Author Topic: F22 cancellation?  (Read 1423 times)

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2004, 04:05:25 AM »
Replicant..

all versions can carry the same internal load... the major diff is that the vertical takeoff version does not carry an internal gun and it has a shorter (less fuel because if lift fan mechanism) range than the other 2 versions.

Offline Hortlund

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4690
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2004, 04:58:59 AM »
What about the Swedish Bamse system. IIRC it is the only SAM system able to engage targets as small as incoming artillery shells.

Offline whels

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1517
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2004, 08:13:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Swager
F22 is a money risk for our defense budget.  Just like the New Attack submarine is.  Useless spending.

:(



lol its all useless spending till u need it.

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2004, 08:27:32 AM »
The 688's still has some good years, but it will eventually have to be retired. The expencive Seawolf class was dropped after 3 were made. The Virgina class is alot cheaper to make then the Seawolf and it is not a product of the cold war. It will be smaller and better suited for land attack and to some degree....littoral warfare.
A good move imo.

Offline Boroda

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5755
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #34 on: April 12, 2004, 08:31:25 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hortlund
What about the Swedish Bamse system. IIRC it is the only SAM system able to engage targets as small as incoming artillery shells.


Soviet S-125 intercepted 76mm shells in the test ground. It was in the 70s.

Offline Wanker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4030
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #35 on: April 12, 2004, 11:33:16 AM »
I'd like to play devil's advocate, too.

Haven't you guys read enough history to know that the next war will not be fought like the previous war? The worst mistake we could do is prepare to fight the next war like how we fight the current war. This has been historically proved to be valid.

So, I wonder....is the next major war going to be fought in the skies, or more on the ground?

Can you imagine how much stress it would be to have to make the right call in this regard? Think of the consequences of being wrong. Ouch.

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #36 on: April 12, 2004, 11:51:04 AM »
yup banana.....balance is the key.

Offline Hortlund

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4690
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #37 on: April 12, 2004, 12:03:01 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by banana
So, I wonder....is the next major war going to be fought in the skies, or more on the ground?


Or in tunnels deep inside the earths crust...

Joking aside, what you are talking about is when new weapon systems or tactics make old weapon systems or tactics obsolete. Like how the Afghans found out the hard way just how efficient a machine gun really is, or how the zulus discovered the potential of the gunpowder, or when the Iraqis discovered the advantage of air supremacy and attack helicopters..etc...etc...etc. ..

I dont think that we are looking at any revolution like that right now. Maybe the balance is shifting more towards the ground units in the air vs ground power though..

Offline texace

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
      • http://www.usmc.mil
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #38 on: April 12, 2004, 12:20:49 PM »
Yes, the JSF is stealthy, but as far as I know it can carry as much of a payload as the Raptor. I could be wrong.

At the moment, the emphasis on stealth brings about advances in SAM technology. Soon, it won't matter how stealthy you are...

Offline Gixer

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #39 on: April 12, 2004, 12:21:24 PM »
Guess with a war running at 5 billion a month the money has to start being saved somewhere.


...-Gixer




War costs could scuttle new fighter, McCain says

The need to add troops in Iraq means the U.S. can't afford the F/A-22, the senator argued.

By Jim Wolf

Reuters


WASHINGTON - The Pentagon may have to scrap its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq, Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed Services Committee, said yesterday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican said on NBC's Meet the Press.

McCain said both the Army and the Marine Corps must be expanded overall, a position at odds with that of President Bush's administration. The United States has 129,000 troops in Iraq, a number McCain said must rise.

Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R., Ind.) joined McCain in calling for more troops.

"It's clear that we're stretched, and the Iraqi security forces are not prepared yet to fight and to turn back insurgents," Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Fox News Sunday.

McCain said that as part of a broad overhaul of U.S. priorities, the Pentagon may have to scrap the $71 billion Air Force program to buy F/A-22 air-to-air fighters built by Lockheed Martin Corp.

"We may have to cancel this airplane that's going to cost between $250 million and $300 million a copy," McCain said.

"We've got to change the way we do business and put the priority where it belongs," McCain said. "And that is making sure that we succeed in Iraq."

Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, said the United States needed more specially trained forces in Iraq.

"People that are in there have to know what the heck we're doing," Roberts said on the CBS program Face the Nation. "If we do have those troops, yes, let's send them."

The Air Force hopes to buy at least 277 F/A-22 fighters, which it describes as key to dominating the skies in future combat.

It is about to enter operational testing en route to replacing the F-15C.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has resisted calls for any lasting increase in the U.S. occupation force in Iraq and argued against permanently boosting the size of U.S. armed forces unless such action is sought by military commanders themselves.

Offline texace

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1031
      • http://www.usmc.mil
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #40 on: April 12, 2004, 12:26:41 PM »
They've come this far, the've built the airplane, they've already started an operation F-22 squadron in Florida, and now they're going to let war costs scuttle it?

Can't they take money form elsewhere, like, I don't know, their saleries? Perhaps they can get the rich folks to help out?

Offline Gixer

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3189
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #41 on: April 12, 2004, 12:37:51 PM »
Bet there is alot of unhappy people in the Air Force right now. Nothing decent to bomb in Iraq and now they've axed their new toy.



...-Gixer

Offline Munkii

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 552
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #42 on: April 12, 2004, 02:17:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gixer
Bet there is alot of unhappy people in the Air Force right now. Nothing decent to bomb in Iraq and now they've axed their new toy.



...-Gixer


So all the good targets Rumsfeld wanted to bomb on 9/12 are already gone?  Damn.

Offline Hortlund

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4690
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #43 on: April 12, 2004, 02:40:30 PM »
Last time I checked, Iran was still building a reactor...

Offline Sixpence

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5265
      • http://www.onpoi.net/ah/index.php
F22 cancellation?
« Reply #44 on: April 12, 2004, 02:43:59 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hortlund
Last time I checked, Iran was still building a reactor...


Well, if it is the Russians who are helping them build it, and it is anything like chernobyl, our worries are over.

I think a little encouragement is in order here.
"My grandaddy always told me, "There are three things that'll put a good man down: Losin' a good woman, eatin' bad possum, or eatin' good possum."" - Holden McGroin

(and I still say he wasn't trying to spell possum!)