Posted on 05/05/2022 9:13:35 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The USAF wants to retire the F-22 beginning around 2030 mainly due to two reasons: the F-22’s high operating costs, and the F-22’s obsolescence in a number of areas, with the latter being the primary reason.
With regards to high operating costs, the F-22 fleet was not produced in sufficient quantities to replace the F-15, and therefore its logistics and supply chain do not benefit from economy of scale as much as jets like the F-16 and F-35. The F-22 also uses legacy stealth materials that increase maintenance costs; properly retrofitting the F-22 with the F-35’s more durable full material stack is also not possible without replacing the composite panels of every F-22. These composites are not the same, so the structural strength of the jet and possibly the thickness of its skin would be affected, requiring recertification of its life limit and likely some redesigns of panels and doors to accommodate altered geometry. There are also a number of other technological advances that allows fighters to be cheaper to maintain, but which would require redesigns of the F-22, some being quite deep.
In terms of obsolescence, the F-22’s biggest issues are its limited range, its outdated core avionics and its stealth design.
For range, the F-22 was designed primarily for fighting in Europe and turn of the millennium era threats, and so its combat radius of approximately 590 nautical miles (less with any use of supercruise) is not ideal for a war with China. This is because jets may need to be flying from locations like Guam and relying on tankers only ~400 nautical miles (if F-22s are using supercruise) behind the F-22’s, which would then be threatened by new very long range missiles and enemy stealth fighters that may be able to slip sufficiently far past fighter screens to take those tankers out.
By comparison, the F-35A (land-based variant) has an air-to-air combat radius of 760 nautical miles, with a new engine being developed for it which would boost that to nearly 1000 nautical miles. The F-22’s NGAD successor is also anticipated to have an approximately 1000+ nautical miles combat radius.
For its core avionics the F-22 is considerably hampered by old ADA code with limited modularity, being run on old processors. Because the software isn’t very modular or open, adding a new sensor requires a lot of extra work. For the F-22 to outperform jets like the J-20 into the 2030s and beyond, it needs to keep up by getting a helmet mounted display, a panoramic cockpit display, updated electronic warfare systems, long range infrared sensors, updated communications systems, improved sensor fusion and combat ID systems, etc. Developing a clean sheet system based around an open architecture will take time and money, but from there it’ll be much easier to keep cutting edge, which will be critical as we enter into something resembling a second Cold War.
For stealth, the F-22 is quite stealthy, but its potential was compromised in order to make it very agile, which in this day and age is becoming a lesser and lesser priority as air-to-air missiles become more advanced. By creating a clean sheet fighter, you can make a jet better shaped to have highly effective stealth against both fire control radar bands like the X-band, and lower frequency “counter-stealth” search radars operating in the UHF and VHF bands, allowing jets like NGAD to escort B-21 bombers as they penetrate deep into enemy airspace.
So in sum, the program was a failure?
I would image that the same logic was used when they retired the F-117.
“By comparison, the F-35A (land-based variant) has an air-to-air combat radius of 760 nautical miles”
Although the fact that the F-35 cannot hope to fill the role of air superiority regardless of range.
Maybe next time there will be no halting production prematurely.
A different view point:
The Air Force top brass are a bunch of bean counters that believe they can build and operate one aircraft that can meet the mission requirements of multiple roles.
However, the problem with an aircraft that can perform multiple roles is that it does not perform any one role very well.
No, no, no, it succeeded wildly at its core mission of failing.
As will everything that replaces it, because it’s the core mission of our federal government.
“Although the fact that the F-35 cannot hope to fill the role of air superiority regardless of range.”
Neither can it fill the role of close air support.
Using the F35 for close air support is like plowing a field with a $2.6 million Lamborghini Countach.
“Why does the U.S. Air Force want to retire the F-22 Stealth Tactical Fighter Aircraft ?”
Because they have orders to divert funds and resources to equity and inclusion endeavors. As a bonus it will weaken the US military.
Because they keep losing it because it is so stealthy, and have to xpend more time looking for it then flying it.
The airplane will be 43 years old as a design in 2030.
Not quite a “failure”.
Century series fighters of the 50’s were retired in the early 70’s for the most part. The B52 being kept alive for over a half century should be regarded for what is - a budget driven bandaid, not a model for all other airframes.
“Although the fact that the F-35 cannot hope to fill the role of air superiority regardless of range.”
Current/modern air superiority is all about AAM range and detection/targeting range.
It will not be another decade before that is done with transport sized aircraft. Already they are being tested as “missile trucks”.
So the F-22 is obsolete but the B-52 will be flying into the 2060’s. SMH, chair force.
And the F-35 will magically deliver as:
* A light bomber
* A ground attack platform
* A combat fighter
* A close in air support platform
* An anti-satellite platform
* An anti-submarine platform
* Pizza delivery platform
My big huge warning sign with the F-35 is it’s over-promised by its proponents. But it might be okay for pizza delivery.
With our political system? You’re dreaming.
The program was a resounding success, just the wrong companies without the political clout benefitted.
Today, there are better classified platforms being developed and due out very soon.
“Because they keep losing it because it is so stealthy, and have to xpend more time looking for it then flying it.”
The stealth must work; I’ve never seen one.
I’m not even certain that it actually exists :)
Partially. The F-117 was designed for 1 purpose, to drop a laser guided bomb in a heavily defended target, such as down town Baghdad. When developed, it was state of the art against Soviet air defenses. Baghdad was perfect for this airplane. It’s air defenses couldn’t see it on radar and at night was totally invisible. Without a flight computer, the wobbly goblin was unflyable.
RE: Stealth was possible until the advent of 3D networked radars.
Are you saying that stealth is impossible now with these radars in place?
What is this “F-22’s NGAD successor” of which you speak?
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.