F-22: A turkey?

Discussion in 'Vintage Topic Archive (Sept - 2009)' started by 4095fanatic, Feb 23, 2008.

Is the F-22 a "turkey"?

This poll will close on Feb 7, 2106 at 1:28 AM.
  1. Definitely Yes

    100.0%
  2. Yes

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Undecided/Somewhere in between

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Definitely No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. [​IMG]

    When the military channel listed the F-22 as a "turkey", I thought they were smoking crack... but then I got to thinking. The F-22 has a "flyaway cost" of $137,500,000. By comparison, an F-15C/D costs $29,000,000, and an F-16C/D costs even less at $18,800,000. The F-15 and F-16 are projected to remain in service until at least 2025.

    The F-15 as of 2008 has a record of 108-0 in air-to-air combat. Now I'm all for giving out boys the best equipment money can buy, but when you factor in the fact that even including maintenance costs, conservative estimates state that you can buy, fully outfit, and maintain 4 squadrons of F-15's for the cost of one squadron of F-22s, do we really need to have an all F-22 airforce in the future? No one can come close to matching it's capabilities... and its overkill. The F-15 is still one of the premier air-to-air fighters in the world. Imagine if police departments only had SWAT teams, and every firefighting crew out west was made up of "hotshots". Fact of the matter is, for conflicts like Iraq/Afghanistan, the F-15 proved just fine; there was no need for F-22 capabilities. Heck, given most of the "low-intensity conflicts" we're involved in (they're anything but, but that's the terminology for the counter-insurgency we're dealing with), the F-15 is overkill in its own way. Just food for thought.
     
  2. The thing is, the F-15's and F-16's in the USAF inventory are actually costing more to maintain as the airframes get older and more flight time on them. They also have projected life spans for each airframe as well.

    Another hit that the F-15's just recently took, is that over 400 of the C/D models WILL NEVER FLY AGAIN! These birds were found to be lacking on construction standards, Quality Control was apparently not available when they were built. Of these 400 odd jets, the usable parts will be stripped from them and they are being sent to the boneyard at Davis Monthan AFB in Tuscon, AZ. Currently the only F-15 that is on active flying status is a handful of the C/D models and all the E model *2 seater* aircraft.

    The F-16 is also an aging airplane, and is nicknamed the "Lawn dart" by many maintainers, as if it loses it's only engine in flight, it doesn't have the proper glide path in order to allow the pilot to glide her home. At that point, the only thing the pilot can do is "ops check his egress system" and punch the hell out of the aircraft. Rumor has it, that once all the QF-4 drones are gone, the USAF is going to next use F-16's as their air to air combat missile test aircraft. Basically they are going to start with the oldest F-16 airframes, turn them into drones and use them for target practice.....

    Yes, the F-22 is expensive, but is it a Turkey? NO! WE NEED THIS PLANE!

    Why, do you ask? Because in order for the US to maintain TOTAL AIR DOMINANCE, we have to have an aircraft that won't be seen by our enemies radar, and can deliver a knock out blow from way back in the nose bleed section and have nobody know where it came from.

    What they are saying about the F-22 is the same thing they said about the F-15's and F-16's when they were first introduced to take over for the aging F-4 Phantoms... Is this necessary? Can we afford it? Do we REALLY need these new weapon delivery platforms? Will these aircraft actually save lives in the long run?

    The obvious answer to all of these questions is a resounding YES!
     

  3. It costs money to keep from being obsolete. Just because the plane is "overkill" for the present obvious threat of the insurgents, there are far more threats out there to be prepared for other then osoma. There's enough food for thought to make an all you can think buffet for both sides of the argument.
     
  4. I'm not saying we don't need SOME F-22's... but replacing ALL of our current fleet with them and JSF's? The Air Force says it needs a crud ton of money in order to stay on track with the upgrade program... so why not instead just slow it down a little? Most of the Eagle drivers I talked to say they love the plane and are in no hurry to transition... it's not like we're currently going to war with Sopwith Camels. There is a need to replace them, but I don't view it as "urgent".
     
