Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Does the f-22 has a real chance to be saved by the powers that the Constitution has delegated to the Congress even though Mr. Gates' recommendations???

F-16.net Sponsor

Why not

They've saved the F136 engine program from DoD budget cuts and omission 2 or 3 times now... Rolling Eyes

They've also kept the C-17 in production years past what the USAF wanted, and they've given new PW-229 engines to the Air National Guard's F-16 Block 42s...

Not to mention some other Post-BRAC changes... Doh

After all, aren't we suppose to be "saving American jobs" with all of this stimulus? Not laying off 100K+ US workers who are involved with the Raptor program?

A few billion (of the TRILLION) that we're spending would buy wing after wing of shiny new Raptors to secure the US as the "dominant" air power for the next 30 or 40 years. (Just like the Eagle of the previous generation... but who quotes history anymore?)

Keep 'em flyin' Thumb

TEG

...almost forgot....

You won't see ANYTHING about the "administration" giving pink-slips to 100K+ workers on CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS.... Rolling Eyes

They simply say the DoD is not going to purchase Raptors anymore so that they can save money.
"Layoffs" would be seen as "negative" to the recovery effort... or "mis-interpreted" by John Q Public, the DoD needs to save those billions because times are tough... Doh

Maybe the Feds will save just enough money to pay unemployment benefits to the US Aerospace workers affected?

For just 5% of the $787BILLION you could purchase 275 MORE Raptors! Shocked

...and have something to show for it that would last 30-40 years...

TEG

calel wrote:

Does the f-22 has a real chance to be saved by the powers that the Constitution has delegated to the Congress even though Mr. Gates' recommendations???

Maybe a 20% chance as other programs have been saved by Congress from DoD cuts. But I would not hold me breathe on it though. Lets hope that large numbers of F-35s will guarantee U.S. air dominance for the 21st century if the F-22 is cut at 187.

I wouldn't be surprised if they get another 20 or so, but overall I think the fat lady is singing on new Raptor production.

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

...almost forgot....

You won't see ANYTHING about the "administration" giving pink-slips to 100K+ workers on CNN, ABC, NBC, or CBS.... Rolling Eyes

They simply say the DoD is not going to purchase Raptors anymore so that they can save money.
"Layoffs" would be seen as "negative" to the recovery effort... or "mis-interpreted" by John Q Public, the DoD needs to save those billions because times are tough... Doh

Maybe the Feds will save just enough money to pay unemployment benefits to the US Aerospace workers affected?

For just 5% of the $787BILLION you could purchase 275 MORE Raptors! Shocked

...and have something to show for it that would last 30-40 years...

TEG

TEG, I'm taking away your politics card. You will not be allowed to run for office... the reason being that you make sense and we can't have that in DC. I mean of course when you're in debt you're supposed to spend your way out of it.

As far as the original question, there's a little the House can do since they're in charge of teh budget. It would take probably take someone making it their pet project to make it happen, I don't see that happening especially with the current leaders of Congress. I'll bite my tongue on any of the politics.

Hey you guys can't have any hope here, its forsaken!!! I think 20 is a descent chance, 40 fair to poor and 60 an absolute dark horse. Possible but highly unlikely.

BDF

Read some of the material here: http://www.f22-raptor.com/advocacy/index.html

The House letter to "the administration" says;

Quote:

The F-22 program annually provides over $12 billion of economic activity to the national economy. As our nation faces on of the most trying economic times in recent history, it is imperative to preserve existing high paying, specialized jobs that are critical to our national defense. Over 25,000 Americans working for more than 1,000 suppliers in 44 states manufacture this aircraft. Moreover, it is estimated that another 70,000 Americans indirectly owe their jobs to this program.

That's $12 billion a year that goes to actual employees, (IE "real people") and companies across the US, not just some bank(s) on Wall Street!?! $12 billion that will be "invested in national infrastructure" (just to coin an "administration term")

1,000 companies in 44 states; that is a lot of political power.

Senators, Representatives, Governors, Mayors, State Legislators, Military Lobbyists, Aerospace Lobbyists, etc. will ALL be pulling for this one.

