USAF estimates F-22 updates could cost $1.7 billion

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

citanon

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2015, 21:42

Unread post27 Dec 2017, 07:45

Given 186 operational planes, that's $37 million per plane. :shock:
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post27 Dec 2017, 08:57

citanon wrote:Given 186 operational planes, that's $37 million per plane. :shock:


"with work expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2027" or 10 years!, thus $3.7 million per plane per year.
:|
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post27 Dec 2017, 16:26

Being an Eagle Driver in late 92 with the 1st fighter wing, there was an invitation to attend a forum on requirements and specifications of the next generational platform. Basically it was a meet and greet to see what we would like to "see" in that platform. It involved aviators from across the services.
I know the 35 was developed using the HMDS system. It was a topic of many a conversation. It's a reach, but I always wondered what enhancement that would have brought to the Raptor.
I have no idea what it would be like to integrate something like that into an existing airframe, but one could hope.........
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7478
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 00:22

The Raptor has been described as a 5gen jet with a 4gen cockpit.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 01:52

popcorn wrote:The Raptor has been described as a 5gen jet with a 4gen cockpit.


....maybe.....4+++??
:)
Offline

tailgate

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2017, 02:46

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 02:31

Yea, I think the airframe was way ahead of the avionics at some point, but I won't sell it short. The Raptor still has avionics/capabilities that made it a generational leap over 4/4.5 gen fighters.

I know that HCMS was a big deal, but I never saw it as a negative when I was flying the jet. My intention was to never let you get close enough to use it and even then staying "invisible" was the name of the game. I think the HMDS would have been beneficial in allowing you to "unlock" from certain tasks associated with the HUD.

It was and is my opinion that the Raptor could have been fielded a little later than it was and then maybe more system maturity would have made its way in there. But the brass was worried about the 27/29/31/35 threat I think more than they should have been.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2893
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 03:57

If they do nothing else (which they won't) they need to add MADL/Link 16 transmit. That alone, would be a major upgrade.
Offline

madrat

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1953
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 14:59

/sarcasm mode
How much to add a second seat in the non-standard F-22A. If they were already being used for training, make them two-seats.
/sarcasm off
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post28 Dec 2017, 17:12

tailgate wrote:Yea, I think the airframe was way ahead of the avionics at some point, but I won't sell it short. The Raptor still has avionics/capabilities that made it a generational leap over 4/4.5 gen fighters.

I know that HCMS was a big deal, but I never saw it as a negative when I was flying the jet. My intention was to never let you get close enough to use it and even then staying "invisible" was the name of the game. I think the HMDS would have been beneficial in allowing you to "unlock" from certain tasks associated with the HUD.

It was and is my opinion that the Raptor could have been fielded a little later than it was and then maybe more system maturity would have made its way in there. But the brass was worried about the 27/29/31/35 threat I think more than they should have been.


Because this is 2017 and we are walking around with electronic devices that allow us to communicate with the other side of the planet for a few movements of our fingers, we forget the pathway that got us here. Raptor mission systems and the power to run them were pretty cosmic things when they were in development and early fielding; they remain really bleeping good today (proabably better than anything not named F-35), just not what the state of the art might be.

"Fielding F-22 later" would have killed it; it barely survived as it was.

I also think there is a collective amnesia about how the pace of technological change affects our expectations in aircraft acquisition. Very simply, the pace of technological change is dramatically outpacing the speed at which the USG acquisition can field weapons systems. The (il) logical extension of waiting for the latest widget is that they never field anything because there's always a 'new shiney object' that someone wants to dangle in front of your eyes about the same time the last 'new shiney object' is being fielded.

There has to be a technical baseline, but there has to be a better/faster way of delivering capability to the operational forces; the systems commands, DoD and Congressional interests are all wrestling with that right now.
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 00:35

neptune wrote:
citanon wrote:Given 186 operational planes, that's $37 million per plane. :shock:


"with work expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2027" or 10 years!, thus $3.7 million per plane per year.
:|


....once again, open mouth and insert leg! :oops:

The $50mil/ a/c is for the 34 trainers brought up to Block 30/35 to increase the number of front line F-22s by those same additional 34 a/c.

Yes!, this is a good proposal!...@ 11 yrs or (3/ yr, serially)?

...Is this sequenced into the existing F-22 fleet scheduled upgrade activities/ facilities?

...Since LM is proposing this, might they "upgrade" (3) LM F-22s with the LM F-35 avionics systems and the LM F-35 electric, hydraulic acutator systems?
:wink:
Last edited by neptune on 29 Dec 2017, 03:05, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1294
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 02:02

neptune wrote:
neptune wrote:
citanon wrote:Given 186 operational planes, that's $37 million per plane. :shock:


"with work expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2027" or 10 years!, thus $3.7 million per plane per year.
:|


....once again, open mouth and insert leg! :oops:

The $37mil/ a/c is for the 34 trainers brought up to Block 30/35 to increase the number of front line F-22s by those same additional 34 a/c.

Yes!, this is a good proposal!...@ 11 yrs or (3/ yr, serially)?

...Is this sequenced into the existing F-22 fleet scheduled upgrade activities/ facilities?

...Since LM is proposing this, might they "upgrade" (3) LM F-22s with the LM F-35 avionics systems and the LM F-35 electric, hydraulic acutator systems?
:wink:


I'd suggest someone find that actual report this article is claiming to be citing, rather than relying on a journalist's interpretation of the report. I'd bet the "10 year" thing is for the entire F-22 upgrade cycle which includes all the planes, and this 34 plane one is just part of that. And if these 34 planes are to be upgraded at the same time as all the other F-22s, then yes the upgrade cycle for them will also be 10 years just like the entire fleet.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7478
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 02:16

quicksilver wrote:...There has to be a technical baseline, but there has to be a better/faster way of delivering capability to the operational forces; the systems commands, DoD and Congressional interests are all wrestling with that right now.


I think we're seeing some of that thinking reflected in the B-21 acquisition and an effort to stay away from the bleeding edge where possible.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 10:07

arian wrote:
I'd suggest someone find that actual report this article is claiming to be citing, rather than relying on a journalist's interpretation of the report. I'd bet the "10 year" thing is for the entire F-22 upgrade cycle which includes all the planes, and this 34 plane one is just part of that. And if these 34 planes are to be upgraded at the same time as all the other F-22s, then yes the upgrade cycle for them will also be 10 years just like the entire fleet.



....no luck!, I can only find "FG" references over a dozen articles/ comments!, any luck elsewhere?
:)
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2453
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 13:25

So we're upgrading 34 "trainers" to be combat capable, a big increase (% wise) of the F-22 fleet.

It seems so simple... why wasn't it thought of before? Or is/was it a $ issue??

With respect to its sensors/systems, I keep harpening back to a conference where a pilot was speaking about the F-35 (he also flew F-22's). He said (paraphrasing), "the least impressive thing about the Raptor is its speed/stealth/raw performance"...
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 814
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post29 Dec 2017, 15:38

There was nothing else for the past pilots to train on that had the same sensor capability and cockpit design. I'm assuming with the F-35 and the t-x coming online in the next few years F-22 pilots will train on F-35's T-Xs and simulators.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests