Entire US Stealth Fighter Fleet Grounded

[critter592]

I hope those idiots at the Air War College are reading this thread. Maybe they'd learn something and get our air capability back on track. All that stupid studying and research when all they really need to do is read from post 1 to post 33, right here on INGO. Instead, those morons will probably just keep studying actual air conflicts in detail, analyzing current and past technology and trying to maintain our air superiority over the entire world. If they only knew how silly they appeared to the real experts here on INGO. There'd be some red faces down there in Montgomery I'd bet.

Dross I've repped you more than once. But...lighten up Francis.

 

[edsinger]

Also, the US is already working on 6th Gen aircraft.

Shhhh

 

[edsinger]

I hope those idiots at the Air War College are reading this thread. Maybe they'd learn something and get our air capability back on track. All that stupid studying and research when all they really need to do is read from post 1 to post 33, right here on INGO. Instead, those morons will probably just keep studying actual air conflicts in detail, analyzing current and past technology and trying to maintain our air superiority over the entire world. If they only knew how silly they appeared to the real experts here on INGO. There'd be some red faces down there in Montgomery I'd bet.

Sure thing, just like they said the F-4 didn't need a gun.....at least they haven't repeated that fiasco..

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Sure thing, just like they said the F-4 didn't need a gun.....at least they haven't repeated that fiasco..

The point here being: with a development lead time of around 20 years, the needs statements that define a weapons system are guesses - at best - of what the threat may be and what the technology available may support. The F-4 was never envisioned as a dogfighter ala WWII and Korea; it was a long-range, all-weather interceptor - until necessity made it a dogfighter. Strategically, it's a terrible idea to limit ourselves to one or two solutions to a problem that may turn out to be very different than what we've planned for. No analysis of a prospective enemy is ever infallible.

 

[edsinger]

The point here being: with a development lead time of around 20 years, the needs statements that define a weapons system are guesses - at best - of what the threat may be and what the technology available may support. The F-4 was never envisioned as a dogfighter ala WWII and Korea; it was a long-range, all-weather interceptor - until necessity made it a dogfighter. Strategically, it's a terrible idea to limit ourselves to one or two solutions to a problem that may turn out to be very different than what we've planned for. No analysis of a prospective enemy is ever infallible.

Well I agree except for the fact that 'they' assumed that the Sparrow missile made up close combat moot, and if just by a wild hair the sparrow missed (likely as the early models POK was around 25% on a good day) that the sidewinder would work.

True, they never know but the F-22 was built with all the known issues built in. Ironic that they close down the F22 line to bring on the F35 because it is cheaper. Those JSF's will soon cost what the F22 did and give 1/2 the capability per se.

The only reason that the Military Industrial Complex allowed the F22 line to be shut down is the same that those same folks allowed the SR-71 to be retired. We have something better or will have shortly....just a guess

 

[badwolf.usmc]

Time will tell whether your predictions are accurate, but I'd like to remind you that the production lines closed on the F-22 about 400 units before the projected need of the Air Force was reached. We can expect the same kind of underruns for the F-35, if, in fact it is ever put into production. UCAVs may or may not prove themselves in armed roles against other aircraft. Personally, I'm more concerned about them being "hacked" and turned back on their owners.

Current aircraft can be "hacked" and forced to crash. Yes, UCAVs have not proven themselves yet, but then there are none in production. At one time the aircraft hadn't proven itself nor had the tank.

The F-22 is a first night/air superiority weapon and 400 of them are more than enough. Even if only half are operational, they can still get their intended job done. If it were up to the Air Force, the A-10 & B-52 would be gone and the only COIN aircraft the US uses would be attack helicopters. What the Air Force needs is more, cheaper ground attack role aircraft and not these super aircraft that can do "everything".

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Current aircraft can be "hacked" and forced to crash. Yes, UCAVs have not proven themselves yet, but then there are none in production. At one time the aircraft hadn't proven itself nor had the tank.

The F-22 is a first night/air superiority weapon and 400 of them are more than enough. Even if only half are operational, they can still get their intended job done. If it were up to the Air Force, the A-10 & B-52 would be gone and the only COIN aircraft the US uses would be attack helicopters. What the Air Force needs is more, cheaper ground attack role aircraft and not these super aircraft that can do "everything".

My concern was about UAVs which have already been hacked in Afghanistan, although it was just the surveillance data which was intercepted.

The F-22 will be an air superiority weapon as long as it doesn't get swarmed by a host of less capable aircraft.

