Do you think there will start to be one or two of these seen in the "drop" out of flight school? Or are they strictly going to go to guys transitioning out of F-15's? There will be no two seat trainer version, and the Air Force is supposed to get nearly 300 of these over the next several years. So who is going to get them? Will the Air Force hand a 120 million dollar single seat aircraft to a nugget out of flight school?
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
When the F/A-22 enters service...
- Thread starter Jafar
- Start date
- Watchers 5
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
CCDiscoB
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2002
- Posts
- 779
NO! The AF won't hand over an F-22 to some chimp out of flight school for many years to come.
The list of F-15 pilots in line to fly the F-22 is long, and since they attached a "A" to the F/A-22 name, I guess there will be some F-16 guys in line too.
It's not like the AF will suddenly have 300 F-22s. It will take a couple of years just to make enough to train the IPs. Then a few more to have the first operational squadron, etc, etc.
The list of F-15 pilots in line to fly the F-22 is long, and since they attached a "A" to the F/A-22 name, I guess there will be some F-16 guys in line too.
It's not like the AF will suddenly have 300 F-22s. It will take a couple of years just to make enough to train the IPs. Then a few more to have the first operational squadron, etc, etc.
rainman_02
GUCCI
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Posts
- 47
GumbyDarnit
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2003
- Posts
- 31
...some chimp out of flight school...
In the Viper community we call these guys and gals "punks" or Sensitive New-Age PilotS (SNAPS). I think it was sometime like 80 when the first punks got assigned a Viper right out of UPT. But we were builing a lot more than 300 Vipers. I think you couldn't count on a punk flying the Raptor til the end of this decade.
Gumby
In the Viper community we call these guys and gals "punks" or Sensitive New-Age PilotS (SNAPS). I think it was sometime like 80 when the first punks got assigned a Viper right out of UPT. But we were builing a lot more than 300 Vipers. I think you couldn't count on a punk flying the Raptor til the end of this decade.
Gumby
JimNtexas
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,590
It would be almost criminal to allow new UPT grad to fly the F-22. As a taxpayer, I certainly hope that they run like the SR-71, where a board picks the best experienced pilots to fly it.
The Commanders will want Lieutenants for political reasons, so there will probably be some sooner or latter. If you have a squadron full of fast-burning senior Captains and Majors, who will be the snacko? Besides, it is a big ego thing is to be able to mold impressional young minds, which is harder to do with experienced guys.
I certainly hope they limit the buy of these overpriced monsters to 50 or so. It's too late to cancel it, but the F-22 really adds very little useful combat capablity for it's fantastic price.
We should deploy 12 to PACAF, 12 to Europe, and keep 25 to 30 of them in the states. That would be plenty.
The Commanders will want Lieutenants for political reasons, so there will probably be some sooner or latter. If you have a squadron full of fast-burning senior Captains and Majors, who will be the snacko? Besides, it is a big ego thing is to be able to mold impressional young minds, which is harder to do with experienced guys.
I certainly hope they limit the buy of these overpriced monsters to 50 or so. It's too late to cancel it, but the F-22 really adds very little useful combat capablity for it's fantastic price.
We should deploy 12 to PACAF, 12 to Europe, and keep 25 to 30 of them in the states. That would be plenty.
HueyPilot2
Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Posts
- 7
F/A-22 is a drain
I'm not a fighter dude, but I agree with Jim. The F/A-22 only got the "A" in the designation because someone at the Pentagon (aka Five-Sided Puzzle Palace) figured it would help keep the program alive if the airplane did something other than just air superiorty.
I almost laughed when I read how the new F/"A"-22 could carry a couple token bombs. That's nice. A single B-1 can carry 30 times the load of one F/A-22.
Had we still been facing a Soviet threat with real capability, the F/A-22 would have a place in our military. Right now, it doesn't. Think about it....how many F-15C squadrons are deployed right now in support of OIF or OEF?
Spend the money elsewhere. Like a real defensive upgrade for the B-1, or more C-17s, or the upgrades for the C-130 fleet (which is falling apart), or the new tankers. Hell, even USSOCOM is looking for funding to increase it's aircraft fleet. So why are we spending so much cash on a program that adds little to the fight? Ask yourself...how many F-16s, F-15s and A-10s did we lose during the past two conflicts (ie OIF/OEF)? Not many. There just aren't too many enemies out there that can field an air superiority force comparable to our fighter pilots and F-15C fleet, much less an F/A-22 fleet.
I'm not a fighter dude, but I agree with Jim. The F/A-22 only got the "A" in the designation because someone at the Pentagon (aka Five-Sided Puzzle Palace) figured it would help keep the program alive if the airplane did something other than just air superiorty.
I almost laughed when I read how the new F/"A"-22 could carry a couple token bombs. That's nice. A single B-1 can carry 30 times the load of one F/A-22.
