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.

 

USAF and Lockheed make a pitch for more Raptors

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Officials at Lockheed Martin Corp. and the U.S. Air Force ratcheted up the fight to keep the F/A-22 next-generation fighter jet in production after 2008, saying its capabilities were essential to maintain U.S. air dominance on Sept. 13.

Further cost-cutting measures and a multiyear contract could help lower the cost of the expensive program, they said.

Maj. Gen. Richard Lewis, Air Force program executive officer for the F/A-22, lauded the fighter’s advanced capabilities, including its ability to fly for prolonged periods at supersonic speeds.

Lewis also raised the possibility of foreign sales of the advanced fighter jet to the United States’ closest allies, a move that could help further defray the cost of the program.


Article link


The military has been doing a mediocre job at promoting new and much needed weapon systems to Congress. I honestly think they should hire a skilled PR person.




posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Lewis said the F/A-22’s ability to fight against surface-to-air missiles would be a critical asset in future warfare, but that capability had been kept quiet in the past due to the classified nature of much of the equipment.

Mistaken Patriot attacks on U.S. and British forces during the Iraq war underscored the importance of the F/A-22’s ability to identify and destroy incoming surface-to-air missiles, Lewis said. In both “friendly fire” incidents, pilots knew they were being wrongly targeted but could not evade the missiles.

Lewis said some countries had asked about possible foreign sales, but such a decision would be up to Defense Department officials, and would probably involve modifications to the airplane for export purposes.

He declined to name countries that would be interested in buying the planes.


I wonder if he is referring to the Raptor's radar ability to "fry" electronic circuits.

I hope we do sell some Raptors to close allies.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Why would we sell raptors to allies? for one thing they will probility stab us in the back one way or another... besides our allies won't be able to afford it in the first place cause it's so dam expensive. if we do sell it to our allies i can bet you somehow it will land in the hands of china somehow. i suggest use the plane for few years first then consteried selling to our allies.

[edit on 14-9-2005 by ulshadow]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
Why would we sell raptors to allies? for one thing they will probility stab us in the back one way or another... besides our allies won't be able to afford it in the first place cause it's so dam expensive. if we do sell it to our allies i can bet you somehow it will land in teh hands of china somehow. i suggest use the plane for few years first then consteried selling to our allies.


It would probably be a little less stealthy than ours, like the case with JSF. But yes I do agree with you, wait a couple years before we export Raptors to close allies.


[edit on 14-9-2005 by NWguy83]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow
Why would we sell raptors to allies? for one thing they will probility stab us in the back one way or another... besides our allies won't be able to afford it in the first place cause it's so dam expensive. if we do sell it to our allies i can bet you somehow it will land in the hands of china somehow. i suggest use the plane for few years first then consteried selling to our allies.

[edit on 14-9-2005 by ulshadow]


yea youre right. France was suppose to be our ally and what did they do when we went to war???



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
I'm sure we can trust Britain, Japan, Australia, and maybe Israel.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
I'm sure we can trust Britain, Japan, Australia, and maybe Israel.


The same Israel who was willing to sell Apache's to China? I would trust Japan no furthur than I could throw it.

I think the sad fact is, the situation may end up with the cost of this thing you'll need to flog some off. It's to bloody expensive.

Chinese are probably more interested in buying whatever Sukhoi turns out next. They don't have the cash reserves the USA has. Or they'll just buy a few Sukhjoi's and run out copies like the J-11. J-11 is the Su-27 copy, right?



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
I'm sure we can trust Britain, Japan, Australia, and maybe Israel.


I agree with Teh_Gerbil on Israel and Japan.

The UK and Australia on the other hand have earned that level of alliance and trust IMHO.

But those planes are so darn expensive the price tag alone might make them go with something eles.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I am certain that, if the Raptor ever does become available for sale to America's allies, that the Australian government would seriously consider purchasing at least a few to supplement the introduction of the Joint Strike Fighter, despite the cost. The Australian government recognises that maintaining dominance in South-East Asia in terms of air warfare capabilities is dependant on acquiring and developing new technologies and the Raptor would be difficult to overlook.

In terms of trust, I cannot recall Australia having ever "stabbed America in the back". Rather, the two nations are extremely close military allies and often engage in air, sea and land war games.

[edit on 14/9/05 by Jeremiah25]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I disagree on Japan, they've proven to be a pretty reliable ally since the end of WW2. My bet is, if they ask for the F-22, they'll get it. Australia too, if they don't balk at the price tag.

Israel, on the other hand, I don't put too much faith in.

[edit on 9/14/05 by xmotex]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
I'm sure we can trust Britain, Japan, Australia, and maybe Israel.


