DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Polmar's Perspective » Secretary Gates and the F-​​22 Raptor

Secretary Gates and the F-​​22 Raptor

f22.jpg

The deci­sion by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to halt the fur­ther pro­duc­tion of the Lockheed Martin F-​​22 Raptor air­craft may be the most con­tro­ver­sial of his new defense strategy. In the past Gates him­self as well as other Department of Defense exec­u­tives had sought to cur­tail F-​​22 pro­duc­tion, not­ing that the air­craft con­tributes lit­tle to — in his words — “fight the wars we are in today and the sce­nar­ios we are most likely to face in the years ahead.…“

But those efforts ran afoul of the F-22’s large num­ber of con­gres­sional and aero­space indus­try sup­port­ers, as well as Air Force’s leadership. Now, how­ever, Secretary Gates has the direc­tion and back­ing of the new admin­is­tra­tion to “reshape the pri­or­i­ties of America’s defense estab­lish­ment.” 

With that under­pin­ning, Gates has stated that F-​​22 pro­duc­tion will end with 187 air­craft — the 183 planes now built and under con­tract plus the four air­craft in the Fiscal Year 2009 sup­ple­men­tal appropriation. This is less than one-​​half of the Air Force’s stated require­ment for 381 air­craft. This is based on the need to pro­vide ten rota­tional Air Expeditionary Forces (AEFs), each with at least one squadron of 24 Raptors.

Under Air Force plan­ning, those 240 F-​​22s assigned to the AEFs would be sup­ported by 60 train­ing air­craft, 15 test and eval­u­a­tion air­craft, 32 for backup, and 34 for attri­tion dur­ing the aircraft’s ser­vice life (i.e., ten per­cent of the above).  The total: 381 air­craft.

However, in February 2009, Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz said that a new F-​​22 tar­get would be “less than 381″ jets, which Air Force lead­er­ship had clung to in recent years. Air Force offi­cials recently told Congress that they would like an addi­tional 60 or more F-​​22s, for a total of between 240 and 250 air­craft.

“I think it’s a sign of a healthy insti­tu­tion that we’re will­ing to revisit long-​​held beliefs, no mat­ter how cen­tral to our ethos they may be,” said Schwartz.

Conceived as the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) in the 1980s, the F-​​22 Raptor won a com­pet­i­tive devel­op­ment with the Northrop-​​McDonnell Douglas F-​​23 design. The ATF pro­gram was ini­ti­ated to (1) insure U.S. air supe­ri­or­ity, (2)counter the growth of advanced air defenses, and (3)allow the timely retire­ment of F-​​15 Eagle aircraft. When Lockheed was selected in 1991 to build the ATF the Air Force pro­cure­ment goal was 648 aircraft.


Now, almost two decades later, the F-​​22 arrives on the scene as for­eign air threats are far more limited.  Instead of hav­ing to counter hun­dreds of advanced Russian Sukhoi or MiG fight­ers over Europe or Asia, U.S. air forces will face only tens of advanced fight­ers in the likely crises and con­flicts of the fore­see­able future. And, beyond the ten AEFs of the Air Force, the Navy can put into for­ward areas up to ten car­rier air wings — with  as many as 60 F/​A-​​18 Hornets of var­i­ous models–while the Marine Corps has three air­craft wings with an aggre­gate of more than a dozen F/​A-​​18 squadrons.

Secretary Gates, while announc­ing the end of F-​​22 pro­duc­tion, has also said that he is accel­er­at­ing pro­cure­ment of F/​A-​​18E and F mod­els for the Navy, and rec­om­mend­ing an accel­er­a­tion of the F-​​35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. The F-​​35 — also hav­ing low-​​observable (stealth) fea­tures — will come in three prin­ci­pal mod­els: The F-​​35A for Air Force land-​​basing, the F-​​35B Short Takeoff/​vertical Landing (STOVL) for the Marine Corps, and the F-​​35C carrier-​​capable model for the Navy. The ulti­mate pro­cure­ment goal for the three ser­vices is now 2,443 air­craft.

Thus, Secretary Gates is pre­dict­ing that the Navy-​​Marine Corps F/​A-​​18 force, even­tu­ally sup­ple­mented and the replaced by the JSF, as well as the Air Force F-​​35A pro­gram will com­ple­ment the reduced F-​​22 force to pro­vide an ade­quate if not supe­rior air capa­bil­ity for the coun­try. 

Editor’s note: This is the first of sev­eral com­men­taries by Mr. Polmar on the new defense strat­egy and pro­cure­ment plans being put forth by Secretary Gates.

– Norman Polmar

Share |

April 15th, 2009 | Polmar's Perspective | 444658 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2009/04/15/secretary-gates-and-the-f-22-raptor/Secretary+Gates+and+the+F-22+Raptor2009-04-15+12%3A58%3A33Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Inside the Shot Heard ‘Round the World | Cyber Attacks on Supply Chain Systems » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. maybe_I_Know_something says:
    April 20, 2009 at 2:57 pm

    How come nobody talks about buy­ing less F-​​35s and more F-​​22s. If we need to sac­ri­fice capa­bil­ity I think we should sacrafice it on the ‘Lo’ end instead of the ‘Hi’ end of the Hi/​Lo mix.

    Reply
  2. pfcem says:
    April 20, 2009 at 4:47 pm

    Total,
    It is you who are woe­fully igno­rant of how defense bud­get­ing works. Contrary to what igno­ranuses like you want peo­ple to believe, the cur­rent con­flicts are NOT being neglected AND there are lit­ter­ally thou­sands of bud­get items that could/​should/​would be cut &/​or delayed before any­thing that was actu­ally con­tribut­ing ANYTHING to the cur­rent effort.
    The Navy doesn’t have the small ships ‘nec­es­sary for anti-​​pirate oper­a­tions’ because NO SMALL SHIPS HAVE BEEN NECESSARY FOR ANTI-​​PIRATE OPERATIONS. Even now that piracy has become more preva­lent, ‘small ships’ is NOT nec­es­sar­ily the best way to deal with them. ;)
    Buying more Raptors would NOT result in ONE casu­alty in Afghanistan &/​or Iraq. BUT not buy­ing more F-​​22 COULD result in THOUSANDS of casu­al­ties in a future con­flict due to the US inabil­ity to obtain &/​or main­tain air supe­ri­or­ity.
    How about you pull your head out of the sand & real­ize that just because the Soviet Union no longer exists & the Cold War is over that that does NOT mean that major con­flict is over.

    Reply
  3. nonito antonio cabato says:
    June 1, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    he is stu­pid to can­cel the fighter F-​​22, it is already in pro­duc­tion and it more stu­pid to export this plane to your allies. the pur­pose of this being built is for your air­force to have the best equipt­ment. it is stu­pid for PLAYING POLITICS for pilot lifes coz you have a stu­pid leader for play­ing POLITICS. its the best fight­er­plane in the world! up there in the sky its not a god­damm game boy its WIN or DIE
    you can improve it stealth by upgrad­ing it, there no engi­neer­ing prob­lem that cant be solve. you want fly lea­gacy air­craft will fall apart in the sky. its waste­ful to main­tain an old air­craft
    so buy 1,000 of it, 800 F-​​35B for close air sup­port and bomber. dont fight a war that not con­cern your secu­rity if you want fight guer­rilla war use attack heli­copter the army has plenty of it

    Reply
  4. Michael norton says:
    June 9, 2009 at 8:12 pm

    187 copys of the F-​​22 is like the ger­man me-​​262. Not enough to win a war!!!!

    Reply
  5. Mike says:
    June 14, 2009 at 10:52 pm

    As an Air Force vet­eran I must say that I have a bias per­spec­tive on the F-​​22. Here are some ques­tions you must ask before you say

    Reply
  6. unknown says:
    November 5, 2009 at 7:48 am

    why the hell does every want to stop mak­ing f-​​22 its a awsome plane and for fuck sakes the f-​​35 sucks more then the fuck­ing f/​a-​​18 and that f/​a-​​18 sucks.
    And are there any plans to reopen pro­duc­tion in the near or unear future?

    Reply
  7. Spiff says:
    November 5, 2009 at 4:49 pm

    Hard to blame Gates, I am sure he was told by El Supremo to leave enough money in the Defense Budget for the Ted Kennedy Escape and Evasion Center in Massachusetts, and some other Democrat Party perks — gotta bal­ance with pri­or­ies you know, no need for the F-​​22 when com­pared with party needs!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    Recent Comments
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      They are going to have to look at the whole...
      Wembley
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Just look at this " picture " for a moment. The...
      Zandor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      I know LOSAT seemed awesome but wasn't it cancelled? I...
      JimboJones
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
      Yes you're quite right, I get to witness...
      JimboJones
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage