The F-35 is operational!

Bob- I understand Pearl Harbor and its causes very well. The main point is, we do not want our guys fighting with inferior equipment. I also know about the T-34 tank, too, and the fact all the loaders were very short and left handed. Bit different training a crew, even ones that had never driven before, how to operate a tank and how to operate a modern fighter aircraft.

Right now we do not really have the technology to do remote operations like the ones you mention, especially in a high threat environment with electronic warfare. The RPAs we have now are more or less straight and level sensor and weapons delivery platforms operating mostly in a 2D, benign environment, not high g platforms working in a 3D environment with heavy jamming and other electronic measures. Maybe in the future, but not now. It is possible our 6th generation fighters will have the capability to operate manned or unmanned. It is possible the B-21 will have that capability. Look at the X-47 for a look in that direction. X-47 has successfully aerial refueled, so a big step in that direction.

The escort or jeep carriers of WW-II made up about 80% of all carriers built in WW-II. Most were built on transport hulls. They were too slow to keep up with fleet operations, too small for extensive air campaigns, and very vulnerable to enemy fire with very limited self-protection capability and sustained heavy loss of life when engaged. They were handy to have around for submarine warfare, escort of convoys, and resupplying fleet carriers and shore installations. Hard to find a similar role in the aircraft world, except maybe the arsenal aircraft. We looked at the bunch of cheap fighters theory multiple times, and they always took unsustainable losses. So no F-20s were ever bought.

The facts are our fighter aircraft fleet is aging out and we need replacements. Buying fourth generation aircraft that cost almost as much or more is not an answer. For the foreseeable future, the F-35 is the only answer. Especially since the major piece of the RDT&E has already been spent and the aircraft is combat ready.

 

EXTREMELY well put. Seriously... bravo.

Also, thank you for your service!

When people complain about the cost of the plains they don't understand how flawed the math is.

I also believe your reference to Pearl is a good example not in the literal sense... but a great example.

Pearl as someone else stated was largely an intelligence failure/failure to act.

People have stated that the f22 was too advanced and built for an enemy that doesnt exist and a combat roll that doesn't exist any longer.

Well what crystal ball are they using? Id like to buy it for some lottery tickets.

The point is to always be ready. We can't develop new aircraft and build them in 6 months like we did in World War II. We have to be prepared. The f22 was and is an awesome platform.

To see one do an air demonstration is unbelievable.

We have the F35s at Luke, and my building is at the Scottsdale airpark.... for somereason we had 2 or maybe 4 F35s rip ass out of here on monday.

Ive seen them fly at luke and they are incredibly loud... When they took off in scottsdale the noise shook the **** out of my building. Seriously one of the loudest things I have ever heard and I while not a pilot, have flown right seat, and am an aviation enthusiast... my mom was a teacher on Williams AFB when it existed... I mean I have been around this stuff my whole life...

You won't find anyone more pro military and more excited about military aircraft than me...

BUT...

THOSE F35s are FREAKING LOUD. I have no idea why that was deemed acceptable... I know noise is not that important in combat... but holy **** the F22 is no where near as loud. Its loud... but not F35 loud

Have I mentioned how loud it is? LOL

 

I may be mistaken, but I think I read that it's no longer possible to put the F-22 back in production.

Really need more F-35's

 

T- It was not possible to put the B-1A back into production, but the much updated B-1B was produced. If we did an F-22B using the basic design, but updated with F-35 type coatings, engine technology, sensor suite, etc, it would be a world beater for decades. Just like the F-22A is now.

 

When was the B-1A ever in production?

 

I think was Taz was trying to say that by the time the B-1A was decided to be modified as a B-1B the tooling and fixtures as well as some of the systems were long gone. So Rockwell took the basic design made changes and upgraded the systems to make the B-1B. The same goes for the F-22A, I am sure that some of the systems are no longer available or to expensive to resume production that L-M would be simpler to upgrade to more modern hardware.

 

The B-1A never went into production, but Rockwell was ready to produce it. Reagan revived the B-1 program, but by then things had changed and a non-stealthy, mach 2.5 heavy bomber did not make any sense. So the decision was made not to put the B-1A into production, but build a heavier max TOW, stealthier version without the variable inlets of the B-1A.

Back was not the correct word.

 

AFM claims the small subcontractors who supplied a number of parts for the F-22 have already closed up. LM purchasing agents would need to put bids together and niche companies would have to bid for new contracts and hire skilled workers. This process will take time.

 

Yup, would take some time, just like the B-1B took some time. We would not necessarily want all the same subcontractors a second time around. Still possible if someone really, really wanted to do it.