Jump to content

F35 Shitbird, F22 Badass and similar


Parliament
 Share

Recommended Posts

Search on here blows.  If there's already a thread, I'll delete.

https://taskandpurpose.com/navys-f-35-strike-radars-already-date-new-report-says/

The Navy’s newest fighter jet, the stealthy F-35C, may not have the range it needs to strike enemy targets, the House Armed Services Committee said in a new report, raising troubling questions about whether the multibillion-dollar program is already outpaced by threats.

And critics say the Navy fighter — part of the Joint Strike Fighter initiative, the most expensive weapons program in history — may actually have been out of date years ago.

Well that's bad.  How do we fix it?  Spend more money.  If money fixes the problem, it's not a problem.

https://taskandpurpose.com/navys-f-35-strike-radars-already-date-new-report-says/

The committee does not want to stop buying F-35Cs, but instead wants to start also buying new sorts of warplanes.

“After billions of dollars have been spent on the F-35C, but before the first aircraft are ready to deploy, lawmakers are already looking at the next carrier-based aircraft,” said Bryan Clark, a former Navy strategist now at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

It gets much, much worse.

https://www.wearethemighty.com/top-gun-2-super-hornet

DegKeduXUAAWBLt.jpg

They F35 is not safe enough even for Maverick himself.

But a solution may be in sight.  Let's just go back to what we shoulda done in the first place:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3687/now-the-head-of-the-usaf-is-jumping-on-the-f-22-production-re-start-bandwagon

Now, Congress is calling to look into restarting the F-22 production line, and even the USAF’s outgoing head honcho is jumping on the F-22 production re-start bandwagon.

General Mark Welsh stated the following at an Air Force Association event today:

“I don’t think it’s a wild idea, I mean the success of the F-22 and the capability of the airplane and the crews that fly it are pretty exceptional. I think it’s proven that the airplane is exactly what everybody hoped it would be… We’re using it in new and different ways and it’s been spectacularly successful and its potential is really, really remarkable. And so going back and looking and certainly raising the idea: Well, could you build more? It’s not a crazy idea.”

The F22 was cut back because it was so expensive.  Tooling (and maybe blueprints?) were destroyed.  It makes sense I guess; destroy that stuff so the Chinese can't steal it.  So restarting would be a huge undertaking.  But sadly, it may be our best option.

Edited by Parliament
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Well, the range issues with the F35 aren't really an F35 problem, but rather revolve around our lack of stealthy support assets (e.g., stealth tankers to extend range). 

Sounds like a great excuse to drop billions of  tax dollars in R&D! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Parliament said:

The F22 was cut back because it was so expensive.  Tooling (and maybe blueprints?) were destroyed.  It makes sense I guess; destroy that stuff so the Chinese can't steal it.  So restarting would be a huge undertaking. 

Makes no sense to completely destroy the investmest.  We don't have a secure garage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Serious question but what does the B-2 not do that we need to do?

Dynamic targeting of any kind. It doesn't have a targeting pod on it like the B-1, B-52, and F-15E, so it's really only good for flying a fully pre-planned mission. Add on that we only have 20 of them, and far fewer than that combat-ready at any given time, so they can't really fly sustained combat ops from a deployed location like a squadron of any other bombers would. They're pretty much only good for flying those long-duration missions from Missouri on night one, then they need a break. Not a flexible option at all in today's much more dynamic battlefield.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Born a Longhorn said:

Dynamic targeting of any kind. It doesn't have a targeting pod on it like the B-1, B-52, and F-15E, so it's really only good for flying a fully pre-planned mission. Add on that we only have 20 of them, and far fewer than that combat-ready at any given time, so they can't really fly sustained combat ops from a deployed location like a squadron of any other bombers would. They're pretty much only good for flying those long-duration missions from Missouri on night one, then they need a break. Not a flexible option at all in today's much more dynamic battlefield.

 

sounds like a big ol waste of money to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Born a Longhorn said:

Dynamic targeting of any kind. It doesn't have a targeting pod on it like the B-1, B-52, and F-15E, so it's really only good for flying a fully pre-planned mission. Add on that we only have 20 of them, and far fewer than that combat-ready at any given time, so they can't really fly sustained combat ops from a deployed location like a squadron of any other bombers would. They're pretty much only good for flying those long-duration missions from Missouri on night one, then they need a break. Not a flexible option at all in today's much more dynamic battlefield.

So you are saying that for what the Spirit can’t do, we have 2 other bombers for that role already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question but what does the B-2 not do that we need to do?

Sadly, it isn't as stealthy as it coulda been. Late in its development, they chickened out and traded a measure of stealthieness for the maneuverability to fly map-of-the-Earth. In short, they didn't trust stealth as it's only defense.

 

And yeah we don't need a multi-billion dollar stealth bomber to flatten tents, but next time we go to war with developed nation, we'll need a multi-billion dollar stealth bomber.

So you are saying that for what the Spirit can’t do, we have 2 other bombers for that role already. 

Yes, and they're aging too. It takes a long time to develop new military aircraft and we gotta look ahead a long ways.

 

Look, I dislike the military-industrial complex, but they don't get EVERYTHING wrong. Our big planes (bombers and transport) are very good. The F22 had teething problems, but it's very good.

 

The Shitbird would be a lot better if we didn't hafta have that stupid STOVL variant. That morphodite pos ruined the whole thing.

 

ETA

Our nuclear aircraft carriers are great also.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

No way.  No way they didn't fly everything to somewhere there wasn't a Cat 4 hurricane happening.

Tyndall is home to 55 F-22 stealth fighters, which cost a dizzying $339 million each. Before the storm, the Air Force sent at least 33 of the fighters to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio.

