• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,018
Reaction score
203
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
bobbymike said:
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
I sure am glad that we decided it was too obsolete to build another 180 to hold us over until (if) the NGAD machine comes on line.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
204
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
bobbymike said:
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
https://youtu.be/mx23RYC5Tks
 

Empire

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
The US Air Force estimates it would cost more than $1.7 billion over 11 years to upgrade 34 Lockheed Martin F-22s Block 20 Raptors to Block 30/35 configuration.
This is partly because some items are no longer in production, like the upgraded APG-77 variant used on the 30/35.
This is the last I heard on this!!! Did congress turn it down or is it hidden in the budget some where? Anyone hear anything? Some things no longer in production but what do they do when those some things really break on the aircraft??
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
923
Reaction score
18
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/how-chinas-new-stealth-fighter-could-soon-surpass-the-us-f-22-raptor/

Interesting point made re:slow pace of upgrades to F-22. Makes me think about the disruptive changes in auto and rocket industries instigated by Musk. Musk has his desk in the middle of the Tesla plant. He's chief designer for SpaceX and knows every bolt in Falcon 9. Who at LM, Boeing or NG has that level of drive, expertise and the wherewithal/freedom to execute?

Do we need a Musk or another Hughes in the aircraft industry?
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
The problem might not be something that requires a company CEO from sticking his desk on just one aspect of his/her companies business and getting things moving faster. The problem may have to do with the fleet size, and no active program that can amortize more expensive development expenditure. Just google the total cost to the taxpayer of Increment-3 capability and on a per unit basis, it is quite a lot of money. Had we had 400 aircraft there would have more incentive to aim for faster and more giant leaps. That said, an architecture overhaul and a move towards Open Mission System architectures are expected next to the program so that should help. Imagine if the aircraft would have been built like we did with the F-15s and you would have much more capability at this stage given the economies of scale and a hot production line. But no, wishful thinking and the massive amount of money spent in Iraq basically put an end to that as it did with so many other plans.
 

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,367
Reaction score
45
Do we need a Musk or another Hughes in the aircraft industry?
In the AI/robots era, talented people makes the difference more than ever
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
923
Reaction score
18
Empire said:
The US Air Force estimates it would cost more than $1.7 billion over 11 years to upgrade 34 Lockheed Martin F-22s Block 20 Raptors to Block 30/35 configuration.
This is partly because some items are no longer in production, like the upgraded APG-77 variant used on the 30/35.
This is the last I heard on this!!! Did congress turn it down or is it hidden in the budget some where? Anyone hear anything? Some things no longer in production but what do they do when those some things really break on the aircraft??
But they can't look at using F-35's APG-81 radar until they start the upgrade program. Do these numbers make any sense? $50m per jet?

This sounds like $29.95 to me. You know the drill. Late night TV. "What's the max they'll pay without thinking about it?" $29.95. If you wanted to make it sound like you'd actually worked the numbers you'd say $47.83M or something. Picking $50M is just lazy.

And 11 years? That's 132 months. With 800 workers that's ~515k hours per jet. For upgrades? It takes Boeing ~80 days to build a new 777.

I'd send them back to the drawing board to show me a plan with breakdowns to the hourly level per task. Something is terribly wrong here.

I might even be tempted to offer one each to LM, Boeing and NG and tell them whoever comes up with the most successful upgrade plan, with objective being <$20M, <100,000hrs per jet and a plan to finish all 34 in <4 years, gets the gig. Winner also gets some additional preference in F-22 replacement program.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,018
Reaction score
203
https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/04/04/5th-gen-fighters-tag-team-air-force-red-flag-exercises.html

Two nearly back-to-back Red Flag exercises at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, in recent months have helped prepare airmen taking part in the drills for warfighting scenarios across the globe.

But as the Air Force continues to talk about the next high-end fight with a near-peer adversary, its most advanced fighters, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, did not train together in either exercise.

Red Flag, established in 1975 at the end of the Vietnam War, is an integrated, multi-force training exercise within a simulated combat environment. There are three planned this year.

"We brought a notional force of F-35s into the [second] exercise, and it was really more about their sensors than it was about their stealth," said Col. Michael Mathes, commander of the 414th Combat Training Squadron. Military.com spoke with Mathes on March 23, the day Red Flag 18-2
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
22
If they really wanted to use them together, they could have put up a BACN.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
The AF plans to put the TACLink-16 capability on the F-22A into DevTesting in about a years time following which it will begin installing it on the fleet (2020). That should give it a level of 4th to 5th and 5th to 5th capability that has been lacking but is desired none the less. However, true 5th to 5th would have come via MADL which was approved for the f-22, by the JROC but then set aside due to cost and risk (at the time). It makes some sense to begin thinking about that in the early 2020s as well once the current set of upgrades have been implemented. The F-22, F-35 and the B-21 ideally need to be able to talk via a common discrete directional data-link without the need of a gateway.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

 

Jeb

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
263
Reaction score
15
Wow, look at the skidmark it left. Maybe the pilot was trying to control the slide with rudder action and the flight control system was manipulating the stabs as well?
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
225
Reaction score
7
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

probably pilot took action when he felt flame out of one the engine.

thus ht moved differentialy
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
923
Reaction score
18
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.

But the part about the pilot not knowing the engine flamed out..... There are no indicators? Warnings? When you feel the plane sinking back to the runway, my first instinct would be to add full power. Did he just get a few feet up and not have time to react?

Ever since the YF-22 incident, the Raptor has had bad luck with runways and belly landings and runway strikes.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
947
Reaction score
55
Bumped for 1500ft and slide for 5000ft (sorry don't have the proper quotation).
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
390
Airplane said:
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.
Yeah. Good thing we bought so many of them.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,157
Reaction score
132
Up on her legs again so far...
Photo via Air Force amn/nco/snco Group on Facebook.
Link: https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/16/f-22-incident-alleged-to-be-engine-power-loss-pilot-lands-gear-up/
 

Attachments

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
stealthflanker said:
Wish for quick recovery.
I am pretty sure in these incidents they have to gut the airframe of engines and avionics and inspect it millimeter by millimeter.

I would love to see the process by with the lower belly is repaired... you know, the skin or non-removable panels. It must be a weld and grind operation to smooth fill up the scrapes and fill gaps from sliding a mile down concrete.

Considering how long it took to repair the other Raptor, NGAD or PCA or whatever the acronym is of the day will be flying by the time this Raptor is repaired!!
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
957
Reaction score
86
Considering how many years this sort of incident has been happening, do they not design easy inspection and repair abilities into these aircraft now?
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,061
Reaction score
45

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,018
Reaction score
203

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
923
Reaction score
18
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.

An air superiority fighter compared to what? Compared to F-15s and F-16s and SU-27s and J-10s, the F-35 is already the better platform. No mods needed. Just need to buy enough to overcome having only 4 AAMs.

What are you going to do to an F-35 airframe to make it an air superiority fighter? Bigger wings for a lower wing loading? That could affect roll rate. Add weight and drag. Make it longer? Then you've got a heavier aircraft with just one engine and again more drag.

It's engine is already the most powerful fighter engine in the world and it's kinematic performance could be marginally improved with another 3-5k lbs of thrust. (the 35C really could really use more thrust).

What Lockheed is talking about is an improved F-22 airframe (more durable stealth) with F-35 sensors.

That's why this is in the F-22 thread and not the F-35 thread. This is obviously an improved F-22... Which by the way if the Japanese still wanted to buy it, considering the F-35 is more advanced in many ways, there is no more need for this 20 year old export ban on the -22. That export ban was absolutly stupid. We're selling the F-35 to every country that wants it. Israel for example isn't exactly a nation that I trust with our highest tech fighter.... the F-16 found its want into the Lavi and that found its way into China. Hmmm...
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
390
Airplane said:
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.
The F-16 is used as an air superiority aircraft all over the place and it only carries six. Six is the standard load for the Rafale, Gripen, and J-10 as well. Hell, J-10s is 4. Haven't heard of those being crippled.
 

