Restarting F-22 production

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

durahawk

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 532
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 20:35

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 14:29

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.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 16:18

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.
Offline

accessdenied

Banned

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2015, 13:39

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 18:07

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.
Offline
User avatar

cosmicdwarf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 677
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015, 21:20

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 18:26

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/
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 19:05

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.
Offline
User avatar

cosmicdwarf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 677
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015, 21:20

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 19:30

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.
Offline
User avatar

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1079
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Nuevo Mexico

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 20:08

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.
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
Offline

accessdenied

Banned

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2015, 13:39

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 20:56

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.
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 21:22

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.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3438
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 21:55

F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4478
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post26 Apr 2016, 23:43

mixelflick wrote:F-22 still have 80s avionics?

I find this hard to believe...

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

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post27 Apr 2016, 00:07

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.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post27 Apr 2016, 01:00

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.
Offline

accessdenied

Banned

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2015, 13:39

Unread post27 Apr 2016, 02:49

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.
Offline
User avatar

jetblast16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 646
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 00:12
  • Location: USA

Unread post27 Apr 2016, 03:19

'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.
Have F110, Block 70, will travel
PreviousNext

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests