F-22 Infighting

[Wing_Z]

The F-22 programme is under intense scrutiny.
Due to the large number of subcontractors involved, US Congressmen find themselves defending it, to save constituency jobs.

Ahead lies a major clash between the Administration and Congress.
Quite an extensive read in the Washington Post

Boeing is no doubt waiting to step in with the F-15 Silent Eagle.

 

[Toastmaker]

Hm. . . but it was ok to blow billions on Chevy and Chrysler, who were going to ultimately go to bankruptcy anyway. . .



(Sorry - I'll shut up now)

 

[Trans_23]

Good topic but I fear the wrong forum.

 

[Lionheart]

Thanks for the heads up.

I had thought it was cancelled until we could afford it anyways. I dont see the harm of holding back say 5 years. Just my own thoughts of course. I know nothing about building fighter aircraft. We are definately broke presently.

Bill

 

[Allen]

"Lockheed Martin F-22, has recently required more than 30 hours of maintenance for every hour in the skies."

Ha... an they called the Me-262 hight maintenance.

"It is a disgrace that you can fly a plane [an average of] only 1.7 hours before it gets a critical failure" that jeopardizes success of the aircraft's mission, said a Defense Department critic of the plane who is not authorized to speak on the record.

Ouch...

"Its troubles have been detailed in dozens of Government Accountability Office reports and Pentagon audits. But Pierre Sprey, a key designer in the 1970s and 1980s of the F-16 and A-10 warplanes, said that from the beginning, the Air Force designed it to be "too big to fail, that is, to be cancellation-proof.""

Simple. We buy USAF that we already own and put it into bank bankruptcy like we do all too big to fail things. Or those morons on the hill can man up and tell us that they wasted are tax dollers on a plane that will neve see real combat and kill the program.

When the F-22 is killed than the F-35 will be next. After all it will be cheaper to keep the AV-8 since we seen what going to happen to the F-35 in the F-22.

 

[Railrunner130]

I've been watching the F-22 debate for several months now. The program managers made some bad decisions over the years and that's partially how the F-22 is in the debockle it's in.

It was originally SUPPOSED to be purchased by the Navy as well. That's the primary reason why it won the competition against the YF-23. There was also supposed to be a less-classified export model. Over the years, both concepts fell by the wayside, which only drove the end costs up. Then, the strike package was added and very quickly removed, due to both cost and time.

Now, the Japanese are interested in the export model to replace the F-4EJ. Congress is trying to buy some time by forcing the extention of the USAF production run. With that bought time, they are working on fixing the export law on the F-22. Problem is that DoD leadership doesn't want more F-22s, mainly because they're expensive and can't be used in Iraq/Afghanistan due to lack of strike capabilities. Not to mention the in-fighting over the end number of airplanes.

Sec. Gates has dumped a lot of confidence in the F-35 program. As I recall, he wants advance $$ for it.

 

[Lionheart]

I've been watching the F-22 debate for several months now. The program managers made some bad decisions over the years and that's partially how the F-22 is in the debockle it's in.

It was originally SUPPOSED to be purchased by the Navy as well. That's the primary reason why it won the competition against the YF-23. There was also supposed to be a less-classified export model. Over the years, both concepts fell by the wayside, which only drove the end costs up. Then, the strike package was added and very quickly removed, due to both cost and time.

Now, the Japanese are interested in the export model to replace the F-4EJ. Congress is trying to buy some time by forcing the extention of the USAF production run. With that bought time, they are working on fixing the export law on the F-22. Problem is that DoD leadership doesn't want more F-22s, mainly because they're expensive and can't be used in Iraq/Afghanistan due to lack of strike capabilities. Not to mention the in-fighting over the end number of airplanes.

Sec. Gates has dumped a lot of confidence in the F-35 program. As I recall, he wants advance $$ for it.

Very interesting and very scary.

I know that from what I have heard from USAF people, we need our present planes replaced badly. Existing planes are showing extreme age.

We are in a bit of a perdicament.

