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.

 

Will the New JSF or the F-22 see action in IRAQ?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2002 @ 03:18 AM
link   
Could The USAF or NAVY test the JSF in Iraq under war conditions? Many prototypes have been made to date and could actually see action. On the other hand the Raptor has been in service for over a Year. Could it make it to Iraq or Korea?




posted on Dec, 28 2002 @ 11:36 AM
link   
I think those jets won't be ready 'till after 2005. Though, the Navy's super hornet will be there and that is quite new along with the Shadow UAV and thermobaric bombs, which were used once or twice in Afghanistan - according to some article that was recently out.



posted on Dec, 28 2002 @ 12:39 PM
link   
but with the f-22 they don;t have enuf pilots to fly them but planes start mass production in 2004 or 2005 i think



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Boyz, don't be to sure. There are Prototypes around and not only 1 or 2. I think the best place to be testing these aircraft would be Iraq. Probably patroling the Southern or Northern No Fly Zones.



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 11:01 AM
link   
if they went they'd do more than just patrol no-fly zones the navy wants to spend less one way is less aircraft they do this but getting multi-role airplanes like the JSF and F-22 so if they were there they'd prolly go on strike missions not just patrols



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 11:07 AM
link   
There are no operational JSF's in the inventory yet. The military is not going to send a prototype, or test model, into combat. It won't happen.



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I think we can safely assume that prototypes will not be used, and if one were operationally ready, the repeat of a "Serbia" - a top-line plane knocked out - would be disastrous to the project.
Also, it's not immediately obvious that this possible theatre would suit the spec's of either aircraft.
It's too risky to risk a combat aircraft in combat!



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 07:55 PM
link   
No offence Estragon, but where then would you 'Risk' a Combat Aircraft other that Comat?
Remember Me-262 that the Germans had in the WW2. They were still very experimental too, I know, times were a little different back then and Desperate times calls for Desperate measures. Though the fact remains that the Me-262 did go in to Combat agains Spitfire, Hurricanes and Mustaings.

www.stormbirds.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Barba, I was thinking of the possible commercial repercussions rather than any military ones: the F-22's future is still in the balance and any unsuspected "weakness" in the JJSF would place the many possible orders in jeopardy.



posted on Dec, 30 2002 @ 11:21 PM
link   
There is also the "face" and propaganda aspect: you'll recall the rather desperate denials by the Pentagon when the F-117A was shot down (apparently by relatively old missiles guided by even older radar) until the Serbs showed the wreckage.
You may also recall that it was widely believed then that the Serbs promptly sold the wreckage to the Russians: which presumably menat that any secrets concerning the Stealth technology that hadn't already become known to othe rnations, immediately stopped being "secret".
Taking your WWII analogy: it is of course true that the Me-262, the Me163 and the handful of other advanced aircraft were thrown into the last-minute defence against the USAAF and the RAF bombings. But, as you say (a) the Germans had nothing to lose (b) these aircraft were all that they had to combat the Allies.
America isn't desperate; the Iraqis aren't overwhelmingly strong and American airpower does not need any further support. You can bet that the no-fly-zone patrols would not continue as they do if the Iraqis had anything with even a hope of stopping the US and British planes.



posted on Dec, 31 2002 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Good point.
I was more interested in the re-design of the
F-22 'Fighter' to the FB-22 'Bomber'.
With the US Air Force facing the looming mass retirement of its dedicated strike fleets around 2015-2020, decisions earmarking the type of aircraft required to replace the capabilities currently provided by the B-52, B-2 and the F-15E and maybe even the F-117 will be needed before the end of the decade.
The FB-22 is a larger, long-range version of the F-22. Additional internal fuel would be carried to grant the
FB-22 a significantly greater range than the Raptor. A Radius of action exceeding 2000km is anticipated. The longer internal weapons bay to be enlarged to accomidate a greater number of weapons, including the projected Small Diameter Bomb; around 30 of which could be carried internally without the need to fit underwing hardpoints and ruin the aircraft's eviable LO(Low Observable) pedigree.
Now what all this signalises is that the F-22 is well and truely available as a Fighter....... Today.



posted on Dec, 31 2002 @ 03:07 AM
link   
This day and age the ability to shoot down an opponent is highly dependent on the weapons used. The AMRAAM has a 90% kill probabilty in all aspects of engagement. This missile can be launched from all US aircraft even bombers ( if so modified ). This allows even the older aircraft to have a significant ability to shoot down any aircraft ebcountered.
Much research has been done on long range precision guided projectiles, reducing the need of approaching a target. This assures the retention of most of the heavy bomber fleet well past this decade.
Whilst the F-22 is an exellent plane, it's capabilities are not needed for the current round of approaching conflict. Also the cost of the F-22 is very high, thus reducing the initial order by over half.

As for the JSF, I don't think it has even reached initial production.

[Edited on 31-12-2002 by mad scientist]



posted on Dec, 31 2002 @ 03:30 AM
link   
Good points about the "bomber" version, Barba - I suspect we have have reached the end of "B" designations: it's amazing to think that the B-52 still soldiers on, and -at what it does - is probably still the best. So pushing for a "fighter-bomber" F-22 may make very good commercial sense, since it's hard to imagine a potential opponent flying anything that would need the interception capabilities of an F-22.
Mad S's point about the missiles rather than the platforms is a good one, too.
If we see any "revolutionary" aeronautics in the conflict that seems pretty sure to come, I fancy it may well be in the area of unmanned aircraft.



posted on Dec, 31 2002 @ 03:32 AM
link   
It's worth noting that - forty years ago - the Western world was getting ready to retire all of its bombers - and perhaps its interceptors - because missiles had made them an anachronism (hence the end of Britain's V-bomber programme & TSR-2) and here we are still discussing the need for them.



posted on Dec, 31 2002 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Estragon has brought up a good point about UAV's. The Boeing X-45(if I remember correctly) id the first attempt at a stealth UAV carrying an internal bombload.
The cost of building a vehicle around a human increases production of an aircraft by a huge margin. In 10 years time I would expect UAV's far superior to the F-22's capabilities at a cheaper price.



posted on Jan, 1 2003 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Good points by all.
I Agree totally. We might even see UAV Bombers.
Lets wait and see shall we.
Happy New Year Boyz!



posted on Aug, 15 2004 @ 11:37 PM
link   
The X-35's built by Lockheed Martin and Boeing were "technology demonstrators" not prototype fighters. They have no weapons bays or tactical systems. The F-35 JSF which is now in development is not due for its first flight until 2006. With an initial operational date of 2012 I hope we will not be using it in Iraq. The F/A-22 will be finished with USAF operational testing in December of 2004 and the first deployed aircraft will be at Langley AFB in VA These aircraft will be strickly fighters until the ground attack systems are rolled into production and retrofit on older planes in a couple of years. I don't think you will see a debut of the F-22 in Iraq either.



posted on Aug, 16 2004 @ 02:03 AM
link   
Even if they had a squadron ready, I doubt that the AF would comit it newest and best prime Air surperiority fighter where they already controll the skies....

As other posters have pointed out, the JSF is not even in production yet and still is in the test stage.

More likely we will see a Eurofigter Typhoon or a Grippen....



posted on Aug, 16 2004 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Estragon has brought up a good point about UAV's. The Boeing X-45(if I remember correctly) id the first attempt at a stealth UAV carrying an internal bombload.
The cost of building a vehicle around a human increases production of an aircraft by a huge margin. In 10 years time I would expect UAV's far superior to the F-22's capabilities at a cheaper price.


I agree about future UCAVs mad scientist their future seem near limitless in my eyes. Taking the human out of the equation helps with so many factors. A future UCAV could be made to take High G turns that would kill or blackout a human pilot they could be made more stealthy and for cheaper then a human piloted craft. I think in about 20 years UCAVs will be the true masters of the skies.

Human pilots might be the biggest hurrdle for the future of UCAV as I bet they will fight tooth and nail to stay in the air.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join