Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

F-22 Fraud suit and 62% mission capable rate.

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
If it's on the internet, it must be true.

RCS is a tightly guarded secret, and materials and composition is at a classification level that will never be released to the public.

Readiness and capabilities are also extremely sensitive, and won't be talked about to vindicate or invalidate these arguments. What's this engineers street cred? In a buidling full of 50 lb brains the title "engineer" dosen't mean much. Whose to say he's not disgruntled?

Based on my personl experience working with Raptors, both on the blue team and as red, it's every bit the Buck Rogers starship it's made out to be. Of course, your opinions on the matter are well documented on this forum.
 
If it's on the internet, it must be true.

RCS is a tightly guarded secret, and materials and composition is at a classification level that will never be released to the public.

The 62% mission capable rate is a direct quote from Young, while he was still serving as undersecretary for defense acquisition, not exactly an anonymous internet posting.
Readiness and capabilities are also extremely sensitive, and won't be talked about to vindicate or invalidate these arguments.
Wrong, actually it is very much included when validating a weapons systems performance.
What's this engineers street cred? In a buidling full of 50 lb brains the title "engineer" dosen't mean much. Whose to say he's not disgruntled?

Obviously, his claims should be instantly dismissed. Clearly not a team player.
Based on my personl experience working with Raptors, both on the blue team and as red, it's every bit the Buck Rogers starship it's made out to be. Of course, your opinions on the matter are well documented on this forum.

I don't recall strongly advocating a position on the F-22. If it is truly much more capable than the JSF, I would advocate more procurement.

Gates does not appear impressed.

I asked if those with experience, with new weapons system, thought that these numbers were especially bad, or in line with early block numbers in other advanced systems.

De wad the panties dude.
 
This thing should have been canned years ago. The Falcon is just as capable and costs a lot less.
 
I love going back and reading about the overpriced, non effective F-15, F-16, and maverick weapon systems back in the late 70s and early 80s. The press was full of reports on how bad, expensive, and ineffective those systems were. (The option at the time that got "good press" was the F-5 type fighters...)

Funny thing is as weapon systems matured they got pretty good. Those Mavericks...the ones that would never work in combat? I saw a bunch fired in anger as a FAC in Gulf 1 that worked liked magic. How many of you drive an 78, 79, or 84 car? I flew all those year models into and out of combat zones into the 90s, and continued to fly similar vintage jets until I retired in 2007 from flying Eagles. I'd say getting 30 years out of a 30 million dollar jet is a good deal. The Raptor isn't cheap, but as someone who has fought it I would say its pretty darn cosmic. I also predict we'll get 20-30 or more years out of them, too...
 
I knew avionics engineers working on the F-22 avionics systems at Skunkworks around 1989. They all agreed that the F-22 was a focked up program, especially the avionics. I am sure many of these issues have been corrected, but it does not make sense to cancel a program where billions have been invested in it.
 
According to the latest issue of Aviation Week, the F-22 currently costs $50,000/hour to operate. The bulk of this is maintenance work on the aircraft's stealth coatings.
 
I knew avionics engineers working on the F-22 avionics systems at Skunkworks around 1989. They all agreed that the F-22 was a focked up program, especially the avionics. I am sure many of these issues have been corrected, but it does not make sense to cancel a program where billions have been invested in it.

1989, I was flying F-4s that year. I'm gonna go WAAAAAAAAYYYYY out on a limb and hypothesize that there've been a few upgrades, mods, and a piece of new technology or three that have made their way onto the F-22. All I've heard from guys who've flown it or flown against it are that it is cosmic, to use a vast understatement. As usual, Albie and Sig have provided some very valuable insight into what the Raptor is and what is shall be . . . to paraphrase Led Zeppelin.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top