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.

 

F-22 is it Worth The Money Spent

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 08:53 AM
link   
ive seen people call this jet a craptor and other things is this jet really whats it cracked up to be?




posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Not only is this bird or dinosaur BTW worth its price but it can do things that we don't even know yet. Check out this site for a lot of info on the F-22 Raptor.

F-22 Raptor



posted on Jul, 15 2004 @ 09:45 PM
link   
mzthang1, I see you are new so allow me to introduce you to the Search Button found at the top of the page (right below ATS banner). No problem this time, but there was the exact same question just a few days ago. Welcome to the board
(I feel old now
)



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   
My cousin, who is stationed at Wright-Patterson, was brought into the F-22 test program not too long ago and he tells me it's a perfectly fine weapons system. They ironed out most of the guideance kinks, so it flies really well. There was something else about an updated tracking system using lasers like the MiG-29 / Su-27 systems.

[edit on 10-8-2004 by Fluxd]



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Lets just hope the F-35 thats replacing the 16s and 18s has better manuverability, I mean, have you seen the turning arc on that thing?



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Yah, those F-16s make really wide turns and it makes it harder to line up landings which has to be done far before you reach the pad because of the lack of manuverability.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 08:07 PM
link   
the Raptor project is just a relic of the cold war that isn't needed anymore. The United States Government and military just creates threats and enemies when there really isnt any
so the politicians can give huge amounts of money to defence contractors that gave them campaign contributions
.

It's your tax money guys, personally i think you should spend it on education or healthcare but that's just my opinion
.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Aug, 11 2004 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Is it worth the money?

In a word, YES, if for no other reason then this.......

To update every F-15 would cost 90% of the cost to replace every F-15 with a raptor. For that extra 10% you are basically providing air dominance for the next 15 years and air superiority for another 10 after that. Seems like a simple buisness choice to me.

BW drfunk, if it is just a relic from the cold war, then how come every other millitry power in the world is not told the same thing when they plan to build there own 5th gen aircraft with stealth? The Russians are going to build their Mig 1.44 or Su-47. China is building 2 new fighters, 1 with stealth, and India is working on the Pakfa (I believe).

So why is it that America cannot do the same? Because it is much better? Because it costs more? Sorry, but when the rest of the world stops building up their millitar, then we will to. Untill that day, we will continue to preserve our air dominance.



posted on Aug, 11 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
It's your tax money guys, personally i think you should spend it on education or healthcare but that's just my opinion


If you look at it tho, with the entire planet (more or less, obviously not every country) opposed to the iraq war (but a majority of the amiercan public behind it) the US was still able to go a. with it. Think about it. France spends very little on their military (they have a single aircraft carrier, for example) and was vehemently opposed to this war. They had a security council veto, and all they needed to do to prevent a resolution apporving the war was veto it. Instead, they spent large amounts of their diplomatical and poltical 'currency' (so to speak) on getting other nations to vocally oppose the war also. I say this only to show that they very much wanted to prevent the war. The end result was that the war occured anyway, and there was, literally, no one on the entire planet to stop us.

The US invests more money, both per capita and overall, than any other nation in the world on its military. Whether the US uses it for good or ill, it gets to decide, because it has power. Even if one disapproves of power politics, its still very much a reality.

Having said that, I do wish that education was a higher priority in the US and received lots more funding. But the trade off has been that, even when the entire planet (practically) is in dead opposition to us, the US still remians capable of doing what it wants.



posted on Aug, 11 2004 @ 05:31 PM
link   
The US government has a bigger military force then all of the world combined. There's nothing to stop it, with its nuclear weapons the US can destroy a nation within minutes and other nations know the military doesn't bluff.

[edit on 11-8-2004 by crossofcrimson]



posted on Aug, 11 2004 @ 11:32 PM
link   
they continue to plan to build these planes to attempt to keep up with US military technology. The Americans have these things and they feel they have to get that capability to keep the peace and status quo. The world still does act like there is a cold war on and a real paradigm shift needs to change. It shouldnt be about the best weapon but about the best argument.

btw I love that YF-23 pic
now thats a 5th gen aircraft! damn the craptor!

US citizens have to stop thinking that everyone hates them. It's the actions of your government that are awful and that is why many people around the world look at the US with disdain, because of unkind actions to the less fortunate. I spose you could say its rampant capitalism in the United States is to blame and even the idea of Socialist policies in the US that every other developed nation has your capitalist politicians cry its "unamerican" or "communism" while they get richer on the unfairness in society. Dont you think its odd that the US has the worst healthcare system in the developed world?


And if the government did stop spending all that cash on the military could you imagine what the US could do in education and scientific research??

or on the space program? or on alternative energy? or on giving real aid to nations and cancelling debt??

The US has the key to bring the world forward, but it has to make the first move.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
they continue to plan to build these planes to attempt to keep up with US military technology. The Americans have these things and they feel they have to get that capability to keep the peace and status quo. The world still does act like there is a cold war on and a real paradigm shift needs to change. It shouldnt be about the best weapon but about the best argument.


The cold war is obviously over. Without the soviets, or even russian agression, the cold war can't exist. Now we are in a period of full fledged 'hot wars'. The cold war was all about detterence and fighting thru proxies. This current stage of war is about open, agressive, warfare. There is an enemy. It declared war on us. It attacked our embassies, then our military, and finally invaded our country and attacked us within. Is the US supposed to pretend that this war isn't happening? Why should international politics be about 'argument'? Why shouldn't it be about power? If the US governement is in a position to do something vital for the US citizens, even tho it might not be 'right' or 'good', it would be irresponsible for the governement to not do it. The same goes for every country on the planet. Its primary responsibility is to its own citizens first, then the rest of humanity.




US citizens have to stop thinking that everyone hates them. It's the actions of your government that are awful and that is why many people around the world look at the US with disdain, because of unkind actions to the less fortunate. I spose you could say its rampant capitalism in the United States is to blame


The mixed economy of the US is a major reason for its global success and wealth. Capitalism -creates- wealth.


and even the idea of Socialist policies in the US that every other developed nation has your capitalist politicians cry its "unamerican" or "communism" while they get richer on the unfairness in society. Dont you think its odd that the US has the worst healthcare system in the developed world?


And yet, more canadians are dissatisfied with their healthcare system than americans.


And if the government did stop spending all that cash on the military could you imagine what the US could do in education and scientific research??

or on the space program? or on alternative energy? or on giving real aid to nations and cancelling debt??


The united states already gives more money in international aid than any other country. The united states is also the leader in 'space programs'. 'Alternative Energy' doesn't need to be researched anymore, its a viable and productive set of energy resources. There are already fuel cell, hybrid, and pure electric vehicles on the road, for example. And while there are less foreign researchers comming to the US than in the past, the US still 'drains' researchers out of other countries.



The US has the key to bring the world forward, but it has to make the first move.


Why should the US do anything more to 'bring the world' forward? Its not the US's responsibility to do this. No one 'brought the US forward'. Heck the US rebuilt europe after WWII, and that was after fighting alongside its citizens to help keep it free. And when the soviets were gearing up to invade and occupy europe, it was the united states that got involved, ratcheted up its defense spending, and went thru -hell- to enforce a policy of soviet isolation and containment. Meanwhile the actual imperial powers of europe were slowly abandoning their colonial possessions, dantgerously destabilizing entire regions of the globe. And the US stepped in there. Just look at Korea. Who is better off, the people in the south, with their modern cities, free market, long life expectancy good health care and cosmopolitan culture, or the north, with its, er, famines, sealed borders, and totalitarian militaristic dictatorship? Capitalism is bad? I guess if people being able to feed themselves is bad then it is.



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I like the Raptor, and I think that it was worth what was spent on it. It sure beats $400 hammers doesn't it?



posted on Aug, 12 2004 @ 02:28 PM
link   
In a thread in the aircraft forum, we all pretty much agrred that the Raptor is worth its weight in gold. Also, I'm looking forward to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the X-44 Multi-Axis No-Tail Aircraft (or MANTA). It's an F/A-22222 without a tail or moveable aerodynamic surfaces.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I still wish they had done something more with the YF-23. That was one beautiful jet.



posted on Aug, 13 2004 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
the Raptor project is just a relic of the cold war that isn't needed anymore. The United States Government and military just creates threats and enemies when there really isnt any
so the politicians can give huge amounts of money to defence contractors that gave them campaign contributions
.

It's your tax money guys, personally i think you should spend it on education or healthcare but that's just my opinion
.

thanks,
drfunk


Your own country is arming up man. They are helping the F-35 project and they just pruchased many Abrams main battle tanks. They also just selected the Aegis radar system for their new ships and they are allow the us to build a large base in you country. So how about you shut your mouth and actually do some research.



posted on Aug, 15 2004 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by drfunk
they continue to plan to build these planes to attempt to keep up with US military technology. The Americans have these things and they feel they have to get that capability to keep the peace and status quo. The world still does act like there is a cold war on and a real paradigm shift needs to change. It shouldnt be about the best weapon but about the best argument.

btw I love that YF-23 pic
now thats a 5th gen aircraft! damn the craptor!

US citizens have to stop thinking that everyone hates them. It's the actions of your government that are awful and that is why many people around the world look at the US with disdain, because of unkind actions to the less fortunate. I spose you could say its rampant capitalism in the United States is to blame and even the idea of Socialist policies in the US that every other developed nation has your capitalist politicians cry its "unamerican" or "communism" while they get richer on the unfairness in society. Dont you think its odd that the US has the worst healthcare system in the developed world?


And if the government did stop spending all that cash on the military could you imagine what the US could do in education and scientific research??

or on the space program? or on alternative energy? or on giving real aid to nations and cancelling debt??

The US has the key to bring the world forward, but it has to make the first move.


There's no way I can argue with this man. He's completely right. The US needs to get there prioritys straight.



posted on Aug, 16 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   
my own country is arming up because we have to be able to defend ourselves in the 21st century. However, unlike the USA we do not have a large defence force and our defence budget is insignificant it's like US$12 billion which is about 5 or 6% of our governments budget compared to the US's 18%.

And why should we develop our own weapons and not allow you guys on our soil because you guys spend all the money on the research and we get to buy the weapons its cheaper that way
and the only reason we want a base here is that so you have another reason to defend us if an enemy invades.



posted on Aug, 16 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   
nygdan,

excellent arguments i haven't read this post in a long time so i will reply now.



"The cold war is obviously over. Without the soviets, or even russian agression, the cold war can't exist. Now we are in a period of full fledged 'hot wars'. The cold war was all about detterence and fighting thru proxies. This current stage of war is about open, agressive, warfare. There is an enemy. It declared war on us. It attacked our embassies, then our military, and finally invaded our country and attacked us within. Is the US supposed to pretend that this war isn't happening? Why should international politics be about 'argument'? Why shouldn't it be about power? If the US governement is in a position to do something vital for the US citizens, even tho it might not be 'right' or 'good', it would be irresponsible for the governement to not do it. The same goes for every country on the planet. Its primary responsibility is to its own citizens first, then the rest of humanity. "


the world still does do this pointless arms race like the cold war is still going while it's over. You are right about the fighting of the cold war but still the US fights proxies if you will, still fights flashpoints. The obvious place the majority of the terrorists that have attacked the US come from the middle East yet the US only attacks weak nations that aren't supplying a good amount of oil to the US economy because of sanctions or of political differences. Afghanistan was the training camp for al-qaeda yet your government hasnt caught bin laden yet and many high ranking al-qaeda members are still not found. "hot wars" were still very present during the "cold war", but what you would see is that they were the satellites or proxies of the Soviets and Americans. The only difference now is that there is no soviets and "hot wars" are still being fought and the US usually backs one side or another.

I know that you are stating that terrorism a big threat. But it is really insignificant and more people in the US die from car crashes or cancer than terrorism. If you put that into perspective, you can understand that there are many greater problems and threats to US citizens than terrorists and you must question why isn't greater resources being diverted to combat these threats. A lot of the time the US govt doesn't do actions for the good of its people, but do it to keep the rich getting richer and to ensure the same way of life (oil) even though it is becoming increasingly obvious it cannot continue.



"The mixed economy of the US is a major reason for its global success and wealth. Capitalism -creates- wealth"


Capitalism does create wealth. That is the great thing about it is it has the potential for people to have successful, happy and productive lives. The problem with US capitalism is that it is rampant and unchecked and it just seems to have a mind of it's own. When the government start relaxing on keeping check on capitalism the rich and the corporations exploit it so that they get most of the pie and they give the poor who exchanged their labour for the wealth get the smallest amount possible. That is why governments should aimed for a socially oriented free market economy, which provides the majority with protection and basic services and a high standard of life. Why do you think countries like Norway, Sweden and Australia are considered to have a better lifestyle than the US, it's because their govt's have a long tradition of making sure the people have access to basic services such as excellent education and healthcare and good social welfare shemes. And what you see is that all developed nations have systems similar to this except the United States.




"And yet, more canadians are dissatisfied with their healthcare system than americans"


this is because a major problem with universal healthcare is the long waiting periods and queues and overcrowding. But all these people in the end have access to healthcare that is considered to be of a better quality than the US system. The US system of HMO's and not the govt having universal healthcare leaves such a huge segment of your populace without proper healthcare,44 million people have been left out. The reason canadians complain about healthcare more is because they believe it's a basic human right that should be free and everyone should have it. US citizens haven't got universal healthcare, therefore their expectations of the healthcare system are different.




The united states already gives more money in international aid than any other country. The united states is also the leader in 'space programs'. 'Alternative Energy' doesn't need to be researched anymore, its a viable and productive set of energy resources. There are already fuel cell, hybrid, and pure electric vehicles on the road, for example. And while there are less foreign researchers comming to the US than in the past, the US still 'drains' researchers out of other countries



yes the US does give more than any country because it is the largest economy in the world and has money to burn. However it certainly isn't no.1 in the world per capita and it can do much more in the world. And while there are alternatives coming out on the market today to the fossil fuel car, they do not have enough support in Washington and Detroit to make an impact due to the fact that the oil companies are still making big bucks and are barring competitive fuel sources by using lobbyist groups. The US is also the leader in the space program, but NASA is now a former shell of what it was it is an unwieldy bureaucracy with the accountants in charge not the engineers and the US only spends a measly US$16 Billion a year!!! could you imagine how much more it could do if they skimped a little from DOD!!!






Why should the US do anything more to 'bring the world' forward? Its not the US's responsibility to do this. No one 'brought the US forward'. Heck the US rebuilt europe after WWII, and that was after fighting alongside its citizens to help keep it free. And when the soviets were gearing up to invade and occupy europe, it was the united states that got involved, ratcheted up its defense spending, and went thru -hell- to enforce a policy of soviet isolation and containment. Meanwhile the actual imperial powers of europe were slowly abandoning their colonial possessions, dantgerously destabilizing entire regions of the globe. And the US stepped in there. Just look at Korea. Who is better off, the people in the south, with their modern cities, free market, long life expectancy good health care and cosmopolitan culture, or the north, with its, er, famines, sealed borders, and totalitarian militaristic dictatorship? Capitalism is bad? I guess if people being able to feed themselves is bad then it is.


I am not questioning the US's past actions that are indeed honourable, but great men were in power back then such as Woodrow Wilson in WWI, FDR and Harry S. Truman in WWII and you can't say the same for the US's recent leaders having such resolve and holding up real beliefs in freedom for others and a free world. If you think the US got to where it is by itself, you are severely mistaken. The US now was former colonies of Britain and France and also contains former parts of Mexico and Russia. These peoples laid the foundations of your nations and when your brave leaders decided to fight for independence over taxes to a foreign king (rightly so) France was there to help you along and give victory at much cost to its own. So the birth of the US was helped by France, your most hated european country while England were the people denying your freedom. It's interesting how things change isn't it?. During the liberation of Europe in WWII the US played the integral part of liberating western europe from the nazi's. Without the US it wouldn't of happened. However the US was still content not to play in Europe's affairs during WWI and WWII if it werent for the Lusitania, The Zimmerman Telegram and Pearl Harbour. Also, the only reason the US rebuilt Western Europe with the marshall plan and the Truman Doctrine was because they needed allies to fight against the soviets. simple. I am not trying to lessen the US's great actions during these periods as I am grateful of US involvement in both wars, America saved my homeland. All I am trying to highlight is that the US didn't do it selflessly it did it for it's own personal interests and not the benefit of others. The US should help others around the world because this way in the end the US wins and the threats against her own citizens lessen as they see the US as a force for good, not a nation of people who basically plunder their natural resources and exploit the poor for little wages.

South Korea is an examplary model of a developed nation. May I also add that it has like the rest of the developed world except the US universal healthcare and a Social Welfare system. I am not saying capitalism is evil, just refer to my argument above
. Capitalism is only useful when it is kept in checked by the government so it works for the people. May I add US capitalism doesn't feed all the people. over 12% of US citizens are below the poverty line and rely on Food Banks to live.

hope this clarifies things,
drfunk

[edit on 17-8-2004 by drfunk]



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 03:10 PM
link   
the 22 is most deffinatly worth it's weight in.. whats the most valuable thing? platinum? the things that this jet can do are just unbelieveable. then there are other things...


there is what they tell the public.....


then there is what it can actually do...


btw.. since it was mentioned.. i used to have a pic a friend took of the yf-23 sittin next to a building down in LA i think. might have been in pasadena.. or palmdale.

[edit on 31-8-2004 by echoRanger]




top topics



 
0

log in

join