  5. i thought the f-15 had been returned to service...but is the 22 a turkey?
    only if you call the f-117 and the b-2 turkeys as well....both are EXTREMELY
    expensive.. i guess its all perspective.
     
  6. Don't forget, the B-2 was designed as an infiltrator to deliver a nuclear payload. We have nothing else that fits that description in the inventory (unless you count the B-1, which has some built in stealth, but still has a rather large cross-section). The F-22 was designed as an air superiority fighter, with stealth merely being used to enhance that role.
     
  7. Bandit320

    Bandit320 Member

    106
    0
    It's pretty much a proven fact that when you "slow down" an aircraft purchase all that happens is that you spend the same amount, or more, and get less airplanes. It's happened with every airplane since the F-16 except the F-117A. The only reason it didn't happen there was that it was a black program that Congress couldn't stick it's fingers into.

    As far as being overkill, I can tell you there was one mission during the first gulf war were approximately 150 strike and support aircraft were set against to closely located point targets. All the strike aircraft were turned back by enemy ground fire. That night four black aircraft completely destroyed both targets and were gone before the bad guys could even fire a shot. In air warfare (like on the ground) there is no such thing as overkill.

    Mike
     
  8. Ari

    Ari Guest

    The hard part for me is the fact we have 3 new aircraft the f-18s the f-35 and F-22.. We should use one basic aircraft and build it with different packages for the needed roll. Then we could buy our parts in bulk, and only have to have one parts package per say. (and still have the hottest thing in the air)
     
  9. Bandit320

    Bandit320 Member

    106
    0
    They tried that one time. Was supposed to be a joint Navy / Air Force fighter to fit all rolls. Ended up being the F-111. Might as well try to design a gun that would be perfect for all missions.

    Mike
     
  10. Dreamthief

    Dreamthief Senior Member Member

    nope, an illustration: there's a reason an xbox 360 costs more than the playstation 1....
     
  11. Krippp

    Krippp Well-Known Member

    don't consider the 22 a turkey, how can you put a price tag on an aircraft that is designed to bring the load onto targets and get the pilots home safely. the safety factor and stealth capabilities that the 22 has over the 15 or 16 lead me to believe that our pilots stand a greater chance of coming home after a sortie than ending up shot down and on CNN, captured by some 3rd world terrorist
     
  12. That was my old view... then it got changed... and I think I've now changed back again. Go F-22! lol
     
  13. Kagern

    Kagern Guest

    F22 = the deadliest bird to ever fly. With AMRAAM block Ds, it can target and engage from 120 miles away using only passive sensors. The first warning that fancy Su-27 will get is when the slammers go into terminal guidance mode a few miles out. Meaning less then 5 seconds of warning before they are a large cloud of recyclables.

    You could (maybe) debate whether or not such an aircraft had a place in todays environment, but certainly not that it is the finest fighter in the world. It will be interesting to see how much it sucks at ground pounding though with no external stores.

    Something new I learned about it last night... Everything is so modular that you're supposed to be able to replace any non-structural component on the aircraft in less then a hour. That includes the entire power plant. It actually has sensors on the load bearing struts and wing panels that measure how much they flex during flight so that it can predict component lifespan and tell the ground crews if something is wearing down. Think about a car like that... WARNING: Your left upper ball joint is worn past specifications and should be replaced within 20 operating hours, have a nice day.
     
  14. It's an Air Superiority weapon and the best plane in the world for that role. They won't get cheaper to build later either. Think of it kinda like playing poker. If you stand pat with four aces long enough, eventually someone is going to catch that straight flush. I think the F-22 is worth every nickel and I'm sure the guys flying them feel that way too. Imagine going into combat already KNOWING you're the baddest MF in the valley. Also, for Joe ground pounder, he doesn't have to worry about whether the air support is going to be there or not. He knows it will. That's a huge comfort factor in my book.
     
  15. Of course, the average Joe ground pounder loves the A-10 for close air support.
     
  16. Ari

    Ari Guest