Attachments

bob225

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
51
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure how long the F22 will take to repair but this one was in the hanger for years!
B)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDwEtzzLIGI
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
923
Reaction score
18
Airplane said:
...

What Lockheed is talking about is an improved F-22 airframe (more durable stealth) with F-35 sensors.

...
Yes...I know.

The premise was LM is not looking to provide a few fighters to Japan. It's that LM wants Japan to pay for LM's work on PCA which, by definition, is an air superiority platform.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.
The F-16 is used as an air superiority aircraft all over the place and it only carries six. Six is the standard load for the Rafale, Gripen, and J-10 as well. Hell, J-10s is 4. Haven't heard of those being crippled.
If you want to have that discussion, then let's start a new thread. 4 AAMs is mighty pathetic for an air superiority fighter. Yes, yes, I know, I know in the last 50+ years how many times has a fighter ever fired more than 4? Everyone here should be aware of how many times missiles have been launched in combat and the missile turns into a dud and goes dumb or a rocket motor fails or fails to ignite.

With kill probability and probability of something malfunctioning, 4 is weak. And ONLY being able to carry AMRAAM internally is also weak. Being forced to carry 9Xs externally and blowing up the planes RCS and affecting its clean aerodynamics is not good at all. I know the 9X on the pylon doesn't affect drag too much, but the penalty is still there nonetheless.

Let's say Japan can afford to buy 120 airframes. Do they 120 airframes that can carry 4 AAMs or do they want an airframe that can carry 8? Come on, it's simple stuff here. 8 is better than 4 no matter how you want to argue it.

I don't why people want to turn this thread into a "The F-35 is better than an X-Wing" thread.

Also the J-10 if it carries only 4 AAMs (and I'm not bothering to research that) isn't our airplane I couldn't care less. If someone wants to start a thread on that, please go ahead.

4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.

Also if the F-35 is the end all and be all fighter, why is Lockheed pitching an aircraft that's the best of both? That's not what they are doing, and the USAF knows it isn't good enough which is why we're getting NGAD/PCA. And the Japanese know it which is why they want something better than the -35 and they were trying to develop their own indigenous fighter.

It's a fine multirole fighter. It'll club all the 4th gen and 4.5 gen stuff like baby seals. But it isn't a plane you want to rest your laurels on for air superiority for the next 30 years. You'll need something with more LO, and more missiles, and faster cruise. That's why Lockheed is pitching what they are pitching to Japan. Of course it will never happen, but its fun to speculate.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
204
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
Airplane said:
4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.
Let’s Do More Shots


The F-35 program office is looking at adding capacity for another AIM-120 AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missile in each of the jet’s two weapons bays, increasing internal—and thus stealthy—missile loadout by 50 percent, program director Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said March 22. Speaking with reporters after his speech at a McAleese/Credit Suisse conference in Washington, D.C., Bogdan said, “There is potential … to add a third missile on each side.” The upgrade would likely be part of the Block IV program of F-35 enhancements, but “that’s something I know the services and all the partners” are interested in. Bogdan said this would not require some special version of AMRAAM, but “the same AMRAAM missiles that we carry today, just an extra one; probably on the weapons bay door.” The F-35 can carry two AMRAAMs in each bay now, or a mix of AMRAAMs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally. “There’s a lot of engineering work to go with that,” Bogdan cautioned, and he did not speculate on when such a change could be made.
As for PCA, of course it is being developed because the F-35 would not have been able to meet that mission in the 2030-2080 time-frame for which the PCA is likely going to be designed. As far as Japan is concerned, perhaps 100% of their requirement is not met by a single type? much like pretty much every air-force barring a handful? A modified F-35 could fit the bill, especially if it comes faster and cheaper than a completely new and clean sheet design.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
Triton said:
"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....
The entire article is a load of crap and lies about why the F-22 was cancelled.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
1
bring_it_on said:
Airplane said:
4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.
Let’s Do More Shots


