Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2016, 22:59
by awsome
Law makers want the air force to study restarting the F-22 assembly line...

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016 ... ction.html

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 00:32
by les_paul59
I'm sure the air force would love more Raptors, but they are looking to create a 6th gen fighter that would eat the raptor for lunch in 20 years....not enough money to go around

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 01:44
by popcorn
Talk is cheap.

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 07:42
by Corsair1963
Very doubtful as the budget is just not there!

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 12:20
by cosmicdwarf
Yeah, not going to happen. This is electioneering.

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 18:50
by playloud
Even suggesting it seems like it would hurt the F-35 politically.

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 19:00
by sferrin
playloud wrote:Even suggesting it seems like it would hurt the F-35 politically.


Apples and oranges. (Of course the basement dweller crowd is all a twitter. I hope Copp thinks that means Australia still has a chance to get F-22s. :lmao: )

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 20:20
by playloud
sferrin wrote:
playloud wrote:Even suggesting it seems like it would hurt the F-35 politically.


Apples and oranges. (Of course the basement dweller crowd is all a twitter. I hope Copp thinks that means Australia still has a chance to get F-22s. :lmao: )

Best Fighter for Canada has been mentioning it. It's funny though, as they claimed the F-35 range was too low, and the cost was too high... but some of them want Raptors. :doh:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 20:47
by sprstdlyscottsmn
:doh: :bang:

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 21:06
by neurotech
sferrin wrote:
playloud wrote:Even suggesting it seems like it would hurt the F-35 politically.


Apples and oranges. (Of course the basement dweller crowd is all a twitter. I hope Copp thinks that means Australia still has a chance to get F-22s. :lmao: )

I didn't know Australia had a budget surplus to afford $250m jet fighters. The F-22 at the time was the worlds most expensive jet fighter in production. The "basement dweller" crowd conveniently forget that the reason for the F-22s increase in operational capability and availability is because of upgrades based on the F-35 and F/A-18E/F programs.

The F-22 Common Integrated Processor (CIP) upgrade in Block 30+ aircraft, is closer to the F-35 ICP (using PowerPC processors etc.), and parts of the mission software was backported from the F-35. The F-22 production line could not have been maintained while the F-35 mission avionics is developed.

The newer RAM coatings on the F-22 that significantly reduced the maintenance required were developed for the Super Hornet.

The improvements in production line technology, sensors and mission systems, pretty much dictates the F-22 would have to be redesigned into a 5.5th gen derivative, just for affordability.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 21:36
by charlielima223
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -f-424404/

as much as I would like to see more Raptors... I am not holding my breath nor am I taking it serious.

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 20 Apr 2016, 23:53
by cosmicdwarf
playloud wrote:
sferrin wrote:
playloud wrote:Even suggesting it seems like it would hurt the F-35 politically.


Apples and oranges. (Of course the basement dweller crowd is all a twitter. I hope Copp thinks that means Australia still has a chance to get F-22s. :lmao: )

Best Fighter for Canada has been mentioning it. It's funny though, as they claimed the F-35 range was too low, and the cost was too high... but some of them want Raptors. :doh:

Most of them are enamoured with air to air and forget Canada needs something that can effectively drop bombs. In fact being enamoured with air to air seems to be common, unless its the A-10.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2016, 02:34
by madrat
Its a conspiracy of bad actors trying to sink the F-35. They did enough damage with extra Super Hornet and Growler purchases, money better spent across the board on force maintenance. Now they want to weigh LM's management down with a golden carrot...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2016, 03:28
by cosmicdwarf
madrat wrote:Its a conspiracy of bad actors trying to sink the F-35. They did enough damage with extra Super Hornet and Growler purchases, money better spent across the board on force maintenance. Now they want to weigh LM's management down with a golden carrot...

It's more likely to kill the 6th gen fighter than the F-35.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2016, 03:33
by KamenRiderBlade
I hope the right people steer this non-sense into funding for the 6th gen fighter.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2016, 04:40
by neurotech
madrat wrote:Its a conspiracy of bad actors trying to sink the F-35. They did enough damage with extra Super Hornet and Growler purchases, money better spent across the board on force maintenance. Now they want to weigh LM's management down with a golden carrot...

The extra Super Hornets and Growlers are about keeping the production line open, and competition in the fighter market. Even though funding may be "better spent on force maintenance ", buying more Super Hornets and Growlers is necessary.

If Boeing stopped producing fighters, that will reduce cost pressure on LM? Unlikely.

If ULA and the previous lack of competition in the EELV program is any indication, the F-35 production costs will mysteriously increase.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 21 Apr 2016, 09:21
by hornetfinn
cosmicdwarf wrote:
madrat wrote:Its a conspiracy of bad actors trying to sink the F-35. They did enough damage with extra Super Hornet and Growler purchases, money better spent across the board on force maintenance. Now they want to weigh LM's management down with a golden carrot...

It's more likely to kill the 6th gen fighter than the F-35.


I think you are right. F-35 is the big thing now and for some time. I see F-22s being used until about 2050-60 and then be replaced with something like 6th gen fighter. Of course F-22s would need SLEP to do that. I actually think that there is so much untapped potential in 5th gen systems that it might take a suprisingly long time before we move on to 6th gen systems. I also think that going to 6th gen will be much tougher than now predicted.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 22 Apr 2016, 15:38
by les_paul59
Does anyone think Trump might politicize restarting f-22 production like Romney did in 2012?

He's always saying "we are going to buy the military equipment that the generals want"
Although I'm not sure the USAF actually wants more raptors like they might have 5 years ago.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2016, 04:26
by tincansailor
les_paul59 wrote:Does anyone think Trump might politicize restarting f-22 production like Romney did in 2012?

He's always saying "we are going to buy the military equipment that the generals want"
Although I'm not sure the USAF actually wants more raptors like they might have 5 years ago.


I don't know if Trump would want to boost the F-22. He's not bright enough to get ideas like that on his own. The cost would scare him off the idea. I do fear he would go after the F-35 because he's read media reports saying it's not as good as Legacy fights. He was bring it up on the campaign trail for weeks. Once he gets an idea in his head it could become an obsession. Saving money by cutting F-35 numbers could become a policy. He could keep the program in LRP thinking it would save money.

As for the F-22 I think the USAF wanted enough planes to form 10 squadrons. With 24 planes in a squadron, with 4 spares you would need 280 F-22's. With a training squadron, and one for testing that's 336, with a few spares say 350. If we'd sold some to Japan, Australia, and Israel we might have built 500. I don't know if they could have gotten enough of those out of production chips for that many computer cores. Does anyone think we could have built that many without upgrading the computer cores, along with many other upgrades?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2016, 18:06
by les_paul59
I'm honestly not worried about trump or the f-35, he polls so poorly with women and minorities that it would be stunning if he won the general election. The F-35 is too far along even for a personality like Trump to stop.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2016, 19:02
by sferrin
les_paul59 wrote:I'm honestly not worried about trump or the f-35, he polls so poorly with women and minorities that it would be stunning if he won the general election. The F-35 is too far along even for a personality like Trump to stop.


Even if he won he's smart enough to know what he doesn't know.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 23 Apr 2016, 21:22
by charlielima223
les_paul59 wrote:I'm honestly not worried about trump or the f-35, he polls so poorly with women and minorities that it would be stunning if he won the general election. The F-35 is too far along even for a personality like Trump to stop.


In my own honest opinion... anyone who is giving serious thought or intend to vote for him has an IQ level on par with pocket lint.

I don't believe there is a program that is ever too large to stop now especially with modern media and access. I look to the F-22 as an example of a program that was indeed a very large nationwide effort (contractors and sub-contracts in 45 states if I remember correctly). It was at FRP very close to FOC and then the ax came down.

Image

The last thing I want to see is a short fall in numbers of F-35s and than people... the very same who cried for its end... will bitch that we don't have enough.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 15:12
by XanderCrews
In the great USAF vs Robert Gates fight, Gates is looking rather foolish as time goes on.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 15:13
by XanderCrews
les_paul59 wrote:I'm honestly not worried about trump or the f-35, he polls so poorly with women and minorities that it would be stunning if he won the general election. The F-35 is too far along even for a personality like Trump to stop.


Stop it? no way! he would find a way to keep it going and make Canada pay for the whole thing LOL

Re: restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 15:16
by XanderCrews
playloud wrote:Best Fighter for Canada has been mentioning it. It's funny though, as they claimed the F-35 range was too low, and the cost was too high... but some of them want Raptors. :doh:


Either way its a fifth Generation choice...

Notice the USAF isn't talking gripens or super hornets BF4C ?? :lmao:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 15:32
by fbw
les_paul59 wrote:.

As for the F-22 I think the USAF wanted enough planes to form 10 squadrons. With 24 planes in a squadron, with 4 spares you would need 280 F-22's. With a training squadron, and one for testing that's 336, with a few spares say 350. If we'd sold some to Japan, Australia, and Israel we might have built 500. I don't know if they could have gotten enough of those out of production chips for that many computer cores. Does anyone think we could have built that many without upgrading the computer cores, along with many other upgrades?


The USAF had requested 381 F-22 to populate ten squadrons. That's 24 PAI per squadron + BAI+ training+ weapons and test aircraft+ attrition airframes. The rule of thumb is roughly 60% of the inventory are combat coded. Last time the numbers were available, there were 123 PAI F-22 between active duty and national guard squadrons.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 16:44
by quicksilver
How soon we forget...

F22 was a nightmare of a program. I wont take everyone through the links -- you can google them yourself, but for example -- anyone remember the minor international dateline problem?

All of these restart ideas are nonsense -- prohibitive for so many reasons -- time, big NRE for the all new stuff you think you can just 'tweak' or import from F-35 (note the eye roll), update the engines, DMS for the stuff you retain, a full test slate, restart at zero for manufacturing learning curve (and a big URF for a small production run as a result), and not exportable so you cant realize any economies of scale. Betcha the CPFH and O&S would be special too.

:roll:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 16:52
by sferrin
quicksilver wrote:How soon we forget...

F22 was a nightmare of a program. I wont take everyone through the links -- you can google them yourself, but for example -- anyone remember the minor international dateline problem?


Judas. That was like a ten minute software fix. :roll: By that measure EVERY program is a "nightmare of a program". Newsflash: Almost every program has issues, and the more groundbreaking it is the more it has. Because, you know, it's harder.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 19:23
by KamenRiderBlade
sferrin wrote:
quicksilver wrote:How soon we forget...

F22 was a nightmare of a program. I wont take everyone through the links -- you can google them yourself, but for example -- anyone remember the minor international dateline problem?


Judas. That was like a ten minute software fix. :roll: By that measure EVERY program is a "nightmare of a program". Newsflash: Almost every program has issues, and the more groundbreaking it is the more it has. Because, you know, it's harder.

And because you're treading in unexplored territory where there is no existing answer or model to copy from.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 19:26
by durahawk
quicksilver wrote: Restart at zero for manufacturing learning curve


Actually, the F-22 is probably one of the best preserved lines in history:
A total of more than 30,000 jigs, fixtures and other "tooling" used to build the plane are being logged into a database and tucked into containers, some custom built, for long-term storage at Sierra Army Depot, Herlong, California.

The Sierra depot's high desert climate, low humidity and mild temperatures, are optimal for systems that might be needed to build components to support the fleet, or perhaps one day resume production.

Lockheed is under Air Force contract also to preserve the shop-floor know-how used to manufacture the fighter. It is accomplishing this through a video library of "smart books," DVDs designed to capture such things as how to hold a tool for best results.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-fighter-usa-lockheed-idUSTRE7BC09T20111213

This is of course is just Lockheed though, and there probably are thousands of suppliers who made parts for the F-22 and F119 engine. Many of these suppliers may continue to produce spares or a shared part with the F-35/F135, but there is likely an equivalent number who have shut down entirely. The primary goal of the Air Force in preserving the Lockheed tooling was to increase sustainment capability and decrease cost. I don't see the F-22 ever returning production unless World War III breaks out and we are in desperate need for fighters. I think at this point, the money that would be spent on an additional batch of Raptors would be better spent on either buying more F-35's or R&D on a sixth gen.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 19:53
by sferrin
durahawk wrote:
quicksilver wrote: Restart at zero for manufacturing learning curve


Actually, the F-22 is probably one of the best preserved lines in history:
A total of more than 30,000 jigs, fixtures and other "tooling" used to build the plane are being logged into a database and tucked into containers, some custom built, for long-term storage at Sierra Army Depot, Herlong, California.

The Sierra depot's high desert climate, low humidity and mild temperatures, are optimal for systems that might be needed to build components to support the fleet, or perhaps one day resume production.

Lockheed is under Air Force contract also to preserve the shop-floor know-how used to manufacture the fighter. It is accomplishing this through a video library of "smart books," DVDs designed to capture such things as how to hold a tool for best results.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-fighter-usa-lockheed-idUSTRE7BC09T20111213

This is of course is just Lockheed though, and there probably are thousands of suppliers who made parts for the F-22 and F119 engine. Many of these suppliers may continue to produce spares or a shared part with the F-35/F135, but there is likely an equivalent number who have shut down entirely. The primary goal of the Air Force in preserving the Lockheed tooling was to increase sustainment capability and decrease cost. I don't see the F-22 ever returning production unless World War III breaks out and we are in desperate need for fighters. I think at this point, the money that would be spent on an additional batch of Raptors would be better spent on either buying more F-35's or R&D on a sixth gen.


WWIII would be over before they could even order the new challenge coins. Even if the tooling and documentation were stored perfectly, the people who knew how to use it all are moved onto other programs. It would be easier than starting from a blank slate (probably) but it wouldn't be a slam dunk by any means. Then there's capacity. With the F-35, 787, 777X, B-21, and others coming on line shortly available capacity is going to get scarce.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 20:17
by KamenRiderBlade
With the amount of things needed to be done to bring the F-22 up to speed.

It'd almost be easier to make a 6th gen platform that was based off of 5th gen technology with room to grow and leave it at that.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 21:02
by neurotech
XanderCrews wrote:In the great USAF vs Robert Gates fight, Gates is looking rather foolish as time goes on.

I would disagree. The F-35 avionics was not mature enough to leverage the JSF program to benefit the F-22 significantly, and the budget wasn't there to keep the F-22 production line open while they figure it out.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't believe Sec. Gates was anti-F-22, but more concerned about the costs of the program with an already constrained budget. Due to some stupid choices with regard to F-22 avionics made well before he was SECDEF, the avionics became ancient and difficult to cheaply upgrade. Knowing that the F-22 didn't have the A/G capability for current operations anytime soon, he had to cut the program.

My understanding was that when Sec. Gates asked about extending F-22 production, the DMS (Diminishing Manufacturing Sources) costs were excessively high, and re-tooling the F-22 production line for efficiency (based on F-35 innovations) was too expensive. If the various contractors involved has been able to reduce costs things might have been different.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 22:11
by durahawk
neurotech wrote: Due to some stupid choices with regard to F-22 avionics made well before he was SECDEF, the avionics became ancient and difficult to cheaply upgrade.


ADA boy!

Weapons systems live and die by the requirements that constrain their designs. The recent push towards industry standards and commercial off the shelf (COTS) items was a long time in coming.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 23:19
by quicksilver
sferrin wrote:
quicksilver wrote:How soon we forget...

F22 was a nightmare of a program. I wont take everyone through the links -- you can google them yourself, but for example -- anyone remember the minor international dateline problem?


Judas. That was like a ten minute software fix. :roll: By that measure EVERY program is a "nightmare of a program". Newsflash: Almost every program has issues, and the more groundbreaking it is the more it has. Because, you know, it's harder.


LOL.

Read what I said -- that was but one example. Try for yourself; Google "F-22 problems".

But dont believe me -- Im just another internet voice. Read what responsible analysts like Todd Harrison at CSBA think about the matter.

http://www.defenseone.com/technology/20 ... ke/127729/

Mark my words -- if the USAF doesnt cease trying to save face with F-22 mythology, they're going to dither around and truncate/death spiral another program and put themsleves in an unrecoverable place for recap. F-15s and F-16s arent good enough any more if the other guys can actually shoot back, and they cant get to the numbers they need for recap buying $200M F-22s.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 23:31
by quicksilver
"Actually, the F-22 is probably one of the best preserved lines in history" -- dh

Recommend you do some research on 'production learning curve'. In this case, it's what happens after you start again -- after all the tooling is in place, you've hired the skilled labor you need, you've got a fully functional supply chain, and you're producing stuff again. Also applies at smaller scale with each of the subs.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2016, 23:33
by quicksilver
neurotech wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:In the great USAF vs Robert Gates fight, Gates is looking rather foolish as time goes on.

I would disagree. The F-35 avionics was not mature enough to leverage the JSF program to benefit the F-22 significantly, and the budget wasn't there to keep the F-22 production line open while they figure it out.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't believe Sec. Gates was anti-F-22, but more concerned about the costs of the program with an already constrained budget. Due to some stupid choices with regard to F-22 avionics made well before he was SECDEF, the avionics became ancient and difficult to cheaply upgrade. Knowing that the F-22 didn't have the A/G capability for current operations anytime soon, he had to cut the program.

My understanding was that when Sec. Gates asked about extending F-22 production, the DMS (Diminishing Manufacturing Sources) costs were excessively high, and re-tooling the F-22 production line for efficiency (based on F-35 innovations) was too expensive. If the various contractors involved has been able to reduce costs things might have been different.


x2

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 00:03
by durahawk
quicksilver wrote:"Actually, the F-22 is probably one of the best preserved lines in history" -- dh

Recommend you do some research on 'production learning curve'. In this case, it's what happens after you start again -- after all the tooling is in place, you've hired the skilled labor you need, you've got a fully functional supply chain, and you're producing stuff again. Also applies at smaller scale with each of the subs.


No need. I live it daily at my current gig, which I why I think those calling for the F-22 to be put back into production are completely unrealistic, especially with the impending FRP ramp with JSF. My point was that in the case of the F-22, the Air Force did go out of there way to capture the "tribal knowledge", something that the aerospace industry as a whole can do better at.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 00:20
by popcorn
All the stuff in storage should be more useful for a future Raptor SLEP...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 01:50
by mrigdon
We'll see what the Air Force says when they report to the Committee, but it may be a lot harder to get everything up and running again than what outsiders think.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/raptor-resurrected-what-will-it-take-restart-f-22-fighter-15862

Haven't seen this posted here and the source is obviously off the record, but if this is true, maybe the Air Force and Lockheed didn't do everything possible to preserve the tooling and knowledge.

In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue has not been completely resolved. The bottom line is that even if the Air Force wanted to, it may not be physically possible to restart the line—at least not without a huge additional investment in time and money.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 13:34
by durahawk
mrigdon wrote:
In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue has not been completely resolved. The bottom line is that even if the Air Force wanted to, it may not be physically possible to restart the line—at least not without a huge additional investment in time and money.


IF this is true, it would seem like this would be a major breach of contract if indeed Lockheed's fault. The fact we haven't heard squat about this inclines me to believe DoD thinks it lost the tooling internally after receipt.. something that happens way more often than it should.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 20:24
by les_paul59
Personally I would like to just get to the point where the raptors have a decent helmet, full link 16 and a 5th to 5th datalink. Treat them like the silver bullet squad that they are and get them properly upgraded.

I'm assuming that by the early 2020's this will all be accomplished.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 25 Apr 2016, 22:00
by KamenRiderBlade
durahawk wrote:IF this is true, it would seem like this would be a major breach of contract if indeed Lockheed's fault. The fact we haven't heard squat about this inclines me to believe DoD thinks it lost the tooling internally after receipt.. something that happens way more often than it should.

Why would losing tooling happen way more often?

How hard is it to keep a secure warehouse locked down?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 13:10
by cosmicdwarf
les_paul59 wrote:Does anyone think Trump might politicize restarting f-22 production like Romney did in 2012?

He's always saying "we are going to buy the military equipment that the generals want"
Although I'm not sure the USAF actually wants more raptors like they might have 5 years ago.

The Generals don't want the F-22 at this point, they want the 6th gen fighter.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 13:48
by mixelflick
les_paul59 wrote:Personally I would like to just get to the point where the raptors have a decent helmet, full link 16 and a 5th to 5th datalink. Treat them like the silver bullet squad that they are and get them properly upgraded.

I'm assuming that by the early 2020's this will all be accomplished.


^^^THIS^^^

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 14:29
by durahawk
KamenRiderBlade wrote:
durahawk wrote:IF this is true, it would seem like this would be a major breach of contract if indeed Lockheed's fault. The fact we haven't heard squat about this inclines me to believe DoD thinks it lost the tooling internally after receipt.. something that happens way more often than it should.

Why would losing tooling happen way more often?

How hard is it to keep a secure warehouse locked down?


It's less nefarious than your probably thinking. The usual scenario goes that something like this: depot lends the tooling to base X, and rather than sending it back to depot when there finished with with it they send it to base Y because by God they need it ASAP so depot loses control over who has it from that point forward. Several years ago one of the existing A-10 gun support drill fixtures was lost in this manner, it was eventually recovered, but it caused some supportability headaches operating off of only one in the interim. Depot support teams will bring the tooling along with them wherever possible, but some of the larger fixtures require pre placement in advance of the team arriving.

I've heard that Lockheed so closely guards the wing master gauge for the F-16 that they basically have an employee who accompanies the tool wherever it goes and doesn't let it out of his sight.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 16:18
by KamenRiderBlade
durahawk wrote:I've heard that Lockheed so closely guards the wing master gauge for the F-16 that they basically have an employee who accompanies the tool wherever it goes and doesn't let it out of his sight.

That sounds very sensible to me for something that important.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 18:07
by accessdenied
cosmicdwarf wrote:
les_paul59 wrote:Does anyone think Trump might politicize restarting f-22 production like Romney did in 2012?

He's always saying "we are going to buy the military equipment that the generals want"
Although I'm not sure the USAF actually wants more raptors like they might have 5 years ago.

The Generals don't want the F-22 at this point, they want the 6th gen fighter.


And for which General(s) do you claim to be speaking for?
I forgot, the USAF Generals don't want the F-22 restarted, but 'they' want to purchase 72 new build F-15s.
I also forgot, the US can't produce an existing airplane while also doing work on a 6th gen A/C.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 18:26
by cosmicdwarf
accessdenied wrote:
cosmicdwarf wrote:
les_paul59 wrote:Does anyone think Trump might politicize restarting f-22 production like Romney did in 2012?

He's always saying "we are going to buy the military equipment that the generals want"
Although I'm not sure the USAF actually wants more raptors like they might have 5 years ago.

The Generals don't want the F-22 at this point, they want the 6th gen fighter.


And for which General(s) do you claim to be speaking for?
I forgot, the USAF Generals don't want the F-22 restarted, but 'they' want to purchase 72 new build F-15s.
I also forgot, the US can't produce an existing airplane while also doing work on a 6th gen A/C.

Those would be the ones in charge of the air force that don't want to fund this at the expense of the 6th gen fighter since the money to restart the F-22 would need to come from somewhere. If Congress wants to fund this without lowering the funding for anything else I'm sure the Generals would jump at it.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 19:05
by neurotech
cosmicdwarf wrote:
accessdenied wrote:
cosmicdwarf wrote:And for which General(s) do you claim to be speaking for?
I forgot, the USAF Generals don't want the F-22 restarted, but 'they' want to purchase 72 new build F-15s.
I also forgot, the US can't produce an existing airplane while also doing work on a 6th gen A/C.

Those would be the ones in charge of the air force that don't want to fund this at the expense of the 6th gen fighter since the money to restart the F-22 would need to come from somewhere. If Congress wants to fund this without lowering the funding for anything else I'm sure the Generals would jump at it.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

The idea of buying 72 new F-15s isn't as insane as it sounds. A new build F-15SA is a far more advanced fighter than the F-15C that left the factory in 1985, and more advanced than the F-15E that left the factory in 2001.

The R&D cost to the USAF of the 72 F-15 "advanced" jets would be minimal, because its mainly been paid by other programs (eg. APG-82 radar has high commonality with APG-79 ) and our allies F-15 purchases. Restarting F-22 production wouldn't have that advantage. The USAF already has F-15 training and logistics pipelines.

I'm not saying that the USAF buying 72 F-15s is a good idea, just that its not as insane as it sounds.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 19:30
by cosmicdwarf
neurotech wrote:The idea of buying 72 new F-15s isn't as insane as it sounds. A new build F-15SA is a far more advanced fighter than the F-15C that left the factory in 1985, and more advanced than the F-15E that left the factory in 2001.

The R&D cost to the USAF of the 72 F-15 "advanced" jets would be minimal, because its mainly been paid by other programs (eg. APG-82 radar has high commonality with APG-79 ) and our allies F-15 purchases. Restarting F-22 production wouldn't have that advantage. The USAF already has F-15 training and logistics pipelines.

I'm not saying that the USAF buying 72 F-15s is a good idea, just that its not as insane as it sounds.


Mine was more on the F-22.

As much as the idea of new F-15s sounds interesting for the USAF, I think they'd rather get more F-35As. And there's the question on if they'd want to make the modifications to what is the F-15E airframe to make it more like the the F-15C.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 20:08
by southernphantom
I think that purchasing 72 new F-15s is a hell of a lot more reasonable than restarting the F-22 line. As nice as the latter would be, it's impractical to say the least. New F-15s would make sense as far as a hedge against any additional delays of JSF.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 20:56
by accessdenied
southernphantom wrote:I think that purchasing 72 new F-15s is a hell of a lot more reasonable than restarting the F-22 line. As nice as the latter would be, it's impractical to say the least. New F-15s would make sense as far as a hedge against any additional delays of JSF.


The US really down-f*cked itself terminating the F-22 at barely 180 production copies if it now how to turn back the clock and buy a plane from the 1970s instead of a plane from just a couple of years ago. Fine go ahead and waste my money on 72 aluminum bullseyes........... then when there is another delay buy another 100... let's keep building up the USAF out of crap that can't survive.

It would be a wise and prudent decision to put the 22 back into production now before we start building F-15s by the hundreds again.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 21:22
by neurotech
accessdenied wrote:
southernphantom wrote:I think that purchasing 72 new F-15s is a hell of a lot more reasonable than restarting the F-22 line. As nice as the latter would be, it's impractical to say the least. New F-15s would make sense as far as a hedge against any additional delays of JSF.


The US really down-f*cked itself terminating the F-22 at barely 180 production copies if it now how to turn back the clock and buy a plane from the 1970s instead of a plane from just a couple of years ago. Fine go ahead and waste my money on 72 aluminum bullseyes........... then when there is another delay buy another 100... let's keep building up the USAF out of crap that can't survive.

It would be a wise and prudent decision to put the 22 back into production now before we start building F-15s by the hundreds again.

Calling the F-15SA series a 1970s jet is disingenuous at best.

The F-22 is a jet designed in the 80s, with the first real production jets delivered in 2000 and entering service in 2005, that still had 1980s avionics in them. Its keeping the 1980s avionics in a 2005 jet that f**ked things up.

BTW The F-15 is the only jet that shot down bandits (Iranian F-4s) that came off the same production line.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 21:55
by mixelflick
F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 26 Apr 2016, 23:43
by sprstdlyscottsmn
mixelflick wrote:F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...

IIRC it was programmed in ADA, so....

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 00:07
by neurotech
mixelflick wrote:F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...

I'm not 100% certain of the current update status, but in 2005 when the jets entered service this was the case.
F-22 avionics designers rely on obsolescent electronics, but plan for future upgrades
May 1, 2001

By J.R. Wilson
The U.S. Air Force's new F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter is finally preparing to move into production after more than a decade of development. In the process its avionics architecture has passed through at least three cycles of obsolescence and relies on an Intel microprocessor — the i960MX — that went out of production four years ago.

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... rades.html

My point was mainly referring to the use of Intel i960MX processors in the F-22 avionics suite that resulted in little compatibility with the other airframes. Subsequent upgrades have introduced the PowerPC chips into the F-22, as used on other aircraft like the F/A-18 and F-35. Its quite probable they are using FPGAs to replace the physical i960 chips, but legacy software compatibility limits the upgrade options. These issues could have been solved a decade ago with proper investment by the USAF.

The real F-22 CIP PowerPC hardware upgrade was deferred to block 30, as I recall. There is considerable legacy software development that is unique to the F-22 and not easily migrated to other platforms. This will likely be the case unless the jet receives a major avionics refresh.

The idea that new F-15 "Advanced" jets are 1970s technology, and the F-22 represents leading edge avionics technology is largely incorrect. The F-22 avionics has the capabilities it has due to scaling out to more physical boards whereas the F-35 avionics is physically a newer generation than practically anything else flying.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 01:00
by KamenRiderBlade
Imagine what could the F-22 do if they adapted their code to the IBM POWER9 architecture that's coming out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_POWER ... ors#POWER9

For the first time, a Fighter plane would use a contemporary Processor instead of a old one with orders of magnitude faster processing power.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 02:49
by accessdenied
neurotech wrote:
mixelflick wrote:F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...

I'm not 100% certain of the current update status, but in 2005 when the jets entered service this was the case.
F-22 avionics designers rely on obsolescent electronics, but plan for future upgrades
May 1, 2001

By J.R. Wilson
The U.S. Air Force's new F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter is finally preparing to move into production after more than a decade of development. In the process its avionics architecture has passed through at least three cycles of obsolescence and relies on an Intel microprocessor — the i960MX — that went out of production four years ago.

http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... rades.html

My point was mainly referring to the use of Intel i960MX processors in the F-22 avionics suite that resulted in little compatibility with the other airframes. Subsequent upgrades have introduced the PowerPC chips into the F-22, as used on other aircraft like the F/A-18 and F-35. Its quite probable they are using FPGAs to replace the physical i960 chips, but legacy software compatibility limits the upgrade options. These issues could have been solved a decade ago with proper investment by the USAF.

The real F-22 CIP PowerPC hardware upgrade was deferred to block 30, as I recall. There is considerable legacy software development that is unique to the F-22 and not easily migrated to other platforms. This will likely be the case unless the jet receives a major avionics refresh.

The idea that new F-15 "Advanced" jets are 1970s technology, and the F-22 represents leading edge avionics technology is largely incorrect. The F-22 avionics has the capabilities it has due to scaling out to more physical boards whereas the F-35 avionics is physically a newer generation than practically anything else flying.


The f-15, even with new avionics, is irrelevant and cannot survive against the new fighters now flying in China and Russia. They cannot survive and persist in a modern battlespace. Certainly if the US took delivery tomorrow of 72 new build eagles, in another 8 years they will be even more irrelevant.

New avionics or not, they are brimming with 1970s signatures and 1970s performance curves... Need to fitted with external fuel and munitions further degrading their performance. They would not survive without 22s escorting them and other nameless assets providing targeting info. In a2a they would die unless there were 22s flying ahead of them, unseen. Break out your bell bottoms and REO Speedwagon albums ladies and gentlemen. Wait that may be a little harsh.... Bust out your Quiet Riot tapes and hair spray.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:19
by jetblast16
'The f-15, even with new avionics, is irrelevant and cannot survive against the new fighters now flying in China and Russia.'

Don't be so sure of that. A well-trained pilot with the latest AESA (APG-63v3) and BVR missile, make for a deadly adversary. The Eagle can hold its own, even against some of the latest threats. It is a stick and rudder plane, but a good pilot makes all the difference.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:19
by talkitron
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:IIRC it was programmed in ADA, so....


It has been mentioned here that there is nothing wrong with Ada. Ada first appeared in 1980, eights years after C and only three before C++.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_%28pr ... anguage%29

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:22
by talkitron
jetblast16 wrote:Don't be so sure of that. A well-trained pilot with the latest AESA (APG-63v3) and BVR missile, make for a deadly adversary. The Eagle can hold its own, even against some of the latest threats. It is a stick and rudder plane, but a good pilot makes all the difference.


It is reasonable to speculate that the Eagle would not be survivable in BVR against the stealth aircraft in development in China and Russia, simply because the Eagle is not a stealth aircraft itself.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:25
by jetblast16
The only thing "wrong" with ADA, is that its syntax is not like C or C++. This made it hard for programmers who are accustomed to those languages to learn (you're looking at one). What matters ultimately, is the quality of the compilers and any optimizers that produce machine instructions. ADA is well-known to have some industrial-strength compilers that are capable of making tight machine instructions, for fast execution on target hardware.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:28
by jetblast16
'in development in China and Russia' That remains to be seen. The Eagle is old but to say it is defenseless is inaccurate.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2016, 03:51
by cosmicdwarf
I honestly don't think that more F-15s are on the table overall. It would be cheaper and more economically viable than restarting the F-22 line, but I'm fairly sure the USAF wants to spend it's money on a more modern design than the F-22. Air combat requirements have probably changed since the 80s when the F-22 was started.

At this point its a matter of what's best for long term, not for the political points scored for looking at restarting what was considered a horrible jet but now everyone loves.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 07:03
by rented
Long time lurker here, just decided to post because I also have an appreciation of IT and software development.

The age or the processor design and the language used is of less importance than the availability of the hardware, and availability of programmers to work with the language.
Another example of hardware being used in a recent design which appears to be old is the 486 chip used in the Ka-50. However, up until the last few years, this chip design was still on sale for embedded systems, and has in reality, plenty of power to run the Ka-50 avionics when it doesn't have to deal with a fairly fat general purpose operating system sitting on top of it (ie: Windows).
I am not terribly familiar with the F-22 avionics shenanigans, but it would appear that they went with a custom designed hardware package that didn't do so well when the production run was scaled down, and was then difficult to support and upgrade.

I have never used Ada, but as I understand it one of the major attractions for its use in military and commercial applications is (according to a lecturer I had for software design) is that it has compilers that have been extensively mathematically proven in some aspect. However, as was pointed out by jetblast, finding and retaining programmers is difficult because it is a difficult language to actually find in the industry.

jetblast16 wrote:The only thing "wrong" with ADA, is that its syntax is not like C or C++. This made it hard for programmers who are accustomed to those languages to learn (you're looking at one). What matters ultimately, is the quality of the compilers and any optimizers that produce machine instructions. ADA is well-known to have some industrial-strength compilers that are capable of making tight machine instructions, for fast execution on target hardware.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 12:56
by mixelflick
talkitron wrote:
jetblast16 wrote:Don't be so sure of that. A well-trained pilot with the latest AESA (APG-63v3) and BVR missile, make for a deadly adversary. The Eagle can hold its own, even against some of the latest threats. It is a stick and rudder plane, but a good pilot makes all the difference.


It is reasonable to speculate that the Eagle would not be survivable in BVR against the stealth aircraft in development in China and Russia, simply because the Eagle is not a stealth aircraft itself.


Would be sweet if an F-15 waxes a SU-35 Flanker before its all over... :)

You're probably right about it not being survivable in BVR against newer LO aircraft being developed elsewhere.But they are LO, not VLO and we know the Eagle has the most powerful radar flying. There's also talk of using an IRST pod to find stealth aircraft, so who knows...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 15:06
by accessdenied
cosmicdwarf wrote:I honestly don't think that more F-15s are on the table overall. It would be cheaper and more economically viable than restarting the F-22 line, but I'm fairly sure the USAF wants to spend it's money on a more modern design than the F-22. Air combat requirements have probably changed since the 80s when the F-22 was started.

At this point its a matter of what's best for long term, not for the political points scored for looking at restarting what was considered a horrible jet but now everyone loves.


The F-22 just entered service a mere decade ago. Are you saying all the work done on it during the 90s is now irrelevant? Because that is exactly what you are saying. The F-22s capabilities are irrelevant to today's modern battle space? You do remember the ATF design requirements were for the AC to be relevant for decades, not 5-10 years like previous AC.

So what is best for the long term is what matters? Then a 44 year old airframe with new radar, that has parity the Russian Flankers and their derivatives is better than an AC that will club them "like baby seals" A 44 year old airframe that will die in every engagement with the new stuff coming from Russian and China makes more sense than the F-22? Honestly?

The US is quite capable of building another 200 F-22s and chewing it's F-35 flavored gum at the same time. And if the F-35 fails we have the insurance of the F-22 production to maintain air superiority. Continued F-15 production is guarantied to make the USAF irrelevant in the today's and tomorrow's battles, unless you're talking about a skirmish with Belize or Argentina.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 15:16
by uclass
mixelflick wrote:
talkitron wrote:
jetblast16 wrote:Don't be so sure of that. A well-trained pilot with the latest AESA (APG-63v3) and BVR missile, make for a deadly adversary. The Eagle can hold its own, even against some of the latest threats. It is a stick and rudder plane, but a good pilot makes all the difference.


It is reasonable to speculate that the Eagle would not be survivable in BVR against the stealth aircraft in development in China and Russia, simply because the Eagle is not a stealth aircraft itself.


Would be sweet if an F-15 waxes a SU-35 Flanker before its all over... :)

You're probably right about it not being survivable in BVR against newer LO aircraft being developed elsewhere.But they are LO, not VLO and we know the Eagle has the most powerful radar flying. There's also talk of using an IRST pod to find stealth aircraft, so who knows...

And the Eagles are getting new DEWS, which could help nullify LO BVR advantages. I'd definitely like to see more F-22s though.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 17:17
by mixelflick
jetblast16 wrote:'The f-15, even with new avionics, is irrelevant and cannot survive against the new fighters now flying in China and Russia.'

Don't be so sure of that. A well-trained pilot with the latest AESA (APG-63v3) and BVR missile, make for a deadly adversary. The Eagle can hold its own, even against some of the latest threats. It is a stick and rudder plane, but a good pilot makes all the difference.


THIS..

The Eagle air to air guys are among the best in the world. I'm sure they're not resting on their laurels, as the Russians roll out their SU-35's, T-50's etc.. I realize the Eagle may no longer have all the advantages, but their training, new radar, advanced AMRAAM's and especially the 9x level the playing field.

Besides, wouldn't their new AESA's be able to jam a Flanker's radar looking for them?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 17:46
by les_paul59
The F-15C Eagle with the AESA, new DEWS and AMRAAM is most likely a very formidable opponent for any russian jet including the PAK FA, because if it's true that the PAK FA's signature is between (.3-.5) than the eagle will still be able to detect and track the PAK FA before the sukhoi can launch a missile,essentially making it a fair bvr fight in terms of SA. The APG 63 V3 is thought to have maybe the best range of any fighter radar, it has no concern for being LPI because of the eagle's huge RCS.

Concerning kinematic performance, I would give a slight edge to the newer flankers (SU-35) and the PAK FA for sure, but in avionics the upgraded F-15C's will be superior to the Russian jets.

The only wild card is, no one can know for sure how good the Russian electronic attack capability is, we know that the U.S. has the advantage in ESM which aides identification and targeting, but it doesn't seem like the USAF has put too much of an emphasis on electronic attack.

The U.S. just wants to upgrade the f-15's and f-22's, get their full desired number of f-35's and get the 6th gen. train rolling

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 20:03
by accessdenied
les_paul59 wrote:The F-15C Eagle with the AESA, new DEWS and AMRAAM is most likely a very formidable opponent for any russian jet including the PAK FA, because if it's true that the PAK FA's signature is between (.3-.5) than the eagle will still be able to detect and track the PAK FA before the sukhoi can launch a missile,essentially making it a fair bvr fight in terms of SA. The APG 63 V3 is thought to have maybe the best range of any fighter radar, it has no concern for being LPI because of the eagle's huge RCS.

Concerning kinematic performance, I would give a slight edge to the newer flankers (SU-35) and the PAK FA for sure, but in avionics the upgraded F-15C's will be superior to the Russian jets.

The only wild card is, no one can know for sure how good the Russian electronic attack capability is, we know that the U.S. has the advantage in ESM which aides identification and targeting, but it doesn't seem like the USAF has put too much of an emphasis on electronic attack.

The U.S. just wants to upgrade the f-15's and f-22's, get their full desired number of f-35's and get the 6th gen. train rolling


The F-22 was designed to penetrate and persist in hostile airspace, knock down Migs and Sukhois, and return home. Not even the Silent Eagle can do that. Any F-15 that tries that is dead. Signature, speed, fuel are all against the Eagle.

You argument about an F-15 getting first look, first shot, on a PakFa is conjecture - perhaps even wishful thinking. Firstly the Russian has a smaller signature (*you* simply don't know what a production PakFa will be in RCS), and secondly the Russian is launching AAMs from at least M1.6 (at greater range than the Eagle can launch) at something with the RCS of the Empire State building. After the Eagles bleed away all their energy to evade, they are toast. The Eagles also don't have the fuel to persist unless they are using drop tanks which further make things worse for them. Even the conformal tanks have a penalty.

Furthermore, in A2G the advanced F-15 will never -- can never -- penetrate today's battle space. Period.

I have an idea, let's bring back the Phantom's out of mothball. New engines, radar, displays, AMRAAM, and 9X.... Wow! Those new Russians and Chinese are dead meat.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 20:33
by cosmicdwarf
accessdenied wrote:The F-22 just entered service a mere decade ago. Are you saying all the work done on it during the 90s is now irrelevant? Because that is exactly what you are saying.

No, I'm saying that the requirements for an air to air aircraft are different now than they were in the 80s, when the ATF program was started. When the F-22 entered service or how well it did is irrelevant to be being based on air to air requirements in the 80s.

You keep on going back to F-15s, which I'm not even talking about being a good idea so I'll ignore the rest of what you wrote. If there's a short term shortage due to F-15 retirement it will be made up by the F-35 until the 6th en fighter is ready, the later being what the USAF is much more interested in getting at this point than more F-22s.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2016, 20:53
by jetblast16
No one here is arguing that the F-15 is better than a Raptor. PakFa has yet to enter into production and prove itself. I find it strange that Kadena STILL operates Eagles to project power in the Pacific.

'Furthermore, in A2G the advanced F-15 will never -- can never -- penetrate today's battle space. Period.' Then why does Lakenheath operate Mud hens (F-15Es) for USAFE?

'I have an idea, let's bring back the Phantom's out of mothball. New engines, radar, displays, AMRAAM, and 9X.... Wow! Those new Russians and Chinese are dead meat.' - I detect some sarcasm there :wink:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 00:27
by les_paul59
The Pak Fa hasn't impressed me in anyway except for being a sexy bird, check out how the indians feel about the pak fa and the r-77 for that matter....thats why i think the f-15 stands a chance

The F-22 is the best air to air fighter in the world everyone knows that

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 03:25
by KamenRiderBlade
Maybe the Indians should fund the Stealth Eagle

=P

At least get a better ROI than the PAK-FA

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 14:29
by mixelflick
I agree re-starting F-22 production would be a bad idea.

Sure, everyone'd like more Raptors. But at what cost? That's money that we wouldn't have to put toward a 6th gen. The one saving grace in all of this is the delayed entry of PAK FA into service. Looks like it's going to be a long, painful road and that's if the Indian's continue to fund it.

Besides, I rather like the fact it pushes the air force to up the F-35's air to air capability. Lot of if's though: IF air combat truly has evolved to be largely BVR, it should excel handsomely. IF AMRAAM's find their intended targets, etc.. In fact if the F-35 has a weakness it's that: Limited air to air load out. I understand it can only carry 2 AMRAAMs now?

I've also heard it can carry 6 in the future, plus 2 9x's. I only hope those don't compromise it's radar signature too much. If they don't, it'll have the same load out as the Raptor..

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 14:54
by cosmicdwarf
The fun part about the 6th gen and how the USAF wants to proceed is that Lockheed could propose a modified F-22, because they want it to be using as much current technology as possible.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 15:36
by zero-one
I think a lot of people here are against the F-22 restart because of the sheer cost of the program.

However when you think about it, what would be more expensive, an F-22 with upgraded avionics, or a clean sheet 6th gen?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 16:33
by cosmicdwarf
zero-one wrote:I think a lot of people here are against the F-22 restart because of the sheer cost of the program.

However when you think about it, what would be more expensive, an F-22 with upgraded avionics, or a clean sheet 6th gen?

Depends on a lot of factors, like how much is saved with the fact that the only thing you might know is what the airframe looks like.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 17:13
by sferrin
zero-one wrote:I think a lot of people here are against the F-22 restart because of the sheer cost of the program.

However when you think about it, what would be more expensive, an F-22 with upgraded avionics, or a clean sheet 6th gen?


Wrong question. The question is which will remain effective longer. (It's a no-brainer.)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2016, 21:33
by southernphantom
cosmicdwarf wrote:The fun part about the 6th gen and how the USAF wants to proceed is that Lockheed could propose a modified F-22, because they want it to be using as much current technology as possible.


I fully expect an updated F-22 to be in the running for the Air Force 6th-gen program, along with some F-35C variant for the Navy FA-XX. Development and flight test costs could represent a savings over a clean-sheet design.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2016, 00:57
by popcorn
southernphantom wrote:
cosmicdwarf wrote:The fun part about the 6th gen and how the USAF wants to proceed is that Lockheed could propose a modified F-22, because they want it to be using as much current technology as possible.



I fully expect an updated F-22 to be in the running for the Air Force 6th-gen program, along with some F-35C variant for the Navy FA-XX. Development and flight test costs could represent a savings over a clean-sheet design.


A case could be made for the F-35. The productiion line exists and so does the supply chain that feeds it. The jet's architecture was designed to be open from the start to accommodate periodic tech refreshes both H/W and S/W. Can't say the same for the Raptor.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2016, 02:35
by delvo
mixelflick wrote:if the F-35 has a weakness it's that: Limited air to air load out. I understand it can only carry 2 AMRAAMs now?
Two internal while carrying air-to-ground weapons, which is what's controlled by the software that's been approved so far. Once all of the control software is approved, six internal without air-to-ground weapons, with an adapter to hold two on each internal spot where air-to-ground weapons would go; four if you don't use the adapter (just one missile on each built-in hardpoint). (It might seem silly not to use them if you have them, but some services/squadrons might not bother buying them.) Also two external dedicated Sidewinder spots and four heavy-duty external places to put a bunch more of either (eight with current two-for-one adapters). But apparently air patrols today are normally flown with four to six missiles of one kind or another. The external heavy points will probably only get real-world use for air-to-ground weapons and fuel tanks, and the dedicated Sidewinder spots will probably get no use at all.

* * *

If the next new fighter after F-35 doesn't have some new gimmick that changes everything, like stealth and sensor fusion change everything compared to previous planes, then it wouldn't be right to call it "sixth generation". A "generation" can have more than one or two entries in it, and the idea behind the "generations" is to include separate examples of similar technology while separating fundamentally different technologies from each other.

* * *

I'm actually not convinced there will be another fighter after F-35. I'm not one of those people who say fighters will be replaced by drones/robots (and have been calling every "manned" fighter the "last" one since the early 1980s at least), but Russia & China keep canceling their programs to try to put out something that would still be decades behind now even if they didn't cancel, so it's starting to look like they might just disappear from the "competition". And without other more advanced fighters to fight, the USA and Europe just won't see a need to put out anything new in that realm, just ground-strikers and attrition-replacements.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2016, 03:36
by les_paul59
Yea im not convinced the usaf needs more raptors...the pak fa will most likely be a 1 trick pony (flying high and fast) but who knows with the j-20 tbf

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2016, 04:06
by popcorn
Preserving the Industrial Base will be a major driver to building a 6Gen. You need to keep challenglng those design teams to push revolutionary new tech and not just warmed over stuff otherwise they atrophy.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2016, 07:22
by mrigdon
rented wrote:I am not terribly familiar with the F-22 avionics shenanigans, but it would appear that they went with a custom designed hardware package that didn't do so well when the production run was scaled down, and was then difficult to support and upgrade.


Google searches seem to indicate that the F-22 used an i960 chip for processing. Intel has never been a big fan of RISC chips and at some point they stopped migrating i960s to newer processes. I found info elsewhere that claims Intel hoped to sell the i960 for the Comanche helicopter as well, but when that went south, the economics of etching i960 ships on newer processes dropped further. When the F-22 got cancelled, they decided to stop making i960s altogether. In some of my reading, there was a claim that when Intel settled with DEC over patents concerning the various Pentium chips, the i960 was one of the designs that would be discontinued.

Apparently the i960 was as great processor for certain tasks. It just didn't have the right home (if you're not x86, Intel can't make enough money off of you, Itanium anyone?)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 02 May 2016, 17:27
by XanderCrews
accessdenied wrote:
southernphantom wrote:I think that purchasing 72 new F-15s is a hell of a lot more reasonable than restarting the F-22 line. As nice as the latter would be, it's impractical to say the least. New F-15s would make sense as far as a hedge against any additional delays of JSF.


The US really down-f*cked itself terminating the F-22 at barely 180 production copies if it now how to turn back the clock and buy a plane from the 1970s instead of a plane from just a couple of years ago. Fine go ahead and waste my money on 72 aluminum bullseyes........... then when there is another delay buy another 100... let's keep building up the USAF out of crap that can't survive.

It would be a wise and prudent decision to put the 22 back into production now before we start building F-15s by the hundreds again.


180 was never the air forces choice. The USAF impaled itself to get F-22 it cut and curtailed and even retired whole fleets to get more F-22s the USAF boss got fired over it and gates picked a guy that wouldn't give him trouble over it.

Don't blame the air force. That's laughable

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 02 May 2016, 17:35
by jetblast16
'I'm actually not convinced there will be another fighter after F-35' I am. Sixth-generation fighter is coming. The Air force knows that eventually they will have to replace the F-22 with something, be it a single platform or platforms. If the Air force had gotten the 339 jets they wanted, there would be less of a push, at the present time, for such capability.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 05:06
by charlielima223
just some extra reading...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-423298/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

I am pretty sure we can all unanimously agree here that restarting the F-22 production at this point is impossible or very very improbable. Just for "fun" though what do you think it would take to re-open the line if it were indeed possible (militarily, financially, and politically)?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 14:26
by cosmicdwarf
charlielima223 wrote:just some extra reading...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-423298/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

I am pretty sure we can all unanimously agree here that restarting the F-22 production at this point is impossible or very very improbable. Just for "fun" though what do you think it would take to re-open the line if it were indeed possible (militarily, financially, and politically)?

Anything is possible with enough money. Politically generally the will seems to be there, but the will to get the USAF enough money is likely lacking.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 19:37
by accessdenied
cosmicdwarf wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:just some extra reading...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-423298/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

I am pretty sure we can all unanimously agree here that restarting the F-22 production at this point is impossible or very very improbable. Just for "fun" though what do you think it would take to re-open the line if it were indeed possible (militarily, financially, and politically)?

Anything is possible with enough money. Politically generally the will seems to be there, but the will to get the USAF enough money is likely lacking.


Agreed. It's just a matter of money and for the politicians to allocate the funds. This isn't the Tomcat where tooling was destroyed. This isn't the A-10 where the tooling is 40 years old and lost and damaged. The Bone assembly line was reopened. It took money and political will. I'm sure some of the Raptor tooling will need refurbishment or rebuilding, but the bulk majority should be A Ok since it was mandated to go into storage in case it was ever again needed.

the question is: do we wait 20 years for a 6th gen bird? over those 20 years the raptor fleet is going to dwindle away. the F-15 fleet is going to get even older and smaller. Same with the F-16. The USAF will have a handful of F-22s and in theory a lot of F-35s. Or will someone recognize that the F-22 is a proven design that works, and a 6th gen fighter is unproven and risky? It's better to have something that works than gamble on an unknown. In a perfect situation the F-22 would be restarted, +200 built, and work on a 6th gen begins.

I would also like to not see the 6th gen become what the F-22 and F-35 were and are: designed with state of the art technology that needs to be perfected over a very long engineering development cycle lasting years and years, I say use today's off the shelf technology to mitigate risks, costs, and shorten development time.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 20:29
by cosmicdwarf
accessdenied wrote:
cosmicdwarf wrote:
charlielima223 wrote:just some extra reading...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-423298/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 2s-422950/

I am pretty sure we can all unanimously agree here that restarting the F-22 production at this point is impossible or very very improbable. Just for "fun" though what do you think it would take to re-open the line if it were indeed possible (militarily, financially, and politically)?

Anything is possible with enough money. Politically generally the will seems to be there, but the will to get the USAF enough money is likely lacking.


Agreed. It's just a matter of money and for the politicians to allocate the funds. This isn't the Tomcat where tooling was destroyed. This isn't the A-10 where the tooling is 40 years old and lost and damaged. The Bone assembly line was reopened. It took money and political will. I'm sure some of the Raptor tooling will need refurbishment or rebuilding, but the bulk majority should be A Ok since it was mandated to go into storage in case it was ever again needed.

the question is: do we wait 20 years for a 6th gen bird? over those 20 years the raptor fleet is going to dwindle away. the F-15 fleet is going to get even older and smaller. Same with the F-16. The USAF will have a handful of F-22s and in theory a lot of F-35s. Or will someone recognize that the F-22 is a proven design that works, and a 6th gen fighter is unproven and risky? It's better to have something that works than gamble on an unknown. In a perfect situation the F-22 would be restarted, +200 built, and work on a 6th gen begins.

I would also like to not see the 6th gen become what the F-22 and F-35 were and are: designed with state of the art technology that needs to be perfected over a very long engineering development cycle lasting years and years, I say use today's off the shelf technology to mitigate risks, costs, and shorten development time.


It's still an older design that may not fit the future (beyond the expected lifetime of the current F-22 fleet) of air combat. That would be why the USAF would rather spend the money they get on the 6th gen (which is supposed to be what you want to be).

They may even prefer to spend more money on more F-35s over F-22s as well.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 20:40
by vilters
Restarting production? ?
Why?
To fight WHO?
When?
Where?
------
There is NO Who,
no Why,
no When,
no "where"......
-------
And nothing in the first 10-20 years either.
The only thing is that clown in North Korea. But that's a clown, nothing more nothing less.
-------
And Putin???
He barks, but has nothing to bite..... And no money to invest in hardware to stand on.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 20:52
by jetblast16
'but has nothing to bite.....' ? He has enough (nuclear) firepower to knock a large portion of the West back into the Stone Age. Don't underestimate Russian military strength, particularly the capability of its Strategic Forces.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 20:53
by accessdenied
vilters wrote:Restarting production? ?
Why?
To fight WHO?
When?
Where?
------
There is NO Who,
no Why,
no When,
no "where"......
-------
And nothing in the first 10-20 years either.
The only thing is that clown in North Korea. But that's a clown, nothing more nothing less.
-------
And Putin???
He barks, but has nothing to bite..... And no money to invest in hardware to stand on.


