Should The F-22 be cancelled?

26-nov,2004 | Me

[Haro_546]

Yes. This type of aircraft has no place in the modern battlefield and Foreseeable conflicts. The money could be put into more usefull sistems (each unit cost about $235 million for 239 planes) Whats your opinion?

[VOR78]

You've made the assertion several times that satellites and other means can replace the F-22, yet where is your proof? Simply stating it does not make it fact.

[Haro_546]

Well, tell me why it should be saved.

[grids]

You are right - F-35s can't do the same job. You are wrong - the F-35s, namely the STOVL variant which was overweight (not the other two variants), has been redesigned to capture approximately 2700 pounds in direct weight reduction and approximately 600 pounds equivalent reduction by increased engine and airframe performance. This STOVL (short take off and vertical landing) variant will not be overweight.

BTW, given the reports about effectiveness of F/A-22 against F-15s during initial operational test and evaluation exercises, and increased abilities of Indian F-15 pilots against US F-15 pilots, and you will see that F/A-22 is a necessary weapon system. The claim that there is no known system which can compete with it is (1) good - military done right is military that is unmatched, and (2) short-sighted reason to argue for its cancellation. I'd hate to be the person who says to the next President "Gee, if only we'd known that the Russians were building the Mig-nn, we'd have kept the F/A-22."

[Long Cut]

There is no Naval variant of the F-22. It's not unusual; there was no Naval variant of the F-15, either.

The Air Force and Navy have vastly different requirements, such that it is difficult indeed to make one aircraft for both, unless you START with a Navy plane and Air-Force-ize it.

[Haro_546]

I agree.

[forYourChildrenVote4Bush]

Isn't the F-35 the plane that was supposed to be used on aircraft carriers (It could take off vertically??)? Can the f22 be modified for aircrafts or will they keep the f18?

F-35 is the one that had multiple countries joining in its development? I always thought that the F-35 was further ahead than the f22.

[Cyclone59]

The far superior bird is in a hanger somewhere - the F23's the McDonnell built we far more agile, faster, production ready and NEVER DETECTED ON RADAR during the testing phases of the contract.

My big pork project that I'd like to see cancelled is that Osprey, sorry Marines, but that thing is, and has been, a nightmare waiting to happen. I understand the need, but we've got to figure out a better way to get you what you need.

[Haro_546]

The US is currently deploying more advance gps satellites.

[JRandomFreeper]

You are naive

We won.

And we read Sun Tszu.

/john

[Long Cut]

"Missiles/radar/satellite webs can easily do whatever the f-22 does for a fraction of the price."

Please cite for us these systems of which you speak, and the cost-benefit comparison between them and the F-22. Give examples and numbers, please.

Oh, and cite your bona fides in this area so we can evaluate your opinions.

[buccaneer81]

Modern missiles will blow it to bits.

Whose modern missiles? I've seen none that threaten American air superiority over the last 30 years.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The JTF-35 is a non-starter, and will in all likelihood be killed, as it is too heavy, and cannot be fixed.

Don't tell that to the engineers in Fort Worth. They'd like to rub your nose in those 2700 lbs of weight reduction.

[Kornev]

There is some bizarre trolling going on in this thread.

[Long Cut]

"Well, tell me why it should be saved..."

BZZZT! Sorry, sport, YOU made the assertion, YOU back your own opinion up. That's how this works.

[Pox]

"Missiles/radar/satellite webs can easily do whatever the F-22 does for a fraction of the price.

After reading through the whole thread, it seems to me you have no idea of what you are talking about. The F-22 is almost deployed and anything in the arena you pronounce to be an equivalent is but technology in it's infancy, and cannot with any reasonable expectation be able to perform the same mission as the F-22.

Instead of endlessly repeating generalized "theoretical" equivilancies comprised of nothing but buzzwords try to offer up some specifics to your beliefs. The F22 is a major leap forward in performance and can literally fly circles around the F15 and F16 if engaged at close range.

[Haro_546]

I like the Osprey. My main point against the F-22 are it cost too much, it will be obsolete before we use it, the money saved can be put to better use.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The Commandant wants the V-22, not the F-22.

[Petronski]

Already been corrected downthread.

[Cyclone59]

OOPS!

Wait 'til you see the new toys that the engineers have cooked up over at Boeing. Our only limitations to our figher aircraft is the human limitations.

[Long Cut]

"the F-35s, namely the STOVL variant which was overweight (not the other two variants), has been redesigned to capture approximately 2700 pounds in direct weight reduction and approximately 600 pounds equivalent reduction by increased engine and airframe performance..."

Okay, that's 3300 pounds. The thing was over 4,000 pounds overweight specs. Where's the rest come from? It's important, because is it's too fat, it can't carry a useful weapon/fuel loadout for its designated job.