Poll: So the F-22 has been cancelled

[Shock and Awe]

OH MY GOD THIS IS OLDER THAN DIRT.

Seriously, are you just now hearing about this? This issue has already been put to rest for months. The Air Force stopped orders because in out current and near future wars the F-35 is more than capable to defeat any foreseeable enemies. If this proves not to be the case you can bet the F-22 will be pressed back into production, but until then it is unnecessary. The F-22 is an amazing fighter, its stealthy, fast, maneuverable, everything you could ever want, but at over 200 million a pop its not worth it right now, especially since all forseeable enemies use mostly jets that don't hold a candle to current F-15s.

EDIT: Holy shit I just watched the video.....this woman is such a fucking idiot I don't even.....

Every point she made beyond the cost and how it was produced was utter bullshit.

1. No stealth systems work well in rain.

2. The communication only is cut during radio silence because it gives away the plane, and thats in ALL aircraft.

3. There are almost no fighters that can take small arms fire, it cuts maneuverability, which is infinitely more important.

4. Almost all new aircraft have a shit ton of repair times.

 

[RamirezDoEverything]

SO MUCH RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

While the F-22 has flaws, her logic is the stupidest shit I've ever heard.
The way she talks just makes me want to break things.
Small Arms fire-Doesn't affect planes going 1500mph or 33000 feet in the air, go ahead and shoot any other fighter jet and tell me how it takes bullets.
Communication issues-If a plane couldn't communicate with other planes, it wouldn't be allowed to fly
Defense Secretary-Didn't use anything from speech that showed an actual side
$356,000,000-$150,000,000 -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor

 

[Jazzyjazz2323]

Wow what a crock of fucking bullshit first off the whole communications problem is one of the easiest fucking things too fix...seriously woman learn what the fuck you're talking about and also the armor...WHAT FUCKING FIGHTER JET IS IN DANGER OF SMALL ARMS FIRE!!!Or the no f-22 has seen combat missions in Iraq well no shit Sherlock they are third world countries and the combatants we are facing are guerrilla fighters not a first world super power and if it comes a time were we have to fight off China or India WE WILL NEED THESE.

 

[omicron1]

This just in: News reporters are laypeople with glib tongues; when talking about highly technical things which, oftentimes, they have no particular interest in, they are not very capable of intelligent discourse. This is true across the board.

So... yeah, don't blame the lady.

On target: Isn't it about time somebody comes up with a revolutionary new design? Aside from advances in electronics and design tools, these planes look much the same as the ones of the past - and while that may be all well and good in a situation where a single hit takes you out and maneuverability is everything, it's not very exciting to laypeople.

 

[Geekosaurus]

Meh, we have the Eurofighter.

 

[KaosuHamoni]

The planes we have now are enough to combat anything in the world. No one has shit that would require something as advanced as the F-22, its a fucking money pit. Not to mention the cheaper F-35 is on the way

Is the Eurofighter Typhoon a match one-on-one for it?

Yes it is and with a capable pilot the Typhoon could actually down a F-22. F-22 is a seriously expensive piece of shit. The Typhoon, F-15, Dassualt Rafale and the Indian Sukhoi 30 MKI could all down it. $150 million and still pathetic and an excellent example of America military complex raping taxpayers

Edit: If you were talking about the F-35 then it would give the Typhoon some trouble at long range but at close range they are pretty equally matched. It all comes down to stealth, EF has RCS but F-35 is completely stealthy

=] First thing i thought when i saw this thread was "Ahh well, the Typhoon could run rings around it anyway, with a capable pilot"

 

[vxicepickxv]

Wow.

Just...*facepalm*.

Political bullshit aside, her 'analysis' of the plane's specs was just laughable. Cannot withstand small arms fire? Look lady, in WWI pilots shot at each other mid flight with their sidearms. We are way past that now. Armor on planes (air superiority jets especially) is pretty much useless, a missile is going to do serious damage to a plane if it connects no matter where it hits or how much armor is present. Hell, air superiority fighters need maneuverability, not fucking armor. Goes to show that the money not spent for plane armor is, well, I don't know, possibly going towards body armor for the guys who actually take small arms fire?

The MiG-35(Russia's new plane) has guns built into it.

And the whole thing about rain messing up the stealth systems? That's hardly as serious of a problem as she is making it out to be. It only messes with the STEALTH SYSTEMS, and this blows it up into something that makes it seem like it destroys the fucking plane. Sure, rain takes away your sneakiness, but you can still fucking fly

The purpose of having radar dampening isn't JUST to be sneaky. It makes missile locks much more difficult, if not impossible. It makes using SAMs and AAMs almost impossible if it works.

And lack of communication to other aircraft? How much more bs will they throw out there? It is hardly a difficult to gets communications up to par with the rest of our forces, no matter what the F-22 has.

I guess you miss the overall picture. There's more to this crazy world than just fighters and bombers.

And I hope everyone realizes that the reason we have no enemy fighters to fight is because our dogfighters are so damn good. One could argue that the F-15 is still doing fine, and I would agree to a good extent, however that is not the point of this. The need for the fighter may have manifested itself in the Cold War era but the fact that the USSR is dissolved is in no way the defining reason the F-22 is a bad investment. Air superiority fighters are a must in any air force that wishes to have any fucking chance in a fight, let alone survive.

Right now when they fly the F-15 or F-22, they spend WAY too much time fixing the aircraft, even if all it did was practice flying around for an hour or three. The requirements set upon by the US Military for how often their pilots fly(vs using a simulator) are very strict. You can't get in a dogfight on inside a hangar.

I will agree that it has become a bad investment; costs a fortune now and seeing as the F-35 program is the main focus now, the project is financially a bad idea. Regardless of this though, the plane itself is still great. A step forward for dogfighters for sure.

Yeah... great. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=20396

In conclusion; bad investment now? Yes. Bad plane? Fuck no.

/rant

Quick Edit: To add a bit more to this, I think the main problem with the whole F-22 program was speed. It went too slow and was quickly outdone by the F-35 program, which is preferable to all branches of the military since it is a multi-role fighter. And when production finally kicked in, things moved too fast for their own good, producing problems with the plane (especially financially) and creating too much to handle. The real trump card here though is just the F-35. If that didn't exist right now, I'm sure they would have thought twice about ending the F-22 program. Sure, it needed its improvements, but no plane is ever perfect and especially not at this young age. Given more time, proper resources and more caring attention the F-22 could easily have been a better plane in every field. Alas, the F-35 took that spotlight. And with good reason. I am no real fan of the F-22 myself, but being a bit of a flight nerd I don't like seeing it bashed like this when it deserves some praise in its own right.

Conceptually, the F-22 was a great aircraft. Of course, there's a difference between concept and practice. The F-35 was the first aircraft designed specifically to have parts go to every branch of the military that needs them. The F-35 is going to be a vast improvement over the F-22, and will ultimately replace the F-15,F-16, and F/A-18.

Of course, when you talk about defensive spending on overpriced products, the F-22 is probably not going to hold too much on the P-8 Poseidon.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

Bullshit.

The United States needs an air superiority fighter to replace the F-15. This women knows nothing about combat, the importance of air superiority and how disarmament DOES NOT WORK. It cost money to be the best, and I for one expect my government to protect me from ALL enemies foreign and domestic.

This women enrages me. I really think that she does not understand what an air superiority fighter is supposed to do. Which is one thing, kill enemy fighters. It doesn't need armour against small arms because it will be flying at 30,000 feet or better at mach 2. Her dissenting voice drives me to kill babies, god damn she is annoying.

Granted, the structuring of how it was manufactured is flawed (cash expenditures.) But the need for an air superiority fighter is still here. The USSR isn't around any more, but China and India are going to be the new threats to western ways of life.

I'm going to stop writing now, before I tick off everyone on the forum...

Yeah right. If China and India want to start a war, they aren't going to send fighters when they hold something with far more potential for destruction, US treasury bonds. The value of the dollar is no longer backed by gold, but by how much other currencies stack up against in the in the global market. That is determined by how many other countries bid on long term and short term treasury bonds (since domestically the populace isn't exactly who we're selling them to like we used to). Huge trading partners like China and India would never start a war with us, but they'd start a trade war in a heartbeat.

Also, how can you be fuming about defense spending that is completely unwarranted and irrelevant in a market where if we can't balance our budget, those two former investors in our economy will stop buying bonds. China is already losing their faith in our currency, and they are one of the biggest players in deciding the buying power of the country. How do fighter planes compare to a need that dire? Easy answer, they don't.

I am a huge plane enthusiast and was excited about the F-22 and what it could eventually be when they finally beat all of the bugs and problems out of it with a stick. The F-16 wasn't perfect when they debuted it, but now it's the most widely employed fighter program in the world. However, simple fact is that we can't afford it, and congress can't justify its use.

 

[vxicepickxv]

Bullshit.

The United States needs an air superiority fighter to replace the F-15. This women knows nothing about combat, the importance of air superiority and how disarmament DOES NOT WORK. It cost money to be the best, and I for one expect my government to protect me from ALL enemies foreign and domestic.

This women enrages me. I really think that she does not understand what an air superiority fighter is supposed to do. Which is one thing, kill enemy fighters. It doesn't need armour against small arms because it will be flying at 30,000 feet or better at mach 2. Her dissenting voice drives me to kill babies, god damn she is annoying.

Granted, the structuring of how it was manufactured is flawed (cash expenditures.) But the need for an air superiority fighter is still here. The USSR isn't around any more, but China and India are going to be the new threats to western ways of life.

I'm going to stop writing now, before I tick off everyone on the forum...

Yeah right. If China and India want to start a war, they aren't going to send fighters when they hold something with far more potential for destruction, US treasury bonds. The value of the dollar is no longer backed by gold, but by how much other currencies stack up against in the in the global market. That is determined by how many other countries bid on long term and short term treasury bonds (since domestically the populace isn't exactly who we're selling them to like we used to). Huge trading partners like China and India would never start a war with us, but they'd start a trade war in a heartbeat.

Right now they wouldn't, because we somehow still have enough influence with a trade embargo. Right now it's still Mutually Assured (Financial) Destruction.

Also, how can you be fuming about defense spending that is completely unwarranted and irrelevant in a market where if we can't balance our budget, those two former investors in our economy will stop buying bonds. China is already losing their faith in our currency, and they are one of the biggest players in deciding the buying power of the country. How do fighter planes compare to a need that dire? Easy answer, they don't.

Have you ever read a book called The Pornography of Power by any chance?

I am a huge plane enthusiast and was excited about the F-22 and what it could eventually be when they finally beat all of the bugs and problems out of it with a stick. The F-16 wasn't perfect when they debuted it, but now it's the most widely employed fighter program in the world. However, simple fact is that we can't afford it, and congress can't justify its use.

The F-16 is an ancient aircraft that has less time on deck for repairs than an F-22 does. There are aircraft that are almost 40 years old that have less on deck repair time than F-22s. That's not a good sign for an aircraft. They're generally supposed to start at <1 hour down per 1 hour up.(Granted that's about a week or so before it goes 1:1).

 

[Dr.Fantastic]

Whatever. It costs way too much. Just wait, in the future all the problems will be fixed and it will be less expensive. But by then There might be something better.

 

[Hader]

The MiG-35(Russia's new plane) has guns built into it.

That has no relevance to the small-arms fire comment. Show me how many dogfights with 4th and 5th gen fighters end with machine gun duels between combatants.

The point is, yes planes still have guns on them, but in aerial combat their use in recent decades has declined dramatically. They are purely a last resort/fallback weapon.

The purpose of having radar dampening isn't JUST to be sneaky. It makes missile locks much more difficult, if not impossible. It makes using SAMs and AAMs almost impossible if it works.

And my point still stands that it doesn't hinder the plane's ability to fly.

I guess you miss the overall picture. There's more to this crazy world than just fighters and bombers.

Please elaborate on what I am missing then. I basically said that communications between aircraft is not a huge problem at all and easily fixable. And I said between aircraft specifically because that is what the video mentioned.

