More F-22's could really happen?

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

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post03 Oct 2017, 19:16

Everyone seems to think the F-22 isn't much better than the F-35, but how can people really know? The F-22's capabilities are classified, and by its very reason for being (air dominance), was designed to excel in this one arena. While the F-35 is no slouch air to air, I do not believe it's better/even in the same league as the Raptor.

As for the topic at hand: There will be no more new build F-22's. The only exception (and its chances are slim) is if McCain, Trump and/or others in Congress mandate it. Congress has done dumber things, so it's not entirely out of the range of possibility.

Highly unlikely though..
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 01:05

Superior sensors is an advantage that you can't overcome.

The nail in the coffin is the potential growth of the F35. Sooner or later, the Raptor will loose the crown.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2135
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 09:19

mixelflick wrote:Everyone seems to think the F-22 isn't much better than the F-35, but how can people really know? The F-22's capabilities are classified, and by its very reason for being (air dominance), was designed to excel in this one arena. While the F-35 is no slouch air to air, I do not believe it's better/even in the same league as the Raptor.


F-22 might well be better individually than F-35 in air-to-air (and it likely is at least near term), but is it that much better that it's better to buy say 200 F-22s than 600-700 F-35s? Maybe if China produces thousands of J-20s or so, but in most potential scenarios I'd say that those F-35s are better. Even if scenario was pure high-end air-to-air combat, a combined force of those 600-700 F-35s would be tremendous. I'm sure they'd give even those 200 F-22s real fits even if they'd lose individually most of the time.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 14:28

hornetfinn wrote:F-22 might well be better individually than F-35 in air-to-air (and it likely is at least near term), but is it that much better that it's better to buy say 200 F-22s than 600-700 F-35s? Maybe


I agree with this, but I would also take cost into account. the 194 F-22s the USAF wants is estimated to cost $40B, that pegs each plane at $206M each.

Now with the same budget, even with a hypothetical $85M F-35A which is the estimated cost of an FRP F-35 in 2019, you will only get 470 airframes.

So thats 470 F-35s vs 194 F-22s. According to Gen. Mike Hostage he needs to have 8 F-35s to achieve the effect of 2 F-22s
https://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen ... -starts/3/

I'm guessing the General was probably envisioning a robust A-A threat with a lot of adversary 5th gens. but based on what he said, you'd need 1,552 F-35s to match 194 F-22, at least in Air-air
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2528
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 17:52

zero-one wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:F-22 might well be better individually than F-35 in air-to-air (and it likely is at least near term), but is it that much better that it's better to buy say 200 F-22s than 600-700 F-35s? Maybe


I agree with this, but I would also take cost into account. the 194 F-22s the USAF wants is estimated to cost $40B, that pegs each plane at $206M each.

Now with the same budget, even with a hypothetical $85M F-35A which is the estimated cost of an FRP F-35 in 2019, you will only get 470 airframes.

So thats 470 F-35s vs 194 F-22s. According to Gen. Mike Hostage he needs to have 8 F-35s to achieve the effect of 2 F-22s
https://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen ... -starts/3/

I'm guessing the General was probably envisioning a robust A-A threat with a lot of adversary 5th gens. but based on what he said, you'd need 1,552 F-35s to match 194 F-22, at least in Air-air


He wasn't comparing a current F-22 with a Block 4/5 F-35. He was comparing an F-22 with 8 AAMs vs an F-35 with 2 to 4 AAMs (i.e. Block 2B/3i/3F.) Later Block F-35s will have 6 AMRAAMs internal (or up to 12 smaller AAMs.) The F-22's current advantages are based upon double to quadruple the AAM loadout + kinematics. As the F-35 loadout increases, the gap will close dramatically, which is why it is preposterous to suggest that 194 F-22s would be preferable to 1552 F-35s.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 18:23

According to Gen. Mike Hostage he needs to have 8 F-35s to achieve the effect of 2 F-22s
https://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen ... -starts/3/

That's quite a statement, and suggests the F-22 has more going for it than more AAM's IMO. If anyone knows the max capability of each airframe, it's Hostage. More F-22's won't happen, but upgrades will keep it ahead of the threat for the next 30 years.

I do agree more F-35's is preferable given the money, but also silently wonder how low the unit cost of an F-22 would be if Gates hadn't made his infamous blunder. Under 100 million? Even at 100, it buys whole lotta' capability..
Offline

f-16adf

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 302
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 20:39

Technically Gates was obeying his master (Obama). He would NEVER continued production of that jet. He had different priorities (social welfare spending). More Raptors will not happen with Trump either.
Offline

alloycowboy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 745
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 08:28
  • Location: Canada

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 21:04

mixelflick wrote:According to Gen. Mike Hostage he needs to have 8 F-35s to achieve the effect of 2 F-22s
https://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen ... -starts/3/

That's quite a statement, and suggests the F-22 has more going for it than more AAM's IMO. If anyone knows the max capability of each airframe, it's Hostage. More F-22's won't happen, but upgrades will keep it ahead of the threat for the next 30 years.

I do agree more F-35's is preferable given the money, but also silently wonder how low the unit cost of an F-22 would be if Gates hadn't made his infamous blunder. Under 100 million? Even at 100, it buys whole lotta' capability..



