Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Ditto, Check- I was just hammering on idesof over in the F-35 area the other day, but he has an excellent point here. As fas as cleaning up my attitude- that may happen sometime in the future Smile

Anyhow, the F-22 does need to get in the fray so we can see what all it can do. As someone else mentioned about it going to RIAT, I bet we'll all of a sudden see some top-end radars on the borders of whatever country it gets deployed to Smile

I wonder how much they would employ the gun in theater? Would the USAF go that far, and risk either A) another incident such as Maj. Gilberts, or B) ground fire "hurting" their airplane? I know if things hit the fan, the F-22 driver would do whatever necessary to help the guys on the ground, but it makes me wonder (hypothetically, I know this stuff would fall under OPSEC) how they would employ the airplane.

F-16.net Sponsor

To idesof and VPRGUY: At least from my personal viewpoint, U.S. Central Command currently no needs any deployed F-22A Raptor unit in his AOR (especially in case of OIF and OEF). For CAS and some other related combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan (see also CENTAF´s daily "airpower" coverage on USAF´s public main website) there are enough F-16s, A/OA-10As, F-15Es and B-1Bs from the USAF, land-based USMC F/A-18s and AV-8Bs, and also at least one USN carrier air wing in the Arabian Gulf or in the Arabian Sea.

Theoretically, in Southwest Asia (SWA) Raptors would be involved in any possibly future conflict with Iran, Syria etc. But please simply remember the combat deployments and combat missions of stealthy F-117As and B-2As in the past! And why was not a single F-15C deployed to the CENTCOM AOR after OIF´s main combat phase? Yeah! Because there was no further air-to-air threat.

As widely known, the Raptor is a fifth-generation air superiority fighter which will replace the F-15C in the USAF inventory.

O.K. The Raptor could also well use his gun for strafing passes against insurgents in Iraq, but so I think, this gun was mainly integrated to give the pilot a "last chance" for self-defense after he launched all of his air-to-air missiles (carried in the internal weapon bays). And I´m sure that neither USAF nor CENTAF will risk any lost of an F-22A during such counter-insurgency OIF/OEF missions.

Note: For redeploying of the twelve Raptors from Kadena AB, Okinawa, Japan, please check out my latest reply to the topic <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-7449.html">F-22 begins deployment to Japan</a> (page 7).

Special message to idesof: Sorry, guy! But before you launch any more "spectacular" topics like this (meanwhile you got the right answers), please check out the "facts and figures" and think about that!

J.J. wrote:

Special message to idesof: Sorry, guy! But before you launch any more "spectacular" topics like this (meanwhile you got the right answers), please check out the "facts and figures" and think about that!

I get you, but on the other hand, this was official USAF information I was going on, not speculation from some shady site. I do believe I noted in my first post that it may be a typo, as it clearly was. But there are typos and then there are typos, and this particular typo was significant enough to raise some eyebrows. And, part of the reason I posted this in the first place was to confirm the validity of the statment in question, which turned out to be wrong, of course. So, facts have been established, confusion cleared up. I would say that this board has served its purpose in this particular case.

Regarding the comments you make earlier in your post, I have to disagree. While there are sufficient air assets in situ to deal with the situation... Actually, no, there aren't sufficient surveilance assets. I recently read a story about S-3Bs being outfitted with former Tomcat Lantirn pods because air taskings were going unfulfilled due to a lack of resources. So that first part of your statement is incorrect. Secondly, even if we deployed every F-16 to the Middle East, it doesn't address the issue of the Raptor's utility in current combat conditions. I would sure as hell not let my pilots go in low and use their gun on anything, but I would try to get the SDB certified for the plane as quickly as possible. With eight SDBs, the Raptor could be particularly valuable to prosecute targets of opportunity and time-sensitive targets. It would, quite simply, get to wherever it's needed about twice as fast as anything else currently flying over there. But more to the point, the USAF needs to show its relevance in this fight. If you've been keeping up with the budget battles in Congress, the U.S. armed forces are coming perilously close to engaging in the inter-service rivalries of old. At the risk of over-simplifying the issue, the USAF is in danger of losing funding for programs that are important to it and having funds funneled to the Army and Marine Corps. The USAF, obviously, is not eager to see that happen. And the USAF needs to make a case that air power continues to be relevant and critical even during an anti-insurgency campaign. They need to show the Raptor is useful now, not later.

Uhhh...airpower is the reason we win war's. No case should have to be made. F-15E's are currently footing the SDB's over Iraq and the difference in 'response time' vs a Raptor is extremely small. I don't see a need to deploy the Raptor to the Middle East unless its in reference to something else going on.

Check

checksixx wrote:

Uhhh...airpower is the reason we win war's. No case should have to be made. F-15E's are currently footing the SDB's over Iraq and the difference in 'response time' vs a Raptor is extremely small. I don't see a need to deploy the Raptor to the Middle East unless its in reference to something else going on.

