"Why Did America Stop Building the Best Fighter Jet Ever?" Topic
6 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 that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board
Action Log
09 Jan 2017 10:06 p.m. PST by Editor in Chief Bill
- Removed from Modern Aviation Discussion (1946-2006) board
- Crossposted to Ultramodern Warfare (2006-present) board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 09 Jan 2017 10:00 p.m. PST |
"In the late 1990s, the United States was at a post–Cold War apex as an aviation juggernaut. Not only did it have the largest fleet of combat aircraft in the world, it was also producing the only fifth-generation fighter in existence: the F-22 Raptor. By 2009, the U.S. government had turned against the fighter, and only 187 were produced. What happened to the F-22 program, and why? There's little doubt the F-22 Raptor is the greatest air superiority fighter of its time. The problem was that the fighter's development went on for so long that its primary adversary, the Soviet air force, went out of business. The F-22 also collided with current events, as the economic demands of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the lack of a peer adversary made a $300 USD million fighter plane, in the view of government officials at the time, an unsustainable cost. An economic recession—nearly a depression—that began in 2008 and only ended in 2010 was clearly another reason…" Main page link Amicalement Armand |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 09 Jan 2017 11:08 p.m. PST |
Wishful thinking that never panned out. The Pentagon planned to have the same 5th-gen hi-lo mix of F-22's and F-35's as the 4th gen F-15/F-16 mix. Everybody thought that the F-35 would be so much cheaper than the Raptor that they could afford thousands. They also believed that the F-35, like the Viper, can be more versatile as an multi-role combat aircraft whereas the F-22 is strictly an air-to-air machine. Then again, hindsight being 20/20 who's to say that an "improved" F-22 wouldn't be cost-prohibitive in today's dollars if we adhere to the belief that the defense industry is a profit-maximization machine. |
Mako11 | 10 Jan 2017 2:40 a.m. PST |
So they can pay more for a much less capable fighter, just like was done with the hi-lo, F-14/F-18 mix. Any more silly questions? Providing less capability means far more profit, which is really a win/win, at least for the manufacturer(s), when they can charge more for less. |
Tgerritsen | 10 Jan 2017 8:48 a.m. PST |
Restarting the F22 line will be VERY expensive. The tooling was supposed to be preserved, but much of it is missing. The aircraft is actually fairly dated right now in its ability to be upgraded, so it would require a whole new design of avionics and weapon integration systems. Those who feel that you can just flick that switch back on are deluded. Even if it was made a priority, you are talking probably 5-8 years before the first full production new build F22 were to roll off a line. Also, FYI, the latest cost per unit of the F35 is currently down, as it has come down in price year after year since the reorganization back in 2011. link Those are LRIP numbers, meaning Low Rate Initial Production, which by their very nature are higher than the final full production costs, which remain on track to be $85 USDM for the F35A and under $100 USDM per unit for the F35B and C. Compare that to the current unit cost of an F15E, which cost $100 USDM per unit back in 2006, the F18E/F at $98.3 USDM per unit in 2016, and the F16, which cost the US $20 USDM per unit back in 1998 (volume lowers price), but the latest units sold to the UAE (the E model Block 60) cost $80 USDM per unit (and somehow we stiffed Iraq for $165 USDM per unit with some F16's we sold them). If there were a block buy of the F35, the LRIP cost would reduce down even further. To say that the F35 cost is anywhere near the F22 cost per unit or 'out of control' is simply not fact. The CEO of Lockheed also reportedly met with Trump and promised to lower the F35 price further in response to his tweets about cost. Before you say, "Hey they should buy Gripen or the Typhoon," the Gripen is running $130 USD million per unit (based on the sale price to Brazil in their deal) while the Typhoon numbers are harder to discern based on widely varied reports, but appear to average out at $106 USD million per unit (with some countries paying as much as $160 USD million per unit). Unless you plan to fly Russian or Chinese designs, modern aircraft aren't cheap. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 10 Jan 2017 9:48 a.m. PST |
$130 USD mil apiece seems high for the Gripen compared to previous advertised costs. There must be other incentives like technology transfers in the deal. |
Mako11 | 11 Jan 2017 5:44 p.m. PST |
Missing? Have the Chinese stolen that too? I'm sure the price-points aren't apples to apples comparisons, since they're probably not in the same-year dollars, etc., but I'm seeing $143 USD – $150 USD million a unit for F-22s in a quick pass, and recently read $155 USD million for the far less capable F-35. One source, date in 2012 on the F-35 mentions $233 USD mil a copy for "the Coot" (definition – a rather ugly, useless bird). link Some of the low-ball prices we're seeing don't even include the engine in them, obviously to make them seem like better bargains. Who the hell would buy F-35s without engines, other than perhaps the Russians, or Chinese, if they could install their own in them? "The JPO also released the final LRIP unit price for each of the three F-35 variants. These prices are: -- $105 USD million for each of 22 F-35A Conventional Take-off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft for the US Air Force; -- $125 USD million for each of seven F-35C Carrier Variant (CV) aircraft for the US Navy; and -- $113 USD million for each of 3 F-35B Short Take-off Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft for the US Marine Corps. These prices are expressed in BY12 dollars, and do not include the aircraft's F-135 engine, which is procured separately. The average unit cost of these three variants is $114.3 USD million, rising to $146.3 USD million when the cost of its engine is added". So, you need to tack on $32 USD million each, and, perhaps more, for the Marine's jump-jet version, to get the real cost for them, in 2012 dollars (no doubt more now, in 2017). As you can see, it appears that the F-35 already now, or shortly will cost more than the F-22s, the latter of which are far more capable in air-to-air combat. It would be interesting to see if the "all-around" sensor tech could be installed in the F-22s. That would be an excellent variant to consider. Probably cheaper though to add that to our 6th Generation fighters, which hopefully some are working on now, since I suspect they'll be needed sooner rather than later, given how few F-22s we have, and how poor the performance of the F-35 is. |
|