Jump to content

US Top Brass Fed Up With F-22 Problems


Vekkinho

Recommended Posts

Here:

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/airforce/US_Top_Brass_Fed_Up_With_F-22_Problems100016788.php

 

looks like F-35 Joint strike fighter seems a better and cheaper option in modern air war! F-22 has no proper role nowadays to vindicate 65 bil US$ of investments, which reminds me of...mmmhm...EF2K!


Edited by Vekkinho

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoever named that article should be fired.

 

Here's some quotes that show how they're "fed up" with "problems":

'Concerning the F-22, "it's not a matter of, do we need it? We have it," said Mullen. "It's a question of, how many do we need for the future?"

 

"I am concerned that it is such an expensive system," he said, adding that the Air Force is seeking another 60 above the 183 F-22s they currently have.'

 

and:

'The program has already cost more than 65 billion dollars -- each F-22 costs 350 million dollars.'

 

So, in summary, the article can be called "US Top Brass say the F-22 costs too much freaking money" or "US Top Brass feel F-22 not worth it". But I fail to see all the "problems" its having. I was expecting more info about some of the corrosion problems it was experiencing.

 

This is NOT an F-22 fanboy rant, this is an anti-journalism rant. I can't stand journalists and their half-assed attempts to get facts in the race to make money from advertising. I'm just as greedy and money-grubbing as the next guy, but not if it means getting the facts all screwed up. They are a necessary evil. Very necessary, and very evil. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here:

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/airforce/US_Top_Brass_Fed_Up_With_F-22_Problems100016788.php

 

looks like F-35 Joint strike fighter seems a better and cheaper option in modern air war! F-22 has no proper role nowadays to vindicate 65 bil US$ of investments, which reminds me of...mmmhm...EF2K!

 

The planes new so its natural it has gripes. So does the F-15 if I recall... to be worse! (broken longerons huh) the press is interpreting the interviewed brass about these issues on their own way.

 

F-35 will fare no better. Its already expensive even if its total price tag is as stealthy as the plane itself.

 

As for EF2K, thats a myth that needs to be debunked. Europe has always lacked an F-15 class fighter. On top of that one that also is multirole. Its no more useless than all the others. It is unmatched in europe and many Airforces had to resort to stopgap old airframes while waiting for it. Im my view they are urgently needed for a credible defense.

 

I am a bit tired to explain while comparing price tags that Euro nowadays is worth a big deal more than US dollars too :D


Edited by Pilotasso
  • Like 1

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(...)

F-22 has no proper role nowadays to vindicate 65 bil US$ of investments, which reminds me of...mmmhm...EF2K!

What does this have to do with the Eurofighter? Europe obviously needs an aircraft in this class to compete. What other option is there? I don't see it. And it is multirole, not some odd niche, so how is there not a proper role for it?


Edited by eurofor

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is NOT an F-22 fanboy rant, this is an anti-journalism rant. I can't stand journalists and their half-assed attempts to get facts in the race to make money from advertising. I'm just as greedy and money-grubbing as the next guy, but not if it means getting the facts all screwed up. They are a necessary evil. Very necessary, and very evil. ;)

No Offence!

Only a question: How much you paid to read this article?!

:huh:- also nothing ?

 

OK -than please don't wonder what kind of "journalism" we see in the I-net (I wouldn't call it:"journalism" - its more what groove said!) these days.

And in TV and.....

....I know:

If you want good information and be well informed on a quick way:

-you have to pay for it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Offence!

Only a question: How much you paid to read this article?!

:huh:- also nothing ?

 

OK -than please don't wonder what kind of "journalism" we see in the I-net (I wouldn't call it:"journalism" - its more what groove said!) these days.

And in TV and.....

....I know:

If you want good information and be well informed on a quick way:

-you have to pay for it!

 

I didn't pay anything, obviously.

 

That article, according to that web page was originally in some sort of publication from "Agence France-Presse" (never heard of them). Did you notice that? This would lead one to believe that it was written by someone attempting some half-way serious journalism. Do you think all journalism is pay only? Ever heard of Reuters? Associated press? BBC? Even cable news networks from the US have websites that are by and large, free.

 

Maybe the title is a poor translation. It certainly is poor, no matter the reason. It was written to grab attention, which it succeeds at, rather than a true summary of the article. Its the motive behind the need to draw attention at the expense of truth that I'm always suspicious of. My first thought is almost always "money from advertisers". Negativity sells.


Edited by RedTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gues in the coming months the discussion will grow more intense: should the US concentrate on the F-35 and its production line at Fort Worth or should it keep alternative production lines open, like F-15, F-22 and Hornet.

 

For the Hornet there are still sufficient orders open, for F-22 it will become time to decide if they want to continue, otherwise suppliers will stop production of parts.

