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: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ppp
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.



It is this attitude that will make the US loose it's military dominance.




posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Originally posted by ppp
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.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no need for 3000 Air Force jets. The x-45 unmaned jets will do the same job and will be much cheaper+ no need for pilot training.



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   
bring the technology the money and the recources man and material to the space exploration program of Nasa so we don't spend it in militairy but in civil space programs so if an attack happens we could strike back from space with strike carriers is space....
science fiction will stay the same if you will not and aren't willing to change it in to science fact.

my conclusion if the program will be cancelled give the recources to NASA.... the pilots can go on to be astronauts.


jra

posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 07:13 PM
link   


The x-45 unmaned jets will do the same job and will be much cheaper+ no need for pilot training.


Well you still need to train pilots for those. People still fly them, but just from the ground. So perhaps not as intense training needed, but still some required.



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
bring the technology the money and the recources man and material to the space exploration program of Nasa so we don't spend it in militairy but in civil space programs so if an attack happens we could strike back from space with strike carriers is space....
science fiction will stay the same if you will not and aren't willing to change it in to science fact.

my conclusion if the program will be cancelled give the recources to NASA.... the pilots can go on to be astronauts.


NASA feeds off of the military sector - not the other way around. Besides, we are already working on space weapons


Ever heard of 'Rods from God', 'SDI' ect ect ect



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 08:08 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.


You should be careful quoting such figures they could be meaning less. They are based on Rand corp studies if memory serves. These are not always reliable. I have a vague recollection of a similar study do on the effectiveness of the Phantom against soviet mig 21 & 19s. They were supposed to get something like 6:1 kill ratios based on an AAM capability.

Needless to say Nam proved them wrong. Know what they say 'garbage in garbage out!'



posted on Apr, 16 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
The jsf will die if the raptor is cancelled because it depends on technologies developed under the atf program. The f-35 is not a dogfighter; no thrust vectoring in flight, high wing loading, no great compatibility with short range air to air missile. It would be like trying to take an A-4 and have it take the role of an F-15. the us cannot buy Eurofighters because that would devistate the us fighter industry plus throw billions down the drain for nothing. Ucavs are good for bombing right now but arent much of dogfighters so a manned fighter is still needed.



posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 09:38 AM
link   
how would buying eurofighters be a waste of money? its a perfictly good aircraft !
also u want to keep a great aircraft just to say to the world "dont mess with me iv got planes u cant see and they can kill u "
and have a monoical laugh "buw ha ha ha"



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   
i said cancelling the raptor now would be a massive waste of money, not buying the eurofughter. The EF2000 is a good plane, but it is designed for european requirements and not US. If the raptor is cancelled the entire us fighter manufacturing capacity will be anihilated, and millions of jobs and billions of dollars will disapear. The euro fighter is not as stealthy or capable (no thrust vectoring, no supercruise) so while it is a perfect pllane for Europe it would be very akward for the US, so it wont be used as teh us fighter. It might end uo like the f-21, being bought in about 30 craft and having their gun and pylons striped to become agressor aircraft, but that is all that we can expect of a US EF2000.


ppp

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   
"being bought in about 30 craft and having their gun and pylons striped to become agressor aircraft, but that is all that we can expect of a US EF2000."

The Royal Navy had wanted some F22's for use in testing the how many seconds it would take a Type 45 destroyer to destroy an F22 once it had been detected from 150 km away, but the navy managed to do the calculations using data collected from B2 bombers based in the UK.



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   
actually the ef has super cruise it was the first fighter to have it
also they wouldnt cancle thier 2nd fav plane and 2nd best plane



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Hi! I'm new here so I thought I'd say that "Why should we continue to build so many Steath Fighters like the F-22 Raptor, when we can simply add something like Russia's "Plasma Cloud" Cloaking Device that renders plane invisible by dissapating electromagnetic waves?"

It was built by Russia's Keldysh Research Center, it can be added to existing aircraft cheaply!

The USAF has had such devices on the SR-71 Blackbird and the B-1 Lancer for years. LOL!



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 04:06 PM
link   
The b2 Bomber is so expensive because it contains special propulsion capacity inherent in its design and engineering. its a flying test platform.

as far as the F22....canceling it would cost billions as well, and you get nothing in return. Ratheon, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc etc all have cancellation clauses in the contracts, amounting to a decent percentage of the contract. If anything, i would argue we must increase research and development in these areas as Humanity pushes into Outer Space.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Supercool
Hi! I'm new here so I thought I'd say that "Why should we continue to build so many Steath Fighters like the F-22 Raptor, when we can simply add something like Russia's "Plasma Cloud" Cloaking Device that renders plane invisible by dissapating electromagnetic waves?"

It was built by Russia's Keldysh Research Center, it can be added to existing aircraft cheaply!

The USAF has had such devices on the SR-71 Blackbird and the B-1 Lancer for years. LOL!


Because plasma cloud doesn't work(yet). And second point some plasma device would teoretically make the plane invisible for radar, but it will make it very visible for advanced infrared sensors.. Stealth means not only radar stealth but all kinds of stealth (IR, optical). The boeing has already developed very advanced infrared sensors for it'[s Airborne Laser, allowing to see balistic misile in 800 km against space background. The smaller IR detection device that could fit on the fighter could detect plasma shielded aircraft 50-80 km against ground look and maybe more than 100 km in top look. So such device will eliminate all plasma advantages.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Well if they really need the money and really want a nice fighter out of it, they could had the project over to the Russians and get it done for half price!
:p
I know it wouldn't actually work because of all the preperations American companies have made to build these things, but yeah next time they want a fighter they should talk the the Russians, I'm sure they'd be happy to oblige........ mmmm funding.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 10:30 PM
link   
this is why the f-22 wont be canceled, and is the best. 1/3 secrets are revealed, pretty amazing what is shown in public.

www.aviationnow.com.../05244wna.xml

[Edited on 29-5-2004 by Laxpla]



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amur_Tiger
Well if they really need the money and really want a nice fighter out of it, they could had the project over to the Russians and get it done for half price!
:p
I know it wouldn't actually work because of all the preperations American companies have made to build these things, but yeah next time they want a fighter they should talk the the Russians, I'm sure they'd be happy to oblige........ mmmm funding.


This is nonsense, again new modernized SU-30 MK has about the same price as new modernized F-15. Maybe Su-30MK is SLIGHTLY better but those both are the same class aircrafts, so how do you explain they have the same price, when RUSSIANS CAN MAKE THE AIRCRAFT CHEAPER? And F-16 is cheaper than Mig-29. Russian Bmp's and tanks are maybe cheaper, but not the aircrafts.



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
The F-22 is a waste of money and it should be canceled.

It will not give the USA any kind of advantage over say an enemy like Russia or China or India.

It is too expensive and it is not stealthy enough.

They will probaby build about 100 and cancel the program like they did with the B-2 Bomber after 21 planes.

The B-2 wasn't worth 2.2 billion dollars USD each.



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Supercool
The F-22 is a waste of money and it should be canceled.

It will not give the USA any kind of advantage over say an enemy like Russia or China or India.

It is too expensive and it is not stealthy enough.

They will probaby build about 100 and cancel the program like they did with the B-2 Bomber after 21 planes.

The B-2 wasn't worth 2.2 billion dollars USD each.



Is not worth and not stealthy enough? Do you know in what range it will be detected by Su-35 radar? 10 km. And detecting doesnt mean lock and track. Really not stealth enough :-). In this time the Sukhoi would be already shot down 6 times.It is also most manuvrable aircraft today (except Su-37 and it will be not produced) and can supercruise that means F-22 supercruising with mach 1.6 at 18 km would be able to outmaneuvre most SAMs (in case it is detected). Plus it has the most advanced radar today (and probalby also in the future), which can also fire microwave EMP beams to jamm or fry enemy radars, incoming misiles or aircrafts. I personaly think it will be not canceled but at least aditionally 250 aircrafts will be build. Without R&D unit replacement cost would ba about 80 milion dollars that means cheaper than Eurofighter. For example Su-35 with advanced western avionics etc. cost 45 milions$ today. The F-15 is already old, and the C/D versions canot be maintained forever.


[Edited on 30-5-2004 by longbow]



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Supercool
The F-22 is a waste of money and it should be canceled.

It will not give the USA any kind of advantage over say an enemy like Russia or China or India.

It is too expensive and it is not stealthy enough.

They will probaby build about 100 and cancel the program like they did with the B-2 Bomber after 21 planes.

The B-2 wasn't worth 2.2 billion dollars USD each.



Then you can say that about all of the bombers we've had. How about not buying anymore B-2A's and allow the continued productions of the F-22.

They're not about to cancel a plane with as much technology on board as that. Supercool, what proof do you have that Russia is far more advanced, and no Plasma Cloud does not cut it, because it doesn't work.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join