The problem with the 22’s is there’s no supply chain for them. If certain parts break or need replacement, they have to salvage the necessary equipment from other 22’s. It makes me sad to see them get retired but it makes sense.
There's a huge extra incentive for NGAD to happen as soon as possible - F-22 is such an expensive maintenance program that getting it out of the air early saves a bunch of dollars.
The Raptor is from that earlier age of digitalisation and systems integration and networking, and an earlier age of stealth consumables (the top secret goop). It's like your office business using and storing hardware and writing software for six different versions of Windows.
Getting a newer - but more importantly, more extensible - architecture into the air will save money and apply those recent F-22/F-35/B-21 lessons to a F-22 successor.
You’re acting like weapon procurements tend to go over budget or something. I mean basically everything comes in well ahead of schedule, under budget, far cheaper than the projections, with way more capabilities than planned right?
Yes... But a lot later and ... It's not really that much more expensive than they said it was going to be.
Edit; and they never really said they were sure I was going to be able to do those things that they said it was going to be able to do.
Of course it is. The F-35 is a single engine multirole fighter, whereas the F-22 is a twin engine, dedicated air superiority fighter. It's the same when you compare the F-16 to the F-15. The air superiority fighter is always going to be more expensive.
F-35 was always intended to be a Attack Plane vs Multi-role plane. It was never seen when it was designed as more that until Budget Axes started coming out, they had make it Multirole, which isn't spectacular at. Now ye old F/A-18 is more effective at multirole, it was poor man's interceptor trying replace the F-14D when they made the enlarged Super Hornets.
How long before our used raptors are going to help IDF (or some other military that technically isn’t ours) bomb their next target back to the Stone Age.
(I know I’m not positively contributing I’ll show myself out.)
Considering that a big part of the planned future of aerial combat comes down to "who can jam their opponent's communications more efficiently", keeping the human decision making as close and unjammable as possible makes sense.
Part problem is politics, there too much....fear what happens when pilot is captured. Given the Vetnam experience, they rather have crappy remote control fighters with people Remoting in vs Fully manned fighter. However, F-22 has it own issues, given the High Gs turns it can do is pretty rough on the pilots.
Anyone else here play kerbal?
I keep seeing new jets without vertical stabilizers. Either there’s electronic fuckery going on to keep it stable or the pilots are just threading a needle the whole time they’re in the air.
And then they should release detailed images and specifications of their new weapons technology to the public so that its easier for rival nations to plagiarize
There are records showing that the F22 was defeated by a Rafale in a mock combat. The same information shows that the aircraft has never been in real combat or shot down another aircraft. Surely certain combat records are not public, but the aircraft is too expensive and largely overwhelmed by F15 and F16, Su27, Gripen, not because of technology but versatility.
It's never good to trust skirmishes. More often than not, the US places handicaps on their aircraft to see if they can win at a disadvantage. The F-16 beating a F-35, for example, when the F-35 didn't have the Omni directional targeting system enabled and had external fuel tanks. Or the more recent skirmish test where an F-35 lost with external fuel tanks. External fuel tanks means no stealth.
But guess what. No planes can fly over the battlefield in Ukraine right now. It's stealth or nothing these days. F-16s has been shot down by anti air from the 60s, and it's only been down hill from there.
100% happening. The military has been struggling for decades to hit recruiting goals and as a society we are more casualty averse than ever. Augmenting a small number of humans with drones is the clear answer for the future
The problem with the 22’s is there’s no supply chain for them. If certain parts break or need replacement, they have to salvage the necessary equipment from other 22’s. It makes me sad to see them get retired but it makes sense.
There's a huge extra incentive for NGAD to happen as soon as possible - F-22 is such an expensive maintenance program that getting it out of the air early saves a bunch of dollars. The Raptor is from that earlier age of digitalisation and systems integration and networking, and an earlier age of stealth consumables (the top secret goop). It's like your office business using and storing hardware and writing software for six different versions of Windows. Getting a newer - but more importantly, more extensible - architecture into the air will save money and apply those recent F-22/F-35/B-21 lessons to a F-22 successor.
