July 14th, 2009 | Defense Tech Poll | 457718 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fdefensetech.org%2F2009%2F07%2F14%2Fup-or-down-on-raptors%2FUp+or+down+on+Raptors%3F2009-07-14+19%3A38%3A23Wardhttp%3A%2F%2Fdeftech.usmilblog.com%2F%3Fp%3D4577
Previous post: Vote ‘No’ on More F-22s
Next post: Catchin’ Some Zs in a Nuke Tube
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
All you have to do is delete cookies to vote multiple times.
NO more F-22s…
FIRST OFF I LOVE THE MILITARY AND ITS TOYS!
I believe that military is the best spending as it secures us and provides numerous technological wonders which filter to the civilian market Internet, Plastics, Computers 3 big ones off the top of my head.
Social programs should be cut first of course before the f22. As others have posted they are bribes for votes which keep people dependent on the gov and nothing more.
The reason i say stop production is because it is clear that
A: UCAVs are the near and long term future. The latest round of war has pushed forward the UCAV timetable by about two decades. Software is the only obstacle. The hardware is already there. And in the real short term the UCAVs could be made without the air to air software. The air to air combat portion of flight could be flown by pilots in simulators. They would be extra deadly since they are flying without fear of death or gforce issues. The AI for combat could be installed later by some guy with a usb memory stick.
B: The other big reason being that we have air superiority and won’t have any real competitor for the next 20 years anyway. China Russia a joke small outdated fleets of aircraft. More importantly their pilots are not trained like the USA our tradition is established long held and refined. It would take russia india china anyone at least a decade, probably more, to establish those schools/cultures and then train enough quality pilots to put up a fight even if they had the aircraft WHICH THEY DO NOT. Su XX MIG XX blah blah blah never combat proven never built in numbers.
So take advantage of the situation and make a revolutionary leap with ucavs and put us 50 years ahead instead of more f22s which only puts us 10-20 years ahead.
We are not under immediate threat from conventional weapons planes tanks ships massive troop formations. The rest of the world combined does not stack up to American hardware. Take away our rules of engagement stop carring about borders and political bs and we are unstoppable. We may not have enough people without a draft to occupy everywhere by we can lay everywhere to waste without much trouble doing so.
We have 12 or so carrier groups the rest of the world combined might have that many and none them stack up to the Nimitz class.
Our air force is the largest AF in the world Followed by and not in this order the US navy/marines,US af reserve,US national guard, and maybe some other US orgs.
The UCAV vs manned fighter positioning reminds me of the cruise missile vs B1 positioning in the late 1970′s. As with the cruise missile and B1, we will need to maintain our ability to field proficinet fighter pilots, and reduce thier risk using UCAVs.
Fighter pilots are the foot soldiers of the sky, air superiority will only be won and maintained with boots in the sky, especially when all the UCAVs go down due to a software glitch or a hacker.
Until they can meed 20 of 22 KPPs (instead of 5!!!), can keep more than 90% of the fleet capable (instead of 45%!!!!) and can keep the cost of flying under 20k per hour (instead of 45k+!!!) this thing needs to be put on the shelf.
The audacity of the legislators, lobbyists and pimps behind this program is absolutely amazing. Purposely promoting underestimated operational and manufacturing costs? These people really deserve to be in jail for essentially robbing taxpayers. Just look at the canopy as one example. The official “estimate” of the canopy service life was almost 800 hours, but when are they actually falling apart? 330 hours at 120k to replace? Don’t even get me started on the “skin” issue and lessons NOT learned from the B2. I hope this piece of operationally incapable junk dies a fury of (finally) responsible DoD spending.
@Tyler, I suggest you read this: http://www.f-16.net/news_article3622.html
The F-22 is not expendable. If you don’t have control of the air you die. The F-22 is in production NOW, its not a prototype like the UCAV or a do-everything wannabe like the F-35.
Keep the F-22, sell it to Japan and Australia and build more F-18s. Cancel the 35.
If you want UCAVs start work on a CAS version.
ADA.. Death From Below!
I can see why people would be against such a gold plated jet, but I voted up.
In my opinion, US military doctrine is so based on its ability to timely achieve air superiority that it’s a capability that America can’t afford to lose. I mean, when your attack helicopters have to be supported by fixed wing assets, that says something.
Furthermore, the R&D costs have already been paid, and it would be effectively be put to waste otherwise. Don’t expect the engineering knowledge to be maintained if you don’t put it to use.
I love the f22, it is the most amazing machine ever built (besides maybe the LHC).
As much as I’d love to see America buy 2,000 of them there is clearly a reason that we are stopping at such a low number. Here are a few points to bring up and discuss
1. There is a serious flaw with the f22…the human body and gforce limits. Computers have to cut the plane’s capability just to avoid crushing pilots.
2. UCAVs are expendable. How demoralizing is it to an enemy to lose pilots and ground forces to a robot. Even if they get a kill, theyre just destroying a few cents of our defense budget.
And 3. OK . Think about this. How long was the f117a around before we knew about it. With the quantum leap in digital technology in the past ten years, we probably have technology so advanced that top military leaders know the f22 is cool but already outdated. example… A UCAV with a pilot sitting in Nellis essentially playing xbox(with a home theater we can only dream of lol) pulling high G manuvers, using cutting edge directed energy and missile technology laying Waste to any enemies we may face from now till 2050. Russia? China? Unless they’re secretly building TIE Fighters, theres no logical point to continue f22 production.
Alex you missed my point. The later of my paragraph explains how it can be made economically feasible. It’s cool and I love cool stuff but it may not be practical because of it’s price tag.
Its a matter of asking what does the USA need right now.
The best? Such as buying DD(1000), FCS, or F-22s
or
What is best? Better ways to combat insurgents and urban combat. Notice how I can’t name anything right off the top of my head for this one.
F-22s are nice, but do we need them?
Why not a compromise? Increase production to around 200 or so – more than 187 – and then cut production?
“Fighter pilots are the foot soldiers of the sky, air superiority will only be won and maintained with boots in the sky, especially when all the UCAVs go down due to a software glitch or a hacker. ”
Correct! So why are the sky soldiers still armed with Sidewinders and AMRAAMS? Instead of the current AAM setup, we should develop better weapons for the fighters that we have fielded e.g. a 21st Century Phoenix missile that can whack enemies from 100 miles away.
I don’t care if a soldier can run like Usain Bolt, I’m more worried about his weapon and his fighting skill.
Isn’t it interesting that on this blog of all places, a location jammed with miltech geeks and affecionados, the damned thing can still only get 6 out of 10 votes? That’s a pathetic level of support in what should be one of the bird’s easiest constituencies.
Do any of you people know just what termination of the F-22 entails? I doubt you do. If we get into a conflict and find that we need more of them, too bad! We won’t have the equipment or the expertice to build any more! Oops! All of the jigs will have been destroyed, in accordance with their contract. All classified equipment shall be turned over to the government, this includes any equipment required to perform classified processes, where they will be either destroyed, decommissioned, dismantled, and/or salvaged for scrap. At any rate they will be rendered useless for the perpose of building additional F-22. The current claims that we do not have any need for more F-22s are based on the following assumptions: 1. The two major regional conflict requirement is no longer valid. (Although it is still the law in guiding defense planning and acquisition.) 2. All future conflicts will involve countries no where equal to the US in military might, ala Afganistan. 3. Neither Russi9a or China will sell their most advanced aircraft to third parties. 4. No other country will acquire enough aircraft to overwealm the F-22s located in any given theater. And 5. we will never again face more than one opponent at a time.
If you beleive all these things then go along with Gates and Obama. Unfortunately, I have studied history, and from that study I have no confidence that all 5 conditions will ever hold for long. Even JFK, the person most liberals would cannonize beleived that this was possible. Evewn he believed that the only way to have peace is through strength. Only by being capable of defeating any and all enemies would they leave us alone. I share that belief.
I’d argue that we need to be dumping less money into buying more F-22s, and more money into making them automated. The earlier poster is totally correct in that it is ridiculous to be limiting the aircraft just to accommodate a pilot.. we’ve been able to make an air superiority drone forever, so let’s get to it already.