Had we still been facing a Soviet threat with real capability, the F/A-22 would have a place in our military. Right now, it doesn't. Think about it....how many F-15C squadrons are deployed right now in support of OIF or OEF?
Spend the money elsewhere. Like a real defensive upgrade for the B-1, or more C-17s, or the upgrades for the C-130 fleet (which is falling apart), or the new tankers. Hell, even USSOCOM is looking for funding to increase it's aircraft fleet. So why are we spending so much cash on a program that adds little to the fight? Ask yourself...how many F-16s, F-15s and A-10s did we lose during the past two conflicts (ie OIF/OEF)? Not many. There just aren't too many enemies out there that can field an air superiority force comparable to our fighter pilots and F-15C fleet, much less an F/A-22 fleet.
Patmack18 said:
It has one. But it's not for landing on boats.
CCDiscoB said:
Well I can dream, can't I?
If all goes according to plan I should graduate from UPT in early '07. (Conservative estimate. Just entering AFROTC in my junior year.) So I'm a ways away. I'll be more than happy to fly anything the Air Force wants to give me, but I think everyone would agree this airplane is truly amazing.
HueyPilot2 said:
First off, let me just say I don't know sh!t about sh!t when it come to this stuff. If we were talking about the Marine Corps and tanks I'd be all over it. This topic is rather new to me, however I've got to voice my little opinion.
I agree completely that we really don't have any competition in the air supremacy arena. However, if we don't continue to upgrade our forces how long will said advantage last? The russians are building new advanced aircraft that are going to wind up all over the planet if they can sell them. F-15's and 16's are great aircraft, but they're not going to last forever.
Sure, we haven't had a serious fight in the air since vietnam. But what happens when we have to duke it out with North Korea's SU-27's and MiG-29's? We can't predict what the world will bring, so in my opinion if we prepare for the worst and the worst doesn't happen we'll probably be fine. Just my .02 cents. In other words, I say build these crazy killing machines like there's no tomorrow. I say more Raptors and less JSFs.
Last edited:
HueyPilot2
Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Posts
- 7
I agree with you on some points
I agree that the F-15 is technology working on borrowed time (that being that there isn't anyone today that can field a similar Air Superiority force). And I agree that it would be prudent for the Air Force to begin purchasing some of these fighters.
However there are more pressing needs. The last war certainly showed we needed more airlift. The KC-135s and the C-130Es are literally falling apart. And the C-5 AMP needs to be accompanied by a re-engining program. The B-1s Defensive Systems Upgrade Program was canceled so the Air Force could move more money to the F-22 program. And the B-1 needed that program....it's still one of the few aircraft in our inventory that can jam itself and not the enemy.
Those are just my concerns...that the USAF doesn't have it's spending priorities straight.
I agree that the F-15 is technology working on borrowed time (that being that there isn't anyone today that can field a similar Air Superiority force). And I agree that it would be prudent for the Air Force to begin purchasing some of these fighters.
However there are more pressing needs. The last war certainly showed we needed more airlift. The KC-135s and the C-130Es are literally falling apart. And the C-5 AMP needs to be accompanied by a re-engining program. The B-1s Defensive Systems Upgrade Program was canceled so the Air Force could move more money to the F-22 program. And the B-1 needed that program....it's still one of the few aircraft in our inventory that can jam itself and not the enemy.
Those are just my concerns...that the USAF doesn't have it's spending priorities straight.
Go for it
Hueypilot said:
I love reading comments from dudes who have never flown a Combat Coded aircraft, they have so much good information to offer.
Thank goodness the Air Force was forward looking enough that we Bought Fighters to fight the next War, not the last one. Every day I watch British Tornados flying around and I thank God we have the F-15C, F-15E, F-16C and A-10.
Jafar,
You have a great chance to get to fly the F-22 or the Strike Fighter. If you fill squadrons with a bunch of old Captains then they never get better, they just keep doing the same old crap they did in thier previos Aircraft. All you'll hear in a Squardon is "Well at Base X we did it this way." Having young fired up LTs in every Squadron helps keep the Old farts on thier feet. There was nothing I liked better when I was an LT flying the Viper, to win a bunch of quarters on the Range from the Old heads.
You are part of Generation X, you will be called a PUNK or a SNAP. When people aren't giving you a hard time, that means that they don't really like you. I have seen PUNKS and SNAPS kick some serious Butt in Afganistan and Iraq, I thank God every day for thier hard work and thier well being.
If you want an F-22, don't let anyone tell you that you can or won't get it. Look at my profile of Aircraft I have flown, everyone one of them I was told I wouldn't get the chance to fly them. I Proved them all wrong.
Good Luck, Work Hard, Never Give up,
And May God Bless you and watch out over you.
Thanks for Serving this great country of ours.
Hueypilot said:
I love reading comments from dudes who have never flown a Combat Coded aircraft, they have so much good information to offer.
Thank goodness the Air Force was forward looking enough that we Bought Fighters to fight the next War, not the last one. Every day I watch British Tornados flying around and I thank God we have the F-15C, F-15E, F-16C and A-10.
