The Real Reason The Navy Doesn't Use The F-22 Raptor

[NVSMITH]

-In case you've been wondering, read this highly technical article from the Hotcars website:
The Real Reason The Navy Doesn't Use The F-22 Raptor
-Short answer is that while they are used by the US Army they would need F-14 Tomcat wings to operate from carriers. 'nuff said.

 

[cvairwerks]

Written by someone that has no clue about naval aircraft design......

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

They're not used by the US Army. Maybe disable your spell-check?

But yes, slow-speed handling isn't sufficient for carrier ops, from what I've read.

 

[rochie]

oh boy !

 

[GrauGeist]

Oh, and it's "too heavy to land on a carrier", too...

Dumbass should stick to writing about cars, FFS.

 

[RogerdeLluria]

That explains why F-18 and F-35 have swing wings ....

 

[ThomasP]

Northrop-Grumman F-14 replacement


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu-MpTfTzyk&t=4s

D/POC (Demonstrator/Proof of Concept) prototype currently flying in air-space near you . . .

 

[GTX]

Northrop-Grumman F-14 replacement



D/POC (Demonstrator/Proof of Concept) prototype currently flying in air-space near you . . .

Really?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Oh boy…

 

[Admiral Beez]

I figured the obvious reason was that LM stopped making them. If the USAF had the original allotment of 750 aircraft there may have been cost efficiencies to enable the necessary mods for naval ops. As it is, the Air Force has more old-tech F-15C/D than its planned F-22 replacement. If you include the F-15E, the USAF has more than 2.5X as many Eagles. I expect by the time the F-22 retires in/around 2030 the F-15 will still be in USAF service.

 

[cvairwerks]

Don't count on the USAF retiring the F-22 in 2030. They just dropped a ton of money and time to put airframe #147 back in to the air, after it suffered major structural damage during an accident at Nellis in 2018.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Don't count on the USAF retiring the F-22 in 2030. They just dropped a ton of money and time to put airframe #147 back in to the air, after it suffered major structural damage during an accident at Nellis in 2018.

My bad, I meant 2030s.

 

[machine shop tom]

Who wants to tell Pranav Unnkrishnan that the US Navy retired the Tomcat YEARS ago and that that US Army does not operate aircraft carriers?

 

[GrauGeist]

So according to the author, the F-111 and B-1 should be carrier capable because they have "swing wing" designs...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I could add so much to this, but can't… lol

 

[machine shop tom]

I learned from this article that (apparently) aircraft land on aircraft carriers only in emergencies.

 

[Admiral Beez]

So according to the author, the F-111 and B-1 should be carrier capable because they have "swing wing" designs...

Wasn't the F-111 intended to be carrier capable?


View: https://av8rco.tumblr.com/post/151388589678/a-rare-shot-of-an-f-111-landing-on-a-carrier

 

[Admiral Beez]

I learned from this article that (apparently) aircraft land on aircraft carriers only in emergencies.

Well, skosh fuel and miles from land could be considered an emergency.

 

[machine shop tom]

Well, skosh fuel and miles from land could be considered an emergency.

True that. But the "expert" author seems to think EVERY carrier landing is an emergency.

 

[GrauGeist]

Wasn't the F-111 intended to be carrier capable?


View: https://av8rco.tumblr.com/post/151388589678/a-rare-shot-of-an-f-111-landing-on-a-carrier

The F-111B was intended to be a replacement for the F4-J, but I'm sure the American Army Air Force wouldn't have liked that!