 

There was an interview in Combat Aircraft with an ANG General that seemed to ponder about additional purchase of F-15/F-16 legacy fighters.

 

The problem with F-22 is that Lockheed-Martin doesn't really need it from an industrial point of view. F-35 is the way to go for them. But on the other hand, some think it is not wise to put all your luck in one basket! Better keep some alternative designs in the air. Suppose, after you sold 3000 of them, the F-35 proves inferior in combat?

It is still nowhere at 50.000 ft, limited by design.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the worst probelm of the F-35 from the US point of view is that its going to be exported in large numbers meaning either there will be no secrets left for its own or the export custumers will have to settle for downgraded examples.

 

Who knows, the current crysis could even put the hurt on the F-35 as much as the F-22.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-35 can kick an F-16's

 

I fixed this for you, since you have very obviously made a typo, or you have been severely misinformed.

 

arse and we're going to replace it with something that doesn't even have stealth?

 

You're right, the F-16 has no stealth. The F-35 on the other hand, has plenty of it. ;)

 

GOD, its like replacing an F/A-18 with an F-86.

 

More like replacing an F-4 with an F-18.

 

WTF:chair::furious:

 

Indeed - get those sources checked ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F-35 is stealthy, may be less than F-22 but stealthy enough for a average "red" radar it may encounter in todays warfare!

 

Thing is, we already saw that line saying US plans to purchase 2,400 F-35 airframes and we know a great number will also be exported worldwide. Plus it's a JSF and will probably have more work to do in modern battlefields and operations. BVR engagements in last 20 years are very, very rare considering the technological level and equipment of todays US adversaries! How many strategic bombers and air superiority fighers Mr.OBL has?!!

 

Now if you compare these figures with F-22 you'll notice there's more income from F-35 than from F-22. Fighter mafia is back again!

 

I saw no data on export versions and numbers of F-22, I believe there's none meaning no foreign currency income to USA!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I do not totally understand is why they need so many F-22s. For the sake of overkill? If this aircraft is such a quantum leap ahead and such a force multiplyer, why do you need more than the 183 you already have? This is like 15 times the size of some countries' entire fighter air force.

 

I can certainly understand the longer term goal of replacing every F-15 with an F-22, but even the USAF got every single Raptor it wanted, it would still be no where near fully replacing every Eagle. Since this is the case, why load up on them now? The F-22 will only be improved over time and there isn't a whole hell of a lot of other aircraft on the horizon that can challenge it.

 

People tend to forget how quickly wars can materialize out of nothing in a time frame that is too quick to produce enough equipment, God forbid anything ever happen. So I can understand the need for them now rather than waiting. But I think asking for more is going to be a suicide mission with what the apparent threat is today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note, why did the F-4 need replacement? We still got it! It's still kicking the BVR arena :D

 

Many, many reasons. ;) The F-15 was quite a leap ahead of the F-4 when it was first developed. Besides things like actually having look-down, shoot-down capability, there are things the F-15 pioneered that flight simmers take for granted. An example is the way radar info is displayed. At the time it was quite a feat. Instead of showing raw radar returns, it processed the info into a digital horizontal picture on the VSD. The dynamic launch parameters of its various weapons were calculated by a computer depending on speed, altitude, etc. of the F-15 and the bandit it was tracking. This allowed the pilot to fulfill the role that was held by the RIO in the Phantom. At the time, and even today, this is seen as an advantage. The VSD allows the pilot to do at a glance what the RIO had to be trained to do with calculations in his head. Another big advance was the concept of a HOTAS, which the F-15 also pioneered. The pilot workload in the Phantom was much higher. These things, especially the way the VSD displays contacts and DLZs are things that many take for granted. I know I certainly did!

 

As much as I dislike the F-4, I'll admit it wasn't a horrible plane for the time. But the F-15 was just so, so much better. ;)


Edited by RedTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I do not totally understand is why they need so many F-22s. For the sake of overkill? If this aircraft is such a quantum leap ahead and such a force multiplyer, why do you need more than the 183 you already have? This is like 15 times the size of some countries' entire fighter air force.

 

 

You have a point. However if they shut down the production line those units will be much reduced say 20 years from now puting in cause the expenditure of maintaining the type alltogether, logistics, parts manufacture and pilot training, not to mention infra structures. After the number decays below a certain number all those support assets cannot be finantialy justified anymore before the congress. SO the plane is axed or retired early.

 

Adding injury to insult, those raptors wouldnt be avaiable in enough numbers to defend all wordlwide US interests. This is not a tragedy for some reading this but from the US point of view it would be like shooting itself on the foot.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The USAF wants 760 Raptors to maintain the air superiority mission. This number accounts for keeping a set number of squadrons over x decades, it accounts for foreseeable attrition, and also for having enough squads to deploy where they are needed, as well as readiness level.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...