F-22 Raptor Thread


kwaigonegin

Colonel
You are right. The original conversation wasn't about the risk to Kadena because of the forward presence of F-22's. It is about the notion that the Kadena being a prime target will likely be made inoperable for a defined period. How long this period will be is obviously highly subjective but it is recognised that the risk of closure will be higher as China's inventory of ballistics and cruise missile increases over time.

View attachment 28887

The scenario premised by the RAND study is that while the Kadena base is made inoperable, the USAF (including F-22's) will have to fight their way in relying on tanker support because of distance. Therefore it becomes an issue of logistics and a numbers game.

View attachment 28888
View attachment 28889


I agree that once the risk to the airbases and the corresponding air assets (including F-22's) are deemed acceptable then the deployment will shift closer to the theater of operation. A Taiwan scenario however assumes that during the initial window, the Kadena airbase will be made unavailable. The whole strategic discussion is about how long Taiwan can hold out before the US can resume air superiority over that airspace. If Taiwan is overwhelm before that can be established then it makes the whole exercise rather moot. China's A2AD is simply about extending that window to the degree that the strategic equation leans in China's favor. The battle is then won before it begins (at least on paper).


I agree it is a complex discussion but framed for simplicity. I have seen an analysis of the type of multi layered system required in the form of THAAD, Aegis and Patriots needed and it is significant. Unfortunately I have not been able to find that document to provide the data to this discussion.
The closure to Kadena is premised on many things including China willing to risk its entire (or majority) ballistic missile inventory on a single airbase. It is liken to a one trick pony and exposes China to a retaliatory strike from the US which will be thru multi facet platforms unlike what China can offer. In my view, the B-21 program is an important piece but that will be a digression.

Agreed.. It also depends on the buildup of forces prior to the first shot fired. In a hypothetical conflict such as described, I like to think it would've been a scenario likely months in the making after all political avenues have been totally exhausted before actual combat. In a case such as this then Kadena would have had time to beef up it's defensive capabilities.

As far as operational longevity and effectiveness of the base in sustaining combat strikes that's all very subjective simply because of the nuclear factor. It doesn't matter if it's a week or a month ... The losing party will likely resort to nukes or other last ditch desperate measures to sanitized the offending base in which time the perverbial can of worms is open that can never be close.

Personally I think that Kadena can withstand a lot of pounding and remain operationally effective for a quite sometime as long as nukes are not brought into the fray or some sort of sudden surprised attack w/o any prior escalation.
 
Apr 24, 2016
I think we should not kid ourselves based on an announcement of "mulling" F-22 restart, as it may be just a trick being played as suggested by
Facing Election Fight, Forbes Pushes F-22 Revival
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(of course I'll NOT discuss Politics here, I'm just trying to point out that "restart" may be forgotten right after the elections, but 6Gen won't be)
LOL! "right after the elections" seems to be now (and the Raptor-restart trick didn't play out, did it?):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
would probably be “cost-prohibitive,” says
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

The idea for restarting the F-22 line was pushed hard by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the outgoing chairman of the House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee. Forbes was defeated by Scott Taylor, a relatively unknown challenger, a Virginia state delegate who is a former Navy SEAL.

Meanwhile, James notes during an interview in her E ring office with gorgeous views of the Washington Monument, the service is pressing ahead with its
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
study to limn the first thoughts on what a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
or
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
will be. Things have changed since the F-22 was first designed in the late 1980s.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is “arguably different” from when the F-22 was conceived, James says, emphasizing that it is a “
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
” and has
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in ways that were not foreseen when it was designed.

Former Air Force Chief of Staff
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
recently had expressed openness to the idea of restarting the line, while citing many of the same strengths and weaknesses James did of the case to restart the plane. “I don’t think it’s a wild idea. I mean, the success of the F-22 and the capability of the airplane and the crews that fly it are pretty exceptional. I think it’s proven that the airplane is exactly what everybody hoped it would be,” Welsh said in late May.

There’s been considerable discussion as to where the idea to restart the F-22 line came from. All indications are that it was not Lockheed Martin, who see the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as much of the company’s bread and butter for much of the next decade — at least. The House installed language in its version of the National Defense Authorization Act telling the Air Force secretary to conduct
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by Jan. 1. But restarting production would costs tens of billions of dollars that the Air Force would have to take from other pots — all while the service juggles how to cope with the still impending threat of sequestration from the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Previous estimates of restarting production placed figures at around $2 billion, including $300–500 million in non-recurring start-up costs, with an estimated unit cost of $233 million for a production run of 75 aircraft over five years.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
17 billions $ in 2010 for 75.
Even if more are build up to 194 in this case the cost for a unit logicaly decrease but price of 2010 increase now definitely add 10 % so he want same price, surely 200+ millions $ by unit.

