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

Goodbye F-22 program. We hardly new ye.

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
Register   Log in
It ain't over till it's over, boys. Lets not forget that when Dick Cheney was the Sec of Defense, he wanted the V-22 Osprey cancelled...and cancelled the program more than once....the congress overrode his decision more than once.
 
If the Air Force would have awarded the "other" airplane the contract, there would be squadrons full of the F-23 as we speak. The "other" plane was a better airplane, but no thrust vectoring.
 
ableone said:
Since 2006 US military spending has been greater than the rest of the world combined. That is not sustainable over time. Our deficits are also a threat to national security.
Click to expand...

Yet up and coming countires such as India, China, Russia, etc continue to develop and procure serious 4-4.5 generation aircraft that are a tangible threat. Not only that, but collect lots of them, for a lot less money than we're spending. It's our system that's broken, not our technology. Think how much we could build the F-22 for if we'd stop changing requirements/technology/micromanagement/testing testing testing before we approve.
 
Second Time

ableone said:
What? The Air force turn down an expensive feature so that they could afford more airframes? It would be the first time.
Click to expand...
No it happen in 1940 when the Army Air Corp wanted newer more modern airplanes with the latest gadgets and latest technology, FDR told them you would take what we give you. Robert Lovett, ex Navy pilot, and first basically Sec of Air Force, wrote a paper and said you will win WWII with quantity and not quality. FDR gave William Knudsen the go ahead to assign aircraft production to the auto companies. When this happened three years later an avalanche of airplanes rolled out of the factories. We won WWII with 1930’s aircraft. This over whelmed the quality of the bad guys.
 
Tejas-Jet said:
It ain't over till it's over, boys. Lets not forget that when Dick Cheney was the Sec of Defense, he wanted the V-22 Osprey cancelled...and cancelled the program more than once....the congress overrode his decision more than once.
Click to expand...

My bet is that Sec Gate's F-22 and Missle Defense cuts will be reinstated by Congress. Both programs account for a lot of jobs.

In these days of trillion $ expenditures, what's a few more billion $ (when jobs is the name of the game)?
 
LearLove said:
If I were pres I'd tell them to pick me up in whatever they have available. no special helo needed. A uh1 or blackhawk would be fine by me.

Same for AF 1. Why pay for that type of stuff. I'd rather spend the money on more or better weapon systems for the guys getting the job done. A C-5 or C17 would be fine by me, eveyone pile in. Domestic travel = C-9.

Along the lines of the F22, ref. the F-35. Do we (and the UK) really need a VSTOL (F-35B) version? I think the program would be better off with an AF and Navy version.
Click to expand...

Marines need the STOVL version to operate from forward bases, unimproved airfields and the LHAs. The Royal Navy also operates predominately from carriers withour catapults or arresting gear and also require STOVL F-35s.
 
pilotyip said:
When this happened three years later an avalanche of airplanes rolled out of the factories. We won WWII with 1930’s aircraft. This over whelmed the quality of the bad guys.
Click to expand...

Ah, we were losing the air war in Europe until the P-47D and P-51 were introduced.
 
On topic, Lockheed has had nearly thirty years to get the F-22 right. They failed miserably. It was a botched design (avionics) from the get go.
 
Gates' argument isn't cutting what we don't need, it's cutting what we don't need the most.

Number one funding boost on his list was life improvements for veterans and troops fighting the current conflicts. I love the F-22, I think we need at least 300 of them! and I think we need 250 c-17s! C-5m's are great, but there is simply no comparison to how much loot a C-17 can put into an assault zone or onto a drop zone consistently. If you want to shove a brigade or two up Kim Jong's A** a ton of C-17's are a must. In addition to that, these airframes are getting used like a cheap hooker in downtown Fayetteville after payday.

It hurts, but Gates is shifting our dollars to where they ought to go when considering the problems right in front of our face.

I'm just glad I'm not headed to UPT. It's going to be hard to get into a cockpit of any kind, and stay there for very long. Get your microsoft flight sim disks out boys!!
 
he wanted the V-22 Osprey cancelled...and cancelled the program more than once....the congress overrode his decision more than once.
Click to expand...

Relevent, however remember it was in large part the strong Marine influence on the hill that forced the issue. After the recent missteps in acquisition, I wonder the USAF's ability to force the issue.
 
Not True

lowtimedriver said:
Ah, we were losing the air war in Europe until the P-47D and P-51 were introduced.
Click to expand...
Not true, we were not really engaged in the air war in Europe until late 1943. Even up to that time we were never denied the use of any airspace due to Lufwafe action. Even before the P-51s showed up the German's were in deep trouble. We were trading a B-17 and its crew for a ME-109 and coming out ahead. By April of 1944 the German Air Force was a non-factor. Then true air superiority existed over all of Europe.
 
propsarebest said:
That's fine, and the -M is a GREAT airplane, but there still is a massive shortage of airlift in general...
Click to expand...

Contract the airlift out to the 747F or other commercial operators. They are way more capable/efficient than a C-17 for strat air and the lift is out there. The C-17s can focus on their short airfields/airdrop/grunt support/tactical ops/inter-theater airlift. Contracting out the pond crossings would free up C-17s which are heavy and inefficient compared to commercial operators on a strat air mission.

Schwanker
 
You guys haven't talked about the real cost of this cut. No more bonus money.

Guys are going to jump ship like rats on a burning ship.
 
SIG600 said:
You guys haven't talked about the real cost of this cut. No more bonus money.

Guys are going to jump ship like rats on a burning ship.
Click to expand...
but when you jump ship there are no jobs to jump into, however a burning ship will keep you warm.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top