[Dr House]

You realize we're still on track to acquire thousands of F-35s in 4 years right?

Which reminds me, do you have any idea why a great fighter like the F-22 is being capped and that piece of shit is not? The only redeeming feature of the F-35 (compared to the Raptor anyway) is STOVL, which isn't really all that useful anyway.

[Typhoon]

Capping the F-22 was a sensible decision, its role as the king of air superiority is defunct with the end of the cold war, there's really no need for large quantities of F-22's either today or over the next few decades, at least not before a successor is in place. Despite being dogged with criticism when you compare the F-22 and F-35, the latter really does come out on top in terms of meeting the US near and long term defence requirements.

The future wars that America will fight will most likely involve the US facing off against the Iraq's and Afghanistan's of tomorrow rather than the China's or Russia's. While the F-22 has been pushed to accept a limited air to ground role it is a poor substitute for a platform that the F-35 could be. Even in air combat the F-35 has better prospects than the F-22 since it comes with IRST, a vital piece of 5th generation equipment the radar orientated F-22 lacks, keeping the F-22 competitive would require further spending and could compromise the aircraft as the PAK-FA's of the future come into service.

The danger now is if the the F-35 becomes an F-22, which ended up draining vital funding from the USAF and impacting on other programs. Already the press, customers and auditors are making unpleasant noises about the program, which has been inefficient, plagued with delays and growing in cost. The cost increases themselves causing purchase delays and rumours of revisions in purchase number for customers to which the recession does not help! Ideally a shake up of the F-35 program will smooth it out and the fighter itself will come out over its detractors, if not then the US and Europe could end up losing valuable ground to the 5th generation programs initiated by Russia and China.

[Piano Red]

Falx

How long does it take to build a battle ship? 3-10 years?

How long does it take to build an airplane once a conveyor belt has started? 20 days?

How long will it take for you to get the point of that statement?

Dr House

Which reminds me, do you have any idea why a great fighter like the F-22 is being capped and that piece of shit is not? The only redeeming feature of the F-35 (compared to the Raptor anyway) is STOVL, which isn't really all that useful anyway.

The F-35 has alot more in terms of redeemable features than just STOVL. But they're too many to mention adequately here.

The F-35 is mostly being continued in that there are a number of other nations reliant on its continued development.

Typhoon

Capping the F-22 was a sensible decision, its role as the king of air superiority is defunct with the end of the cold war

An incredibly short-sighted statement considering the potential for future conflicts.

To say the least of the assets outside of air superiority that the F-22 has.

there's really no need for large quantities of F-22's either today or over the next few decades

Perhaps not now. Hence why I can agree with the decision.

But if the F-15C fleet is ever to be adequately replaced than more F-22s will need to be built.

The future wars that America will fight will most likely involve the US facing off against the Iraq's and Afghanistan's of tomorrow rather than the China's or Russia's.

Speculation. No one can really predict the kinds of conflicts that might be waged 20-30 years down the road accurately.

While the F-22 has been pushed to accept a limited air to ground role it is a poor substitute for a platform that the F-35 could be. Even in air combat the F-35 has better prospects than the F-22 since it comes with IRST, a vital piece of 5th generation equipment

The F-22 has other assets outside of A to A than just its A to G capability.

Also, IRST isn't a 5th Gen technology, its been around since the 80s, and it was forgone on the F-22 because there was no need for it.

keeping the F-22 competitive would require further spending and could compromise the aircraft as the PAK-FA's of the future come into service.

I fail to see how.

Ideally a shake up of the F-35 program will smooth it out and the fighter itself will come out over its detractors, if not then the US and Europe could end up losing valuable ground to the 5th generation programs initiated by Russia and China.

Considering that both the US and Europe will both be fielding 5th Gen aircraft in service long before Russia (to say the least of China) gets its own off the ground, there not anywhere near close to losing the gap in advancement they've enjoyed for quite some time.

[Falx]

How long will it take for you to get the point of that statement?

It has none since the R&D was already done for this plane.

