"Everyone Who Wanted More F-22s Is Being Proven Right" Topic
10 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board Back to the Modern Aviation Discussion (1946-2011) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleYou wanted more photos of the Santa Claws Gang? Here is Santa and two of his companions.
Featured Profile Article
Featured Book Review
|
Tango01 | 26 Sep 2015 9:48 p.m. PST |
"As if they suddenly came to an epiphany, the United States Air Force brass is now admitting what many of us have been screaming about for so long: We didn't build nearly enough F-22s, and the F-35 cannot simply pick up the slack. So why aren't those who pushed so hard to cancel the F-22 program being held accountable? By the mid 2000s, the F-22 was finally entering the fray as the world's first true stealth fighter, offering a quantum leap in capability and performance when compared with anything else on the battlefield. It was a thoroughbred weapon system meant to shape the battlefield by vanquishing anything in the skies and neutering enemy air defenses, so that less capable combat aircraft could survive over the battle space. It was a high-end door kicker, the ultimate "anti-access" fighter…" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Visceral Impact Studios | 27 Sep 2015 5:36 a.m. PST |
Before holding accountable those who canceled the F-22 let's first prosecute those who proposed and developed it. Line for accountability starts with them. The F-22 experienced almost every one of these problems. The Air Force began laying plans to build the F-22 in the early 1980s. A decade later, it estimated it would take nine years and $12.6 USD billion to develop the jet, but it ended up taking 19 years and costing $26.3 USD billion, not including the production of any aircraft. link |
mandt2 | 27 Sep 2015 6:37 a.m. PST |
I think this particular debate is based on a false argument. The F-22 was never going to be the only new fighter. The Navy and Marines wanted the F-35 as a replacement for the F-18. And IIRC, the cutting back of F-22 production had more to do with the F-22s obscenely bloated price-tag, and the fact that it was already obsolete compared to more advance designs. See Visceral's post above. Like the F-18, the F-35 is primarily intended to be a strike aircraft with good A-A capability. The F-22 is pure fighter. The question isn't, "is the F-35 inferior to the F-22," but rather how does the F-35 stack up against the F-18 and how does the F-22 compare to the F-15? Besides, we are not going to war with Russia or China. So the likelihood of of the F-22 ever full-filling it's primary role is very slim. On the other hand, if the F-35 replaces all of the F-18s in the U.S. inventory, the chances it will see high threat combat is pretty high. |
Generalstoner49 | 27 Sep 2015 7:51 a.m. PST |
All the pieces are there to restart production. I actually just read an article from a reputable source that said to just rebuild the line would cost around $250 USD million. To then tool it, man it with experienced and skilled workers and push the go button would be another $200 USD million. So in essence $500 USD million to start making the F-22 again. I honestly think it is worth it. |
McKinstry | 27 Sep 2015 9:24 a.m. PST |
If you treat the R&D costs as a sunk cost and don'try and reamortize them across the cost of new units, the per aircraft cost of new F-22's would be less than that of F-35's although there may be added upgrade costs that have been builtinto the existing fleet that would have to be factored in. All in all, I think new F-22's might be cost effective if some F-35's are cancelled/delayed. |
mandt2 | 27 Sep 2015 5:26 p.m. PST |
Yeah, but what about the Navy and Marines. You can't fly F-22s off of carrier decks, and they will never fulfill the Marines' wish for a VTOL attack aircraft. Personally, I think if the F-35 gets booted, funding should not go toward building more F-22s, but developing a successful fighter/bomber that can operate from carriers. Mark my words. The F-22 is a place-holder for the next generation of air-superiority aircraft. I'd be very surprised if they put the F-22 back into production. |
Mako11 | 27 Sep 2015 8:41 p.m. PST |
The problem is with so few F-22s, and so many old, worn out birds, what's gonna fill the squadrons between now and 2035+? The F-35 certainly is proving to have been a horrible, overpriced choice. |
Tango01 | 28 Sep 2015 12:09 p.m. PST |
Thanks for the link. Amicalement Armand |
EnclavedMicrostate | 06 Oct 2015 4:18 a.m. PST |
"quantum leap" When an electron changes energy state in a brief period of time. Clearly, the most immense of developments. Furthermore, whose stupid idea was it to give Marines planes in the first place? |
Lion in the Stars | 06 Oct 2015 7:24 a.m. PST |
@Sadowa: The US Navy, back in the 1920s. Marines have been operating CAS forever. |
|