Check

You are preaching to the choir regarding the relevance of airpower, and although in a perfect world no case should have to be made for it, a case does have to be made for it when you have limited resources and competing interests. The Army wants its tanks, the Navy wants its carriers, the Marines want their Ospreys and the USAF wants its 5th Gen fighters. It is not at all clear that the USAF will get all the F-22s and F-35s it wants, precisely because there are those who doubt the utility of those aircraft in the current environment. One of the people who most doubted the F-22's utility was Donald Rumsfeld, and he is among those who are most responsible for the program having been slashed to the bone as it has been today. If your own SedDef doesn't "get it," you can well imagine that many in Congress, who hold the purse strings, may not "get it" either. And one of those who don't quite seem to "get it," I'm afraid, is John McCain. So, yes, airpower wins wars, but not everyone seems to have gotten the memo...

checksixx wrote:

I don't see a need to deploy the Raptor to the Middle East unless its in reference to something else going on.

*cough*

checksixx wrote:

Uhhh...airpower is the reason we win war's. No case should have to be made. F-15E's are currently footing the SDB's over Iraq and the difference in 'response time' vs a Raptor is extremely small. I don't see a need to deploy the Raptor to the Middle East unless its in reference to something else going on.

Check

Many thanks for this reply, checksixx (my new F-22A Raptor friend)! As you states: "I don't see a need to deploy the Raptor to the Middle East unless its in reference to something else going on.", that´s very helpful and goes conform with my own viewpoints.

But please note: This former F-15E Strike Eagle deployment to Al Udeid AB is just history! In the next couple of days, I will post an OIF/OEF deployment update, including most of all deployed USAF units.

To idesof: As I already told you, please check out the web on a daily-base for current OIF/OEF deployments! And so I hope, you will understand my viewpoints, supported by checksixx.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 24, 2007 - 05:59 AM Posts: 32

I'm trying to figure out the acronyms you guys are throwing around. What does SDB mean? I was looking through the DOD acronym site and found.

SDB
Satellite Communications Database
JP 1-02

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/doddic ... index.html

Wasn't in the Aviation Glossary either.

No problem...Small Diameter Bomb (SDB)...

F-15E's are still available in theater...Check

The difference between a loaded F-15E and F-22 getting to a 911 call from a JTAC would be a big difference. 2 F-22s with JDAM should be in the JSTARS stack at all times for just such a call. On the way home they can do an ISR mission (pick somewhere in the region ). F-22 putting down something very soon, beats waiting on anything else 5-10-15 whatever minutes later. An F-22 could response fast ( and yes it would be better if it had the SDB option ), put something down for a JTAC right away (and or including show of force) and then when the real CAS aircraft arrive they can take over. Given the cost of GI death benefits these days, this is cheap money having a few F-22s available for 911 calls.

The ONLY mission over there is the grunt on the ground that eats dirt everyday.Everything else is support.

Enthusiast Joined: Apr 24, 2007 - 05:59 AM Posts: 32

checksixx wrote:

No problem...Small Diameter Bomb (SDB)...

Oh, ok thanks, check.

idesof wrote:

checksixx wrote:

They will be scheduled into regular AEF rotations...its already planned. It certainly isn't useless over there...it can carry JDAM which is more than enough to do the job. Defunding the program will not produce more troops or armored vehicles for any service other than the Air Force, who specifically, is paying for the Raptor. If Congress killed the entire program, it would in a sense, flush tons of tax payers dollars down the toilet. Personally, I'd rather see more aircraft produced for a better investment of my tax dollars. We need the jet...lets get all that we need.

Couldn't agree more. But you know that so much of this is a matter of perception. So, in the interest of good PR for the jet, let's send it "over there" like yesterday and have it start killing bad guys. It may be a bit of overkill, but again, the more it can be seen as contributing to the wars we're fighting now--as opposed to the wars we may fight ten years from now--the more it will be perceived as being useful and relevant now.

Of course, the real justification for the Raptor is actually China, which worries me, and Russia, which in some ways worries me even more. The Russians have a serious inferiority complex, and Putin, an ex-KGB man and despot, has been sounding a less-than-friendly note toward the U.S. of late. I don't think Russia will ever be a genuine friend (especially not when the bastards are suplying nuclear technology to Iran). Russia is a natural enemy of the U.S. which is, for the time being, licking its wounds. But, rest assured, it has enormous oil and natural gas resources, and it will come back stronger than it was before. Before long, it will once again be a clear and present danger, and I would not want to be without at least 380+ Raptors when that happens (and a production line that's still warm enough to ramp up in case we need more).

Stronger than USSR days? I dont think so... by 2050 Russia will hav shrunk to less than 100 million people, while the US will be over 400 million...

The USSR of old used to have a bigger population than us (about 260mil vs 220 mil in 1980) , and an economy about 1/3rd our size. And they'd have spend like 20% of GDP on defense to keep up with us. Right now the Russian economy is about 1/10th our size (and that's in PPP terms too). The US military budget is about half the size of the Russian economy.

Putin does seem to be drifting towards a resurgence in dictatorship. Who wants to bet he will actually step down in '08?

I'm worried about China, but I think it's starting to look more and more like late 80s Japan part deux. All bubble, hype and a house of cards waiting to get blown down. The reason I'm worried is what happens if it does get blown down...

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 in Middle East since February!?