Man, if thats true about the F-22, needing 'that' much maintenance, then perhaps it should be cancelled. We need a good plane up there that can run and run well and not be a hanger queen, pardon the pun.

 

[deathfromafar]

Better idea, let's cut em all (the F-22's) up for scrap and buy Migs and Sukhois. Let's just speed the process to becoming a third world power(already well in progress). Rant aside, I have heard this BS before. I heard it with the M-1 Abrams, I heard it with the AH-64, I heard it with the B-1 just to name a few. Some of the bashing comes from in-service sources, others from politcal sources, all with questionable motives over the other. It's the same vicious cycle over and over again. Nearly all the past critics of programs have been proven dead wrong. They will with the F-22 and most likely after we can it and become a third rate military power(just want many want inside and outside of our borders). But we keep funding crap like the V-22 and other pork projects in this country that are basically worthless. What a shame, the pride of this Nation, we who once put men on the moon can't even stick to the plan of a plane over 20 years in the making that was supposed to replace a now geriactric and tired albeit combat proven and undeafeated fighter. Makes me sick as hell.

 

[TARPSBird]

Hmmm... 30 maintenance hours per flight hour is high. The F-14 averaged (according to various sources) around 50:1 which was real high, the F/A-18 is around 20:1 and the F-18E/F Super Hornets are supposed to be down around 10-15:1 which is probably about as good as it's gonna get for any high-tech fighter.
Still, I don't think it's a smart move to chop the F-22 program because we can't be sure what threats we may face in the future and where they might come from. I recall some of our F-16 and F-15 guys got their butts handed to them by Indian Air Force Su-30's during an exercise a few years back. The next batch of real bad guys might be pros and not ill-trained goobers who eject the first time their RHAW gear chirps.

 

[jmig]

... I recall some of our F-16 and F-15 guys got their butts handed to them by Indian Air Force Su-30's during an exercise a few years back. The next batch of real bad guys might be pros and not ill-trained goobers who eject the first time their RHAW gear chirps.

Is that really true or hearsay? :isadizzy:

I say give them to the Israelis with the stipulation that after they put them to good use and improve them, they show us what they did and allow us to do the same.

 

[djscoo]

But we keep funding crap like the V-22 and other pork projects in this country that are basically worthless. What a shame, the pride of this Nation, we who once put men on the moon can't even stick to the plan of a plane over 20 years in the making that was supposed to replace a now geriactric and tired albeit combat proven and undeafeated fighter. Makes me sick as hell.

V-22 =

• 24 years in the making.

• Replaces MH-53, a geriatric (60's era) combat proven yet possibly tired transport helicopter

Just an observation...

 

[Panther_99FS]

Is that really true or hearsay? :isadizzy:

jmig,
Do a search on 'Cope India' & you'll find some information. Now then, I'm sure with your history & experience, you completely understand that separating credible sources from the banter is another story...

 

[Toastmaker]

jmig,
Do a search on 'Cope India' & you'll find some information. Now then, I'm sure with your history & experience, you completely understand that separating credible sources from the banter is another story...

Nowadays, separating credible sources from banter may require extraordinary engineering skills. . .

 

[Trans_23]

jmig,
Do a search on 'Cope India' & you'll find some information. Now then, I'm sure with your history & experience, you completely understand that separating credible sources from the banter is another story...

From that read it sounds as if the deck was stacked against the US fighters. A good learning experience none the less.

 

[Odie]

The F-22 programme is under intense scrutiny.
Due to the large number of subcontractors involved, US Congressmen find themselves defending it, to save constituency jobs.

Ahead lies a major clash between the Administration and Congress.
Quite an extensive read in the Washington Post

Boeing is no doubt waiting to step in with the F-15 Silent Eagle.

If I remember correctly, there are sub-contractors in almost every state...so every congressman has a stake in it.

 

[deathfromafar]

V-22 =

• 24 years in the making.

• Replaces MH-53, a geriatric (60's era) combat proven yet possibly tired transport helicopter

Just an observation...