If they can save the F136, the C-17, C-130J, or bases recommended for closure by the BRAC, the "bureaucracy" will find a way to save the Raptor. Two Cents

Look at the very right end of this line chart: http://projects.nytimes.com/creditcrisi ... ents/table
According to it there is $55.2 Billion of "uncommitted" federal money; take half of that funding ($27.6B) and buy an additional 200 Raptors to keep our jobs and our national security!?! WTF

Keep 'em flyin' Thumb

TEG

LM needs to put some solar panels and a windmill on the Raptor and we will get all we need. How about a plug in Raptor , You know it will be slow, not go very far and be extra expensive but it's green and the Dems will fund it.

Lee
Living under a Luke flyway and loving every minute of it

Check this out..........

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123144084

"This op-ed piece appeared in the Washington Post on April 13, written by Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz."

Looks pretty much like even the new brass are not interested in more F-22's. I think the F-22's biggest problem is its weapons bays. Their limitations for loadouts hurts it pretty big. Not to mention the F-35's avionics are 10-15 years ahead of the F-22. Rolling Eyes

If those goons in Capitol Hill ever try to kill the F-22 Raptor program, expect a frighteningly stealthy but explosive response from a bunch of angrily disillusioned Raptor drivers in the form of dummy GBU-39 SDBs dropped outside Capitol Hill (maybe the White House as well).

Very explosive indeed!

Last edited by geogen on Apr 14, 2009 - 10:45 AM; edited 1 time in total

Man I feel dumb, just realized ELP nailed the issue quite succinctly about 12 hrs ago..

The following issues are added to list re: Donley/Schwartz's op-ed plea (full of contradictions and inconsistencies) cried out to Congress:

(1) Re: USAF's summer '08 conclusion for a down-graded 'moderate risk' requirement of 60 additionally needed F-22 acquisition (perhaps 200 as frontline models, to assume Air dominance role for future decades)...

Sec Donley's response: "based on warfighting experience over the past several years and judgments about future threats, the Defense Department is revisiting the scenarios on which the Air Force based its assessment." (So this time the 'judgements of future threats' are really so ingenius there will be no further need for new judgments from here on out?)

Note to Congress: Ask USAF top brass, (NOT DoD), 'behind closed doors' what they independtly assess as a 'moderate risk' requirement for Air dominance needed over the next 2 decades!

(2) Re: 60 additional F-22, ordered over 3 FY budgets at a noted cost of an unfunded $13b bill and at a time of Constrained Defense budgets...

What will be the unfunded costs of the 150+ additional F-35 orders, over 5 FY budgets claimed as the must have goal, compared with the same 5 yr program procurement plan - official from only 2007 (513 vs 361 F-35s)? $30 billion? $50b??

Idea

Fund the 60 essential Raptors, per USAF's assessed requirement with a mix of only 90 additional unfunded F-35s (beyond F-35 program's 2007 schedule) over the next 5 yrs?? Question

(3) Re: "We [DoD] considered whether F-22 production should be extended as insurance while the F-35 program grows to full production"...

Note to Congress: F-22 is a superior Air dominance enabled platform! F-35 is a Multi-role design with serious growth-creep requirements over many years and dubious funding, before it can deploy FOC.

The First 3 F-35A squadrons' fully operational status will NOT considerably overlap 60 additional F-22 units! USAF/F-35A needs insurance!

(4) The kicker (also highlighted by ELP) .... "Make no mistake:" "Within the next few years, we will begin work on the sixth-generation capabilities necessary for future air dominance"???

Huh? Constrained defense budgets? Can't afford over-lapping F-22 production w/F-35? Hit head on wall here?

Here we go again..

Reading the full article once again just raises the same red flags (and tired eyebrows), but now... one new question too: "Within the next few years, we will begin work on the sixth-generation capabilities necessary for future air dominance".

I noticed that myself. Sixth-Generation capabilities?????? Wonder what that will be? Interesting indeed..... leaves the imagination once again wondering what is actually possible!! Warp drive, cloaking device, light speed???????? LMAO

Maybe VprWzl will skip right over the F-35 and transfer into 6th gen around 2022!

Salute

Elite 1K Joined: May 26, 2005 - 08:39 PM Posts: 1496

skyhigh wrote:

If those goons in Capitol Hill ever try to kill the F-22 Raptor program, expect a frighteningly stealthy but explosive response from a bunch of angrily disillusioned Raptor drivers in the form of dummy GBU-39 SDBs dropped outside Capitol Hill (maybe the White House as well).

Very explosive indeed!

Yes. United States military officers are going to attack Washington D.C. if they don't get more F-22s... Rolling Eyes

WTF man?

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 vs. Congress