any grunt if CAS works from 30k feet. Only a fighter pilot believes that BS. What happens when you are out of PGMs and the bad guys are about to overrun your position. What does the CAS guy do from 30K? A) Smile and wave. B) Get down and dirty with the gun. Now lets get a bit more complicated. Say they have tanks. Do you want the 30mm gun of the A-10 which is designed to destroy tanks, operated by a pilot whose sole mission is CAS or some 25mm gun optimized for A2A operated by a pilot who would rather be at 30K killing those tanks.

Quote:

check
Not sure where your getting your figures, but you may want to re-check them. Current "D" models are coming off the line at just shy of $14 Million.

My bad. You are correct. Latest batch is about 14million each. Still a far cry from 50M.

Once again I have nothing against the F-35. I realize it's best attributes may be more diplomatic and economic than military. I am sure it will be a good plane and give our enemies all sorts of fits. I bet it even puts most other AC manufacturers out of business. What good is an SU-35 if it can't see it's enemy.I just think that right now we have so many problems in all of our armed forces that need to be addressed that this 200 billion could have been spent elsewhere on defense.

All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics.

Sir Sydney Camm!

There have been some fantastic aircraft that have fallen by this simple measure most notably the TSR2 the great what if of the british aircraft industry! Which was a MASSIVLEY capable aircraft with a whopping 60,000 lbs thrust that was designed to be a jack of all trades for the RAF.

http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/index.html

As an unashmed brit, an export customer of the F-35 i can see the position (somewhat) from a neutrals point of view.

From our perspective i can see see the attractiveness of the f-35B and IMHO it will be a big sucess on the export market particularly as it allows smaller nations who opperate smaller, cheaper carriers. Its a big plus for countries like italy, spain, india, UK to have an aircraft like that available an expect other countries to look at it because it can offer a saving in new carrier production. (i.e. build smaller ones because the f-35B can permit that)

Doctrinally speaking i'm glad the RAF and RN are getting this plane as an airforce which can ill afford to have planes shot down striking installations with storm shadows and cleaning up with F-35's it may not be ideal but it works.

Its all about credible threat really thats what'll keep the peace between major nations and splat the nasty little dictator that rises up in the middle east. Lets face it 183 F-22s is a half decent threat its less than ideal when you consider that not all of them will be available at anyone time, the USAF could probably do with more, but not the 380 specified by the USAF for reasons i will specify later.

The F-35 is a credible threat despite whatever detractors it has, it may have issues in the future when the fruits for the russian PAK FA project are revealed expect a stealthy and improved Su27 varient (nice low cost option) these will be threats to the f-35's credibilty but its an entirely different debate there and a whole can of worms i dont want to involve myself in. The f-35 is also politically convient, with bag loads of export customers so it will be favoured its natural. If the f-22 can win itself a couple of export customers then there's a good chance it will see a few more orders from its home market.

The problem the f-22 has is that the chances are that a war in the future will not be faught by one nation alone. Should the situation present itself (there's a chance it probably will) there's no reason why USAF f-35's cant fly missions with a RAF Typhoon CAP particualrly if the best they have to offer is some irritating mig 21's or a few better russian exports there's simply no need to send F-22's its overkill. Operating from carriers then USN F-35C's with an RN F-35B CAP.

Firefox said that there's a lot of missions that can be done with cheaper or different planes the same is true of the f-22 (to a certain extent) as well as the f-35 if your allies have harriers get them to do some CAS. lets face it the US and its allies such Japan, UK, Austrialia and whoever else chooses to get involved and if Japan buys f-22's then why should the US spend more tax dollars when it has allies with the same plane. I could go on with counter point to counter point and get everyone really confused. The bottom line being its also important to think interms of potential coalition capability as well as US capability.

Politics!

But having said that being politically just to the right of atilla the hun nuts to it more of both of them!! GRRRR!!!! Evil or Very Mad

The TSR2 was canceled due to the lack of technology avaiable to fullfill its intended requirements. The planes avionics systems failed to materialize. The step was simply bigger than the leg.

As for the F-35, consider this, only the US or europe have the technology to as much try to shoot it down. The flankers are vastly overrated as stealth beating platforms. Russian made R-27 missiles wich consist the main AA missile of the Su-27 Variants have very bad combat record and certainly wont fare better VS a target that has little RCS to guide on. The R-77 or RVV-AE is unproven but its also radar guided and all that implies against low obervable tehcnology. Su-30KMI is all very cute and all, but if you ask me VS the F-35 those thrust vectoring moves will be inadequate to evade AMRAAMs since its biggest problem will be to actualy know its there before pitbull.

Its inneviatble that every new aircraft are going to be badly dissed before we know them better, just like the teen F's were.

Paulofische wrote:

Should the situation present itself (there's a chance it probably will) there's no reason why USAF f-35's cant fly missions with a RAF Typhoon CAP particualrly if the best they have to offer is some irritating mig 21's or a few better russian exports there's simply no need to send F-22's its overkill.

If the threat is aerial in nature then the US system which will primarily deal with that threat will be the F-22A Raptor, it doesn't matter what plane the OPFOR is flying. If the Raptor is available, it will certainly be apart of any US air combat effort (so may the F-35). That's because there is no such word as "overkill" in USAF vocabulary. The Raptor represents US doctrine as a whole. And that is to be as overwhelming as possible and to dominate so thoroughly that any potential enemy will not want to even fight, aka deterrence. However should they choose to there will be no attempt to make it even or less challenging for the enemy, we don't want a fair war.

What's more likely, IMO, is coalition aircraft (should this be a join effort) flying missions with Raptor escorts acting as front line assets.

Pilotasso wrote:

The TSR2 was canceled due to the lack of technology avaiable to fullfill its intended requirements. The planes avionics systems failed to materialize. The step was simply bigger than the leg.

As for the F-35, consider this, only the US or europe have the technology to as much try to shoot it down. The flankers are vastly overrated as stealth beating platforms. Russian made R-27 missiles wich consist the main AA missile of the Su-27 Variants have very bad combat record and certainly wont fare better VS a target that has little RCS to guide on. The R-77 or RVV-AE is unproven but its also radar guided and all that implies against low obervable tehcnology. Su-30KMI is all very cute and all, but if you ask me VS the F-35 those thrust vectoring moves will be inadequate to evade AMRAAMs since its biggest problem will be to actualy know its there before pitbull.

Its inneviatble that every new aircraft are going to be badly dissed before we know them better, just like the teen F's were.

The TSR.2 Was a catalogue of errors and still IMHO a massive loss for the British Aircraft Industry there were flying prototypes by the time it was cancelled though in a way it would be like cancelling the f-35 now! My point re the SU27 varient was slightly poorly worded, basically its reasonable to expect with the russian economy re-use of existing parts and technology to lower costs whereever possible.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Does the US need the F-22 or the F-35 or Both?