We can trust Britain, japan, australia. but remember your allies today can be your enemies tomorrow so choose carefully. But trusting Israel would be insane, i can't even count how many times they stab us in the back... why are we giving them 2 billion + to Israel anyway? they are already so dam rich for a small country and what we get, our tech that we give Israel somehow land in the hands of china... again



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   
i agree on not trusting isreal but if anyone of our allies knew how to make anything out of the f-22 it would be isreal. look what they did with a couple of f-15s and f-16s back a couple years. isreal gots some hell of a pilots



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
I'm sure we can trust Britain, Japan, Australia, and maybe Israel.

Although this thread has gotten a bit off topic, I can't help but comment.

I think the US has no greater allies than the UK and Australia.
I would be for making the Raptor available to them, possibly not in the same configuration as the US version, and if they could not afford the price tag I would also be for selling it at an actual loss and let the US Govt pay Lockheed the difference.

This would insure that our closest allies would have matched technology in the theater of operations for support and maintenance as well as giving them an asset that can not only help in their security but insure that they have the best tools available to watch our backs.

As for Japan I'm just not sure, but Israel... although they are a good ally to have in the middle east, they have unfortunately shown that they cannot be trusted with our advanced tech. ...and that's really too bad.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Link the USAF purchase with maybe 50 for the RAAF (AUS).
Then both will benefit with a lower price tag.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I don't know why the don't tell the Senate "just how good it is". Maybe it's because it's not that good...or at least not anymore.

I assume LM fixed all the many many many problems they were having with the F22? Well if this is the case, then they're bloody miracle workers.

With the US spending of the Iraq and Afganistan wars, the rebuilding of Iraq, and now Katrina, I think that the government can't exactly afford to buy a lot of these fighters.

As for selling it to allies....quite honestly, who will be able to afford it??
As for the Australian AF purchasing 50 of these, that's absolutely impossible, as it would use up more than half their annual millitary budget!

I doubt the UK can afford it either, as a lot of it's millitary spendings went towards the Iraq war.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manincloak
I don't know why the don't tell the Senate "just how good it is". Maybe it's because it's not that good...or at least not anymore.

Erm, probably because the Congress, Senate, and the House [including numerous armed services sub-committees] already know of the Raptors capabilities. Knowing of the aircrafts capabilities in no way, shape or form has any bearing, at all, upon why the numbers of Raptors were reduced or will be added. The reductions were a matter of overall cost in relation to the entire DOD and/or Air Force budget.

As such, your implied reasoning that perhaps the Raptor is "not as good...or at least anymore" is ludicrous and uninformed.





I assume LM fixed all the many many many problems they were having with the F22? Well if this is the case, then they're bloody miracle workers.

You assume correctly, but then go on to assume incorrectly. The Raptor had few flaws or problems, and Lockheed Martin has addressed each one satisfactorily, hence the aircraft now moving on to near operational deployment.


Overall, let me guess: your not a fan of the Raptor, huh?
Seems quite self-evident to me, anyhow....






seekerof

[edit on 15-9-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 01:07 AM
link   
im from Australia but i rekon the politicians are doin a crap job
they are goin to buy the JSF to replace the hornets and F-111s
u cant replace F-111s with any form of F-35 basically it dont have the range, speed or weapons load of the pig
the politicians also havent ruled out buying the FA-22, mainly cos the JSF is costing so much
if the aussies bught raptors instead then the price would nearly the same as buying JSFs also whats better 60 JSFs or 50 raptors? gotta be Raptors



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Forsazh
im from Australia but i rekon the politicians are doin a crap job
they are goin to buy the JSF to replace the hornets and F-111s
u cant replace F-111s with any form of F-35 basically it dont have the range, speed or weapons load of the pig
the politicians also havent ruled out buying the FA-22, mainly cos the JSF is costing so much
if the aussies bught raptors instead then the price would nearly the same as buying JSFs also whats better 60 JSFs or 50 raptors? gotta be Raptors


yea youre right considering australias geographical position, but i ask you, can australia afford 50 raptors without damaging its economy?



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
As such, your implied reasoning that perhaps the Raptor is "not as good...or at least anymore" is ludicrous and uninformed.

You assume correctly, but then go on to assume incorrectly. The Raptor had few flaws or problems


www.counterpunch.org...

Idk if you've read it....or believe it, but I have and I do.



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manincloak

Originally posted by Seekerof
As such, your implied reasoning that perhaps the Raptor is "not as good...or at least anymore" is ludicrous and uninformed.

You assume correctly, but then go on to assume incorrectly. The Raptor had few flaws or problems


www.counterpunch.org...

Idk if you've read it....or believe it, but I have and I do.


This site is just dumb, its over 4 years old, so a lot of what it states is not the current situation. Not to mention it is clearly 100% against the F/A-22, it points out nothing good about it...only the bad...the classical one way argument.

This site is clearly a Bush Bashing left wing site...nothing more.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join