The trouble with the basement dwellers

raffaauk48 · by **raffaauk48** » 31 Oct 2015, 20:43

borg wrote:How about any US politician concentrate on getting the funding aviable to do a propper upgrade on the F-22's that are allready in service..
Its been long overdue.

The only forseeable upgrade is the integration of AIM-9X in the next couple or three years, the other feasible upgrade is adding the Scorpion HMCS which already tested successfully last year.
Adding SDB II is another upgrade which I see not necessary for the Raptor because of the F-35A entering the service.
Anyway adding air-to-ground capability to the F-22 was in the first place an interim solution because of the delays in the F-35.
F-22 pilots as I read are stressed because of the workload they suffer instead of focusing on air-to-air mission which is their primary task and I think with the F-35A become operational with US Air Force the F-22 lads can breath a little !.
Cheers

count_to_10 · by **count_to_10** » 31 Oct 2015, 21:21

sferrin wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:He doesn't seem to be as naive as Romney pledge for more F-22s...

I take it you've been living under a rock the last five years? We could use the things, the only thing lacking is the political will.

The problem was that, with the tooling destroyed, the cost of re-starting an F-22 construction line would be uncompetitive.

tritonprime · by **tritonprime** » 31 Oct 2015, 22:14

count_to_10 wrote:
sferrin wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:He doesn't seem to be as naive as Romney pledge for more F-22s...

I take it you've been living under a rock the last five years? We could use the things, the only thing lacking is the political will.

The problem was that, with the tooling destroyed, the cost of re-starting an F-22 construction line would be uncompetitive.

Who said the F-22 tooling was destroyed?

See:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=16186&p=307944#p307944

count_to_10 · by **count_to_10** » 01 Nov 2015, 00:23

tritonprime wrote:Who said the F-22 tooling was destroyed?

See:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=16186&p=307944#p307944

I have no idea. It's one of those things that I remembered hearing somewhere, and assumed was true. :doh:

tincansailor · by **tincansailor** » 01 Nov 2015, 01:57

count_to_10 wrote:
sferrin wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:He doesn't seem to be as naive as Romney pledge for more F-22s...

I take it you've been living under a rock the last five years? We could use the things, the only thing lacking is the political will.

The problem was that, with the tooling destroyed, the cost of re-starting an F-22 construction line would be uncompetitive.

I don't think they destroyed the tooling. I understand the biggest problem with building more F-22s is they haven't made the chips for her computer system for 20 years. I thank I remember a RAND study that said it would cost $17 Billion to start the line up again and build 75 more F-22s. Considering the cost of some government programs that doesn't sound like so much. I'm sure if they did build more they would be upgraded with some F-35 sensor tech, enough to classify them as an F-22B.

What F-35 tech could be incorporated into the airframe of new build F-22s?

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 01 Nov 2015, 02:27

Raptor's highly integrated systems architecture was idenfified as the main obstacle to integrating new tech on the jet. When your envision grafting an entirely new nervous system to run in conjunction with the existing one you know it's a mess. AFAIK this "2nd brain" idea has been abandoned.
http://archive.defensenews.com/article/ ... -New-Brain

count_to_10 · by **count_to_10** » 01 Nov 2015, 02:40

tincansailor wrote:
I don't think they destroyed the tooling. I understand the biggest problem with building more F-22s is they haven't made the chips for her computer system for 20 years. I thank I remember a RAND study that said it would cost $17 Billion to start the line up again and build 75 more F-22s. Considering the cost of some government programs that doesn't sound like so much. I'm sure if they did build more they would be upgraded with some F-35 sensor tech, enough to classify them as an F-22B.

What F-35 tech could be incorporated into the airframe of new build F-22s?

That doesn't sound right. Too cheep.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 01 Nov 2015, 03:50

count_to_10 wrote:
tincansailor wrote:
I don't think they destroyed the tooling. I understand the biggest problem with building more F-22s is they haven't made the chips for her computer system for 20 years. I thank I remember a RAND study that said it would cost $17 Billion to start the line up again and build 75 more F-22s. Considering the cost of some government programs that doesn't sound like so much. I'm sure if they did build more they would be upgraded with some F-35 sensor tech, enough to classify them as an F-22B.

What F-35 tech could be incorporated into the airframe of new build F-22s?

That doesn't sound right. Too cheep.

I'd rather have 200 F-35 @ $85M in lieu of 75 F-22s.

raffaauk48 · by **raffaauk48** » 01 Nov 2015, 07:28

For time being unless a war between US and near peer enemy the number of F-22 is fair enough : just equip them with AIM-9X and HMCS to be par with Typhoons and that is enough. As for the next three decades or so : Better to invest in sixth generation aircraft.

charlielima223 · by **charlielima223** » 01 Nov 2015, 08:38

sferrin wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:He doesn't seem to be as naive as Romney pledge for more F-22s...

I take it you've been living under a rock the last five years? We could use the things, the only thing lacking is the political will.

I live under a rock in terms of social media but please read the entirety of my post...

He doesn't seem to be as naive as Romney pledge for more F-22s... seriously as much as we would like to fantasize about having more... that is all it is, a fantasy now until something really bad or good happens that kicks us in the butt to build more.

There have always been the want for it but there has never been any real political and financial will to start up the F-22 line again. Even IF the USAF suddenly had the go ahead from congress and the president to acquire additional F-22s... just to start up the line alone would probably cost more than the combined overall per unit cost for additional Raptors.

Do I want to see more Raptors in the sky? Yes but I'm not going to fool myself that it will be a actual reality any time soon or even ever.

thepointblank · by **thepointblank** » 01 Nov 2015, 08:39

tritonprime wrote:
Who said the F-22 tooling was destroyed?

See:
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=16186&p=307944#p307944

Problem will be the sub-contractors and suppliers; do they have the industrial capabilities to restart production, or can we effectively engineer a new solution in a cost effective manner? We already know that at least one subcontractor that provides a critical component doesn't and won't make any more components.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 01 Nov 2015, 08:58

raffaauk48 wrote:For time being unless a war between US and near peer enemy the number of F-22 is fair enough : just equip them with AIM-9X and HMCS to be par with Typhoons and that is enough. As for the next three decades or so : Better to invest in sixth generation aircraft.

180+ Raptors and 2400+ Lightning-IIs, not even counting those serving in friendly Air Services... shoukd be enough to take care of business. What near-peer can come anywhere close to that njmber of 5Gen jets? And that's assumjng their desugns are even competitive.

count_to_10 · by **count_to_10** » 01 Nov 2015, 15:02

popcorn wrote:I'd rather have 200 F-35 @ $85M in lieu of 75 F-22s.

There is also the possibility that an engine upgrade and some new missiles for the F-35 would eliminate most of the advantages the F-22 has over it.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 01 Nov 2015, 15:10

count_to_10 wrote:
popcorn wrote:I'd rather have 200 F-35 @ $85M in lieu of 75 F-22s.

There is also the possibility that an engine upgrade and some new missiles for the F-35 would eliminate most of the advantages the F-22 has over it.

No, I'm not even factoring those in my position.

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 02 Nov 2015, 14:34

popcorn wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:
tincansailor wrote:
I don't think they destroyed the tooling. I understand the biggest problem with building more F-22s is they haven't made the chips for her computer system for 20 years. I thank I remember a RAND study that said it would cost $17 Billion to start the line up again and build 75 more F-22s. Considering the cost of some government programs that doesn't sound like so much. I'm sure if they did build more they would be upgraded with some F-35 sensor tech, enough to classify them as an F-22B.

What F-35 tech could be incorporated into the airframe of new build F-22s?

That doesn't sound right. Too cheep.

I'd rather have 200 F-35 @ $85M in lieu of 75 F-22s.

The USAF was prepared to give up 500 F-35s for 100 more F-22s.