ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

About the F-22

Modern Discuss About the F-22 in the Other Eras forums; The F-22 is a phenomenal plane. It has a great airfoil, great capabilities, and great speed. The problem is cost. ...

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    11
    Country
    United States

    About the F-22

    The F-22 is a phenomenal plane. It has a great airfoil, great capabilities, and great speed. The problem is cost. It costs about 361 million dollars. So much so that we (America) only bought about 180. The F-35 costs about and estimated 65-120 million. I understand that the F-16s are aging and need to be replaced, but they are still capable fighters. It's my opinion a smarter option would have been instead of buying a GREAT plane, who's numbers are so few that no real effectiveness would be achieved against a country with similar planes that are more cost effective; Start a contract with another company to build more F-16s with a few more modern updates, or buy more F-35s to replace the aging planes we have today.
    Perhaps my logic is faulty however, your opinion?


  2. #2
    Senior Member Vassili Zaitzev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    2,966
    Country
    United States
    Quick correction, the F-22 costs around 150 million a plane, not 361.
    "Never was so much owed by so many to so few"- Winston Churchill.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    11
    Country
    United States
    "the price tag for each of the stealth fighters, designed during the Cold War for the next generation of air-to-air combat, is about $200 million." source (Democrats, Obama disagree on F-22 spending - The Boston Globe)

    Hmm, still, that still sounds a bit much to me.

  4. #4
    "Shooter" evangilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Moorpark, CA
    Posts
    18,928
    Country
    United States
    Buying F-35s to replace F-16s, that is part of the plan. The F-22 is more of a replacement for the F-15, which is an air superiority fighter. The F-16 was developed as a low cost daytime fighter that evolved into a multirole combat aircraft. The F-35 will have the same mission, multirole.

    The F-22 was an air superiority fighter from the design. There are a bunch of things that aircraft does that would be prohibitively expensive to put into an older airframe. Do we need it now? Maybe, maybe not. If we ratchet up for war in a big hurry, you need a system that is tested with all of the bugs worked out. In the field is the LAST place to be testing weapons systems and aircraft.

    Complacency and arrogance with the status quo can lead to you getting caught with your pants down and unprepared. Look at the US the day after Pearl Harbor and you will see the cost.


    > I Support Doug Gilliss <

    For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci

  5. #5
    Senior Member Messy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ankeny, Iowa
    Posts
    2,651
    Country
    United States
    IMO the U.S.A's push since WW2 for the latest, greatest fighter is a direct result of the U.S. having to play catch up as far as aircraft design and technology goes. We were behind many of the major countries involved in WW2. We were way behind Germany and Japan. The quest for the next great dominant plane is the end result of that hard lesson that was learned, and out military never wants to find itself in that position again. Try explaining that to the politicians who want to cut military spending and funds for research projects that keep the US ans her allies ahead of the rest of the world.

    Bryon O.




    "When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt


  6. #6
    Forum Mascot Lucky13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    26,576
    Country
    Scotland
    Country II
    Sweden
    What is better, fewer aircraft that cost more, more advanced or not as expensive but do slightly less? Look at the B-2, is that money well spent.....will the B-2 fly as long as the B-52? B-52, now....that's money well spent!

    Jan "Felicis Tredecim"
    "I´m going back to the front to relax"
    "THE BLACK CATS FLIES TONIGHT"
    "Find your enemy and shoot him down - everything else is unimportant!"
    "When you're out of F-8's... You're out of fighters!"

  7. #7
    Senior Member Messy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ankeny, Iowa
    Posts
    2,651
    Country
    United States
    Can't argue with you there Lucky at all on the B-52! Not sure which philosophy is better more craft, or fewer numbers of advanced craft. Guess it all depends on your perceived threat or enemy.
    Last edited by Messy1; 06-22-2010 at 11:45 AM.

    Bryon O.




    "When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt


  8. #8
    Forum Mascot Lucky13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    26,576
    Country
    Scotland
    Country II
    Sweden
    Personally, I think that it would have been easier to defend the costs etc., of these birds, if Soviet Union had still been around today....

    But, that's just me....

    Jan "Felicis Tredecim"
    "I´m going back to the front to relax"
    "THE BLACK CATS FLIES TONIGHT"
    "Find your enemy and shoot him down - everything else is unimportant!"
    "When you're out of F-8's... You're out of fighters!"

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    11
    Country
    United States
    The spirit is a bomber, one able to get in, drop the load, and get out quickly. In WWII, because we didn't have the power and precision of today, many planes were used at a time. Today we don't need that, we can level several blocks with one bomb; Or destroy cities with a nuke. Planes like this probably won't be lost often.

    Fighter planes, such as F-35 F-22 F-16 ect. will lose numbers if we are faced against a country with similar resources. That much is a given. So why buy a new plane, when the airframe you have is perfectly fine? I'm not very educated on this, and I could be wrong. But couldn't we just use that money to put new technology on the F-15 (new power plant, slight adjustments ect.) and buy more F-35s?

  10. #10
    Senior Member Messy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ankeny, Iowa
    Posts
    2,651
    Country
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucky13 View Post
    Personally, I think that it would have been easier to defend the costs etc., of these birds, if Soviet Union had still been around today....

    But, that's just me....
    Again agree 100%. For decades the Soviets military was the big threat for our countries. Now that may not be true at the current time, it's hard for some people to justify the money that goes into the F-22 because we do not have a clear defined threat from a country such as the USSR anymore. Although I feel we do need to keep an eye on China, and other parts of Asia and be prepared.

    Bryon O.




    "When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt


  11. #11
    Senior Member Messy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ankeny, Iowa
    Posts
    2,651
    Country
    United States
    Fighter planes, such as F-35 F-22 F-16 ect. will lose numbers if we are faced against a country with similar resources. That much is a given. So why buy a new plane, when the airframe you have is perfectly fine? I'm not very educated on this, and I could be wrong. But couldn't we just use that money to put new technology on the F-15 (new power plant, slight adjustments etc.) and buy more F-35s

    I think a country has to keep upgrading it's weapons platforms weather that be planes, ships, tanks, firearms, etc. because your enemy will constantly be upgrading theirs. I do not a country has the luxury of resting on it's laurels anymore and trying to upgrade 30+ year old platforms for the most part. Sooner or later you are going to come to the limits of that airframes abilities, and if your enemy has a more advanced platform, you may be in trouble!

    Bryon O.




    "When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt


  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    11
    Country
    United States
    At this point I'm just being devils advocate, but why try looking for another less expensive plane? I believe I glimpsed something about the Euros having a few next gen fighters for less.

  13. #13
    "Shooter" evangilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Moorpark, CA
    Posts
    18,928
    Country
    United States
    Airframes only last so long, regardless of upgrades. Do you remember a few months ago there were F-15s breaking up in flight? Upgrades are great, but the F-15 and F-16 are 1970s technologies. The airframes are aging.


    > I Support Doug Gilliss <

    For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci

  14. #14
    Senior Member Vassili Zaitzev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    2,966
    Country
    United States
    I understand your position Jareds, but the F-15's and F-16's airframes are pushing close to 30 years. I believe it's time for an upgrade.
    "Never was so much owed by so many to so few"- Winston Churchill.

  15. #15
    IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO FLYBOYJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    20,663
    Country
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by jareds View Post
    At this point I'm just being devils advocate, but why try looking for another less expensive plane? I believe I glimpsed something about the Euros having a few next gen fighters for less.
    30 years ago the same stuff was said about the F-15. Former Defense Secretary Melvin Laird along with the "Fighter Mafia" (John Boyd, defense analysts Tom Christie and Pierre Sprey, and test pilot Col. Everest Riccioni) came up with the argument that eventually saw the F-16 being developed. Although they were responsible for the development of an excellent combat aircraft, in essence they failed in their assessment as the F-15's record speaks for itself.

    Right now there is nothing that can touch the F-22 - period. They are bought and paid for, let's just hope we have enough of them.

    Sprey is still flappin his yap about the F-35 and suggested a "new" A-10 type aircraft in lieu of the F-35. Although not a bad idea he failed to realize how much it would really cost to “re-develop" such an aircraft and at this point the F-35 is still the better option.

    BTW L-Mart just announced that it intends to try to lower the cost of each F-35 by 30%. LM are putting their money where their mouths are.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86