[Typhoon]

Trying to predict future US confrontations is speculation, but we can make some educated guesses. All the potential hostile major powers are in no position to go on the offensive and Europe is likely to remain a close ally of the US over this period. No power is going to overcome the effect of the nuclear deterrents over the next few decades either. This leaves the US facing less developed countries like Iran or being sucked into the third world (Somalia) and war on terror (Afghanistan/Central Asia) type conflicts.
The F-22 unlike the F-35 just doesnt fit well into these kinds of conflict, as a result the F-35 will provide the bulk of future US aircraft, in a way it could be considered that the F-15 fleet has already recieved its successor.

Also, IRST isn't a 5th Gen technology, its been around since the 80s, and it was forgone on the F-22 because there was no need for it.

IRST may not nessasarily be 5th generation technology but it is a vital piece of 5th generation equipment. When the PAK-FA or equivilent comes into service we could well see a point where IRST will be able to detect aircraft before radar. Since the stealth aspects employed by 5th generation aircraft work best for the centimeter wavelength used by aircraft. The F-22 relies on an active target to allow passive detection, in a passive-passive situation then F-22 could well be blind to the enemy and detected first, the F-35's optical system allows it to overcome this problem.
The IRST in the F-22 was cut to reduce cost as at the time it was deemed unessasary, that was the past however and it has left the F-22 with a big flaw. The F-22 will require further modification in the future to keep it competitive in air combat, which is an additional cost. Intregration of the sensor as a pod or by modifying the nose could also compromise the stealth features of the aircraft.

Considering that both the US and Europe will both be fielding 5th Gen aircraft in service long before Russia (to say the least of China) gets its own off the ground, there not anywhere near close to losing the gap in advancement they've enjoyed for quite some time.

If the PAK-FA gets off the ground this year it will be a very small gap, the bigger problem though is not timing but substance, the US and Europe may field the F-35 sooner but if the aircraft turns out to be a lame duck then early deployment is not going to count for much in the long run. The F-35/PAK-FA could end up being a repeat of the F-15/Su-27 problem, the Su got off the ground later but it is a superior aircraft design.

[War Angel]

I honestly don't see why the USA would even need so many stealth air-superiority aircraft to begin with. Yes, the F-22 naturally kicks arse... but at 200 million a pop, it's hardly cost-effective. I think even 200 units is too much, so capping it at that is really sensible, in my opinion.

I'd personally like to see a lot more funding to ground units. How about more durable and effective tanks? Better body protection for soldiers? Better fighting equipment and weapons? For the price of just a handful of F-22s, you can do so much...

The F-22 is mostly a political and economical thing. It has more to do with economical and political pressure, than national security, and that's a sad thing. The USA is already light-years ahead in terms of conventional technology, ahead of any other nation on Earth, and it's the only one capable of producing aircraft like these (even if other nations can acquire them). The Chinese and Russians aren't even close to something like this, but still stand a chance in conventional war, because other segments of the American military have been neglected.

F-22 are designed to kill other fighters, not hold ground, not press wounds, not effectively defend soldiers in tight spots. Where are the better attack helicopters, or advanced tanks?

[NYYS]

To answer your last question the Comanche got scrapped and the Mounted Combat System part of the FCS program has some pictures floating around, although I think there was talk of a reduction in funding for that.

[Igor Antunov]

and it's the only one capable of producing aircraft like these (even if other nations can acquire them). The Chinese and Russians aren't even close to something like this,

That's a complete opinion piece and not representative of reality.

The russian PAK-FA is just as advanced (and expensive) as the F-22. Technologically russia is not way behind, she just can't afford these cost-ineffective toys.

[Typhoon]

Where are the better attack helicopters, or advanced tanks?

The budget will include an increase in spending surrounding intelligence, surveilance and recon (more UAV) as well as increasing the number of helicopters avaliable in afghanistan, which will be welcomed be the forces there in conjunction with the increase in troops. I think the Apache and Cobra have proven themselves in afghanistan, rather it is a case of more of them and better intelligence to support the activity they do. The M1 isnt really appropriate in the kinds of enviroment that the US finds itself, Iraq and Afghanistan being an example of why the BMPT got produced by Russia and there is perhaps a requirment for somthing like that...although its been taken up by India in still not sure that active protection systems are worth the cost, the next big upgrade for tanks perhaps.