Jafar,
You have a great chance to get to fly the F-22 or the Strike Fighter. If you fill squadrons with a bunch of old Captains then they never get better, they just keep doing the same old crap they did in thier previos Aircraft. All you'll hear in a Squardon is "Well at Base X we did it this way." Having young fired up LTs in every Squadron helps keep the Old farts on thier feet. There was nothing I liked better when I was an LT flying the Viper, to win a bunch of quarters on the Range from the Old heads.
You are part of Generation X, you will be called a PUNK or a SNAP. When people aren't giving you a hard time, that means that they don't really like you. I have seen PUNKS and SNAPS kick some serious Butt in Afganistan and Iraq, I thank God every day for thier hard work and thier well being.
If you want an F-22, don't let anyone tell you that you can or won't get it. Look at my profile of Aircraft I have flown, everyone one of them I was told I wouldn't get the chance to fly them. I Proved them all wrong.
Good Luck, Work Hard, Never Give up,
And May God Bless you and watch out over you.
Thanks for Serving this great country of ours.
HueyPilot2
Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Posts
- 7
Wait a minute
I find it amazing that some individuals seem to think that not having the ability to deliver munitions, but still flying airframes that get shot at and participate in combat ops, aren't allowed an opinion.
While deployed I heard someone mention "What do they know about combat flying" regarding the Herks in theater. Perhaps the guy should go ask them since they get shot at every day.
Even more interesting is that Jim holds the same view I have...the F/A-22 might be needed, but we don't need as many airframes nor do we need to rob other programs' budgets to fund this one. But since I guess Jim sat in a "combat coded" aircraft, his opinion is worth more than mine.
No, I don't drop bombs or shoot down airplanes. But I've logged O-1 time and done my fair share of training for combat flying.
I find it amazing that some individuals seem to think that not having the ability to deliver munitions, but still flying airframes that get shot at and participate in combat ops, aren't allowed an opinion.
While deployed I heard someone mention "What do they know about combat flying" regarding the Herks in theater. Perhaps the guy should go ask them since they get shot at every day.
Even more interesting is that Jim holds the same view I have...the F/A-22 might be needed, but we don't need as many airframes nor do we need to rob other programs' budgets to fund this one. But since I guess Jim sat in a "combat coded" aircraft, his opinion is worth more than mine.
No, I don't drop bombs or shoot down airplanes. But I've logged O-1 time and done my fair share of training for combat flying.
JimNtexas
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2001
- Posts
- 1,590
I agree with Opie01 that Jafar has as much chance as anyone to fly the F-22 or any other airplane. I'm all for young guys setting their sights high.
I don't agree that new pilots should be PIC of billion dollar airplanes.
If a new LT crashes an F-16 or even an F-35, its not a national disaster. But the F-22 is so fantastically expensive that it makes no sense whatsoever to trust them to anyone except proven, experienced pilots.
"If you fill squadrons with a bunch of old Captains then they never get better, they just keep doing the same old crap they did in thier previos Aircraft. " This is what I mean about Commanders wanting Lts for ego reasons. It's much easier for a Commander to mold a new guy into an image of himself than it is to mold a pilot with experience. This is more fun for the Commander, but not sensible for the aircraft owners.
The F-22 is suposed to be a weapon, not a tool for ego gradification.
People spending their own money on fleets of aircraft always put the experienced guys into the most expensive airplanes. Its just common sense.
The F-22 is about 10 years behind schedule. There are no threats out there that could not be defeated by the four to eight F-35s that we could buy for the price of one F-22, and the F-35 will probably be delivered sooner.
We've wasted so much on this turkey that we might as well deploy a few, but we need to recognize that the F-22 has hurt the national defense of the U.S. more than it will every help it.
I don't agree that new pilots should be PIC of billion dollar airplanes.
If a new LT crashes an F-16 or even an F-35, its not a national disaster. But the F-22 is so fantastically expensive that it makes no sense whatsoever to trust them to anyone except proven, experienced pilots.
"If you fill squadrons with a bunch of old Captains then they never get better, they just keep doing the same old crap they did in thier previos Aircraft. " This is what I mean about Commanders wanting Lts for ego reasons. It's much easier for a Commander to mold a new guy into an image of himself than it is to mold a pilot with experience. This is more fun for the Commander, but not sensible for the aircraft owners.
The F-22 is suposed to be a weapon, not a tool for ego gradification.
People spending their own money on fleets of aircraft always put the experienced guys into the most expensive airplanes. Its just common sense.
The F-22 is about 10 years behind schedule. There are no threats out there that could not be defeated by the four to eight F-35s that we could buy for the price of one F-22, and the F-35 will probably be delivered sooner.
We've wasted so much on this turkey that we might as well deploy a few, but we need to recognize that the F-22 has hurt the national defense of the U.S. more than it will every help it.
Last edited:
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
