As much as I fell in love with the F-22, proven by it's ability to utterly obliterate the F-15 Eagle in air-to-air combat, which is no slouch, we had no choice. The cost was just to high. On the bright side, the JSF-35 designed to do more, like air-to-ground, will do a good job in place of the F-22's. Technology is the same generation. Not as perfect as the F-22 in air to air, but the difference is not that important.

One thing we can and should accelerate work on is our unmanned armed ROV/autonomous fighters. The F-22's computers inhibit manuverability so the pilot does not splatter one's brains on the instruments... Freed from this, Lord help any pilot who has to go up against a drone that can pull and maintain 20g's, and more.

Originally posted by on_yur_6
USA uses the Navy to keep the sea lanes open.

The US uses its navy for much more than keeping sea lanes open.


Don't even try and pretend otherwise.

Gates is as brilliant as was McNamara.

Just as short-sighted.

The reason you HAVE advanced weapons is not to FIGHT a war, but to PREVENT a war.

And this BS about the F-35 replacing the A-10? Get serious!

You have to be a complete idiot to believe that.

We're losing SKILLED technicians in some critical areas once this line is closed.

I guess the thing that pissed me off the most is that our GROUND troops need to be able to rely on air cover.

Hundreds of times in the past several years, our troops have been left with their asses hanging out in the breeze because they could NOT get sufficient AIR support.

When a firefight goes on for hours, and not ONE SINGLE A-10, and not ONE SINGLE APACHE is available, then we may want to rethink the F-35's all purpose promise.

McNamara did the identical same thing with the F-111. It was a do-everything DO NOTHING.

We need A-10 replacements, and we need the high-end F-22's, and fewer of the middle-road crap.

FINE! If the US can't buy anymore, then let's sell them to Japan and Israel. Anything to keep the production line open and operating.

This will eventually cost hundreds and likely thousands of American lives on the ground.

THEN how much will these damned planes cost?

And this BS about the F-35 replacing the A-10? Get serious!

You have to be a complete idiot to believe that.

It would not be surprising in the least to see this.

We're losing SKILLED technicians in some critical areas once this line is closed.

Many will be moved to F-35... most, actually.

When a firefight goes on for hours, and not ONE SINGLE A-10, and not ONE SINGLE APACHE is available, then we may want to rethink the F-35's all purpose promise.

What are you talking about? F-35 is not replacing Apache, only possibly the A-10 after 2028.

same thing with the F-111. It was a do-everything DO NOTHING.

???? F-15, F-16, F-18 are all multirole and the best fighters ever created.

We need A-10 replacements, and we need the high-end F-22's, and fewer of the middle-road crap.

How many more do you think they should get?

We/Allies aren't bying F-35s "just in case" like how people are saying we should do with the F-22. The actual demand exist for missions the F-35 performs. They are happening everyday in the CENTCOM AOR and off the decks of USN Carriers.

DarthAmerica on f-16 dot net.

And yes I think more F-22's would be great but I don't think cutting the F-35 to make room would be the smartest move. And um, how would more F-22's instead of more F-35's help the troops?

[edit on 23/7/2009 by C0bzz]

clinton destroyed our military bush built it back up now obama is destroying it again democrats rather spend money on programs that are supposed to help American citizens but it only ends up helping illegals since their include in the funding and take nearly 90%of it the other 10 goes into admin costs or gets screwed away when the new generation aircraft start being sold to our enemies then we will rebuild but at even more costs than previous before

if they would have bought all the f22s at once it would have been 80 million a plane but instead they only bought 4 to 10 guaranteed a year with no guarantee of more for the following year so their 150 to 180 million a plane original plan was to buy 700 raptors then went to 350 then 240 now 187 witch is kinda ironic considering 187 means murder they just killed our air dominance

so now for the price of 187 raptors we could have got 1000 +
just more wasteful spending congress sucks we need term limits for em just like the president

I just saw a technology show here on tv in Scandinavia.

The Americans said that these are the last manned fighters in history?

The future belongs to unmanned uaw and such, robot war and 3D grid and chit!

Gates said the days of the traditional fighter pilot was over?

when it come to artillery system that need to be replaced he stopping funding

XM2001 Crusader was cancelled , by Bush, in 2002

the air dominance fighter f22 he stop funding altogether

about damn time - there is no role for the F22 now - its an A2A only with very limited A2G - unpowered short range `iron` bombs is all it will carry.

going to stop plans for the ddg100 destroyers witch and stop any threat from an ememy to an aircraft carrier

the new DDG`s cost nearly the same as an aircraft carrier


each


for 1 zumwalt you can get 4.2 arleigh burkes or nearly 1 nimitz carrier or even ,


ready for this?


3 wasp class asault carriers for the marines (USS Bataan cost $731 million)


thats why the navy are buying 2 - they are the biggest , most expensive mistake ever made - the manufacturer needs to be dragged out and shot for the over the top costs.

even the new corvettes are nothing like cheap.


the entire procurement system is a bloated corrupt mess - the ambiguous `$500 toothbrush` which needs to be kicked into touch.

the air dominance fighter f22 he stop funding altogether

about damn time - there is no role for the F22 now - its an A2A only with very limited A2G - unpowered short range `iron` bombs is all it will carry.

the air dominance is not over. obivously russia is trying to build there 5th generation fighter which will try to challenge the raptor. its just not worth canceiling a project thats cost billions of dollars and not to mentions many years to produce. so why would you waste that many years or research to produce the worlds best fighter aircract

On July 24, 2009 CongressNow reports that Congressman Murtha is considering supplemental funding to add 20 more F-22 fighter jets to the fiscal 2010 Defense appropriations bill. This number reflects the view of General Schwartz's ideal number for a total of 200+ F-22s.

Murtha added that the threat by other nations like China requires building more F-22s than the 187 currently planned. Murtha also noted the plan to sell an export variant to Japan as a counter measure against NK missiles for instance.

And for the sake of clarification, the Senate voted to cut off funding in their current version of the appropriations bill BUT both houses have to agree on a single appropriations bill before it goes to the White House. Supplemental funding may very well work its magic as might a Congressional nod to an export version of the F-22.

How that pendulum swings . . .

Ummm take this to your BANK no pun internded. The US economy is coming back and with the "attitude and lifestyle" adjustments this country will be back stronger and stronger than ever.

Originally posted by kilcoo316

Originally posted by on_yur_6
Back on topic. Where Russia, China, and India can hurt us is engagements near their territory. Our carriers are amazing but one carrier wouldn't last long off the shores of Russia, China, or India.

How about don't go invading their territory then...


Your country is skint. Spending in the US is about to nose-dive... big time. Alot of people will have an awful lot of readjusting to do, both in attitude and lifestyle.

F-22 funding was cut because we have a new plane to spend money on.

[edit on 1-8-2009 by Holographic]