The Air Force was on the brink of handing the A-10 over to the Army just prior to Gulf War I because the fighter jocks who dominated the command structure at that time didn't want to emphasize ground support (just as the Bomber Command which dominated the Air Force after WWII wanted to make fighter/interceptors an afterthought). Of course, the A-10's performance during Gulf War I brought so much positive publicity to the Air Force that they could no longer justify giving up the close air support role, although now the advent of "smart" munitions has given the F-16, F-15, and F-18 the capability to provide that "close air support" from reasonably safe altitudes. Again, though, this ability to provide such support relies on Air Superiority and we've not been seriously challenged for Air Superiority since the Korean Conflict in the 1950s. If we get into such a contest for air superiority with China, Russia, or even India, we might find ourselves overwhelmed by sheer numbers; make the battlefront broad enough, and those 10 wings of F-22s will have too much sky to defend.

 

[badwolf.usmc]

My concern was about UAVs which have already been hacked in Afghanistan, although it was just the surveillance data which was intercepted.

The F-22 will be an air superiority weapon as long as it doesn't get swarmed by a host of less capable aircraft.

The Air Force was on the brink of handing the A-10 over to the Army just prior to Gulf War I because the fighter jocks who dominated the command structure at that time didn't want to emphasize ground support (just as the Bomber Command which dominated the Air Force after WWII wanted to make fighter/interceptors an afterthought). Of course, the A-10's performance during Gulf War I brought so much positive publicity to the Air Force that they could no longer justify giving up the close air support role, although now the advent of "smart" munitions has given the F-16, F-15, and F-18 the capability to provide that "close air support" from reasonably safe altitudes. Again, though, this ability to provide such support relies on Air Superiority and we've not been seriously challenged for Air Superiority since the Korean Conflict in the 1950s. If we get into such a contest for air superiority with China, Russia, or even India, we might find ourselves overwhelmed by sheer numbers; make the battlefront broad enough, and those 10 wings of F-22s will have too much sky to defend.

Total Aircraft by Country

In total aircraft, we still outnumber anyone else. The F-22s won't carry the load all by themselves, there will still be F-18s, F-16s, F-35s & such. Don't forget all the cruise missiles we would launch.

I'm not saying the US wouldn't have loses, nor am I saying the US is invincible but we would still fair better than our opponent.

 

[Prometheus]

Ike warned us against military/industry complex. We did not listen.

Yep.

[ame]http://youtu.be/nUXtyIQjubU[/ame]

Ike knew exactly what was coming.

The f-22 itself represents unchallenged air superiority for the foreseeable future. That alone makes it worth its pricetag.

Could you justify 22% of you annual household income to just one facet of your self defense budget? It's ridiculous.

The military is one of 18 things the federal government is actually allowed to do under the Constitution.

Have a strong and superior military is crucial to any Republic if it wants to remain free.

Unfortunately we are no longer free and the Republic is now an empire.

The federal government spends billions each year feeding kids before and after school so those kids "don't go hungry".... is that also "worth the price tag alone"?

Come on man, get real. The country is bankrupt. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed and corrupt, over budget and incompetent programs like these need to be dealt with just as urgently as welfare and entitlements.

The notion that this is different than entitlement programs is also equally absurd. Trillions of dollars are going to waste and we will never have anything to show for it in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Were these things being used to actually defend the nation or deter aggressors, it would be one thing. The current foreign policy is squandering it's money on fruitless wars and it seems the intended purpose of everything going forward from here on out is to continue these failed wars and policies.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Yep.

http://youtu.be/nUXtyIQjubU

Ike knew exactly what was coming.


Could you justify 22% of you annual household income to just one facet of your self defense budget? It's ridiculous.

The military is one of 18 things the federal government is actually allowed to do under the Constitution.

Have a strong and superior military is crucial to any Republic if it wants to remain free.

Unfortunately we are no longer free and the Republic is now an empire.

The federal government spends billions each year feeding kids before and after school so those kids "don't go hungry".... is that also "worth the price tag alone"?

Come on man, get real. The country is bankrupt. There is a lot of fat to be trimmed and corrupt, over budget and incompetent programs like these need to be dealt with just as urgently as welfare and entitlements.

The notion that this is different than entitlement programs is also equally absurd. Trillions of dollars are going to waste and we will never have anything to show for it in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Were these things being used to actually defend the nation or deter aggressors, it would be one thing. The current foreign policy is squandering it's money on fruitless wars and it seems the intended purpose of everything going forward from here on out is to continue these failed wars and policies.

The F-22 is not an "incompetent program". It is the latest in cutting edge performance technology to be fielded. While it's an expensive system, it gets more expensive per unit the fewer units that are produced - That's wasteful!

Current foreign policy is civilian-driven, not military-driven, so don't blame the military for any foreign adventures you don't happen to approve of - those are civilian decisions to be made and civilians have made them.

Frankly, I'm not sure you have a clue what you're talking about. You seem to be parroting someone else's talking points instead of making a reasoned argument of your own.

 

[Prometheus]

Not sure where to start blackhawk, so I won't other than to say you need to take a class on reading comprehension.

Speaking of which, you seem to be internalizing this, do you have an aunt or uncle working on this project? Stock dividends not paying out what they should? Perhaps that is where your lack of comprehension stems from...

 

[ATOMonkey]

I have done work on the JSF Beta propulsion system, and our new 6th gen propulsion systems.

The liftfan design began in the early 90s. The first concept demonstrator flew in the early 2000s. The first production intent test plane flew in '05 I believe. The first low rate initial production models are being manufactured right now.

Scope creep is a big deal, and generally comes from the Pentagon requesting more capability as short-comings in current platforms manifest themselves.

For instance. They no longer want to dump fuel or ordinance when returning from patrol missions. Which reminds me, we rarely EVER used to do patrol sorties just looking for targets of opportunity, and when we did we NEVER brought all the bombs and fuel back home. Anyway, they have determined that we waste a **** ton of money dumping bombs and fuel onto mountains or in the ocean.

So, now the plane has to land with an extra 10,000 lbs of weight on it. That means more power, especially for a vertical landing, and stronger airframe, which adds weight, which means more power for takeoff, etc etc etc...

Initially the Liftfan was supposed to provide, I think 20,000 lbs of thrust and it's closer to 25,000 lbs now if not 30,000. They've gone from 40,000 shaft HP to almost 60,000 shaft HP. The LP turbine is bigger, the shafting in the engine and liftfan are bigger, the spiral bevel gears are bigger, which reduced the flow path in the liftfan, so the fan was redesigned, they were talking about growing the diameter of the fan so the airframe would need to grow, and blah blah blah. I got out of it during the intial planning of all this growth, but have kept some loose tabs on it.

The 6th gen propulsion systems are supposed to be able to do everything. They want a high thrust super sonic engine that uses very little fuel, can loiter all day, and has a low IR and noise signature. And yes, they are intended for unmanned aircraft. You can imagine that the super do-all engine is going to take a lot of time to develop, and time is money. It's also going to need lots of exotic hardware, which isn't cheap either.

The DoD has all but pulled the plug on these new engines though, after having already sunk billions of dollars into initial development. Which is probably the right move. When funding becomes available in the future, we can drag these things out of mothballs and get to work on them again. It's just going to push the readiness date way to the right.

As far as F-35 vs F-22 goes, the F-22 is intended as an air superiority fighter in every sense of the word. It is supposed to engage targets in the air, and also coordinate other aircraft. It is NOT intended to engage ground targets. 1) It's very risky to the aircraft, and 2) It would take away from the intended role of coordinating aircraft. The meat sack in the seat can only do so many things at the same time.

The F-35 is specifically designed to engage ground targets and provide close air support, while being coordinated by the F-22 providing air superiority. Since both of these birds are being developed by lockheed, it is the perfect blending on technology and roles. When these two platforms are used in conjunction, they should be the ultimate in air combat.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Not sure where to start blackhawk, so I won't other than to say you need to take a class on reading comprehension.

Speaking of which, you seem to be internalizing this, do you have an aunt or uncle working on this project? Stock dividends not paying out what they should? Perhaps that is where your lack of comprehension stems from...

Yes, I'm certain you don't know where to start, since you weren't able to make a coherent argument and had to resort to an unsupported insult. This, among other reasons, is why I've got you on my "ignore" list. You started out with Eisenhower's famous quote, added a number, and then implied that the program was bull**** and had no worth. I responded with my opinion and, since you didn't really make a case for your opinion, prodded you a bit with my last comment. While I may miss a word or phrase here or there, I can guarantee you I understand what I'm reading.

As to your implication that I have some sort of financial or familial connection to either the F-22 or F-35 program, other than having a distant cousin who is a zoomie, I have no connection that I'm aware of. Not that it matters. Bozo.