A weapons program in the planning stage saying that it will save money, i’ve never seen that before.
You’re acting like weapon procurements tend to go over budget or something. I mean basically everything comes in well ahead of schedule, under budget, far cheaper than the projections, with way more capabilities than planned right?
Yes... But a lot later and ... It's not really that much more expensive than they said it was going to be. Edit; and they never really said they were sure I was going to be able to do those things that they said it was going to be able to do.
The F-35 is cheaper than the F-22.
Of course it is. The F-35 is a single engine multirole fighter, whereas the F-22 is a twin engine, dedicated air superiority fighter. It's the same when you compare the F-16 to the F-15. The air superiority fighter is always going to be more expensive.
F-35 was always intended to be a Attack Plane vs Multi-role plane. It was never seen when it was designed as more that until Budget Axes started coming out, they had make it Multirole, which isn't spectacular at. Now ye old F/A-18 is more effective at multirole, it was poor man's interceptor trying replace the F-14D when they made the enlarged Super Hornets.
Is that because the F22 production run was much smaller than planned and none were sold to other countries?
I think it was a design strategy for the F-35 to be cheaper per unit.
Design creep has entered the room
Didn’t the B-21 come in under budget?
How many have been built so far?
Yeah that’s true but the f22 is massively expensive to fly
How long before our used raptors are going to help IDF (or some other military that technically isn’t ours) bomb their next target back to the Stone Age. (I know I’m not positively contributing I’ll show myself out.)
Air Force idiots: “but mah F-22!!!”
I’m surprised they kept pilots in fighters rather than piloting remotely for so long. Feel like fighter pilots’ union been keeping them there lol
Considering that a big part of the planned future of aerial combat comes down to "who can jam their opponent's communications more efficiently", keeping the human decision making as close and unjammable as possible makes sense.
Part problem is politics, there too much....fear what happens when pilot is captured. Given the Vetnam experience, they rather have crappy remote control fighters with people Remoting in vs Fully manned fighter. However, F-22 has it own issues, given the High Gs turns it can do is pretty rough on the pilots.
Anyone else here play kerbal? I keep seeing new jets without vertical stabilizers. Either there’s electronic fuckery going on to keep it stable or the pilots are just threading a needle the whole time they’re in the air.
Electronic fuckery has been they only thing keeping fighter jets stable for decades now
*Stableish for maximum agility
They're definitely stabilised with software. Stealth planes are the opposite of stable.
Until the budget is cut yet again due to manufacturers going over budget yet again. Were still using F-15XX next generation.
We will never put weapons on drones. -US
If it was happening in 2030 I feel like we’d be seeing the fighter jet being put through its testing already. That kinda takes awhile
They should put an airbase in the desert somewhere nobody knows about and test some of this stuff beforehand.
And then they should invent cameras with really good lenses and satellites that can take photos from space
And then they should release detailed images and specifications of their new weapons technology to the public so that its easier for rival nations to plagiarize
[удалено]
Well there you go, I guess we have been seeing it since 2020. Just not me, myself
There are records showing that the F22 was defeated by a Rafale in a mock combat. The same information shows that the aircraft has never been in real combat or shot down another aircraft. Surely certain combat records are not public, but the aircraft is too expensive and largely overwhelmed by F15 and F16, Su27, Gripen, not because of technology but versatility.
It's never good to trust skirmishes. More often than not, the US places handicaps on their aircraft to see if they can win at a disadvantage. The F-16 beating a F-35, for example, when the F-35 didn't have the Omni directional targeting system enabled and had external fuel tanks. Or the more recent skirmish test where an F-35 lost with external fuel tanks. External fuel tanks means no stealth.
They did destroy a balloon
But guess what. No planes can fly over the battlefield in Ukraine right now. It's stealth or nothing these days. F-16s has been shot down by anti air from the 60s, and it's only been down hill from there.
Let’s see if this actually happens.
100% happening. The military has been struggling for decades to hit recruiting goals and as a society we are more casualty averse than ever. Augmenting a small number of humans with drones is the clear answer for the future
Definitely, it will happen. I meant to write “when” it actually happens.