| The F-22 Fighter Plane (Which started life as | | | | |
| the Advanced Tactical Fighter {ATF} and later | | | | Being on the cutting edge of military |
| became the Air Dominance Fighter {ADF}) and | | | | advancement doesn't come cheap or easy. But |
| the Typhoon were programs started in the | | | | the most powerful country in the world is |
| early 80's. The F-22 is intended to replace | | | | ALWAYS the country with the most powerful |
| the F-15C/D While the Euro fighter plane is | | | | military. You can't very well impose your |
| intended to replace a whole plethora of | | | | will if you... can't impose your will. |
| aircraft. | | | | |
| | | | Our military isn't just judged based upon its |
| The JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) is a | | | | ability to fight those we will likely have to |
| replacement for aircraft types such as the | | | | in the near future. But, everything out |
| Harrier (VSTOL variant slated for the USMC; | | | | there. including our own weapons. |
| Britain), the F-16 (CTOL Variant for the | | | | |
| USAF) and the F/A-18C/D (Naval Variant for | | | | A lot of Russian/European Fighter planes are |
| the USN). | | | | at par or has exceeded the F-15E's |
| | | | capability. This puts the US at a |
| While the Jury is still out on the JSF (As | | | | disadvantage. Besides, F-15 will be at least |
| far as I am concerned) I think the F-22 has | | | | 25+ years old. For a military that's taking |
| turned into one of those "Projects that won't | | | | the fight into the OPFOR's own backyard, the |
| die" like the M2/M3 Bradley. The US | | | | US has to dominate its battle space. And that |
| Government has spent so much money on it that | | | | means having an Air Superiority to operate |
| they can't afford to buy it. | | | | with impunity. |
| | | | |
| Do we need it? That question is already moot. | | | | Sure, it's expensive. But whoever said that |
| We are getting it whether we "need" it or | | | | Air Superiority was cheap? If you looked back |
| not. I think, however, that the F-22 may be | | | | into the 70s when the F-15 was still in its |
| the last manned fighter to be deployed. The | | | | R&D phases lawmakers said the same damn |
| focus will, IMHO, switch to highly capable | | | | thing: "that plane's too expensive!" And now, |
| UCAVs... | | | | we got hundreds of them. |
| | | | |
| From a military perspective, yes. What will | | | | The F-22 may be the single biggest waste of |
| stop these European countries from selling | | | | money since the B-1. Large, heavy, bad E-M |
| this aircraft to any country that wants it? | | | | (energy-maneuverability) ratings it simple is |
| What will stop members of the design team | | | | not a good air plane. Instead of being based |
| from selling plans to other countries? It is | | | | on the E-M theory like the F-15 and 16 were |
| possible that our aircraft will infact have | | | | it has instead reverted back to the |
| to fly against the euro fighter. | | | | bigger-higher-faster doctrine. It simply puts |
| | | | to many gizmos into a plan that doesn't need |
| Keep in mind, there was a time when Iraq was | | | | it. The E-M theory proved that the lighter |
| our ally (of sorts). Just because someone is | | | | the plane the better it will be able to |
| my ally today does not mean they will be | | | | maneuver, the F-22 is one of the heaviest |
| tomorrow. If I'm putting you in a hunk of | | | | planes designed. |
| metal that for all intents and purposes is | | | | |
| one large explosive. That you will have to | | | | It also has far surpassed its budget and its |
| fly faster than the speed of sound while | | | | cost per plane is simply unacceptable. By the |
| being fired at.... call me crazy, but I think | | | | time the air force has enough money to |
| you would like to be sitting in the most | | | | replace its fleet with these flying boxes |
| technologically advanced thing you could get | | | | they will be long obsolete. |
| your hands on. | | | | |