Yeah and it is still a piece of crap deathtrap. How many of you heard another V-22 accident happened? Luckily no one was hurt or killed. Damn near could have been ugly. There's a few things I'd scrap to built at least the second BUR F-22 purchase plans. This idea that the F-35 is going to be a one answer for everything will end up going the way of the old TFX(3 Services F-111 Program). BTW, they are already cutting the original F-35 numbers. By the time all is said and done, we will only see 1/3 or worse 1/4 of the original planned numbers. The hole keeps getting deeper.

 

[Railrunner130]

The V-22 program has gone through some rough stages. It's new technology that took a while to develop. Remember, the USMC developed the V-22 alone and from scratch. They had very little help from any of the other services. For the USMC, that hasn't happened in a long time, if ever. It also has suffered more than it's share of budget cuts, etc.

It's been made public that the Osprey has a low in-commission rate. The question is "why?" Are the spares not adequately funded? Do the maintenance practices need to be revamped? Are the maintenance folks up to speed? Do the systems need to be further developed to increase reliability? Time will tell.

It's a good platform. It's just not as good as it should be. Yet....

Back to the F-22.

 

[tigisfat]

These things go back and forth all the time. I was once chastized here for not supporting F-22s, and now the chief of staff's job depends on him supporting the production cancellation.

There's more to consider. Someone said we should curtail production until we have money. It's not easy to stop and start aircraft production. A complex combat aircraft is unlike any other machine on the planet. It's not like calling Coca-cola and having them start making an old recipe again. They may keep working equipment, but workers go bye-bye and move on to new careers. It'd be just like trying to call ACES up and have them release FS11 in short order.

There are some things that are uncontestable: brand new aircraft with already-limited capabilities should not be experiencing such issues. C-17s are settling into a pattern now, but the average new one worked like a charm for many years before experiencing drops in MC rates. I mentioned pre-production and post-production issues, and I was talked down to before. I was told the problems didn't exist, and that it was just negativity. Well folks, you can't deny it anymore. Guys, F-22s have been grounded countless times, and have SERIOUS failures all the time that the metrics don't reflect.

The Raptor, along with many other controversial programs, has seen it's share of downs and downs. Not every defense acquisition is this way. Just because there have been others that've gone like this doesn't make it right. Look at the C-17 as an example again, deathfromafar..

I'm kinda torn right now. Our defense industry needs HUGE boosts NOW because it's in shambles, and we are at risk of losing power on the world stage because of extremely aged and antiquated aircraft. On the other hand, I don't feel like buying F-22s is right for us, even as a stopgap. Does anyone recall the Chrysler Crossfire of late? Just because it was expensive and sporty didn't mean it was good looking or fast. "WE NEED A NEW ONE NOW" and "IT'S EXPENSIVE BECAUSE YOU ALWAY GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR" aren't good excuses for buying a 40,000 dollar POS like the Chrysler Crossfire, or a jillion dollar fighter jet.

 

[Allen]

I'll buy Migs and Sukhois as long as they are as good as the F-22 any day if they cost less. Third and second world power Migs and Sukhois are already better than the F-22. If not, they out number ready combat F-22's. 20 Migs and Sukhois to every 1 F-22. F-22 lose every time.


National pride dose NOT mean we have to buld a 20 year old plane becouse have no newer planes to make.That makes you stupid. The Soviet got so far by coping the best of the world. Now they may have copyed them self ahead of the U.S in jet fighters. Not only have the copyed them self ahead but done it cheaper and made lot more of them.

If Russian have a better jet we need to have it in the U.S. Buy it, Steal it. What ever it take to find out what makes them better. Not waste tax payer doller on F-22 junk that 20 year old is already behind Russian Fighter. Are 30 year old jets can be modded to make the just as good as the F-22.

 

[PRB]

... 20 Migs and Sukhois to every 1 F-22. F-22 lose every time ...

Not necessarily. History teaches us differently. Many "factors" go into the "who wins and who looses" equation...