Congress Asks for a Study on Restarting F22 Raptor Production 

"Busslayer" (Busslayer) 04/22/2016 at 09:20 • Filed to: None

0

21

Lawmakers have tacked a provision onto a defense bill that will determine how much it would cost and how difficult it would be to ramp up production of the Air Force’s fifth generation dogfighter. They also want to know about possible options for exporting F-22s to allies. Currently, exporting Raptors is illegal.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Supposedly the equipment to manufacturer the F22 has been mothballed and could be brought back online. The F22 is certainly an awesome piece of hardware, but if improved Russian and Chinese anti-aircraft technology can easily shoot it out of the sky, is it really worthwhile? There has been some talk that the F22 could be upgraded with some of the tech that was developed for the F35. I know the F35 has issues, but I’m not sure if the F22 is really a better answer from a combat point of view. A legitimate study is probably a good though.

I saw one at an air show and will say the F22 was amazing to see in action. Unlike anything else. It made everything else look boring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-5F3d…

itschrome > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:29

0

yeah that’s what we need, more over priced fucking planes for war..

Dru > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:30

0

I am not well learnt on planes and such. So I am curious if the F35 is such a vast improvement over the F22 that it justifies the great expense and myriad issues? Or should the F22 possibly have been kept in production longer, to get more mileage out of that design/engineering?

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:32

1

Restarting the F22 line would probably be cheaper than the tax hell hole the F35 is

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Dru 04/22/2016 at 09:33

0

The F35 was built to be a “one plane does all” thing. The F22 was built for air superiority

BigBlock440 > Dru 04/22/2016 at 09:34

1

They’re two different planes for two different purposes. The F35 is more a CUV, trying to be all things to all people, where the F22 is a Mclaren F1 that was designed to be an all-out performance machine and only that.

*disclaimer: everything I know about them I learned from Tyler

ttyymmnn > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:38

1

But while many within the Air Force would dearly love to see the Raptor back in production, it is not likely to happen. The first problem is that while Lockheed and the Air Force supposedly made every effort to carefully squirrel away the tooling and instructions for building the F-22, problems have emerged when maintenance crews have attempted to pull the equipment in order to repair damaged jets.

One recently retired Air Force official with direct knowledge about the service’s efforts to repair two damaged Raptors said that they faced severe difficulties with retrieving the correct tooling. In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue remains unresolved. The bottom line is that even if the Air Force wanted to, it may not be physically possible to restart the line—at least not without a huge additional investment in time and money. ( link )

Congress wants the AF to keep flying the A-10, and Congress wants the AF to build more F-22s. The AF has no interest in doing either. They have gone all in to get the F-35, a plane that supposedly can do the job of both the F-22 and A-10. But frankly, I’m not sure the money is there for more F-22s. The original plan was to have at least 750 F-22s, but production was halted at just under 200 because of cost. The AF is in a real pickle. They need the F-22 to make the F-35 work because the F-35 is not an air superiority fighter no matter how many missiles and computers you cram onto it. But the existing F-22s are in need of upgrades, which will be expensive, while the AF is trying to procure the F-35 which is stupid expensive. That’s why they are so desperate to dump the A-10. It’s a huge mess that may only be solved by the infusion of billions of dollars that this country just doesn’t have.

StingrayJake > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:40

0

Restarting production would be comically expensive. If they’d been producing them all along, it’d be bargin by now.

StingrayJake > BigBlock440 04/22/2016 at 09:43

1

That’s a good analogy... but also imagine that the CUV suddenly costs substantially more than the F1 car because the people buying it want F1 performance from a CUV.

BigBlock440 > StingrayJake 04/22/2016 at 09:46

1

So instead of a generic CUV, it’s a Model X.

66671 - 200 [METRIC] my dash > Busslayer 04/22/2016 at 09:46

0

So with all the money being spent on the f35s they want to start making last gen fighters again? Smh.

StingrayJake > BigBlock440 04/22/2016 at 09:49

0

Haha yes.

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > ttyymmnn 04/22/2016 at 09:55

1

The Air Force is a mess basically...and it’s a mess they created

ttyymmnn > Dru 04/22/2016 at 10:01

0

You would be well served to read about the F-111. Back in the early 1960s, both the AF and the Navy needed a new plane. Defense Secretary McNamara decided that we could save money by having both branches buy the same plane. But it’s no secret that the AF’s and Navy’s needs are vastly different, and the effort became a complete failure after spending millions of dollars. The AF eventually adopted the F-111, but the Navy bailed on the project and went with the F-14 Tomcat. Tom Cruise can tell you how well that worked out. The lesson that one plane doesn’t fit all was learned then, but not remembered today. Now they are trying to build THREE versions of the same plane, one of which is supposed to be V/STOL. It may well become a very capable platform, but that is still a long way off. The Royal Navy is in an even worse state, since they are building two new carriers and will have nothing but US fighters to fly from them. They retired all of their Harriers to pay for the F-35, and the F-35 is still years away.

As others have said, the F-22 is an air superiority fighter. That means it wins and holds the airspace above the battle by knocking all the other planes out of the sky. It was built to replace the F-15, which was possibly the greatest air superiority fighter ever made (at least so far; the next greatest AS fighter will probably be a robot). But they’re getting old. The F-22 is a very worthy successor (once they got the bugs out of it), but we simply don’t have enough of them. Less than 200, when we had planned to build 750 or more. The F-35 is more of a jack of all trades, but I fear it will be a master of none. It’s supposed to be able to bomb the enemy with the precision of the A-10, but it is too fast and doesn’t have the loiter time. It’s supposed to be a fighter, but it can’t match the F-22, and the AF has admitted that it needs the F-22 to protect the F-35 or the F-35 won’t be viable. It seems to me that the US has built a Swiss army knife, when what they really need is a dedicated cutting blade and a dedicated wrench. Sure, that means two or more different planes, but each one could be built to do a specific job and do it very well. That’s why the F-22 excels. It does its one job very well. What the Navy should have done (IMO) is get something similar to the F-22, then replace the A-6 with a dedicated attack jet. They tried with the Avenger II, but it was stealth, flying wing, all that, and it got too expensive so they canceled it.

ttyymmnn > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras 04/22/2016 at 10:06

1

The Navy’s not much better off. They’re flying the wings off of their Hornets, with nothing on the horizon to replace them. The US could be in a real pickle in about 10 years, because China isn’t going to stop work on their 5th gen stuff, and I’m not sure the F-35C will be a match for it.

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > ttyymmnn 04/22/2016 at 10:13

1

The Navy still had a hard on for the LCS program and their need for x amount of hulls..wonderful use of tax dollars all around

Dru > ttyymmnn 04/22/2016 at 10:17

0

Is it true that they still don’t have any true successor to the A-10?

ttyymmnn > Dru 04/22/2016 at 10:29

0

True successor? No. The F-35 is supposed to be filling that role in the future. After the F-35, it will likely be drones. Skynet, here we come.

ttyymmnn > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras 04/22/2016 at 10:31

1

History will show that, at least since WWII, the primary mission of the Navy has been to get airplanes somewhere. That mission will not change, even when the pilots are gone and the carriers are covered with UCAVs. And then we’ll have a fleet of autonomous missile ships.

plak424 > 66671 - 200 [METRIC] my dash 04/22/2016 at 14:01

0

Not last gen, the F22 is a 5th gen fighter as is the F35. F22 is air superiority and the F35 is a fighter/bomber, not meant to be used as air superiority.

66671 - 200 [METRIC] my dash > plak424 04/22/2016 at 15:03

0

Oh ok, I’m no expert on planes (obviously).

Herr Quattro - Has a 4-Motion > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras 04/22/2016 at 16:17

0

But restarting the F22 line could take away money from the already troubled F-35.

And, the F22 would desperately need some software upgrades. Last time I checked, it couldn’t handle JDAMs (Or maybe it was the AIM-120D?)

Finally, the F22 would probably get the F35s helmet display, because nothing but most expensive...

Besides, knowing the AF, if they tried to restart the F-22, they’d try to jam as much 2016 tech into a 2000 body.

(Remember, it was designed in 96)