Yeah... great. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=20396

Yes, let's point out every tiny flaw with every plane shall we? Every plane can have problems, getting picky about one plane's problems is futile. I can pull up plenty of examples for many more planes.

Conceptually, the F-22 was a great aircraft. Of course, there's a difference between concept and practice. The F-35 was the first aircraft designed specifically to have parts go to every branch of the military that needs them. The F-35 is going to be a vast improvement over the F-22, and will ultimately replace the F-15,F-16, and F/A-18.

Of course, when you talk about defensive spending on overpriced products, the F-22 is probably not going to hold too much on the P-8 Poseidon.

Conceptually, a good aircraft. I never said the design was to par either. But overall bad? No. I never denied that it needed improvement in various ways. Then again, every plane goes through plenty of changes. Even the F-15 evolved throughout its lifetime.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

snip

snip

Right now they wouldn't, because we somehow still have enough influence with a trade embargo. Right now it's still Mutually Assured (Financial) Destruction.

snip

Have you ever read a book called The Pornography of Power by any chance?

snip

The F-16 is an ancient aircraft that has less time on deck for repairs than an F-22 does. There are aircraft that are almost 40 years old that have less on deck repair time than F-22s. That's not a good sign for an aircraft. They're generally supposed to start at <1 hour down per 1 hour up.(Granted that's about a week or so before it goes 1:1).

Right now they wouldn't, but what trends indicate that they will not have the same issue in the near future? The Chinese may be showing signs of trying to revalue their currency to realistic standards, but that doesn't change their current dependence on western markets (mostly the US) to function. With Africa stepping in as a future competitor, they still are trapped in the spiral. I know you're thinking long term, but what scenario does the cancellation of the F-22 create that the F-35 can not respond to?

And no, I have not read or heard of that book. Are you recommending that I do so, or are you trying to deconstruct where my arguments are coming from?

 

[Canid117]

haha, 1 eurofighter typhoon would bash 3 f-22

haha thats a good joke

 

[Souplex]

We haven't fought an enemy with a functional airforce in years. Why would we need fighterplanes?

 

[Shock and Awe]

haha, 1 eurofighter typhoon would bash 3 f-22

Thats funny because the Eurofighter couldn't even find an F-22 much less hit it.

 

[Singularly Datarific]

So after ALL THAT DAMN TESTING AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THEY ARE CANCELING THE DAMN THING?!?
This just pisses me off. I HATE how people cut the cord on a project so far in development, whatever it may be (Just not a doomsday device).
They already cut the shuttle replacement (well, seriously nerfed the whole project, NOT going to the moon, only building the ORION as a transport to the ISS.), and now they cut the Fighter project that has been in development since the mid-90's!

haha, 1 eurofighter typhoon would bash 3 f-22

Thats funny because the Eurofighter couldn't even find an F-22 much less hit it.

Please don't let this turn into a flamewar like all of youtube...

 

[Plurralbles]

personally I hate that woman.

Secondly, if you're going to cnacel something... please don't sink billions into it first!

 

[brodie21]

anybody else notice that they developed an F-35? perhaps that might be a bigger reason why they discontinued the F-22. the us is purchasing about 2443 of these. at an estimate of 80 to 200 million each. costs are expected to reduce 20% after the implementation of the F-35. also, this is a multirole aircraft, meaning it might be a successor for the hornet, as variants of it can be launched and recovered from a carrier, is able to carry both air to air and air to ground ordinance.

 

[brodie21]

So after ALL THAT DAMN TESTING AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS THEY ARE CANCELING THE DAMN THING?!?
This just pisses me off. I HATE how people cut the cord on a project so far in development, whatever it may be (Just not a doomsday device).
They already cut the shuttle replacement (well, seriously nerfed the whole project, NOT going to the moon, only building the ORION as a transport to the ISS.), and now they cut the Fighter project that has been in development since the mid-90's!

relax, they are switching to the f-35, which is like 20% cheaper

 

[Sacman]

Good... at least it's cutting the military budget... besides we haven't fought a country with a functional air force in years and I doubt we ever will again unless aliens invade... and I don't think F-22's would be much use against alien death rays or whatever advance technology their holding...<.<