Gates on the F-22: "Does Not Make Much Sense"

The F-22 is notably superior to the F-35 in air-to-air combat, but this is its only selling point. The issues are first whether there is a scenario in which this difference can matter (there is) and second whether this scenario is credible (not really). There are actually two scenarios where this could matter, one involving any number of Russian PAK/FA fighters, which currently do not exist and have been delayed due to flight problems. In 5-10 years, however, the Russians could have a large enough operational fleet of these planes to overwhelm a mixed fleet of F-22's and F-35's. Not that they would, and not that we don't have other weapon systems that could shoot them down well before they become a threat, but we would lose our unquestioned air combat superiority. The other scenario is a large-scale attack with several hundred Sukhoi flankers, which outperform everything but the F22 and F35 and which are almost evenly matched against the latter plane. see http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-170209-1.html for an analysis of this second scenario. Neither is particularly likely, but as one who supported killing this project, the data makes me think twice about whether we might not be better off with a few hundred more f22s. Perhaps we could use this threat of killing the program to get Lockheed to reduce the cost of these machines, effectively killing the argument that f35s are better because they are equivalent (they are not. they are slower at cruise speed and less agile in close combat) and cheaper.

For the REAL FACTS ON THE F-22, READ KR...

So are you saying we can't believe the proposed long service life of the F22 given the problems we have already encountered?

----------------------------------

Yeah, I guess its kinda like we should not by into the the 'promises' about the proposed benefits from the great "Stimulator", the Enery/Climate/No its a jobs bill, and the healthcare bill.

"Um... I guess you didn't read my post below in its entirety. Instead of reposting it, look at it below involving China."

China has fighters that can cross the Pacific?

"Which means we do not need another $65B in fighters that no longer have a role to fill."

Um... I guess you didn't read my post below in its entirety. Instead of reposting it, look at it below involving China. I'm not going to go in circles with you.

"So are you saying we can't believe the proposed long service life of the F22 given the problems we have already encountered?"

Service life is a direct relationship with money invested. The H-46 is a 1950's airframe still flying today. It's service life was supposed to be over with long ago. Money and the lack of replacement has kept it flying.

The service life of F16's and F18C's can be 2040 and beyond, we just have to pay for it. Kind of hard now though since the production facilities were shut down.

"Every new aircraft has developmental problems. The service life of the F-16 and F-18C was supposed to be through 2040. They have recently found structural cracks in the rear stabilitors, shortening the life to 2020. The fix would cost millions per aircraft."

So are you saying we can't believe the proposed long service life of the F22 given the problems we have already encountered?

"Hamilton was the first to propose the modern vision of the General Welfare clause and his opinion has since been affirmed by the Supremes."

Hamilton had no concept of a "nanny" state.

In depth, its principle is that it wouldn't benefit any single group. Yet, single payer healthcare benefits only a small percentage of the population (by design, so they say), meaning the uninsured, and paid for by another group (the wealthy supposedly). Sorry, but that is against the meaning of "general welfare" as it doesn't benefit all people, only a portion, thus it is contrary to the intentions of our founding fathers.

"The F-16 and F-15 were both DESIGNED for air superiority. They were modified for the strike role. It's no different with the F22. After 911, as it was realized that the majority of air missions (for lack of an Air to Air threat) were strike missions"

Exactly.

Which means we do not need another $65B in fighters that no longer have a role to fill.

""A year ago(in 2006), Air Force Times reported that F-22A structural problems could cost $1 billion to fix. But after further tests, the Air Force now estimates the fixes will be in the millions of dollars, although a final estimate for labor and parts has not yet been calculated, Moore said."

Every new aircraft has developmental problems. The service life of the F-16 and F-18C was supposed to be through 2040. They have recently found structural cracks in the rear stabilitors, shortening the life to 2020. The fix would cost millions per aircraft.

"Better tell the AirForce"

I really get tired of educating you. Go back to the beginnings of the program please. The competition between the YF-22 and YF-23. Both DESIGNED to be air superiority fighters to replace the F-15/F-14.

The F-16 and F-15 were both DESIGNED for air superiority. They were modified for the strike role. It's no different with the F22. After 911, as it was realized that the majority of air missions (for lack of an Air to Air threat) were strike missions. In order to garnish more support for the F22, they gave it greater strike capability.

Fact is ANY aicraft can do the strike role with a software upgrade and the correct hard points (pylons). The F14 dubbed the "Bombcat" was a modification of the F14 to carry and deliver strike ordinance, but thats not what it was DESIGNED to do, nor was that it's primary role.

"A year ago(in 2006), Air Force Times reported that F-22A structural problems could cost $1 billion to fix. But after further tests, the Air Force now estimates the fixes will be in the millions of dollars, although a final estimate for labor and parts has not yet been calculated, Moore said."

"That must be why the Continental Army was disbanded rather than formalized...."

Wow, I guess i should have been expected that you would take a snipet of history and focus on it. Should read the beginnings of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Army, the debates, and the assertion that the military swear an oath to the Constitution instead of Congress or the President. The assertion that a fractured and scattered state militia was inneffective for common defense of the union. All you have to do is fast forward a few years.

Philip Coyle, a former director of the Defense Department’s Operational Test and Evaluation Office, points out that the Air Force has spent two decades trying to get the F-22A right and meet the high expectations set for the fighter.

The dilemma is not a lack of time to find and fix problems.

“What you see now is poor design and reliability,” Coyle said.

"8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

"general welfare" can mean anything anyone wants it to mean. Yet if you read the section in its entirety, you'll notice it outlines in more detail exactly what it means by "general welfare"."

Hamilton was the first to propose the modern vision of the General Welfare clause and his opinion has since been affirmed by the Supremes.

Also one other point on the radar thing.

If the F-22 has it's radar off, getting data link from AWACS, it can deploy the AIM-7 Sparrow radar homing missile, essentially shooting down an aircraft without ever turning its radar on. Difference between the 22 and our current inventory, its far less detectable further out and can get in close enough to deploy it.

It must also be explained that if the 22 has a bunch of external stores, such as pylons for missiles, CATM's, etc, it gives off a larger radar signiture. If it is using only its internal bay, it's far less detectable by radar.

Speed and angle plays a part as well. It's complicated but we train to take advantages of its strengths.

"Designed for first strike options? It was designed as an air superiority fighter, thus the designation "F-22". If it was designed as a strike fighter, it would have been designated "F/A-22"."

Better tell the AirForce

"The F-22A has a significant capability to attack surface targets. In the air-to-ground configuration the aircraft can carry two 1,000-pound GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally and will use on-board avionics for navigation and weapons delivery support. In the future air-to-ground capability will be enhanced with the addition of an upgraded radar and up to eight small diameter bombs. The Raptor will also carry two AIM-120s and two AIM-9s in the air-to-ground configuration."

The aircraft designation was the F/A-22 for a short time before being renamed F-22A in December 2005."

"Founding fathers were wary of standing armies? Wow, guess they shouldn't have passed all those bills in the 1790's establishing the US Marine Corps, Navy, and Army. Those crazy founding fathers and their intentions. "

That must be why the Continental Army was disbanded rather than formalized....

President James Madison: “…to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and authorities reserved to the States and to the people as equally incorporated with and essential to the success of the general system;… to keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics – that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe;…” – President James Madison, First Inaugural address, Saturday, March 4, 1809.

Wheeler doesn't have a clue about military aviation or he wouldn't have said things in that article that he did. I wrote a lengthy and enraged post but I guess it was blocked.

In short, all aircraft have a radar cross section and can be locked up, the difference is at what range.

He talks about tracking the F-22 with its radar being on. In his ignorance he fails to mention what happens when it turns the Radar off. It gets a data-link from an AWACS, in effect, it can see and not be seen.

He mentions lackluster peformance? It is the only aircraft in the US inventory capable of "supercruise", which is essentially just slightly above Mach 1, and thats cruise. The F/A-18 could barely break mach in level flight with all the gear hanging. The 22 also has vectored thrust which gives it outstanding low speed performance.

Radar missiles innefective?? Does this guy think we are still using Vietnam erra Sparrow missiles? The AMRAAM is a deadly BVR missile, one of the finest in the world.

The 22 also is designed to use the AIM9-X, a near 360 degree heat seeking missile that is not yet deployed. The 22 and 35 will both use the AIM9-X which is far superior to the AIM9-M in use now. The AIM9-X is effectively immune to countermeasures.

A new AMRAAM is in development as well that is largely be immune to counter measures.

Wheeler unfortunately has no concept of military aviation, hes a bean counter.

"Raptor has a 100 to 1 kill radio"

In what theater?

Don't know where Wheeler got his info but to paraphrase HE IS WAY OFF TARGET..Raptor has a 100 to 1 kill radio...enough said..