I don't think it really matters because the F-22 is third generation stealth and its stealth coatings are pretty expensive to maintain where as the F-35 is fourth generationm stealth with stealth baked in. So you also need to look at it from a cost per hour basis. The F-22's aren't going to be very useful if they are hanger queens.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 22:04

wrightwing wrote:He wasn't comparing a current F-22 with a Block 4/5 F-35. He was comparing an F-22 with 8 AAMs vs an F-35 with 2 to 4 AAMs (i.e. Block 2B/3i/3F.) Later Block F-35s will have 6 AMRAAMs internal (or up to 12 smaller AAMs.) The F-22's current advantages are based upon double to quadruple the AAM loadout + kinematics. As the F-35 loadout increases, the gap will close dramatically, which is why it is preposterous to suggest that 194 F-22s would be preferable to 1552 F-35s.


How would we know?? Look, lets not try to interpret the General's words just so it will agree with our own conclusions, he said it plain and simple. F-22 is to the F-35 as the F-15 was to the F-16, the foremer are the Kings of air to air combat. how much clearer do we want him to be.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post04 Oct 2017, 22:08

alloycowboy wrote:
I don't think it really matters because the F-22 is third generation stealth and its stealth coatings are pretty expensive to maintain where as the F-35 is fourth generationm stealth with stealth baked in. So you also need to look at it from a cost per hour basis. The F-22's aren't going to be very useful if they are hanger queens.


Not anymore
http://www.dailytech.com/F35+Stealth+Co ... e21321.htm
of the [low observables] coatings system and gap-fillers that the F-35 had an advantage on, we have incorporated into the Raptor," said Jeff Babione, vice president and general manager of the F-22 program for Lockheed Martin.
Defense News reports that Babione claims that the new coatings don’t change the radar cross section of the F-22. The coatings according to Babione are simply to reduce maintenance costs. He said, "[The F-35 program] had some more robust materials that were more durable and we were able to pull those back on to the F-22. So our system is better, and the life-cycle cost of the F-22 is reduced."

Analyst Dan Goure said, "It's not going to transform the airplane, but what it's going to really do is make it much cheaper to operate the F-22 fleet, which is terribly important given its small size."
Offline
User avatar

rheonomic

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 383
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 03:44
  • Location: US

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 01:15

This thread is a giant waste of time.

The F-22 restart isn't happening.
u = (CB)⁻¹(cvdt_des - CAx)
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2528
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 03:39

zero-one wrote:
wrightwing wrote:He wasn't comparing a current F-22 with a Block 4/5 F-35. He was comparing an F-22 with 8 AAMs vs an F-35 with 2 to 4 AAMs (i.e. Block 2B/3i/3F.) Later Block F-35s will have 6 AMRAAMs internal (or up to 12 smaller AAMs.) The F-22's current advantages are based upon double to quadruple the AAM loadout + kinematics. As the F-35 loadout increases, the gap will close dramatically, which is why it is preposterous to suggest that 194 F-22s would be preferable to 1552 F-35s.


How would we know?? Look, lets not try to interpret the General's words just so it will agree with our own conclusions, he said it plain and simple. F-22 is to the F-35 as the F-15 was to the F-16, the foremer are the Kings of air to air combat. how much clearer do we want him to be.

You're making some pretty wild speculations, too, based upon some unknown and unspecified capabilities. Let's just call my assertion an educated guess.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 06:12

wrightwing wrote:You're making some pretty wild speculations, too, based upon some unknown and unspecified capabilities. Let's just call my assertion an educated guess.


You can call mine wild, you can call yours educated, you can call it whatever you want, point is we don't know what he knows.

In fact, if you read the article,Hostage didn't say that the advantage of the Raptor was in missile load out, but he did mention that the he would send 8 F-35s to do the task of 2 Raptors because it didn't have the Speed and altitude of the latter.

And he here we keep on waving that one phrase by Col. Chip Burke that speed and maneuverability was the least most impressive thing about the Raptor. Thats his opinion, but that maybe the one thing that makes the F-22 "better" than the F-35.

I mean, think about it, the Raptor and the F-35 both share stealth, they both have sensor fusion, they both have impressive S.A. and actually the F-35 has more, they also both have impressive kinematics, but in that area the F-22 has more.
But the General's conclusion is that it will take him 8 F-35s to replace 2 Raptors.

So making an "educated guess", I think the least impressive attribute (for Chip Burke) about the Raptor is what sets the Raptor apart from the F-35.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1182
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post05 Oct 2017, 06:27

rheonomic wrote:This thread is a giant waste of time.

The F-22 restart isn't happening.


I already made peace with that decision, but this thread is a good discussion between the capabilities of the F-22 and the F-35 since the latter will do a lot of the former's task in a large scale war due to the insufficient number of Raptors.

Listen, I love the F-35 and I've spent a lot of time in forums, blogs and comments sections defending that plane from all the negatives. But when people start saying that its better than the Raptor in A-A, then I'll have to draw the line there. It's second best only to the F-22.

People usually tend to overhype the F-35's S.A. Advantages over the F-22 and severly downplay the kinematic advantages of the F-22 over the F-35 to make that argument. (Note: I do know that SA is more important than kinematics but I also think that in an A-A mission both planes provide more than good enough S.A. To get the job done so much more S.A. than what you actually need doesn't necessarily make you better.)
Previous

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests