It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump: The USAF, F-22,F-35 Vs 6th Gen.

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
President-elect Trump has made his opening statement about the costs of the F-35 program. I believe this is the first 'shot across the bow' in taking on the MIC, it's costs to the taxpayer as well as concurrently addressing the waste of money by the DoD, itself.

While my views on this are strictly at a fan level and many in this forum have far deeper knowledge than myself, it remains that the F-22 run, upgraded to some degree or not, is not only sound militarily, it saves the taxpayer money over two separate 6th Gen platforms.

I suspect/hope Trump will cover the issues that Zaphod voices in upgrading the tankers, etc., concurrently.

This article shows both overview and a solution to the so-called 'barriers' to restarting an F-22 line and how it could produce F-22s in two years from a 'go'.

nationalinterest.org...

Thoughts?




posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

So $400M+ an airframe saves us money? So you'd rather buy more F-22s, then what's the Navy going to do? Or are they going to get a new fighter while the Air Force gets slightly upgraded F-22s that gut just about every other program they have in the works?

I'm impressed. He manages to use the F-22 costs from the original production run AND simultaneously bash the F-35.
edit on 12/13/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

So $400M+ an airframe saves us money? So you'd rather buy more F-22s, then what's the Navy going to do? Or are they going to get a new fighter while the Air Force gets slightly upgraded F-22s that gut just about every other program they have in the works?

I'm impressed. He manages to use the F-22 costs from the original production run AND simultaneously bash the F-35.


I'm going on the premise that Trump will add funds and other programs won't be gutted. 400 million per airframe? really? So you adding in the original development costs of the F-22 into the new run even though that money is already spent and the base development is already paid for? Is there something here I'm missing? Please clarify.

Also, any amount spent for the F-22 is less than a sixth Gen will cost. If the navy requires a sixth Gen., then sobeit. The USAF doesn't, at this time as they already have the Raptor. Since when have you been worried about the navy anyways....



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I'm going off actual numbers. When production was ended they did a study to show how much restarting production would cost out to something like ten years. It grew almost exponentially at that point.

In 2010 a study showed that it would take $200M to restart production, and building 75 aircraft would cost $227M per aircraft. Every year that they delayed restarting production the cost would continue to increase rapidly.

Trump can talk all he wants but unless Congress increases the budget we're in the exact same boat. So as usual, we'll build more F-22s and wait until they're 30 years old to start replacing them. And end up exactly where we are today, yet again. But by then it'll be someone else's problem.
edit on 12/13/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


Of course, all these depends on an actual increase in funding.

As far as those numbers you cite, I have reservations about the intent, and
therefore, the accuracy of them. it's plain from various cites I follow is that the USAF and the MIC is in lockstep with each other. Perhaps more so than any other of the military branches. Perhaps merely pragmatism....who knows.

Nothing in those numbers, assuming they're accurate, negates my conviction that two separate 6th gens. aren't far more expensive and potentially makes the scenario you post even worse in the long run than F-22s for now and use the money not spent on sixth gens to repair/upgrade all the areas your concerned about.

I'm not positive on my position on this and you know more than me by a long shot, but, with more funds, we can't be worse off with more raptors than we are now.

I am open to changing my opinion on this with more information as it comes down the road. A lot depends on Trump and co-operation with congress on this. Please remember it was Congress that requested the costs of re-opening the F-22 run in the first place. I suspect that the funds will be forthcoming, based on that fact.



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

The funds will be forthcoming at the expense of other programs. Congress has made no bones about the fact that they currently have no intention of increasing the budgets. The only way to get the money is to cut away at other things.

As for the 6th Gen, as I've said many times, yes, long term, you're looking at more money. But those costs will be spread out over years of development, similar to what they're currently doing with the Air Force One replacement. They've issued three risk reduction contracts for developing various features of the aircraft. Once that work is done they'll issue the final contract to buy the physical aircraft.

If they go for the F-22 buy, they're going to have to put a huge chunk of money forward immediately, and wait several years for Lockheed to get back up to speed before the first aircraft are coming off the line. Really, what does that do for you, except push any more replacement designs, such as the 6th Gen back even farther, and force the existing inventory to stay viable longer. You still are looking at 4-5 years minimum for the first to roll off the line.



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Trump is in for a rude awakening once he gets into office.

He will change his tune real quick.



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

That's something people seem to forget. Yes it's a Republican Congress, but that doesn't mean he's going to be able to do anything he wants.


RAB

posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Hi,

Although I've never been a massive fan of the F35, speaking from a UK point of view we need the F35 to continue otherwise we end up with so very expensive ships with nothing to put on them :-(

RAB



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker
Do you think the F-22 will stay the better in the futur ? I don't think so , look at the Chinese and Russian product, do you want to see the USAF becoming the third actor in the world ? For me I hope USAF will stay the first Air Force in the world and for staying with that, investment is needed in F-22 successor , the F-22 is not the Graal in combat aircraft and soon it will be in second role with the agressive Chinese developpement of J-20. Usaf need a very long leg fighter to fight in the Pacific and for escorting the futur B-21, I saw the Trump slogan of " make America great again " so guy stop talking and do the job ! invest in the futur technology and stop with the price of everything, security for futur have no price !



