The last Raptor - no. 10-4195

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

munny

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 589
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2010, 01:39
Offline

g3143

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 00:16
  • Location: New York

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 01:59

Its so sad
Offline

Patriot

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 271
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 17:48
  • Location: Poland

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 02:15

Maybe in the nearby future assembly lines in FWTx will be again filed up with some newest cutting edge revolutionary version of that wonder bird, maybe containing 6th generation fetures including some airframe modifications.. who knows.. Super Raptor 8) one day. Anyway.. they should build at least another 300.
Great Balls Of Fire
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1643
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 03:31

They should have built all 700. With an additional 500 Block 35 Raptors the AF wouldn't have needed the JSF and the Navy could have just RFP their own. Sure the F-22 cant carry a JSOW internally, but the F-35 can't launch one from 50,000 ft+ @ 1.6M+. Oh and then economies of scale would drive the Raptor per unit cost to around 150mil or less (then year dollars). too late, I know, but I am just really mad that they axed that program, same with the B-2. Was supposed to be a 200 unit contract and Northrop was given a "blank check" to develop the "best bomber the world has ever seen"... Oops, now they only bought 20. Of course they cost 2 billion when all that RnD gets lodged into 20 airframes! Meanwhile the B-1s continue to be hangar queens and the B-52s are eyeballing their 49th birthday (factory closed in 1967). Sure I rode in a 57 year old P-51 once, but that was a flying museum piece that likely never saw combat (rolled out of the factory July of 45), not a SAC front line deterrent. Sorry, I just get upset about chopped up productions.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-Project Engineer
Offline

handyman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 104
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2011, 05:41
  • Location: SFO

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 09:25

Well at the rate the F35 program is going, theres hope for more F22.
Offline

southernphantom

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Somewhere in Dixie

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 14:39

Production wrapping up...

...for now :twisted: :twisted:

I think the Raptor was before its time. Expect more once the bugs (and liberals) are worked out.
Offline

railmonkey

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 14:32

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 15:12

Ha! Know one of the guys in that vid. Mike Crawford. Smart guy,good guy, didn't work with him often but when I did he was good to work with and a good guy to crack a beer with.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2109
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 15:53

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:They should have built all 700. With an additional 500 Block 35 Raptors the AF wouldn't have needed the JSF and the Navy could have just RFP their own. Sure the F-22 cant carry a JSOW internally, but the F-35 can't launch one from 50,000 ft+ @ 1.6M+. Oh and then economies of scale would drive the Raptor per unit cost to around 150mil or less (then year dollars). too late, I know, but I am just really mad that they axed that program, same with the B-2. Was supposed to be a 200 unit contract and Northrop was given a "blank check" to develop the "best bomber the world has ever seen"... Oops, now they only bought 20. Of course they cost 2 billion when all that RnD gets lodged into 20 airframes! Meanwhile the B-1s continue to be hangar queens and the B-52s are eyeballing their 49th birthday (factory closed in 1967). Sure I rode in a 57 year old P-51 once, but that was a flying museum piece that likely never saw combat (rolled out of the factory July of 45), not a SAC front line deterrent. Sorry, I just get upset about chopped up productions.


Had they bought 700 of them, I suspect the price would've gotten down to the $90-100m range(and possibly lower). They were already below $150m, with the small buy, as it was.
Offline

fretmarks

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 134
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2004, 07:55

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 18:49

Sad. Just sad.

How far along is the F-35 again? :bang:
Austin 1, Fox 3!
Offline

tacf-x

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 446
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2011, 02:25
  • Location: Champaign, Illinois

Unread post14 Dec 2011, 19:12

wrightwing wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:They should have built all 700. With an additional 500 Block 35 Raptors the AF wouldn't have needed the JSF and the Navy could have just RFP their own. Sure the F-22 cant carry a JSOW internally, but the F-35 can't launch one from 50,000 ft+ @ 1.6M+. Oh and then economies of scale would drive the Raptor per unit cost to around 150mil or less (then year dollars). too late, I know, but I am just really mad that they axed that program, same with the B-2. Was supposed to be a 200 unit contract and Northrop was given a "blank check" to develop the "best bomber the world has ever seen"... Oops, now they only bought 20. Of course they cost 2 billion when all that RnD gets lodged into 20 airframes! Meanwhile the B-1s continue to be hangar queens and the B-52s are eyeballing their 49th birthday (factory closed in 1967). Sure I rode in a 57 year old P-51 once, but that was a flying museum piece that likely never saw combat (rolled out of the factory July of 45), not a SAC front line deterrent. Sorry, I just get upset about chopped up productions.


Had they bought 700 of them, I suspect the price would've gotten down to the $90-100m range(and possibly lower). They were already below $150m, with the small buy, as it was.


I figured the unit price would have dropped to that range once 700 were bought. Every revolutionary program has been plagued with cost issues. It isn't just the Raptor. These liberals just need to pick up a few books on the development of the F-X or something.
Offline

pushoksti

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 172
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008, 04:50
  • Location: Canadar

Unread post15 Dec 2011, 03:28

Time to re-open the line and make some money off international customers.
Offline

thestealthfighterguy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 252
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2011, 01:18
  • Location: Your six-O-clock

Unread post15 Dec 2011, 04:04

A hanky for those who've lost their dreams of a thousand Raptors.
Maybe they should have named you Phoenix so out would be reborn from your ashes.
Good bye old friend. We'll miss you.

TSFG :cheers:
Attachments
il_430xN_165072244.jpg
Stealth, so the bad guys don't know your there till they start blowing up. Have a nice day!
Offline

condor1970

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 07 May 2011, 21:40
  • Location: Port Orchard WA

Unread post15 Dec 2011, 09:18

After reading the article on the front page of this website about how the F-35 has so many problems, I can't help but wonder why the heck they didn't keep the line open, and build a few more Raptors. The F-22 obviously has less problems, as most have been worked out over the last 20 years of developement.

I'm really starting to wonder about the feasability of the f-35.

It's starting to remind me of the Edsel.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1643
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post15 Dec 2011, 14:36

F-22 lines are shut down... and yet F-15, F-16, F/A-18 lines keep rolling...
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-Project Engineer
Offline

sewerrat

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2009, 18:03

Unread post15 Dec 2011, 21:43

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:F-22 lines are shut down... and yet F-15, F-16, F/A-18 lines keep rolling...


The F-18 is a workhorse. Not the fastest, not the slowest, or the prettiest, or the ugliest, she's the girl you thought was cute enough to go on a date with, and then fell in love. The USN **had** to keep the F-18 line going. What were they to do once the F-14 tooling was turned melted down into plows? The ATF was on track to take nearly 2 decades to make it to the flight lines -- that didn't encourage the Navy in an era of declining funds to start up its own NATF -- especially after the A-12 fiasco; and the, what is now,the JSF wasn't going to be ready for nearly 10 years after the F-22. The F-18 had to be kept going.

The good die young, and the F-22 is no exception. Maybe Boeing can make use of the preserved tooling in its next gen fighter -- which they say that evolutionary is better than revolutionary.......

Edit: The F-15 and F-16 lines are printing presses for $$$, and jobs; why let Typhoon and socialist Europe scoop up the crumbs of the US ending all fighter production?
Next

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron