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.

 

USA to cancel the F-22 to fund the war?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Shattered,
Sorry to be the one to point this out, but the F-15 has reached the limit as to what you can do to upgrade it. There is simply no room left to upgrade the computers onboard.

The RCS of the F-15 is also amongst the largest of all fighters out there. It does not have a place on tomorrow battlefield.

Don't get me wrong, it was a good aircraft. It just can't keep up with what's coming.




posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Its like taking out a mortgage.(loan) the JSF and f22 programs will continue. Same with the Comanche they claimed they scrapped. More than likely the Comanche was just assigned a different platform (UAV) and not scrapped.



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by project_pisces
Its like taking out a mortgage.(loan) the JSF and f22 programs will continue. Same with the Comanche they claimed they scrapped. More than likely the Comanche was just assigned a different platform (UAV) and not scrapped.

It was scrapped.

A commanche uav? what would they use it for? Reconnaisance?

Shattered OUT...



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Where'd this all come from?Was there an actual news or gov't announcment?



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 12:50 PM
link   
the f-15 could be upgraded, but it would only achieve parity with new fighters and the usaf needs dominance. I also love the eagle but it was designed 30 years ago and we really need the raptor. with the jsf program the raptor is developing tech for two stealth planes, so it is inexpensive in that sense and also indespensible. No raptor=no js= crumbling military



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 04:41 PM
link   
see i told u
the f22 isnt gona get cancled but the comanche was cause it was a stupid wee chopper ( i know it was nice but i had to say it sorry)
secondly lets rock !!
thirdly i need to ask do u actualy think the usaf will allow thier fav plane to be cancled



posted on Apr, 12 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Thanks for the pic Zion Mainframe
I love what that plane looks like. I coudnt help but notice the F-22 getting shot down in the pic. Cool pic thanks again



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 04:30 PM
link   
The first combat-ready planes are supposed to hit the skies next year, and the military is supposed to decide by December whether to continue with full production of the plane. The GAO report called on the Pentagon to submit to Congress a detailed justification of the program before that decision.

Full Article
www.globalsecurity.org...



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 11:41 PM
link   
The F-15 can actually be upgraded to be a powerful aircraft still. A few years ago a F-15 was modified with thrusr vectoring and canards and it improved the handling greatly. New electronics and radar could be put in it also.



posted on Apr, 13 2004 @ 11:59 PM
link   
I think we need to be honest with ourselves here. Every plane the government has released knowlege of to the public has been in use for a while. There's no reason to believe the F-22 is any different except that this time the government came out with a different story: We're developing this plane.

Are we sure we were developing it when it was released? I'm not, that's for sure. So now if we take that into account, it would probably mean we have something better we're not releasing to the public...So the F-22, like the F-16, can be put aside. Read the "official" ATS article on the flying disks firing particle weapons. That is one of the few stories here that I actually believe as being possible. We must have something spectacular to beat out the F-22, and the very fact that it was made public, in my mind, says to me that we have that spectacular device.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 03:24 AM
link   
I don't believe this! Stupdi Java controls blooming went and lost all of those links and everything I wrote!!! I'll just have to hand code these links now.

A pretty good overview of the F-22 / ATF program...

"The political controversy behind the F/A-22 has had some amusing aspects. At one time, program backers cited estimates that had been devised that gave the "kill ratio" between the F/A-22 and the MiG-21 as about a thousand to one in the F/A-22's favor. Even senior USAF brass responded, in essence, to ask them what they had been smoking. It brought up the old joke that fighter complexity and cost was increasing so rapidly that eventually the Air Force would only be able to buy one fighter -- but it would be able to destroy the entire Soviet Air Force by itself."

www.vectorsite.net...

...that comment may turn out to be more truthful than previously thought.

I checked Lockheed Martin... no press releases regarding the F/A-22 since 09/16/2003. Nothing turned up in search of "F/A-22; cancellation" or any related keywords. (Are we surprised?)

www.lockheedmartin.com...

Something regarding the stealth characteristics of the F/A-22. Don't know how valid it is, but interesting nonetheless.

iron-eagles.tripod.com...

The Air Force is standing behind the F/A-22, apparently...

www.vnis.com...

More criticism of the F/A-22...

www.globetechnology.com...

Article from POGO that virtually confirms everything. There are rumblings similar to what happened prior to cancellation of the Comanche.

www.pogo.org...

www.pogo.org...

The OMB document (from POGO internal link). Don't know what OMB stands for... Office of something-or-other...

www.pogo.org...

I have good advice for the USAF.

Buy Eurofighters!






[Edited on 14-4-2004 by Lampyridae]

[Edited on 14-4-2004 by Lampyridae]



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
The F-15 can actually be upgraded to be a powerful aircraft still. A few years ago a F-15 was modified with thrusr vectoring and canards and it improved the handling greatly. New electronics and radar could be put in it also.


I believe you are right on this.... But I also remember reading it would cost about 90% of the money to upgrade the 15's rather then the 100% to simply replace it with raptors. Given that the US is not exactly poor, don't you think it would be more practical to simply replace them?



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
The F-15 can actually be upgraded to be a powerful aircraft still. A few years ago a F-15 was modified with thrusr vectoring and canards and it improved the handling greatly. New electronics and radar could be put in it also.


F-15 = OLD.
F-22 = OLD.
UCAV = NEW.
UCAV = CHEAP.
UCAV = EXPENDABLE.
Humans = OBSOLETE.

Well, not quite. But it sure seems that way!



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:49 AM
link   
Lampyridae - Eurofighter should be renamed as MSOF -Most #ty Overpriced Fighter. It is not even able to stand against su-35 and it is comparable to su-27. It is not stealth and also NOT ESPECIALLY maneuverable. It has no thrust vectoring. The only modern thing on it is avionics. And it will cost 50-60 mil USD , f16=20 mil. usd, modernized Su-35 about 35 mil. usd. The only reason why this old design will be produced is the euro politic to help create the jobs in the aircraft industry.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Lol cenzorship
. MSOF= Most S...itty overpriced fighter.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I'd rather have something that can stay in the air and not fall out of the sky after 3 hours because of a software crash!!!


Sorry... I couldn't resist this...

In addition to these overall combat performance results a number of individual comparisons have been made available. Of enormous importance for BVR combat is acceleration at medium altitudes and here the Eurofighter's acceleration at Mach 0.9 and 22,000ft equals that of the F-22. At supersonic velocities (Mach 1.6 and 36,000ft) the sustained turn rate of the Eurofighter betters all but the F-22, while its instantaneous turn rate is superior to the F-22. At low altitudes, Eurofighter can accelerate from 200kts to Mach 1.0 in under 30 seconds. In a similar vain to its supersonic performance, the sustained and instantaneous subsonic turn rates of the Eurofighter are bettered only by the F-22. Only the Rafale comes close to the matching the Eurofighter's capabilities in these comparisons.

www.eurofighter.starstreak.net...

Yeah, yeah, I know, it's from a Eurofighter web page and is hardly an unbiased view, but I can't resist knocking the F-22!

[Edited on 14-4-2004 by Lampyridae]



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   
You forgot to post the results above. The bvr kill ratio - 10.1:1=F22 , 4.5:1=Typhoon. Also I dont think the EF is bad plane but it is simply overpriced - for its capabilities.



posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   
At $320 mil a pop, the F-22 isn't???
Yes, I do see your point - things are overpriced but that's modern combat aircraft for ya. I'm wondering if there are any plans for laser weapons on the EF2000 or F-22... must do some digging.



posted on Apr, 15 2004 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Eurofighters are good for defensive operations that thee European powers desire, but the f-22 is the best answer to the usaf's need for offensive capabilities. here are reasons why it wont be cancelled.
1. It is already being produced so cancelling it now will mean that they developed a plane, assembly line, and support facilities have already been built, the plane is acually the cheapest part.
2. Whille the Jsf and Super Hornet are good strike planes, they arent air supperiority fighters. While the raptor is expensive, no other plane can serve as well in the air to air role. Also the JSF usses the technological risks the raptor takes, and if the raptor is cancelled the jsf will have to be cancelled also leaving the us with no new stealth fighter, very bad.


ppp

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   
The Raptor should be cancelled, it is not needed.

NO country has the capability to bring the fight to the USA, and win, although some would be able to do a large ammount of damage. The planned 1700 JSF would be able to repel the strongest of attacks on the USA mainland, and Raptor would add liitle to the defence.

In an offensive role, the carrier airwings would be more than capable to destroy the enemies air force, and the countries who could defeat the carriers would be likely to defeat them with a nuclear weapons.

If the USAF wants more power in the air combat area, then the $37.6 billion for Raptors would be better spent on 1253 more JSF, bringing the total to 2953 for the USAF, which is 500 more than the USAF had F4's! Of course, the economies of scale realised from 1253 more planes would increase this number further.

The arguement could be made that JSF isnt as capable in air to air, but jsf could be made with 2 available radars, one for export and one for the USAF/RAF/USN/RN/USMC. The JSF export could have a radar similar to that of the F16 block 60E's APG-80, and a radar more comparable to the F/A22's APG-77 for the USAF/RAF/USN/RN/USMC.





top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join