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius


There is nothing, at this time that outperforms the F-22 as an air superiority aircraft. Period.

It's very design was intended to last a good thirty years with upgrades. Not 10 years. If the republican congress operates as a replacement for the democrat party, it will get what it deserves, IMO.

I get Zaphod's point on spreading the development costs out and therefore leaving some crumbs for the rest of the issues . Come on people, we've only had one 5th Gen. operational for about 10 years and the other one is barely coming up to speed now!

Hey! Who am I to argue against Zaphod's position. Apparently , he's willing to accept the USAF having an extended window no longer having 'air dominance' until 6th gens.

I'm betting the Congress WILL cough up with the money over and above the recent trend. let's not forget that budget has been shrinking under Obama and he'd have never signed a bill that increased spending.


I would wait a couple extra years for a '5.5 Gen'. F-22 which would assure continued air dominance and buy us some time to sixth Gens. Just my opinion though.



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

The problem with your argument, even of "waiting a couple extra years" is that it keeps us in the exact same boat we are now. The more money that goes into building F-22s, the longer the delay in building their replacement. They're currently looking at setting the requirements for that aircraft within 2-3 years, which puts the actual start of development in about 5.

Now say we decide to start building F-22s again. It's going to be about a five year delay until they're rolling off the line, which pushes its replacement start back at least that far. Then they build them for say another 5-10 years. That actually gives you an interesting situation where you're forced to start retiring the first of the current F-22s before you have a replacement flying.

I love how in one sentence you take a shot at me for being "willing to accept the USAF having an extended window no longer having 'air dominance' until 6th gens" while in the same post, you say "There is nothing, at this time that outperforms the F-22 as an air superiority aircraft. Period."

So somehow someone is going to go from absolutely nothing that outperforms the F-22 to able to take away air superiority for an extended period of time before the F-22 replacement comes along. We already aren't going to have air dominance in a peer/near peer war. We gave that up years ago.
edit on 12/13/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Restarting F-22 seems like a foolish idea. A UCAV companion to F-35, and refitting F-22 to be able to talk to it with the modern protocol, that's a better idea.

After all, a A2A missile is a one-use UCAV.
edit on 13-12-2016 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

There are much better options than restarting the F-22, that are more cost effective.



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel
Ucav companion have nothing to see with futur air dominance, what is need it's a new air dominance Platform , I hope that the futur penetrating counter air will stay alive and in track for timing in 2030. O r why not an F-35 evolution in air/air dominance with new more powefull engine able to augment the speed of the F-35 in a supercruiser without afterburner and with more range.


edit on 13-12-2016 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


I believe the point of 'air dominance' is numerical, not qualative. I believe you know that.

You seem to only give reasons why not. No addressing the issues put forth, I believe well, by that article. I can accept no upgrades other than avionics or delay and add the stuff already developed, as you have hinted at.

To use your own posts, you seem to support the direction the powers want re: the sixth Gen. and other the other hand vent your spleen on a regular basis on the idiocy of the Air Force decision makers.

Let me pose this, IF the dollars are forthcoming, and I believe they will, what are your desires?



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker
J-20 and futur Pak - FA are not enough to think for a new air dominance Platform for USAF ?



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Uhm, you need to get your definitions straight. Air Dominance is what we had in Desert Storm, where our aircraft went where they wanted, when they wanted, without being challenged. Air Supremacy is where you can operate in some areas, with little to no threat to your aircraft, but there is still a threat, be it a fairly low level one. Air Dominance has nothing to do with quantity, and everything to do with being able to kill anything that comes at you, at any time.

Yeah, I vent my spleen, and I'm going to continue to. Because they have made idiotic decisions in the past, and the recent past, which is why we're exactly where we are right now. Spending money that's going to kill other programs is not the way to get out of it. Neither is building more F-22s.

The F-22 replacement program, whether they call it 6th Gen, or something else, is where we need to be heading right now, along with PCA, even if they end up rolling both into one program. The F-22 is a great aircraft, but the longer we wait to build the next step, the longer our existing aircraft have to keep flying and doing missions they're getting too old to do. More F-22s is going to delay that, and keep them flying much longer than they should be. They're already calling for F-15s to be almost 60 years old when they retire. Not the design, the actual aircraft still flying missions. And as little as two months ago, they were looking at possibly extending that even more.
edit on 12/13/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: darksidius
a reply to: nwtrucker
J-20 and futur Pak - FA are not enough to think for a new air dominance Platform for USAF ?



No. I follow the various sites that compare-the best they can- the various platforms of China and Russia. I'm more than satisfied that the F-22 will dominate both China and Russia's 'version' for a number of years yet. As long as upgrades continue in the F-22 then on a 1 v I basis, the F-22 should remain superior for quite a while.

Our problem will be numerical, not quality. But, then again, what do I know??? LOL



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Its shaken the stock market enough for shares to dive in various aircraft manufacturers..Its what happens when politicians mouth off about processes they dont understand.




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join