Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
there are some words being exchanged about the B-2 going away before the B-1 and the reason nobody has truly attacked the mainland US with military craft since WWII is because of our extraordinary air force and carrier fleets to protect us and the F-22 is part of that system
I don't know where you're getting that from but I seriously doubt it. The B-2 fleet still has way more life hours left on it than the B1 fleet. Additionally the cost to operate the B-2 is less than the B-1. If anything the B-52 will go first.there are some words being exchanged about the B-2 going away before the B-1
The reason why the USAF wants an aircraft like the F-22 is to maintain a total air superiority fighter force that will actually be smaller and easier to maintain and have longer longevity than the current F-15 fleet. Right now the "big mission" in the US are areas like you stated (border control, CIA time, whatever needs to be done to stop terrorists from striking the US again) but those items could be easily covered with way less sophisticated equipment on the short term. The world is very dynamic, 20 years ago the requirement for the F-22 was priority, 20 years from now that requirement could be back in place. I rather see it paid for now than wished for later.Very true, but the last attack on US soil, and probably the next one too, were made by means that an F-22 could do nothing to stop... why spend the money on weapons that do not fit the war you are fighting? The money spent on a single F-22 airframe would buy an incredible amount of border control, CIA time, whatever needs to be done to stop terrorists from striking the US again. It wouldn't look as sexy or an intimidating as a Raptor, but it would probably save many more lives.
Those in the USAF will always want state of the the art and will settle for nothing less - I hate to say it, they want their cake and eat it too!FlyboyJ, I see your point about replacing F-15, and understand the need for the USAF to have air superiority capability. I think the key issue in these most recent cuts is how much capability the USAF needs vs. how much capability the govt. is willing to pay for. As ever, the political paycheck will be smaller than the generals want, although in this case I can see good reason for that course of action
While and ABL is an effective weapons system, in the end there will be a need for advanced fighter and strike aircraft. An effective ABL is still several years off even if its fully funded.Will ABL stop guys hijacking airliners? Nope And neither will F-22 or any other airplane.
Will it stop terrorists detonating nukes hidden in suitcases/trucks/etc? Nope B]And neither will F-22 or any other airplane. Ditto
Will it stop insurgents planting IEDs and killing NATO troops in Baghdad/Basra/Helmand? Nope B]And neither will F-22 or any other airplane. Ditto
Will it stop Iran/N. Korea developing nuclear weapons? Nope BUT it can provide cover for Israel and Japan from the delivery systems of those weapons
Will it p*ss Moscow off even more than ABMs already have and re-ignite the Cold War arms race, consuming billions of tax dollars in the process? You betcha And just how is Moscow going to counter this without spending its own tax dollars...and I recall the last time Moscow went into a money pissing contest with the West...bankruptcy city!
Will ABL stop guys hijacking airliners? Nope And neither will F-22 or any other airplane.
Will it stop terrorists detonating nukes hidden in suitcases/trucks/etc? Nope B]And neither will F-22 or any other airplane. Ditto
Will it stop insurgents planting IEDs and killing NATO troops in Baghdad/Basra/Helmand? Nope B]And neither will F-22 or any other airplane. Ditto
Will it stop Iran/N. Korea developing nuclear weapons? Nope BUT it can provide cover for Israel and Japan from the delivery systems of those weapons
Will it p*ss Moscow off even more than ABMs already have and re-ignite the Cold War arms race, consuming billions of tax dollars in the process? You betcha And just how is Moscow going to counter this without spending its own tax dollars...and I recall the last time Moscow went into a money pissing contest with the West...bankruptcy city!
Russia has felt less relative effect from the global downturn than the US .
Very true, but the last attack on US soil, and probably the next one too, were made by means that an F-22 could do nothing to stop... why spend the money on weapons that do not fit the war you are fighting? The money spent on a single F-22 airframe would buy an incredible amount of border control, CIA time, whatever needs to be done to stop terrorists from striking the US again. It wouldn't look as sexy or an intimidating as a Raptor, but it would probably save many more lives.
The F-22 is all about China in 2020 - not asymetrical warfare - we need a force multiplier to replace the F-15/F-18/F-16 force at that time.
The situation is much the same here with our new aircraft carriers - I can't imagine what use they're going to be in the future, but we could have used that money to combat the radicalisation of young Muslims, or even to give our Army in Afghanistan more of the tools they need to do their job. I think many countries, with the terrorist threat on one hand and the economic downturn on the other, will start cutting funds for high-tech, high-unit-cost systems that don't answer the needs of the situation at hand.
Last I heard they wanted to keep the B-52 through 2040.I don't know where you're getting that from but I seriously doubt it. The B-2 fleet still has way more life hours left on it than the B1 fleet. Additionally the cost to operate the B-2 is less than the B-1. If anything the B-52 will go first.
Wishful thinking if the AF want to keep the F-22 and F-35 alive.Last I heard they wanted to keep the B-52 through 2040.