F-22 production will end at 187 aircraft

[Force_Feedback]

But... More F-35s, man, I really like that jet, great optical system, cool helmet, and a worthy F-16 replacement :) Cons: Noise, though I don't live near an AB, still noise will upset a lot of people.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090406/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/defense_budget

 

Ripped from airliners.net:hehe:

[p_o_d_2_2]

Hopefully Congress will gets its way and more will be built.

[SuperKungFu]

It's like this with every new aircraft. Remember when the B-2 was first build? They said they wanted to build 200? But after the cold war ended, they only built like 20 at 1.3 billion dollars each.

[Brassbud]

This sucks, especially when Gates mentioned the F-35 as a "superiority" fighter. The Air Force has long held the F-22 would be the last manned air superiority fighter, and with only 187-2 airframes to last us well into the middle of the century, I just don't see how this plan is going to work.

 

Sure the F-35 has a cool cockpit and minor stealth, but it's not a good airframe, not as good as most 4th gen fighters and probably not as good as some 3rd.

 

It's a shame that in just 3 months a guy can come in and destroy decades worth of work, work that can't be redone with a different, wiser administration down the road.

[hitman]

I always thought of the F-22 as junk...it looks like a flying boat for godssakes! The Black Widow would have been the best choice, and probably cheaper too. I dont think the F-35 will do well except in the USMC as a replacement for the AV-8B.

 

You guys elected him, not me. Dont look at me. :)

[SuperKungFu]

I agree, I liked the YF-23 better, the black widow was beautiful. It was faster and had a smaller radar cross section if memory serves me right. So i was quite surprised when the F-22 won, especially since the YF-22 crashed during testing- i thought that would have gave the lead to the YF-23.

 

The F-35, although it is saving cost for 1 general airframe, whenever someone does that, it limits its capability in order to support its multi-task role. I remember the Australian review board said the F-35 can't turn, can't climb, can't fight. But only time will tell.

[MBot]

In the current situation I would say the money is better spent for 50 OV-10 instead of one F-22.

[tflash]

It's not only for current wars that the F-22 is basically useless. You have to look at the number of sorties you will generate, in any scenario.

 

When looking at the ATO, there are only a number of slots an F-22 can fit into. So anyway, thousands of sorties will be done by the F-35/Super Hornet/Reaper pack, while the F-22 is sightseeing Hawaii.

 

While ANG pilots that fly workhorses like F-16 can relieve the burden of active duty units in real conflicts by doing tours in theatre, the F-22 ANG pilots can only rotate to ... euh Hawaii again.

 

It must be good in Hawaii, but I guess history is being made elsewhere.

 

For the very specialized ops where an F-22 might clearly be better if all goes well, they seem to have estimated 187 will do the job! Let the 2000+ others be F-35.

[Force_Feedback]

Seems they are finally starting to use their heads, and not the organ that makes you hungry for money. Still, Lockheed has an extensive bribing history, and I'm sure they're still at it (judging by my own country, with all the unsubstantieted pro-JSF whinnig). The YF-23 is said to be faster as well, but the best thing was its looks, man, that thing had some sleek curves.

The F-35 can only be saved now if it's produced in large numbers, otherwise it will cost more than the F-22 per airframe. So this is a good move, and since there is no nation that could threat the US, other than with MAD, the F-22 will not be used that often (maybe to greet rusting Tu-95s near Alaska). The problems are now mostly on the ground, and oppose the curent establishment in some way, and since those people don't have an airforce it's quite pointless to have hundreds of F-22 wasting American, and in turn the world's ;) tax money.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

There is no money. Period. 187 is too much to begin with. What was the F-22 score against those F-15's? If it is that good then, why do you need them in large numbers?

 

Beside, me as a taxpayer, I am more then happy for my money to be spent on F-22 program, but not to the point that my children can not have medical insurance and I am left without retirement. That's how Soviet Union collapsed.

[Boberro]

Yep money is one of the main reasons imo. But anyway 187 pieces is huge threat, quality of them is really high.

[tflash]

It of course leaves US wide open for a Canadian invasion ;)

 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090406/world/us_cda_stolen_plane

[GGTharos]

Talk about a lot of misconceptions.

 

The F-22 is being cut because of politics; it is a super fighter with specifically one job (air superiority) which is the problem - super fighters are expensive, just like the F-14 and F-15 before it.

It's getting cut because some people think an air superiority fighter isn't necessary. History will tell here.

 

As for the YF-23 being 'better'? Turns out the F-22 is pretty speed, has better payload capability, and had the lower risk of development. The more advanced materials used on the 23 then, are used on the 22 now, and are better proven.

 

There's no real proof that the YF-23 had lower RCS, nor, in particular, what 'lower RCS' meant to anyone who might have said that. Lower frontal RCS? Doubt it - at least, not significantly so.

 

The F-22 probably came out on top in maneuverability.

 

As for the F-35 being a 'bad airframe' ... what a joke ;) That thing has more thrust in its single engine than an F-15C in both of its engines. It weighs about the same too, if that gives you any hints about its performance (it should) ... and to boot, it's also flying clean, with incredible situational-awareness enhancing hardware onboard, as well as stealth, which decreases the usefulness of situational awareness enhancing hardware for the other side.

 

The notion that F-22 pilots would only rotate to Hawaii is also ridiculous; they would again be likely stationed in Japan (already have), potentially germany, and other places.

 

Why more than 187 F-22s? The plan isn't for just now. The plan for the 760 F-22's originally was for a fighting force of F-22's that would last 30 years. Those 760 aircraft aren't produced all at once - they keep running production for 15-20 years, so that the Air Force always has a given number of operational + spare aircraft.

 

Cutting production off right now not only costs American Taxpayer's jobs, but money too (Where do people get EI from? ), it costs them part of their defensive arsenal (with the best defense being a good offense, how good of an investment do you think an F-22 is when the excrement hits the rotary device? ), and it costs in taxes that the producer and people employed by the producer would pay as well.

 

It also costs in innovation: If you want the lead in air warfare, YOU HAVE TO KEEP THE LEAD.

This ties in to exports and other things also. One might argue here that the F-35 certainly does help - but when it does come to war, the F-35 isn't an Air Dominance fighter. The F-22 is.

 

While there is a crunch currently, it's best for these to be implemented as temporary measures rather than permament ... or else.

[jpm1]

the recent crash seems to have given the coup de grace i'm a bit sad for the american but it seems manned planes haven't their place in modern conflict anymore

[GGTharos]

I don't know about that - I see more manned than unmanned planes flying sorties currently.

 

The crash itself shouldn't have given a 'coup of anything' ... it is actually surprising that the crash rate is so -low- given that this is a new aircraft.

[hitman]

F-35 can't turn, can't climb, can't fight. But only time will tell.

I dont see how they can say this...its not like it doesnt have the most powerful engine in service today pushing a frame that weighs as much as, if not less than an F-16.

[GGTharos]

The F-35 grosses as much with a combat load as a loaded F-15C with nominal payload. It has MORE THRUST. How can it -not- climb?

 

That engine puts out 48000lbs of thrust.

[EtherealN]

It of course leaves US wide open for a Canadian invasion ;)

 

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090406/world/us_cda_stolen_plane

 

Heh, hilariously enough if true, a friend of mine in the US navy said that one of the most meticulously planned wartime scenarios is that of a war with Canada. I assume more because it is pretty unique in allowing a direct landwar on the US land borders than a specific threat assessment, though. :P

 

Also, that article has to be one of the most horribly poorly written pieces of written journalism I have ever seen. :P

[tflash]

Maybe there is still enough growth potential in the F-35, so that you do not need the longer F-22 production run.

[GGTharos]

Maybe the F-22 can still do the things the F-35 can't ... like cruising at 50-55 thousand feet and supercruising for reasonable distances - not to mention the maneuverability and payload aspect, as well as better all-aspect stealth ;)

 

Growth is great, but you can't grow into an A2A role from a striker as easily as you can go the other way around.

[hitman]

I heard rumors around that the Navy is planning on purchasing some F-23's for the fleet. Be nice to see a big black can o' whoop ass sitting on the newest carriers coming out.

[GGTharos]

I heard that one too, and I seriously doubt it'll happen. The 35 is their new toy, along with the superbugs.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The F-22 is being cut because of politics; ...

You can cry politics all day long. The fact is, this county's total debt is at staggering 78 800 000 000 000 dollars (78,8 trillion dollars). We are just simply running out of money. We have to be more rational of our needs and capabilities.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

[GGTharos]

You may want to do the math on that number. ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

You may want to do the math on that number. ;)

If you clicked on the link I provided, you would see that the math was not done by me.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!