The Chinese and Russians aren't even close to something like this,...
The russian PAK-FA is just as advanced

Well we will hopefully see how close at MAKS 2009!

[NYYS]

That's a complete opinion piece and not representative of reality.

The russian PAK-FA is just as advanced (and expensive) as the F-22. Technologically russia is not way behind

lol, you have no way of knowing this. The rumors floating around are that it will be similarly designed as the Raptor, but you're just making shit up saying it's definitely "just as advanced." I wouldn't be surprised if it is, but let's go easy on the woohoo russia talk until it's been verified by anyone, ever.

[Falx]

Who cares if it is as advanced? As long as it fulfils the role it was designed to it doesn't matter if it was build with bamboo that is held together by chewing gum. Also the USSR had a preference for "tried and tested" technology during the cold war, it might even be the case now that they don't use absolute latest and instead go for something that just does the job.

[War Angel]

To answer your last question the Comanche got scrapped and the Mounted Combat System part of the FCS program has some pictures floating around, although I think there was talk of a reduction in funding for that.

So, nothing yet. :-\

The russian PAK-FA is just as advanced (and expensive) as the F-22. Technologically russia is not way behind, she just can't afford these cost-ineffective toys.

The F-22 is a fully operational piece of equipment. This aircraft is still mostly fiction.

The M1 isnt really appropriate in the kinds of enviroment that the US finds itself

I disagree. A well-protected tank is essential in many situations, even urban combat.

[Igor Antunov]

The F-22 is a fully operational piece of equipment. This aircraft is still mostly fiction.

One prototype has been built, tested and flown. Final design will fly in August of 2009. It's reality. Outright dismissing it won't make it go away.

[War Angel]

One prototype has been built, tested and flown. Final design will fly in August of 2009. It's reality. Outright dismissing it won't make it go away.

I couldn't find ONE non-CGI (real-life) picture of this aircraft. You'll have to excuse me if I'm doubtful of Russian claims to technological glory - they've never really spear-headed this front and usually make outrageous claims, which their online fan-boys gladly endorse. The Russians are very good at making rough, rugged and moderately effective weapons and hardware - but not advanced. The AK-47, Sukhoi-27 and MiG-29 aren't very technologically advanced, but for their price, they're among the very best. Russia will remain the main weapon supplier for the Third\Second World, I believe.

But a real contender to the American technological throne in the upcoming 2-3 decades? Unlikely.

[Igor Antunov]

But a real contender to the American technological throne in the upcoming 2-3 decades? Unlikely.

Spare me. The russians don't play with cost-innefective hardware because they can't afford it, not because they don't know how to put complex hardware together. They are the nintendo of the military world. Take proven existing technology and make a functional easy to maintain design, that doesn't try to sell itself on the amount of new features it sports, but on it's reliability and cost-effectiveness. This is how they dominate the arms export market, just like how nintendo dominates the handheld and home console markets. It's not about shiny new technologies it's about doing new things with existing technologies.

[War Angel]

Spare me. The russians don't play with cost-innefective hardware because they can't afford it, not because they don't know how to put complex hardware together. They are the nintendo of the military world. Take proven existing technology and make a functional easy to maintain design, that doesn't try to sell itself on the amount of new features it sports, but on it's reliability and cost-effectiveness. This is how they dominate the arms export market, just like how nintendo dominates the handheld and home console markets. It's not about shiny new technologies it's about doing new things with existing technologies.

... which is exactly what I've said, using more words.

Still, they are no-where near a working, operating piece, and even farther away from a full production line of these aircraft. I've no doubt that some day they'll have stealthy, 5-6th generation aircraft... but not now, and not anytime soon either, I'd wager. When they do, the aircraft they'll produce will be cheaper, more cost-effective, less advanced and probably more reliable and easier to maintain.

[Typhoon]

A well-protected tank is essential in many situations, even urban combat.

Its true that tanks can be useful in urban combat, but I wouldnt say they were essential. They generally have to be "urbanized" before they are really capable of performing in the urban arena, hence TUSK for the M1 and why the Merk is unconventional. Even then you have to question if the armament on a tank is appropriate for the urban enviroment.

The Russians are very good at making rough, rugged and moderately effective weapons and hardware - but not advanced.

This is nothing more than stereotype. In addition to the low cost, rugged 'Kalashnikov' designs we are all familiar with, Russian industry maintains a strong base in military high technology.
Contrary to belief the Su-27 is a very advanced aircraft, it was the MiG-29 that was the low cost, mass produced and rugged alternative. The Su-27 was the culmination of over 10,000 hours of aerodynamic testing and implimented a lot of innovative features, which is why it outperformed any of the other major fighters of the time, until the F-22 arrived.

The PAK-FA should fly by the end of this year with the first aircraft being constructed by KNAAPO now. No imagary exists because the aircraft doesnt exist yet and its top-secret. The only design we have are graphics released by NPO Saturn to demonstrate its next generation engine, though we dont know if the graphic in any way resembles the final product. Though there are a lot of interesting pointers as to what the PAK-FA will resemble in terms of technology and design.

[War Angel]

Its true that tanks can be useful in urban combat, but I wouldnt say they were essential. They generally have to be "urbanized" before they are really capable of performing in the urban arena, hence TUSK for the M1 and why the Merk is unconventional. Even then you have to question if the armament on a tank is appropriate for the urban enviroment.

Of-coure. The Merkava 4 is a very good example, and I was so happy for it during the Second Lebanon War, and so very concerned for the well-being of the poor sods in the Mk.IIs... The Mk.IV has proven itself, and I imagine other tanks of its kind can do the same. The armament... well, mortars, smoke, inside-operated MGs.. y'know. It's not even so much an offensive tool, as a defensive one. It attracts fire, etc.

This is nothing more than stereotype. In addition to the low cost, rugged 'Kalashnikov' designs we are all familiar with, Russian industry maintains a strong base in military high technology.
Contrary to belief the Su-27 is a very advanced aircraft, it was the MiG-29 that was the low cost, mass produced and rugged alternative. The Su-27 was the culmination of over 10,000 hours of aerodynamic testing and implimented a lot of innovative features, which is why it outperformed any of the other major fighters of the time, until the F-22 arrived.

I'm not too familiar with these aircraft, but I don't imagine their avionics are as sophisticated as late 4th Gen. American aircraft. Aerodynamic... the Su-27 is a serious MoFo, truly. I'd take it and fit it with Israeli avionics... YUM YUM YUM.

No imagary exists because the aircraft doesnt exist yet and its top-secret.

Oh, come on. Due to FLY in less than a year, and still NO REAL IMAGES?

I'd be thrilled to see a Russian-made, 5th generation fighter, and see how it competes with the F-22 and F-35. But I'm a bit concerned that this is nothing more than the same old Russian wank-fest, like most of the supra-secret-extra-sophisticated-mega-powerful technological advances as of late. They lack the funding and stability mostly, I think... but maybe now that they're a dictatorship again, this will change.

[Igor Antunov]

but I don't imagine their avionics are as sophisticated as late 4th Gen. American aircraft.

Historically they often went with simpler avionics to keep costs down, and for ease of maintenance and replacement parts, as well as for proofing against magnetic pulse weapons and various forms of radiation, not because they were a few technologies behind, this isn't age of empires or the civilisation series.

[War Angel]

Historically they often went with simpler avionics to keep costs down, and for ease of maintenance and replacement parts, as well as for proofing against magnetic pulse weapons and various forms of radiation, not because they were a few technologies behind, this isn't age of empires or the civilisation series.

I don't know why they do it, but they do. And sophisticated avionics ARE hard to develop. They're often very well-kept secrets. If the Russians do not value them, they wouldn't bother much with developing them either, I'd imagine.