The F-35 program office is looking at adding capacity for another AIM-120 AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missile in each of the jet’s two weapons bays, increasing internal—and thus stealthy—missile loadout by 50 percent, program director Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said March 22. Speaking with reporters after his speech at a McAleese/Credit Suisse conference in Washington, D.C., Bogdan said, “There is potential … to add a third missile on each side.” The upgrade would likely be part of the Block IV program of F-35 enhancements, but “that’s something I know the services and all the partners” are interested in. Bogdan said this would not require some special version of AMRAAM, but “the same AMRAAM missiles that we carry today, just an extra one; probably on the weapons bay door.” The F-35 can carry two AMRAAMs in each bay now, or a mix of AMRAAMs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally. “There’s a lot of engineering work to go with that,” Bogdan cautioned, and he did not speculate on when such a change could be made.
As for PCA, of course it is being developed because the F-35 would not have been able to meet that mission in the 2030-2080 time-frame for which the PCA is likely going to be designed. As far as Japan is concerned, perhaps 100% of their requirement is not met by a single type? much like pretty much every air-force barring a handful? A modified F-35 could fit the bill, especially if it comes faster and cheaper than a completely new and clean sheet design.
Modified how? How do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of the F-35A and the best of the F-22?

Whatever you do to the F-35 is a weight adder. Make it bigger/longer for more fuel - That's a weight penalty. Give it a bigger wing? That's a weight penalty. And you're certainly not going to fit 4 AAMs per weapons bay to give it the same capacity of a F-22. The weapons bays already have a heat problem and putting more stuff in them will only make it worse... Everyone ignores the heat issues with those bays.

I don't foresee a 50,000lb thrust engine anytime soon to give it supercruise and higher altitude operations of a F-22.

So how do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of both AC? One engine can only lug so much weight around.

It's easy to answer how one would modify an F-22 to give it the best of both: add the passive sensor suite to the F-22 airframe, and done. The Japanese military is a defensive one... They don't have the same requirement to drop 2 2000lb jdams on hardened targets. And if they did they are F-35 operators and already have that capability.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,192
Reaction score
390
Airplane said:
Triton said:
"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....
The entire article is a load of crap and lies about why the F-22 was cancelled.
Well it is Tyler Rogoway. Would you expect anything more?
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,018
Reaction score
203
http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2018/April%202018/Schwartz-in-Memoir-Says-F-22-was-Traded-for-B-21-Bomber.aspx

The top Air Force leadership went along with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ termination of the F-22 fighter—after producing less than half the required number—because they believed they couldn’t win the argument and that getting approval to build a new bomber was more important.

In “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” now in bookstores, retired Gen. Norton Schwartz said his predecessor, retired Gen. Mike Moseley, “never gave up in his principled attempts to get those 381 F-22s,” for which Gates fired Moseley and the then-Secretary of the Air Force, Mike Wynne. Schwartz was named to replace Moseley, and Mike Donley was brought in as Wynne’s replacement.
Trading a much needed capability today for something 'maybe' 20 years from then seems shortsighted but I wasn't there so...............
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,954
Reaction score
35
Airplane said:
So how do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of both AC? One engine can only lug so much weight around.
Can you point me to where I said that a modified F-35 will somehow magically acquire the best features of the F-35 and F-22?

What I did say ,however, was that a modified F-35 could be looked at as an affordable and less risky alternative to an F-22 production/re-design or a clean sheet design as far as Japan is concerned. At the end of the day the trade space involves a combination of schedule, cost, risk, and technology development so no two solutions will be the same. There are things you can do to make the F-35 better such as expanded A2A missile carriage (from 4 to 6), introducing new weapons, perhaps a new adaptive engine, and improved sensors. From a cost perspective that will likely be cheaper to do than to develop a highly upgraded F-22, and then manufacturer it. Overall the difference could be significant when one looks at how many aircraft they can field within a finite budget.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
204
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"F-22A Production Restart Assessment: Report to Congressional Committees" United States Air Force February 2017

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4452474-F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.html
 
Top