Air Force officials have not disclosed the whereabouts of the remaining 22 planes, other than to say that a number of aircraft were left at the base because of maintenance or safety reasons.

An Air Force spokeswoman, Maj. Malinda Singleton, would not confirm that any of the aircraft left behind were F-22s.

But photos and video from the wreckage of the base showed the distinctive contours of the F-22’s squared tail fins and angled vertical stabilizers amid a jumble of rubble in the base’s largest building, Hangar 5. Another photo shows the distinctive jet in a smaller hangar that had its doors and a wall ripped off by wind.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/us/air-force-hurricane-michael-damage.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ETA with a better article:

THE US Air Force’s Tyndall Air Base in Florida has taken a direct hit. Many of its ultra-advanced F-22 Raptor stealth fighters have been caught on the ground.

Exactly how many of the $475 million aircraft were damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Michael has not yet been revealed.

The United States Air Force could only afford to buy 187 operational examples of the 5th generation stealth fighter. Now, that number may have been significantly reduced.

We know 55 Raptors are based there.

Reportedly, 33 F-22s sought sanctuary at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio.

That leaves 22 of the $475 million warplanes unaccounted for.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/f22-raptors-damaged-destroyed-by-hurricane-michael/news-story/d89d7c18e1b3caf550238cbdd7a8a2ba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$10.5B, if all 22 are lost, but it gets worse than that. 11% of the World's hands down, absolute BEST fighter jets are off of the roster.

We were already way too thin at that position and you can thank the F35 Shitbird for that. In the late aughts, Congress cut F22 production short, in favor of the F35, because...Congress.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those things are supposed to be crazy good, to the point of defeating like 5-10 other planes by themselves in a dogfight. 

So how many do we really need?  Not the point, since we had them and left them vulnerable, I understand. But would losing 22 really affect our ability to have air superiority?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Parliament said:

$10.5B, if all 22 are lost, but it gets worse than that. 11% of the World's hands down, absolute BEST fighter jets are off of the roster.

We were already way too thin at that position and you can thank the F35 Shitbird for that. In the late aughts, Congress cut F22 production short, in favor of the F35, because...Congress.

This hurts John Cornyn's feelings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

But would losing 22 really affect our ability to have air superiority?

Losing roughly half of your top of the line fighters would make a huge dent if an air war broke out. Fortunately, that's not a threat at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, RPM said:

Losing roughly half of your top of the line fighters would make a huge dent if an air war broke out. Fortunately, that's not a threat at the moment.

Eleven percent (187 were built), but still.  Add in the F35 is a hangar queen, and this is a big gap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Pentagon announced Thursday it is grounding its entire fleet of F-35s, just days after the first crash of an F-35B led investigators to suspect there is a widespread problem with the advanced fighter’s fuel tubes.

“The U.S. Services and international partners have temporarily suspended F-35 flight operations while the enterprise conducts a fleet-wide inspection of a fuel tube within the engine on all F-35 aircraft,” the F-35 Joint Program Office announced in a statement Thursday morning.

“If suspect fuel tubes are installed, the part will be removed and replaced. If known good fuel tubes are already installed, then those aircraft will be returned to flight status. Inspections are expected to be completed within the next 24 to 48 hours.”

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/10/11/dod-announces-global-grounding-of-all-f-35s/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RPM said:

Losing roughly half of your top of the line fighters would make a huge dent if an air war broke out. Fortunately, that's not a threat at the moment.

 

8 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Those things are supposed to be crazy good, to the point of defeating like 5-10 other planes by themselves in a dogfight. 

So how many do we really need?  Not the point, since we had them and left them vulnerable, I understand. But would losing 22 really affect our ability to have air superiority?

If we could lose half our fleet and it doesn't impact national security, did we need them in the first place?

Edited by Aqua Buddha
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Potentially losing 22 Raptors is a big deal.  Most national defense strategy experts already agree that 187 is not enough.  We've already lost 3 I believe to crashes, so losing another 22 would be borderline catastrophic.  However, I highly doubt all 22 left behind were damaged beyond repair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2018 at 11:15 AM, Parliament said:

Tooling (and maybe blueprints?) were destroyed.  It makes sense I guess; destroy that stuff so the Chinese can't steal it.  So restarting would be a huge undertaking.  But sadly, it may be our best option.

The F-22 tooling wasn't destroyed.  It was saved (along with procedures, etc) specifically so that we could restart the line if necessary....and then some of it was apparently lost or something, at least as of 2016.  https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/raptor-resurrected-what-will-it-take-restart-f-22-fighter-15862

Edited by MadBurgerMaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the shitbird, did they ever figure out if it was an Israeli F-35 that the Syrians were shooting at when they smoked that Russian plane (lol what a clusterfuck)?

They've been using their brand new ones over there to bomb shit, so there was speculation, but I never saw anything other than "maybe."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2018 at 7:39 PM, MadBurgerMaker said:

The F-22 tooling wasn't destroyed.  It was saved (along with procedures, etc) specifically so that we could restart the line if necessary....and then some of it was apparently lost or something, at least as of 2016.  https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/raptor-resurrected-what-will-it-take-restart-f-22-fighter-15862

I would think an opportunity exists to greatly reduce those costs if Japan is actually willing to help foot the bill, and we are willing to share the air frame and F35 avionics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2018 at 7:39 PM, MadBurgerMaker said:

The F-22 tooling wasn't destroyed.  It was saved (along with procedures, etc) specifically so that we could restart the line if necessary....and then some of it was apparently lost or something, at least as of 2016.  https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/raptor-resurrected-what-will-it-take-restart-f-22-fighter-15862

I stand corrected.  Thanks for the update.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...