Posted on 08/14/2011 11:58:36 AM PDT by skeptoid
SAMs are cheeper than jets. We need a plane that can get through a modern air defense. That means stealth.
Or the strategic ballistic missiles we have. Or the AEGIS systems on our ships. Etc., etc., etc. We wouldn't have much of a strategic military left if we measured its effectiveness by whether or not we had used it in the "brush wars" after 9/11...
Your analysis is spot on! Folks who don't understand the need for dominant weapons systems are the modern day versions of the grasshopper in Aesop's fable of the grasshopper and the ants...
Untilled a first tier enemy learns how to jammed drones. Then it’s pilots in the cockpit again.
Newer inferred technology and radar which sees the ‘holes’ these aircraft produce will come to age making these slow multibillion jets obsolete.
Speed and distance is the answer
So, they serve no purpose?
Tell that to the KIAs from Korea and Viet Nam.
RAM
You recall incorrectly.
“RAM”
There is much more to maintaining RCS (that’s what you call it...) configuration than the materials themselves, of which “RAM” is only part of it.
Every single hatch, door, rivet, screw has to be treated to maintain the RCS.
Sometimes RCS is not so much about controlling the magnitude (though lower magnitude is always sought) as it is controlling the direction in which it “spikes”.
All of these things are part of maintaining RCS - much much more than just materials.
It takes time (as measured in maintenance per flight hour) but usually improves significantly as it goes, like other aspects of the platform.
That said, I’m not generally a fan of the F-22 on cost alone. The same avionics, engines, and other efforts could be integrated into an F15 platform at a far lower cost, reducing the F22 buy and resulting in more aircraft and a more effective force (in my opinion)
I can go into more (unclass) detail if you wish to know. I used to do this for a living.
For certain. The US military understands the fundamental importance of air supremacy v. air superiority.
The fundamental question is noted by someone above - having never used my gun does it make my gun a waste of money?
Liberals would say yes, until the day they’re mugged.
If America were to lose a major war, it would be the end.
That contingency is already accounted for.
Well, enlighten me if you would be so kind.
I have heard of that case...just goes to show, there is always, always, always some chink in the armor or a weak point.
True, I stand corrected. Thank You to all who gave it their ALL.
“A unique situation of dissimilar corrosion between the surfaces of the carbon skin and aluminum structure, not the normal corrosion one finds in other aircraft.”
I wasn’t aware tha carbon fiber corrodes, but of course you have technical proof of that, eh?? (So far, I’ve read a lot of allegations, but no evidence by responsible engineers...)
JC
“Plus they have to stay dry, a big problem.”
I have never heard of this being a specified requirement for any modern aircraft. Can you produce same for the F-22? Last I heard, it was designed to be all-weather capable, per spec!
JC
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.