F-22 Raptor "sucks"

[TucksonSonny]

While we're speculating ;) ...have any of the current Russian A-A radar missiles been used in combat successfully?

 

I appreciate what the wikipedia article has to offer, but, again, its public domain info...and even af.mil journalists have been known to be just as clueless as any other journalist about military hardware. So, such internet articles should be taken with a grain of salt. The FSB tends to keep a pretty tight lid on actual figures going anywhere, much like the OSI does in the US. :smilewink:

 

If it were a "We gotta do this or we're all gonna die in 10 minutes" kind of situation, then Russian fighters may maddog some of those R-77s toward the general vicinity of a flight of Raptors and hope like hell they found targets. But, how would anybody know? Could their theoretical war effort afford to do so. :detective: Something with ramjet propulsion has to be fairly pricey.

 

I don’t believe that the F-22 was already used successfully in combat too!:D

 

1 versus 300 don’t count as successfully in combat (read Iraq/Yugo war)

 

You are free to edit the “wikipedia” and delete all the lies if you can argument this!

[Guest IguanaKing]

All true...and that's a pretty sharp response, Sonny. I salute you for that.The fact of the matter, however, is that what you spoke of are rumored capabilities which are "in development". The F-22 is currently deployed in no less than 3 active USAF squadrons. F-14s and F-15s weren't used in the air war in VietNam either, even though the F-14 was successfully dropping iron bombs in 1970 (a little-known, proven capability of the Cat in its infancy). We all know what "slouches" they both turned out to be. ;)

[S77th-konkussion]

I don’t believe that the F-22 was already used successfully in combat too!:D

 

 

 

But you really don't "know" that either do you? ;) I won't argue that the odds are against it- but you don't "know" anything.

[tflash]

I do not know anything either, but I'ld like to "stirr" things up a little bit again with the following quote from Air International on the B-2 (you know, the even more overpriced stealth project)

 

"Maintaining the LO characteristics is perhaps the biggest obstacle to achieve high mission-capable rates. In October 2001, the mission-capable rate was reported to be 55, but by mid-2002, this had declined to slightly over 40%".

 

The question is not whether you can build a superior weapons system, but whether you can afford it. With things going the way they are, you don't.

[TucksonSonny]

But you really don't "know" that either do you? ;) I won't argue that the odds are against it- but you don't "know" anything.

 

I am pretty sure if it was “successfully” used in combat we had known it already right? ;)

[nscode]

And even if it was used at all we would be told that it was used "successfully" ;)

 

I detected a mig 150 miles away and I was about to shoot it down.. but then... whel... the button that was supose to fire jamed. BUT! he didn't manage to detect me with his unworking radar.. and he wasn't able to see my lock with his unworking RWR. it later crashed due to it's unworking engines, so my mission was a success after all. weee did later manage to get the button to work using a chainsaw.. and some explosives

 

:D

[S77th-konkussion]

I am pretty sure if it was “successfully” used in combat we had known it already right? ;)

 

No. We didn't know about the first combat use of the F117 until well after the fact.

 

 

I love the way some of you are always whining about the cost of something that has probably saved your sorry butts. Either directly- or by virtue of the threat it presents by its very existence.

[tflash]

The problem is none of our foes seem to worry any longer about these silver bullet threats. People are not waiting in their HQ bunker till some B-2 passes over to drop a GPS bomb. They melt into the environment and population.

 

We need navy vessels, transport aircraft, armoured vehicles, round-the-clock CAS aircraft and lots of predators rather than raptors.

 

And very sorry to say so, but decent body armour and medical kits have saved many more lives than the big TV appearances of "stealth" aircraft.

 

That doesn't mean however that the F-22 is not simply the best fighter; it is. But I think the F-35 will be much more relevant. Chances are that stealth will have matured in such a way that it is cheaper and more maintainable. Then you really have a long-run advantage.

[TucksonSonny]

I love the way some of you are always whining about the cost of something that has probably saved your sorry butts. Either directly- or by virtue of the threat it presents by its very existence.

 

I love the way some of you adore the F-22 and whining about the immortality as it was the new God. Anyway it must be because it cost so much that our sorry butts (our US butts anyway) have to pay for the rest of their life to get out of debt. Either directly- or by virtue of the threat it presents by its very existence.;)

[Pilotasso]

^^^^LOL

 

I could say the same about the SU-27 and then we would have to argue wich god is better. :D

[GGTharos]

I love the way some of you adore the F-22 and whining about the immortality as it was the new God. Anyway it must be because it cost so much that our sorry butts (our US butts anyway) have to pay for the rest of their live to get out of debt. Either directly- or by virtue of the threat it presents by its very existence.;)

 

 

Actually, you're wrong. No one claims the F-22 is invincible. They DO claim it'll be -incredibly- effective.

 

Rather, what's really happening is all the Russian hardware fans claiming that the F-22 is pretty much a waste of money that will never amount to anything ;)

 

The truth is that this thing was built to deal with current (and by Current I mean S-300, S-400, R-77, current flanker designs) AND projected threats in a very unfair and dominating manner.

 

So, if you get to shoot a couple F-22's out of the air, pin a medal on yourself and enjoy it, because you've likely lost half your air force trying to do this, and half your SAMs.

 

It's incredible how people fail to understand that the F-22 is part of a system that is designed to roll over and crush the opposition in any sort of large scale warfare, AND THAT THERE IS NO COUNTERPART TO IT. That's the deal ;)

[nscode]

and if you loose your other half to get just one more you've won the media war and some bank in US will make it back away

[S77th-konkussion]

Spot on, Ghost. See- we have facts and HISTORY to back us up. We pretty much mean what we say, and if we have to improve- we say so and then we do it. Cost? Yep, the military has to spend a lot of money. It's called "research & development". Some money is spent only to have the project deemed "no go". Go ahead-delude yourself by calling it a "waste", get your jollies that we "failed".. It's rather humorous to watch.

 

Whatever imperfections you'd like to desperately hang onto by a thread- at least we haven't been reduced to fashion critique. If someone makes something better- We'll usually salute em for it. If we think that we need to out-do it, we'll get to work. That's the way of the competitive world.

[Floyd]

 

... snip ...

 

The truth is that this thing was built to deal with current (and by Current I mean S-300, S-400, R-77, current flanker designs) AND projected threats in a very unfair and dominating manner.

 

So, if you get to shoot a couple F-22's out of the air, pin a medal on yourself and enjoy it, because you've likely lost half your air force trying to do this, and half your SAMs.

 

It's incredible how people fail to understand that the F-22 is part of a system that is designed to roll over and crush the opposition in any sort of large scale warfare, AND THAT THERE IS NO COUNTERPART TO IT. That's the deal ;)

 

 

Great! I can't imagine anybody in the world stupid enough to attack

the US with a third world airforce. Just take a look at current events

in the world and -imho- the challenges can't be mastered by something

like the F-22.

 

I don't want to start a political discussion, but looking at current problems

the F-22 is in no way part of a solution. A nice toy to fly and play with,

but nothing more. And therefor, it really sucks.

[GGTharos]

Sorry Floyd, that doesn't cut it. Mayeb 'it sucks' right now, because there's this whole terrorist/insurgent thing happening. Sure, the F-22 can't deal with them. Did anyone ever claim it would?

 

The F-22 isn't there for some 3rd world air force, and it isn't there for the Taleban.

 

It's there in case say, China or India or Pakistan decide to get uppity.

 

You could claim that F-4's would have been adequate aircraft for fighting both gulf wars and the Balkan conflict as well. In that respect, pretty much any newer aircraft to fly there sucks ;)

[tflash]

It's incredible how people fail to understand that the F-22 is part of a system that is designed to roll over and crush the opposition in any sort of large scale warfare, AND THAT THERE IS NO COUNTERPART TO IT. That's the deal ;)

 

I totally understand this premise and I even fully agree to it. I just think the enemy didn't agree to the same game rules. They do not want to play the "roll over me" in a large scale warfare. They are totally involved in avoiding contact, in hiding, in attrition, in duration, in testing nerve.

 

It's like going after the fire ant with a Bulldozer. As they say in National Geographic: the fire ant truly flourishes in wastland. That's *their* habitat, not ours. Hitting bridges, deserted command posts, empty bunkers, disguised hospitals and unwilling stand-ins: call the global strike force B-2 & F-22.

 

Getting the true enemy nailed and pinned: call the marines.

[Frostie]

Originally Posted by Frost1e

The price of a Raptor is abso insane in a couple of yrs russian built planes will be just as good if not better at a 'fifth' of the price that means a hell of a lot more aircraft.

 

 

GGTharos

Which Russian 5th gen aircraft? And how did you come up with Russian built planes being as good, but cheaper?

 

 

Originally Posted by Frost1e

I don't think Raptors are going to be able to compete against superior numbers of 5thgen fighters , it won't be a turkey shoot like what the f22 has been showcased with against f15's.

 

GGTharos

Are those '5th gen aircraft' stealth? No? THen it'll be a turkey shoot. ;)

 

 

 

Jes GG u do love the Raptor don't you.:smilewink:

Im sure your not naive enough to believe that only the US creates new technology, I said in a couple of years Russian built a/c will be comparable if not already, the Russian a/c development aint in reverse and to put all your eggs in one small basket IMO is not a good idea.

[GGTharos]

Jes GG u do love the Raptor don't you.:smilewink:

Im sure your not naive enough to believe that only the US creates new technology, I said in a couple of years Russian built a/c will be comparable if not already, the Russian a/c development aint in reverse and to put all your eggs in one small basket IMO is not a good idea.

 

And I ask ... -which- Russian aircraft are comparable? Or anyone else's, for that matter?

[cool_t]

We need to see the Raptor in Combat, well we need to see all of theses new fighters go to battle before we can judge them.

 

:thumbup:

[Frostie]

So you believe the Raptor justifys its price because it has the best stealth technology in the western world.

[GGTharos]

Um, yes. Because if it so happens that it has to get itself in a tiff with another airforce, regardless of what aircraft THEY are using, it'll pay itself off tenfold in preventing air to air shoot downs of friendly aircraft.

[zaGURUinzaSKY]

Why does the Air Force need expensive new bombers? Have the people we've been bombing over the years been complaining?

[pschelchshorn]

 

You could claim that F-4's would have been adequate aircraft for fighting both gulf wars and the Balkan conflict as well.

 

Youre right, The F-4 is still the best aircraft!hgeheheheheheh! Beats all yer feckin other aircraft that are "oh so modern" im up for the old iron, id take a Phantom or Starfighter Seat instead of a JSF seat ANYDAY!! :pilotfly::pilotfly::pilotfly:

 

 

Flip

[Ukr_Alex]

I still find it amussing that some people think that you can grab a couple of your F-22s and fly into a country bypass all Sams bypass the air forces and win a war.

 

I doubt you can fly into Moscow on your little F-22 and bypass all the S-300s and the rest of the SAMs they have around the city...

 

All the power to the F-22...but I just dont see it happening until someone does it. Until then its nothing but words on this server in 0 and 1s.

[Pilotasso]

I still find it amussing that some people think that you can grab a couple of your F-22s and fly into a country bypass all Sams bypass the air forces and win a war.

 

Your statement is even more amusing, after all that has been said here, no one ever said anything of the sort. F-22 wont win wars by itself but I belive right or wrong, whoever owns an F-22 fleet has pretty much the rest needed for doing it. Not that I want to see something hapen to the point (because thats sad realy), but its a question of realism.

 

All the power to the F-22...but I just dont see it happening until someone does it. Until then its nothing but words on this server in 0 and 1s.

"F-117's in 1991", "Bagdad", "most heavily defended city in the world " rings a bell? Would you believe it back then?

And in the end the war could have gone to a standstill if the allies had breakup the coalition if Israel retaliated after the Scud attacks. All came to unity on the startegy, not one plane, although it helped. Humans still vanquish other humans, not machines.

 

Manifestations symptomatic of sorrow after the fact all of us wont bow to the mighty flanker like this, is somewhat presumptuous.

We all have different opinions and we are from different countries, you dont expect me or any other that is not a slav born to be in the same opinion, nor should you assume whoever doesnt, is an "unfortunate" american byproduct, COMRAD. :)