How much life.... REAL usable life as a twisting and turning Mach 2 capable fighter, is left in the F-15 fleet? Without limitations placed on them due to metal fatigue?

Honestly, your arguments against the F-22 production are the same arguments that shut the like down prematurely.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 20:55
by jetblast16
'I say use today's off the shelf technology to mitigate risks, costs, and shorten development time' You gotta pay to play. Following this strategy won't push the "state-of-the-art". True, next-gen capability is going to cost.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2016, 21:04
by vilters
Adding up all fighters the "east" has to offer? You end up with??

We already have a 4-5 to one in pure flyable airframe numbers only. (Just counting airframes)

Then add the quality difference, pilot training, organisation and you get what?

Then add up tankers and other support A/C and we can safely say : We are "more" then "more" then safe for the next 30 -50 years.
--------
Then add the declining China economy, add up that Putin has no money left, and all we got left is a Clown in North Korea.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 01:39
by nutshell
jetblast16 wrote:'but has nothing to bite.....' ? He has enough (nuclear) firepower to knock a large portion of the West back into the Stone Age. Don't underestimate Russian military strength, particularly the capability of its Strategic Forces.


Do you remember (or Did you watch) that Putin's interview where he said he'd gladly dismantle all of his nuclear weapons if the US do the same?

If i were to be the Russia's prime minister, i would NEVER EVER be "happy" to get rid of the only thing that instill fear upon my enemies and grant my country the deterrent to keep the Nato at bay.
Unless my nuclear arsenal is rotting, hardly usable, unlikely to detonate.

But fear not, the only thing that would be wiped out from the face of earth in case of nuclear war, is my country, Italy.

Because we're proudly the number one target for Russia's ICBM and nuclear submarines since 1960.

[yeah as absurd as it could be, there are infact more nuclear weapons pointed at us then toward the rest of the west]

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 03:58
by les_paul59
This whole Russia vs. the West business is so overblown...Putin would never take that chance, he isn't a madman people, he just has to support his scumbag allies like Iran, Syria and the like. When you only have a few friends, you have to keep them happy.

The USAF has no real need for more raptors

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 07:41
by zero-one
sferrin wrote:
Wrong question. The question is which will remain effective longer. (It's a no-brainer.)

It is, I think we can all agree here that the current combat coded F-22 is far superior to anything that the enemy will have until at least the 2040 time frame.

Russia and Chain's AFs are still ramping up on late model Flanker buys. this means that within the next 15-25 years their fighter force will still be largely composed of late model Flankers (a.k.a. Raptor food).

Now with a few upgrades like side looking AESA and a dedicated IRST system, which was originally what the F-22 was supposed to have anyway. then you're simply compounding the problems for the majority of RuAF and PLAAF fleet.

I simply can't see how a clean sheet 6th gen design will be just "slightly more expensive" then an upgraded Raptor restart program.

Anyway, below is a good read on how one airforce officer thinks the F-22 restart program can be feasible. Not sure if it has been posted.

Here are three proposals to offset some of the costs associated with restarting the Raptor line. While each has its own degree of difficulty, partial success of any of the propositions is worth the effort. My WAG of a plan has four major components:

Slow F-35A procurement for the USAF and defuse any per-unit price increases by ramping up delivery of F-35As to international customers. Accelerating foreign F-35A deliveries ensures the number of F-35As coming off the Lockheed-Martin production line remain consistent with current projections, preventing a spike in per unit cost that could scare off international customers and put at risk the total USAF purchase of 1,763 F-35A airframes. This would require a great deal of negotiation with our international partners, including requiring them to modify their current spending projections. But with rising tensions in the Pacific and elsewhere, perhaps our allies would welcome a chance to accelerate their own F-35A initial operational capability.

Second, the US should allow export of the F-22B to our closest allies. HASC opened the door for this option when they tasked the Air Force to look at “opportunities for foreign export and partner nation involvement if section 8118 of the Defense Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105-56) prohibiting export of the F-22 were repealed.” In the past, Australia, Japan and Israel were very interested in purchasing the Raptor.

The fighter landscape in each of these nations has changed; Australia and Israel have signed contracts for the F-35, and Japan recently flew its indigenous design for a stealthy 5th Generation fighter. Signing an F-22 sales agreement to any of these nations, especially without impacting current F-35 procurement plans would be extremely difficult. However, success in even one of these nations could help amortize the cost of reopening the line over a greater number of aircraft, keeping per unit costs more reasonable. Additionally, export of the F-22B would allow the US the benefit of achieving cost savings that develop from quantities of scale, even if the US bought a relatively small number of fighters per year.

Third, and most painfully, my plan would require the retirement of the F-15C on a 1:1 basis with F-22Bs reaching operational status. The Eagle is the most successful air superiority fighter in history (104:0 air-to-air kill ratio makes a pretty persuasive argument), and its retirement will be a sad day for thousands inside and outside the active duty Air Force. However, by the time the theoretical F-22B reaches operational status the youngest F-15C airframe will be more than 50 years old, and ready for its retirement from the force. It must be noted that my plan would not allow for premature retirement of the F-15C fleet, these airframes could only be retired as they are replaced by the newest Raptors. This would prevent a further USAF fighter gap, and would provide a ready and trained force to pilot the new F-22s.

The Air Force must treat this acquisition as a total force initiative. Considering the majority of remaining F-15C squadrons are in the Air National Guard (ANG), the 1:1 replacement of the F-15C would send new F-22B airframes directly to the Guard. The ANG should therefore assist with procurement, modernization and sustainment. This would undoubtedly require complicated budget machinations, but the opportunity for new-build 5th generation fighters could be very enticing for the ANG.

Would these three efforts be enough to pay for 194 Raptors, while the Air Force is procuring 80-100 B-21s and 1763 F-35s? Probably not, but that is not a reason to not try. The F-22 is vital to the Air Force’s ability to survive and defeat emerging threats and A2/AD environments for the next two decades (at least). Air Force and DoD leaders, as well as Congress, should make every effort to find the means to reopen the Raptor line and preserve US Air Dominance for decades to com


https://fightersweep.com/5023/case-re-o ... ptor-line/

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 08:19
by jessmo111
Zero I posted that article In a similar thread entitled how to PAY for a F-22B. To say that some here are tired of discussing it would be putting it midly. Maybe its time to let fate and congress decide.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 08:26
by jessmo111
vilters wrote:Adding up all fighters the "east" has to offer? You end up with??

We already have a 4-5 to one in pure flyable airframe numbers only. (Just counting airframes)

Then add the quality difference, pilot training, organisation and you get what?

Then add up tankers and other support A/C and we can safely say : We are "more" then "more" then safe for the next 30 -50 years.
--------
Then add the declining China economy, add up that Putin has no money left, and all we got left is a Clown in North Korea.


Vitters I worry about 2 things:

1. The Chinese advances in stealth.
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-J-XX-Prototype.html



2. Advances in high advanced SAMS

That Bird is NOT a sukkoi

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 08:31
by jessmo111
Its Not a Su-30, but a High value asset killer.
Will it turn and burn with a F-22? No It wont have the power plant.
Will it become a major threat to JSTARS, Tankers, AWACS,?
Yes. And the irony is the F-22 is less equipped than the F-35 at tracking stealth targets.
It doesn't have to get in a furball with F-35s or F-22s. It just has to kill support assets.
A F-22 with IR cheek arrays would be ideal for tracking down leakers, and cruise missile carriers.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 09:54
by zero-one
jessmo111 wrote:Its Not a Su-30, but a High value asset killer.
Will it turn and burn with a F-22? No It wont have the power plant.
Will it become a major threat to JSTARS, Tankers, AWACS,?
Yes. And the irony is the F-22 is less equipped than the F-35 at tracking stealth targets.
It doesn't have to get in a furball with F-35s or F-22s. It just has to kill support assets.
A F-22 with IR cheek arrays would be ideal for tracking down leakers, and cruise missile carriers.


Well the F-22 won't be fighting alone, it will be part of a highly integrated combat cloud. Basically the F-35 will act as the brains while the F-22 will be the brawn.

in the USAF the F-35 will act as sensor nodes creating a clear picture of the battle space, feeding the few F-22 hunter killer teams with valuable S.A. that they cannot collect themselves.

If they see a VLO target, the F-22s have the option to Salvo fire or get close knowing that they have both the missile payload to ripple fire Slammers or the performance should the fight develop into a classic phone booth fight.

The F-35s on the other hand can mop up everything else that the Raptors left behind.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2016, 11:45
by charlielima223
zero-one wrote:Well the F-22 won't be fighting alone, it will be part of a highly integrated combat cloud. Basically the F-35 will act as the brains while the F-22 will be the brawn.

in the USAF the F-35 will act as sensor nodes creating a clear picture of the battle space, feeding the few F-22 hunter killer teams with valuable S.A. that they cannot collect themselves.

If they see a VLO target, the F-22s have the option to Salvo fire or get close knowing that they have both the missile payload to ripple fire Slammers or the performance should the fight develop into a classic phone booth fight.

The F-35s on the other hand can mop up everything else that the Raptors left behind.


There is no doubt that a combination of F-35 and F-22 will be a seriously painful enema to any possible enemy force out there.

As you stated at the end the F-35 will mop up everything else that the Raptors didn't kill in the first place. With so few Raptors available as is let alone what could be in theater... that is a heavy work load for the F-35.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2016, 20:20
by XanderCrews
accessdenied wrote:I would also like to not see the 6th gen become what the F-22 and F-35 were and are: designed with state of the art technology that needs to be perfected over a very long engineering development cycle lasting years and years, I say use today's off the shelf technology to mitigate risks, costs, and shorten development time.


6th generation fighter
new fighter using 5th generation technology.

pick one.

I don't know how you develop next gen airplanes but refuse to develop next gen technology. please explain.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2016, 00:36
by les_paul59
6th gen has to have revolutionary tech...otherwise you will end up in the position russia is in now, with 5 different upgraded versions of the same cold war based airframe

Granted when the wall came down, their economy was shot and their investment in r & d plummetted.
But at least they have the pak fa.....

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2016, 13:39
by mixelflick
les_paul59 wrote:6th gen has to have revolutionary tech...otherwise you will end up in the position russia is in now, with 5 different upgraded versions of the same cold war based airframe

Granted when the wall came down, their economy was shot and their investment in r & d plummetted.
But at least they have the pak fa.....


5 different variations of same cold war airplane.

Six, if you count PAK FA as a Flanker that got stepped on... :)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2016, 17:06
by nutshell
It's almost the same as to say the Raptor is an upgraded F-15.

BTW, if I were to be the DoD of the US, I think I'd save the money just to upgrade the current fleet of Raps and go deep down with the Navy and new gen SAMs systems

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 03:10
by arl8733
I think that most of us agreed that production was stopped very prematurely. When you subtract from the fleet those birds that are used for flight test, those used for flight training and those in various forms of up-grades as well as those down for normal maintenance, how many are truly available at any one time? But given this, I doubt the feasibility of re-starting the line now. I have witnessed the re-start of the C-5 line as well as the start-up of the F-22 line and know the challenges that must be overcome. The resurrection of the vendor base being perhaps the biggest challenge. Perhaps the next biggest challenge would be to prevent design creep to the extent that most of the bird is internally re-designed blowing the cost out of the water. As much as I would like to have many more, I don't see it happening. I think what we need is once we make a production decision we should build everything planned as fast as possible and keep the short term politicians out of it.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 16:00
by accessdenied
arl8733 wrote:I think that most of us agreed that production was stopped very prematurely. When you subtract from the fleet those birds that are used for flight test, those used for flight training and those in various forms of up-grades as well as those down for normal maintenance, how many are truly available at any one time? But given this, I doubt the feasibility of re-starting the line now. I have witnessed the re-start of the C-5 line as well as the start-up of the F-22 line and know the challenges that must be overcome. The resurrection of the vendor base being perhaps the biggest challenge. Perhaps the next biggest challenge would be to prevent design creep to the extent that most of the bird is internally re-designed blowing the cost out of the water. As much as I would like to have many more, I don't see it happening. I think what we need is once we make a production decision we should build everything planned as fast as possible and keep the short term politicians out of it.


Restarting the line is possible, and easy. The few components that need to be re-tooled, they will need to be qualified through design verification and production verification, and vehicle verification/integration. It's not impossible. It's not rocket science. It's just mundane hum-drum-engineering. The hard work has been done. The parts exist in CAD. The materials specs already defined. The GD&T and tolerance stack-ups are done, and have been done for a long, long time.

The u's are the big bad boogeyman that everyone loves to point their fingers at, because Oh My God, u's are black magic. They're wafers with gold wire bonding. Like the tooling for every other component, it's design exists in CAD and can be turned out in a matter of months. I've been a party to what happens when a u's supply chain is interrupted for reasons beyond the control of the production plant, and it's about 6 months to bring it back to life from scratch. Not years. Not even a year. It's a matter of months.

I know you boys want to hold out for a 6th gen aircraft. But the 15/16 fleet is about to be rendered obsolete depending on how things play out in China and Russia.

The US can walk and chew gum at the same time. It can build 2 fighters at the same time and do work on a third.

The thing that irks me is giving to much business to Lockheed. But it's not as if the Raptor will go back into production.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 16:55
by str
accessdenied wrote:Restarting the line is possible, and easy.


Hahahaha.


No.


Okay, yes it is possible, but no, it. Is in no way easy. $200 million anythings are never easy.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 18:06
by accessdenied
str wrote:
accessdenied wrote:Restarting the line is possible, and easy.


Hahahaha.


No.


Okay, yes it is possible, but no, it. Is in no way easy. $200 million anythings are never easy.


No. Easy. Mundane. Dull.

What don't you understand that the designs are complete, fully dimensioned, fully spec'd out, and it's a matter of producing new tools, fixtures and gauges, for a minority, not a majority, of components.

Difficult is creating something from nothing. Difficult is what was done in the late 80s and the 90s.

Most pilot-engineers, you could hand them a fully dimensioned drawing and CAD model for a wing spar, and they would be clueless about how to even to go about running an effect supplier source selection process. You may know your thermal dynamics equations with your BS and MS, but have no experience or knowhow in how to build something. I doubt any of you have done a stack up analysis on mating components or have done a worse case circuit analysis, let alone visited an electronics assembly line.

The Raptor line could be up and running before the end of the next US presidency.

So yeah, let's bring back the F-15 to hedge our bets against the F-35. The US can then build up a 4.5 gen AF while China and Russia move ahead with their advanced designs.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 18:57
by sferrin
accessdenied wrote:No. Easy. Mundane. Dull.


:lmao:

accessdenied wrote:What don't you understand that the designs are complete, fully dimensioned, fully spec'd out


And what you don't understand is that, assuming they can even find them, they may not even be in a usable condition. Speaking as somebody currently involved in multiple production projects your whole position is laughable.

accessdenied wrote:and it's a matter of producing new tools, fixtures and gauges, for a minority, not a majority, of components.
Assuming (there's that word) the existing tooling has been stored and maintained in proper condition. EXTREMELY unlikely. "Best intentions" and all that.

accessdenied wrote:Difficult is creating something from nothing.


You mean like a new assembly line from a patch of dirt?

accessdenied wrote:Difficult is what was done in the late 80s and the 90s.


Sure that was difficult. This would be marginally less so. And that's assuming they didn't take the opportunity for a "refresh" and you KNOW that would never happen. So you'll end up with a massive kludge of trying to build an old design using current software, while rolling in a significant portion of new stuff and making it all work. In the words of Mr. T, "I pity da fool".

accessdenied wrote:Most pilot-engineers, you could hand them a fully dimensioned drawing and CAD model for a wing spar, and they would be clueless about how to even to go about running an effect supplier source selection process.


"Drawings"? What the hell are those? MBD all the way baby!

accessdenied wrote:You may know your thermal dynamics equations with your BS and MS, but have no experience or knowhow in how to build something. I doubt any of you have done a stack up analysis on mating components or have done a worse case circuit analysis, let alone visited an electronics assembly line.


Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

accessdenied wrote:The Raptor line could be up and running before the end of the next US presidency.


Six years? That's more time than it took to go from a clean piece of paper to Blackbirds breaking records. Guess it ain't so simple after all eh?

accessdenied wrote:So yeah, let's bring back the F-15 to hedge our bets against the F-35. The US can then build up a 4.5 gen AF while China and Russia move ahead with their advanced designs.


How about, "no". Any money dumped into bringing back the F-22 would be money taken from the F-22 replacement. No thanks. Better to just accelerate the F-22's "replacement". The F-15Cs would finally get to leave with the F-22s taking their place while the new plane takes the F-22's place.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 21:45
by accessdenied
The US presidency is 6 years? It may take about 36 months (at the max end of the spectrum) to get the line up and going.

And how do you equate the time to re-source select, re-tool, re-test components, and re-test vehicles with it being hard? It's boring, mundane time consuming work.

Keep dreaming about gen 6 with it's particle beam weapons 20+ years out in the future.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2016, 23:08
by sferrin
accessdenied wrote:The US presidency is 6 years? It may take about 36 months (at the max end of the spectrum) to get the line up and going.


As much as I can't wait for him to leave, the current occupant isn't gone yet. So that's 5 years to the end of the next cycle.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2016, 00:31
by XanderCrews
accessdenied wrote:
arl8733 wrote:I think that most of us agreed that production was stopped very prematurely. When you subtract from the fleet those birds that are used for flight test, those used for flight training and those in various forms of up-grades as well as those down for normal maintenance, how many are truly available at any one time? But given this, I doubt the feasibility of re-starting the line now. I have witnessed the re-start of the C-5 line as well as the start-up of the F-22 line and know the challenges that must be overcome. The resurrection of the vendor base being perhaps the biggest challenge. Perhaps the next biggest challenge would be to prevent design creep to the extent that most of the bird is internally re-designed blowing the cost out of the water. As much as I would like to have many more, I don't see it happening. I think what we need is once we make a production decision we should build everything planned as fast as possible and keep the short term politicians out of it.


Restarting the line is possible, and easy. The few components that need to be re-tooled, they will need to be qualified through design verification and production verification, and vehicle verification/integration. It's not impossible. It's not rocket science. It's just mundane hum-drum-engineering. The hard work has been done. The parts exist in CAD. The materials specs already defined. The GD&T and tolerance stack-ups are done, and have been done for a long, long time.

The u's are the big bad boogeyman that everyone loves to point their fingers at, because Oh My God, u's are black magic. They're wafers with gold wire bonding. Like the tooling for every other component, it's design exists in CAD and can be turned out in a matter of months. I've been a party to what happens when a u's supply chain is interrupted for reasons beyond the control of the production plant, and it's about 6 months to bring it back to life from scratch. Not years. Not even a year. It's a matter of months.

I know you boys want to hold out for a 6th gen aircraft. But the 15/16 fleet is about to be rendered obsolete depending on how things play out in China and Russia.

The US can walk and chew gum at the same time. It can build 2 fighters at the same time and do work on a third.

The thing that irks me is giving to much business to Lockheed. But it's not as if the Raptor will go back into production.


Whether you are for or against it, restarting F-22 production and hand waiving it as "easy" is ridiculous. That's like Kopp level of lunacy

"A simple bending of sheet metal"

Arl8733 is right.

Can it be done? Of course it can be done, easily? no. If it was easy we wouldn't be having this conversation because we would have bought the nearly 400 the USAF wanted in the first place when they were in production and easy to get in the first place instead of waiting years to spend more and do it all over again

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2016, 00:40
by sferrin
arl8733 wrote: I think what we need is once we make a production decision we should build everything planned as fast as possible and keep the short term politicians out of it.


This. They turned out 100 B-1Bs in about four years. High rate production is what brings your learning curve down quickly and gives you the best value for your money.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2016, 02:36
by durahawk
accessdenied wrote:No. Easy. Mundane. Dull.

What don't you understand that the designs are complete, fully dimensioned, fully spec'd out, and it's a matter of producing new tools, fixtures and gauges, for a minority, not a majority, of components.

Difficult is creating something from nothing. Difficult is what was done in the late 80s and the 90s.

Most pilot-engineers, you could hand them a fully dimensioned drawing and CAD model for a wing spar, and they would be clueless about how to even to go about running an effect supplier source selection process. You may know your thermal dynamics equations with your BS and MS, but have no experience or knowhow in how to build something. I doubt any of you have done a stack up analysis on mating components or have done a worse case circuit analysis, let alone visited an electronics assembly line.

First off, talking down to people won't get you anywhere on this forum, or you know, life in general. There are plenty of talented engineers, pilots, and mechanics that frequent this forum that have a wide variety of experience within the Aerospace Industry, including some in the very areas you mentioned. Show respect and you might just get some back.

The Raptor line could be up and running before the end of the next US presidency.

Ya, we could probably be cranking out XB-70 Valkyries in 5 years too, anything is possible if you throw some serious cash at the problem. That doesn't make it an intelligent or rational decision. If you do in fact work in the Aerospace Industry, I probably don't need to tell you that F-35 suppliers have a lot on their plate already in meeting the increased capacity required for full rate production for that aircraft. Production yields on certain complex parts are still low, and will require process improvements and redesigns going forward. Oh by the way, as you probably know we are also seeing a significant ramp in quantities on the commercial side as well. Evidently the Asian airlines are buying up jets like crazy.

Fabricating a CNC part from a CAD drawing is one thing, producing a quality cast or forged part in mass quantities is quite another. As someone who deals with out of production spares on a regular basis, producing anything out of production, be it years or decades, is not a trivial task and requires a great deal of re-learning on the production floor. It seems more often than not the original tooling can't hold the part within it's original tolerances anymore so either new tooling must be acquired (costly and time consuming, always a fight over who is paying for it) or a revision needs to be done to the print (also a pain) in order to get the part to pass first article. This is particularly true with castings and forgings.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2016, 03:39
by sferrin
durahawk wrote:
accessdenied wrote:No. Easy. Mundane. Dull.

What don't you understand that the designs are complete, fully dimensioned, fully spec'd out, and it's a matter of producing new tools, fixtures and gauges, for a minority, not a majority, of components.

Difficult is creating something from nothing. Difficult is what was done in the late 80s and the 90s.

Most pilot-engineers, you could hand them a fully dimensioned drawing and CAD model for a wing spar, and they would be clueless about how to even to go about running an effect supplier source selection process. You may know your thermal dynamics equations with your BS and MS, but have no experience or knowhow in how to build something. I doubt any of you have done a stack up analysis on mating components or have done a worse case circuit analysis, let alone visited an electronics assembly line.

First off, talking down to people won't get you anywhere on this forum, or you know, life in general. There are plenty of talented engineers, pilots, and mechanics that frequent this forum that have a wide variety of experience within the Aerospace Industry, including some in the very areas you mentioned. Show respect and you might just get some back.

The Raptor line could be up and running before the end of the next US presidency.

Ya, we could probably be cranking out XB-70 Valkyries in 5 years too, anything is possible if you throw some serious cash at the problem. That doesn't make it an intelligent or rational decision. If you do in fact work in the Aerospace Industry, I probably don't need to tell you that F-35 suppliers have a lot on their plate already in meeting the increased capacity required for full rate production for that aircraft. Production yields on certain complex parts are still low, and will require process improvements and redesigns going forward. Oh by the way, as you probably know we are also seeing a significant ramp in quantities on the commercial side as well. Evidently the Asian airlines are buying up jets like crazy.

Fabricating a CNC part from a CAD drawing is one thing, producing a quality cast or forged part in mass quantities is quite another. As someone who deals with out of production spares on a regular basis, producing anything out of production, be it years or decades, is not a trivial task and requires a great deal of re-learning on the production floor. It seems more often than not the original tooling can't hold the part within it's original tolerances anymore so either new tooling must be acquired (costly and time consuming, always a fight over who is paying for it) or a revision needs to be done to the print (also a pain) in order to get the part to pass first article. This is particularly true with castings and forgings.


Yep. Hell, even stuff you'd think would be on the shelf can have long lead times simply because demand has tapped current production. As for the XB-70 in five years that thing used a lot of specialized manufacturing processes that I'd be surprised if ANYBODY is left that could do it. How about ceramic tooling for brazing stainless steel sheet to formed stainless honeycomb? Or "painting" an aircraft with a ceramic coating that had a "cure" temp of god knows how high? Who even makes stainless steel honeycomb aircraft structures? I was shocked they were even able to find anybody who could make the RATTLRS airframe. (Wouldn't surprise me at all if the reason it failed is because there was simply no industrial base to support production of the thing.)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2016, 16:16
by cosmicdwarf
Sometimes it's easier to start over than to try and bring something back that hasn't been worked on or produced in a while.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 07:14
by delvo
I think this is all just a difference in what the two camps are thinking of in reference to whether it's easy or hard: engineering in one case, and paying for it in the other case. In the engineering, there's no challenge left at all; every single engineering problem was already solved and we have records of what the solutions were. But getting enough money for a project can be difficult or impossible even if all of the project's engineering is already done... especially when it includes paying contractors the extra that it would take to get them to revert to old systems that would cost them more than just using something more current.

accessdenied wrote:That's right keep dreaming about gen 6 with it's particle beam weapons 20+ years out in the future.
I'm not sure what the connection is supposed to be between that and the subject. Do you think that people who say a restart of F-22 production either won't ever happen, or shouldn't, are basing that conclusion on the idea of switching to the next generation "instead"?

arl8733 wrote:Perhaps the next biggest challenge would be to prevent design creep to the extent that most of the bird is internally re-designed blowing the cost out of the water.
Design creep/alteration would be the only way it could happen at all, the only way making any more could be "justified" to the right people. For starters, they'd demand things like a more F-35-like ground-attack abilities and longer range, which would require lengthening the body to fit in both more gas and longer internal bays and possibly more sensors or fancy communication/networking gear or laser designators or such that's hard to find places for currently. It would be a bit like what happened with F-18s.

But then even that would still go nowhere because it would start sounding more like a couple of other planes we already have anyway (F-35 and B-3/21).

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 12:20
by sferrin
delvo wrote:I think this is all just a difference in what the two camps are thinking of in reference to whether it's easy or hard: engineering in one case, and paying for it in the other case. In the engineering, there's no challenge left at all; every single engineering problem was already solved and we have records of what the solutions were.


Easier does not mean easy. It is in no way shape or form as simple as flipping the power switch back on and the assembly line starts back up. The line is gone, the people are gone, documentation', tooling, etc. is in an unknown state. Yes, unknown. There was a case a while back where they were going to build a spare widget for the F-22, they went to get the tooling, and the shipping container it was suppose to be in was EMPTY. It's a virtual certainty they didn't just happen to get the only empty/otherwise-f--ked up container of tooling. Anybody who thinks restarting production would be easy really has no idea what they're talking about. Would it be as hard as doing it the first time? Obviously not. That does not mean it would be easy.

delvo wrote:I'm not sure what the connection is supposed to be between that and the subject. Do you think that people who say a restart of F-22 production either won't ever happen, or shouldn't, are basing that conclusion on the idea of switching to the next generation "instead"?


That's exactly what should happen. The USAF is already deep into the development of the F-22's replacement. Were F-22 production to start back up what do you think would happen? Where do you think the money would come from? I can already hear it, "well if the F-22 was in production we wouldn't NEED the next gen". Just don't even say it.

delvo wrote:Design creep/alteration would be the only way it could happen at all, the only way making any more could be "justified" to the right people.


The only way it could happen at all, "justified" or not. Some of the F-22 components are out of production and are going to stay that way. All the more reason it's a stupid idea that's never going to happen. Do I wish they'd bought more at the get go? Obviously. But that ship has sailed.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 15:17
by durahawk
delvo wrote:I think this is all just a difference in what the two camps are thinking of in reference to whether it's easy or hard: engineering in one case, and paying for it in the other case. In the engineering, there's no challenge left at all; every single engineering problem was already solved and we have records of what the solutions were. But getting enough money for a project can be difficult or impossible even if all of the project's engineering is already done... especially when it includes paying contractors the extra that it would take to get them to revert to old systems that would cost them more than just using something more current.

Actually, putting parts back into production can and frequently does require extensive engineering redesign. Lapsed manufacturing processes are a main driver. The new A-10 wings currently being made by Boeing/KAI required extensive design changes off the original A-10 wing because nobody can make a wing today the same way they made it in the late 70's... the equipment has changed, the tooling is long gone, most of the skilled workers have long since retired (or deceased), and the achievable manufacturing tolerances have changed. Now, the F-22 certainly hasn't lapsed out of production as long as the A-10 has, but this problem will only get worse as the time goes on.

It is clear that we learned a lot from manufacturing the F-22 and rolled those improvements into the F-35. For one thing, the F-22 used a crap ton of titanium, something like 39% by weight, a metal that is notoriously difficult and costly to machine. The F-35 uses substantially less titanium (17% by weight) and more composites. Could F-35 titanium manufacturing process improvements be rolled back to the F-22? Sure, but I'm almost certain some F-22 parts would require extensive redesign in order to realize any cost savings. The point of the matter is that instead of spending all this money trying to turn out new F-22's using the F-35's manufacturing enhancements, DAS, sensor fusion, networking, etc, why not just simply order more F-35s? Once the F-35 can fire off six AMRAAMs internally, I think the difference will be even more moot.

F-22 production was terminated far too early, and we will be likely be living with Gate's folly for quite some time, but there is little we can do about it now.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 16:46
by XanderCrews
delvo wrote:
arl8733 wrote:Perhaps the next biggest challenge would be to prevent design creep to the extent that most of the bird is internally re-designed blowing the cost out of the water.
Design creep/alteration would be the only way it could happen at all, the only way making any more could be "justified" to the right people. For starters, they'd demand things like a more F-35-like ground-attack abilities and longer range, which would require lengthening the body to fit in both more gas and longer internal bays and possibly more sensors or fancy communication/networking gear or laser designators or such that's hard to find places for currently. It would be a bit like what happened with F-18s.


I think design creep would naturally occur, and I think you would run into sunk cost stuff too. "Well if we are going to spend X many billions of dollars to build new ones, might as well build em right! whats a billion more here or there to add X, Y, Z?" By the time you get the bill for the "super Raptor" you can buy 90 of them, not 200, and the only thing they have in common are the engines and the nose.

One my friends wrote his masters thesis on the amount of hours a B-52 hits before its cheaper to just buy a new B-52 than repair the old. But of course its a paradox, because we wouldn't build a Circa 1962 B-52 complete with paper blueprints. It would be manufactured with 21st century techniques, and if you are starting from scratch everytime new tech and safety features will naturally find their way in since you are just redesigning so much anyway...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 17:00
by slapshot!
Im still just wondering why we dont just upgrade the current F22/F15C combo to last till we have a 6th gen replacement? Im sure its a whole lot cheaper to gut an F15C and stuff it back up with new sensor tech. The only thing it needs that it doesnt already have/will have is a good cockpit design to tell the pilot whats going on with all the new sensors.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 20:40
by les_paul59
The f-15c is getting upgraded with a new electronic warfare suite and most already have the apg-63 v3 aesa. The f-15 will soon have a "5th gen" ew capability and will use the talon-hate pod to see what the raptor sees. The f-22/f-15 combo is still the most formidable air dominance tandem in the world.

No one is looking forward to facing that combo.

I don't understand how people don't see the recurring trend that happens with military equipment procurement.
By the end of a generation like the "4th" for example, people have grown to have a sentimental relationship with a certain piece of equipment. Then when the better more expensive new generation comes out "5th gen" they say, it's too expensive and untested. Then after a decade of operating the new equipment, it is proven that the "5th gen" is so much better than the 4th gen, and everyone who was against 5th gen pretends like they were a supporter from the start.

Rinse and repeat.... but the fact is there will always be a new generation. Otherwise you get left in the dust by some other country who wasn't procuring military equipment based on emotion and sentimental value.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 22:41
by madrat
F-22A teamed to F-35A will likely offer a better pairing.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2016, 22:58
by wrightwing
For the cost to restart the line, and add technology refreshes for ~200 new F-22s, we could probably buy 350 to 400+ F-35s.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2016, 04:09
by les_paul59
yes madrat, of course the f-35 w/ the f-22 would be better but at the moment the f-35 isn't operational and isn't intended to be a pure air superiority platform like the f-15. And they have no other use for the f-15c until it goes to the junkyard. It doesn't have another job besides air to air and they are upgrading it for the 2020's. In the future the f-35 will take over for the f-15 alongside the raptor.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2016, 21:13
by mixelflick
Came into thread rooting for F-22 re-start, leaving rooting for 6th gen.

The minds on here presented a very convincing argument; Re-starting production will take huge $ and more importantly, suck 6th gen dollars out of the budget. We have an operational 5th gen fighter and getting a 2nd. Russia/China will be lucky to have fielded something similar by 2020.

Sixth gen is supposed to hit circa 2030 by which time we'll have thousands of F-35's, 120 or so F-22's and (I'm guessing) a few hundred F-15C's (heavily upgraded). Much will depend on the F-35's ability to handle the air to air mission. I'm betting teamed with a few Raptors, they'll be more than up to the job...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2016, 23:09
by madrat
les_paul59 wrote:yes madrat, of course the f-35 w/ the f-22 would be better but at the moment the f-35 isn't operational and isn't intended to be a pure air superiority platform like the f-15. And they have no other use for the f-15c until it goes to the junkyard. It doesn't have another job besides air to air and they are upgrading it for the 2020's. In the future the f-35 will take over for the f-15 alongside the raptor.


That's just it, the F-15C has to be incorporated into F-22A doctrine whereas the F-22A has to be in support of F-35A doctrine. The F-35A drives the doctrine, whereas F-15C has to be integrated. I think F-22A, in a role to augment F-35A, gets freedom of movement independent of its partners. It has to fly cover for the F-15C, limiting its role.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2016, 23:27
by les_paul59
The raptor is the ultimate air to air machine, so it is going to fly top cover for everyone in reality, but I get your point. The f-35 is changing the way the air force fights as a organization all together. At this point they are going to upgrade and fly the f-15 because it has hours left on the airframe, and they need it to fill a short term gap in fighters.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 00:20
by quicksilver
Good that the home teams are the only ones with F35 because F-15 is not survivable against it.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 01:00
by les_paul59
yeah during testing of the f-35 with block 3f, it will become evident that the f-15 can't compete against the f-35

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 01:13
by popcorn
It's evolved beyond individual platform capabilities, it's all about the Network going forward.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 02:35
by count_to_10
les_paul59 wrote:The raptor is the ultimate air to air machine, so it is going to fly top cover for everyone in reality, but I get your point. The f-35 is changing the way the air force fights as a organization all together. At this point they are going to upgrade and fly the f-15 because it has hours left on the airframe, and they need it to fill a short term gap in fighters.

Well, the F-15's can also carry the F-35's missiles.
(Insert reference to man holding his girlfriend's purse here)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 02:56
by quicksilver
les_paul59 wrote:yeah during testing of the f-35 with block 3f, it will become evident that the f-15 can't compete against the f-35


Actually it was evident to test guys well over a year ago, and to the fleet guys when they got 2B last year. With more recent expansion of released aero envelope they gained the wherewithal to exploit all of its other advantages as well.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2016, 04:22
by les_paul59
we know that the f-15 can't hang with the 35, but once the public starts getting leaked test reports that the f-35 had a 70-1 kill ratio against agressor f-15's (hypothetical results), then i think everyone will understand how much of a leap 4th to 5th gen. really is.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 16 May 2016, 13:57
by mixelflick
les_paul59 wrote:we know that the f-15 can't hang with the 35, but once the public starts getting leaked test reports that the f-35 had a 70-1 kill ratio against agressor f-15's (hypothetical results), then i think everyone will understand how much of a leap 4th to 5th gen. really is.


I wouldn't take as a given F-35 trumps the F-15 15. Pilots make mistakes, and if the F-15 gets to the merge he has HOBS missile and the F-35 won't...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 16 May 2016, 17:55
by les_paul59
I'm not affiliated w/ the usaf in anyway mixelflick, but I'm pretty sure that the f-15's aren't going to fare to well against the BVR shots, or know where the f-35's are to merge. That's the thing people always forget, it's tough to merge with something that you can't find...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 16 May 2016, 21:09
by vanshilar
les_paul59 wrote:That's the thing people always forget, it's tough to merge with something that you can't find...


Actually, I suspect that with stealth aircraft, pilots will find that when entering the merge they'll usually be found on your tail...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 17 May 2016, 12:24
by mixelflick
les_paul59 wrote:I'm not affiliated w/ the usaf in anyway mixelflick, but I'm pretty sure that the f-15's aren't going to fare to well against the BVR shots, or know where the f-35's are to merge. That's the thing people always forget, it's tough to merge with something that you can't find...


Quite true.

Still, that puts virtually ALL the F-35's eggs in stealth's basket. They must be super-confident it works now and will continue to do so, well into the future..

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 17 May 2016, 12:53
by sferrin
mixelflick wrote:Still, that puts virtually ALL the F-35's eggs in stealth's basket.


Have you read anything said by actual F-35 pilots? :doh:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 17 May 2016, 16:13
by wrightwing
mixelflick wrote:
les_paul59 wrote:we know that the f-15 can't hang with the 35, but once the public starts getting leaked test reports that the f-35 had a 70-1 kill ratio against agressor f-15's (hypothetical results), then i think everyone will understand how much of a leap 4th to 5th gen. really is.


I wouldn't take as a given F-35 trumps the F-15 15. Pilots make mistakes, and if the F-15 gets to the merge he has HOBS missile and the F-35 won't...

Eh, the F-35 also carries HOBS missiles (that's the premise of LOAL/spherical engagement.)

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 17 May 2016, 16:16
by wrightwing
mixelflick wrote:
les_paul59 wrote:I'm not affiliated w/ the usaf in anyway mixelflick, but I'm pretty sure that the f-15's aren't going to fare to well against the BVR shots, or know where the f-35's are to merge. That's the thing people always forget, it's tough to merge with something that you can't find...


Quite true.

Still, that puts virtually ALL the F-35's eggs in stealth's basket. They must be super-confident it works now and will continue to do so, well into the future..

Much like the Russians and Chinese, etc...that are working on their own stealth designs.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 18 May 2016, 04:41
by les_paul59
@mixelflick, stealth isn't just flying anywhere without regard for enemy sensors. It's an entire strategy of how you operate, stealth jets are always trying to present the best angle to the enemy to keep their rcs low, and the f-35 sensors are so much better than every other jet, knowing where enemies are won't be the problem. My point is the f-35 isn't just about stealth, it's about flying a smart stealthy jet in an intelligent way.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 18 May 2016, 12:20
by mixelflick
les_paul59 wrote:@mixelflick, stealth isn't just flying anywhere without regard for enemy sensors. It's an entire strategy of how you operate, stealth jets are always trying to present the best angle to the enemy to keep their rcs low, and the f-35 sensors are so much better than every other jet, knowing where enemies are won't be the problem. My point is the f-35 isn't just about stealth, it's about flying a smart stealthy jet in an intelligent way.


OK, understand. Just hope these Russian radars can't find it or if they do, can't track/lock on for a launch. If the shoe were on the other foot, I'd be a REAL nervous SU-35/PAK FA pilot knowing the F-35 can see me and I may not be able to see him (until it's too late)...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 18 May 2016, 17:13
by les_paul59
I agree, it must be really scary to know there are probably jets out there that can see me, but I have no ability to target them.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 19 May 2016, 01:39
by dirtcatcher
(long time lurker, first time poster)

On the topic of 5th gen vs. 4th gen fighter engagements, I suspect the contest could be decided before ever a BVR shot need be taken. VLO + AESA + Fused Sensor Networking will likely make available tactical options to the 5th gen force that would close the door on the 4th gen force's pursuit of its strategic objectives without a single blow exchanged.

i.e.: Not only may the 5th gen fighters have the option of whether or not to engage the 4th gen fighters, but the 4th gen force may be so limited in its tactical options (knowing the capabilities of its opponent) that it may be unwilling to risk extending itself as would be necessary to even challenge its opponent.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 19 May 2016, 03:25
by les_paul59
welcome to the forum dirtcatcher, I'm sure there will be times where a 5th gen. jet just avoids trouble, no need to shoot down a target if you don't have to and it's unaware of your presence. Those missiles cost big bucks.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2018, 22:21
by basher54321
USAF Report to Congressional Committees
F-22A Production Restart Assessment Feb 2017

F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.pdf
(2.1 MiB) Downloaded 287 times

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2018, 03:19
by XanderCrews
basher54321 wrote:USAF Report to Congressional Committees
F-22A Production Restart Assessment Feb 2017

F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.pdf



Has it been a year already?!

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2018, 20:03
by citanon
basher54321 wrote:USAF Report to Congressional Committees
F-22A Production Restart Assessment Feb 2017

F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.pdf


So basic message is 50.3 billion for 194 aircraft, with 9.87 billion of that being nonrecurring.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2018, 20:32
by icemaverick
So procuring 194 Raptors would cost about $259.3 million per plane. That doesn’t sound very likely. It would be more economical to buy more F-35As if they feel there is a shortage of aircraft.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 05 May 2018, 23:51
by popcorn
Lots of red flags and risks not covered in that $50B estimate.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 06 May 2018, 00:41
by count_to_10
icemaverick wrote:So procuring 194 Raptors would cost about $259.3 million per plane. That doesn’t sound very likely. It would be more economical to buy more F-35As if they feel there is a shortage of aircraft.

Or spend the money to make a fourth variant of the F-35 that gets closer to the performance of the F-22, if the whole pilot shortage thing is an issue. A SDB sized heat seeker would also help.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 06 May 2018, 07:05
by madrat
Considering the production of F-35A in LRIP exceeds what competitors will have over the next decade, it makes more sense to bank on the current F-35 plans.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 06 May 2018, 10:14
by citanon
At this point money is probably better spent developing and fielding better missiles and moving to the next gen.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 00:45
by count_to_10
madrat wrote:Considering the production of F-35A in LRIP exceeds what competitors will have over the next decade, it makes more sense to bank on the current F-35 plans.

That’s why, if you really felt the need to eek out a little more performance, you may get more bang for your buck by modifying the F-35A.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 03:21
by Corsair1963
My guess is the Raptor will get modest upgrades in the coming years. While, the F-35 will get the "Lion Share" of future funding.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 07:32
by citanon
If you think about it, the US is in the unique position of being the first nation in history to have access to a large and comprehensive array of stealth aircraft in different roles (B-2, B-21, F-22, F-35, what ever surveillance drones are in the black/gray worlds) to both employ and practice against.

Perhaps then the next major "upgrade" is not to the platforms but to how the entire network is integrated and employed for offensive and defensive operations.

In other words, we might already have the 5th gen hardware in place for PCA. The sixth gen is actually us knitting those 5th gen pieces together and creating those new concepts of operations.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 15:13
by mixelflick
I'm confused...

You're suggesting there will be no sixth gen airframe?

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 15:51
by citanon
I'm suggesting that the sixth gen won't initially be an airframe. It will start as a better network and a better way of employing the network. One key feature, I think, will be the ability to bypass big centralized C2 nodes. Another key feature would be better fusion of high bandwidth data from a larger number and larger variety of platforms to counter stealth.

The first hardware components will actually be MADL data links pushed out across all the platforms and advanced data fusion engines with even more powerful processors.

When PCA the aircraft finally comes, it will be designed to plug the remaining capability gaps of PCA, the network.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2018, 16:35
by zero-one
I don't think we can get around this by just buying more F-35s.

Think about it, when AMRAAM was integrated into the F-16, it had real BVR capabilities. Some countries use it as their premier air dominance platform. So you could make the argument of simply retiring F-15s and just buying more multi role F-16s.

In fact the F-35 has better chance of replacing the F-15C for A-A. Its already better than the Eagle in both BVR and WVR anyway. But they still want this whole F-15C 2040 non sense.

I think its because each aircraft has a "Nitch" to fill.

The F-15 is there when you need CAP against Syrian Su-22s and Mig-29s maybe, its cheaper than a 5th gen to operate and because its not stealth, the enemy knows you're there. They'd rather hide than face you.

The Raptor is the absolute top tier Air dominance platform, the silver bullet.

Now putting F-35s into A-A squadrons that train exclusively for A-A isn't a good idea. Not because it can't but because they won't be able to maximize the platform. They'll only use half the F-35's capabilities but you're paying for all of them.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 01:52
by count_to_10
I think you might be wrong, zero one. It may well be that training will be the limiting factor for the F-35. We already have some evidence that exclusive ground attack and CAS training in some squadrons makes them better at the job than multi role squadrons flying aircraft that are theoretically better at ground attack. It’s entirely possible that a similar difference could be seen with an F-35 squadron trained primarily in air to air. Actually, it might even be worthwhile to have members of the same squadron focus individually on different tasks, particularly given the F-35s ability to fire wingmate’s weapons.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 02:25
by Corsair1963
zero-one wrote:I don't think we can get around this by just buying more F-35s.

Think about it, when AMRAAM was integrated into the F-16, it had real BVR capabilities. Some countries use it as their premier air dominance platform. So you could make the argument of simply retiring F-15s and just buying more multi role F-16s.

In fact the F-35 has better chance of replacing the F-15C for A-A. Its already better than the Eagle in both BVR and WVR anyway. But they still want this whole F-15C 2040 non sense.

I think its because each aircraft has a "Nitch" to fill.

The F-15 is there when you need CAP against Syrian Su-22s and Mig-29s maybe, its cheaper than a 5th gen to operate and because its not stealth, the enemy knows you're there. They'd rather hide than face you.

The Raptor is the absolute top tier Air dominance platform, the silver bullet.

Now putting F-35s into A-A squadrons that train exclusively for A-A isn't a good idea. Not because it can't but because they won't be able to maximize the platform. They'll only use half the F-35's capabilities but you're paying for all of them.



Honestly, main reason for keeping the F-15C and the A-10 is jobs. As every state wants to keep their bases fully employed. Same could be said of the Company that supply the parts or perform the work on the aforementioned aircraft. Hell, if the US had enough F-35's to replace either aircraft. They would both already be gone.......... :wink:

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 02:26
by icemaverick
zero-one wrote:I don't think we can get around this by just buying more F-35s.

Think about it, when AMRAAM was integrated into the F-16, it had real BVR capabilities. Some countries use it as their premier air dominance platform. So you could make the argument of simply retiring F-15s and just buying more multi role F-16s.

In fact the F-35 has better chance of replacing the F-15C for A-A. Its already better than the Eagle in both BVR and WVR anyway. But they still want this whole F-15C 2040 non sense.


A lot this is also due to Senators lobbying to keep their airbases open. It probably also has a little to do with Boeing's lobbying.

I think its because each aircraft has a "Nitch" to fill.


This is true but as you have admitted, the F-35 is superior to the F-15 in both BVR and WVR.

The F-15 is there when you need CAP against Syrian Su-22s and Mig-29s maybe, its cheaper than a 5th gen to operate and because its not stealth, the enemy knows you're there. They'd rather hide than face you.


Will it be cheaper as time goes on? Once the F-35 infrastructure is up and running and the production line is churning out F-35s, its cost of operation should be cheaper than what it is now. The F-15C is getting quite long in the tooth and the cost of maintaining it will only go up as time goes by.

As for letting the enemy know you are there, the F-35s can easily carry radar reflectors and carry their weapons externally.

Now putting F-35s into A-A squadrons that train exclusively for A-A isn't a good idea. Not because it can't but because they won't be able to maximize the platform. They'll only use half the F-35's capabilities but you're paying for all of them.


It's true that you're only using half the capability but its still cheaper than buying new F-22s if more A2A platforms are needed. The PCA is realistically at least 20 years away from entering service and there are fewer than 200 Raptors in service. Not all of them can be operational at any given time and unfortunately it is almost inevitable that there will be some losses due to accidents.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 02:55
by Corsair1963
zero-one wrote:
Now putting F-35s into A-A squadrons that train exclusively for A-A isn't a good idea. Not because it can't but because they won't be able to maximize the platform. They'll only use half the F-35's capabilities but you're paying for all of them.



Getting to the point that dedicated Air Superiority Squadrons days are numbered. As all US Fighter Squadrons are becoming Multi-Role Fighter Squadrons. (including Raptors) The only real difference is some spend more time in one role vs another. (adjusting mission set as required) This is also becoming more common with Air Forces from around the globe.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 03:01
by vanshilar
icemaverick wrote:As for letting the enemy know you are there, the F-35s can easily carry radar reflectors and carry their weapons externally.


The radar reflectors can't be discarded in the air though if the F-35 is suddenly fired upon and needs to stealth up. If that were an option then it'd be a lot more convenient. Same thing with weapons, if fired upon then the F-35 needs to discard or shoot them quick or become a target.

What I think would be a hoot though is if/when they finally get external fuel tanks for the F-35, then the F-35 could carry them, and just drop them if fired upon. Then watch the missiles go for the fuel tanks as the F-35 circle around to kill.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 16:19
by zero-one
Corsair1963 wrote:
Getting to the point that dedicated Air Superiority Squadrons days are numbered. As all US Fighter Squadrons are becoming Multi-Role Fighter Squadrons. (including Raptors) The only real difference is some spend more time in one role vs another. (adjusting mission set as required) This is also becoming more common with Air Forces from around the globe.


I think it could be largely because we haven't gone up against an adversary with some real air-air contenders. The last one maybe was Vietnam and only because they were heavily backed by the Soviets and China.

But when the air becomes heavily contested again, I think we may find ourselves with a renewed emphasis on specialized roles

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 18:17
by icemaverick
vanshilar wrote:
icemaverick wrote:As for letting the enemy know you are there, the F-35s can easily carry radar reflectors and carry their weapons externally.


The radar reflectors can't be discarded in the air though if the F-35 is suddenly fired upon and needs to stealth up. If that were an option then it'd be a lot more convenient. Same thing with weapons, if fired upon then the F-35 needs to discard or shoot them quick or become a target.

What I think would be a hoot though is if/when they finally get external fuel tanks for the F-35, then the F-35 could carry them, and just drop them if fired upon. Then watch the missiles go for the fuel tanks as the F-35 circle around to kill.


In some scenarios, as described by Zero, one doesn't want or need stealth. Presumably we are talking about making a statement rather than an actual aerial engagement. Even if unstealthed, the F-35 isn't helpless....it has chaff/flares, ECM etc. besides, a smart commander would have a stealthy F-35 or F-22 escorting the unstealthy one.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 20:58
by wrightwing
zero-one wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
Getting to the point that dedicated Air Superiority Squadrons days are numbered. As all US Fighter Squadrons are becoming Multi-Role Fighter Squadrons. (including Raptors) The only real difference is some spend more time in one role vs another. (adjusting mission set as required) This is also becoming more common with Air Forces from around the globe.


I think it could be largely because we haven't gone up against an adversary with some real air-air contenders. The last one maybe was Vietnam and only because they were heavily backed by the Soviets and China.

But when the air becomes heavily contested again, I think we may find ourselves with a renewed emphasis on specialized roles

Every air force in the world is moving away from specialized roles, and to multi-role aircraft. There will never be a point in time where Russia or China will have numerical or qualitative superiority vs the F-35.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2018, 22:04
by vilters
Russia does not have the technology and does not have the money. No worries there AT ALL.

China on the other hand, does not have the technology (yet) but has the will, the tech, AND the money to buy into anything they want to get their hands on.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 00:08
by Corsair1963
zero-one wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
Getting to the point that dedicated Air Superiority Squadrons days are numbered. As all US Fighter Squadrons are becoming Multi-Role Fighter Squadrons. (including Raptors) The only real difference is some spend more time in one role vs another. (adjusting mission set as required) This is also becoming more common with Air Forces from around the globe.


I think it could be largely because we haven't gone up against an adversary with some real air-air contenders. The last one maybe was Vietnam and only because they were heavily backed by the Soviets and China.

But when the air becomes heavily contested again, I think we may find ourselves with a renewed emphasis on specialized roles


No, not really....It just adds more flexibility and is more cost effective to the overall fleet. In addition adding more mission sets to a fighter. Hardly, means it less capable in the Air Superiority Role. For example adding the ability for the F-22 Raptor to drop 1,000 lbs PGM's from its Weapon Bays. Hardly, means it would be less effective in the Air Superiority Role by doing so.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 02:43
by madrat
You can specialize an unmanned platform much simpler and cost-effective considering the platform has no human limitations.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 02:50
by popcorn
The paradigm has shifted. The cross-domain Network is the killer.

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 15:11
by mixelflick
zero-one wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
Getting to the point that dedicated Air Superiority Squadrons days are numbered. As all US Fighter Squadrons are becoming Multi-Role Fighter Squadrons. (including Raptors) The only real difference is some spend more time in one role vs another. (adjusting mission set as required) This is also becoming more common with Air Forces from around the globe.


I think it could be largely because we haven't gone up against an adversary with some real air-air contenders. The last one maybe was Vietnam and only because they were heavily backed by the Soviets and China.

But when the air becomes heavily contested again, I think we may find ourselves with a renewed emphasis on specialized roles


We will.

The only question is will it be too late. It takes time to train and psychologically hone an airman for air to air only. If the air war is over the Taiwan straight, it isn't going to last long and we might not have the luxury of running classes and classes of guys through top gun like we did in Vietnam...

Re: Restarting F-22 production

Unread postPosted: 09 May 2018, 15:18
by mixelflick
citanon wrote:I'm suggesting that the sixth gen won't initially be an airframe. It will start as a better network and a better way of employing the network. One key feature, I think, will be the ability to bypass big centralized C2 nodes. Another key feature would be better fusion of high bandwidth data from a larger number and larger variety of platforms to counter stealth.

The first hardware components will actually be MADL data links pushed out across all the platforms and advanced data fusion engines with even more powerful processors.

When PCA the aircraft finally comes, it will be designed to plug the remaining capability gaps of PCA, the network.


I don't agree with you, but will concede it's an interesting concept.

I think it might give Russia a great story line though: "We can't really manufacture a 5th gen. Don't have the stealth, engines or integrated avionics. But we're building bigger and more robust networks, and that's what's really important... " :D