F-35A target price for 2019, 83 millions $ costs are estimated as of 2012, saying about 100 millions $ in 2019.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


1 new F-22 want 2 F-35A.
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
17 billions $ in 2010 for 75.
Even if more are build up to 194 in this case the cost for a unit logicaly decrease but price of 2010 increase now definitely add 10 % so he want same price, surely 200+ millions $ by unit.

F-35A target price for 2019, 83 millions $ costs are estimated as of 2012, saying about 100 millions $ in 2019.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


1 new F-22 want 2 F-35A.

At this point it would be too expensive with full commitment to the 35s. They F22 production run should've never have abruptly ended like it did. Knowing how the Pentagon, Congressional committees and the MIC work if they restart the Raptor there will be consequences to other major programs. Either significant cutbacks to the F35s or prolong delays in programs like the LRSB or the airborne ISR and few others.
 
...

F-35A target price for 2019, 83 millions $ costs are estimated as of 2012, saying about 100 millions $ in 2019.
...
... for those who don't know the future :) it may be interesting to look into
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
document
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

at p. designated 1-7 (15 of 83 in PDF)
EDIT in Table F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
summarizing money actually spent LOL
Procurement (excluding R&D) cost ($m / # of aircraft):
2015 6675/38 = 176
2016 9476/68 = 139
2017 8286/63 = 132
(retyped, rounded by me)
 
Last edited:

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The 563 Super Hornets ordered by Navy have cost less than the 195 F-22 :cool:
$50.06 billion ($44.50B procurement + $5.56B RDT&E)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

187 F-22 :eek:
Program cost US$66.7 billion as of 2011
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
How many for F-22s RDT&E o_O

F-35, 55 billions...:rolleyes:
Program Cost:
The total procurement cost of the F-35 program (incl. engines) is estimated at $319.12 billion + $55.13 billion in research and development (RDT&E)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
For 2457 A, B and C.
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Apr 24, 2016

LOL! "right after the elections" seems to be now (and the Raptor-restart trick didn't play out, did it?):
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I get the impression that you may be "taunting me", with the possibility and then the door "slamming shut" on a Raptor restart......The fact that it is even being discussed is ample evidence of the veracity and possibly what many consider the necessity of a true "air superiority" fighter. The F-22 is still the most "viable option", and it works, and works exceptionally well.

Its all politics all the time, but then a student of history such as yourself really should know that??? The F-35s survival and the cancelation of F-22 is ALL POLITICS, can you say "PORK"?? politicians are all in office at the will of the people, with the exceptions of the "Extreme Court Justices", and other lower ranking federal judges, and people like "Secretary of the Air Force James", yes she is a political appointee!

Almost anyone who has any real interest and belief in the "archaic" concept of a fighter aircraft that is able to establish and maintain air-superiority over a theatre of operations
could tell you that F-22 numbers are far below what would be considered an adequate level. The F-35 will not have the advantage of the true "Hi ground, nor of the Mach 1.6+ Supercruise" of the F-22.

For your information the Air Force has authorized a 45,000 lb thrust engine up-grade which could also be retro-fit into the F-35, so lots of folks realize that there is a capability gap.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
For your information the Air Force has authorized a 45,000 lb thrust engine up-grade which could also be retro-fit into the F-35, so lots of folks realize that there is a capability gap.

Yep F-35s engine can do,
Pratt & Whitney tested higher thrust versions of the F135, partly in response to GE's statements that the F136 is capable of producing more thrust than the 43,000 lbf (190 kN) of early F135s. In testing, the F135 has demonstrated a maximum thrust of over 50,000 lbf (220 kN);
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
making it the most powerful engine ever installed in a fighter aircraft as of 2010
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
do you know your reference
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is almost six years old
Pratt Raises Stakes In JSF Engine Battle
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?

but still relevant to the conversation, so while I am whole-heartedly in favor of a Raptor restart, and I do realize that it would take an "act of God", yes He likes the Raptor too!!!!

She keeps the peace!

The new engine will not only have a thrust increase, but various other efficiencys.
 

Top