Friday, July 24, 2009

The Whole Story

Here is the best summary of the F-22 Raptor issue that I've seen:

VodkaPundit Tells It Straight

He's got it all down in terms that even the layman can comprehend. Maybe we can get some of them to explain it to SecDef Gates and the Messiah before it is too late.


Buzz Barron said...

One thing for sure on this issue, our Dumbass is better than their Dumbass...McCain's our expert! Right on John....NOT

tballard said...

My understanding is that they are pushing the F-35 instead of the F-22, mainly because it has capabilities in many different areas rather than just being an air superiority fighter like the F-22. Now I have no military background (my dad was in the Air Force, but mainly did missile maintenance), but to me, a fighter that serves many different roles is not going to excel at any of them because it must necessarily compromise in design and capabilities to do so. The way I see it is that design compromises to save on $$$ could mean dead pilots. If I'm a pilot, I'm not so sure I want to be flying Econo-Fighter when I'm up against anything other than the Somali air force.

Anonymous said...

Didn't you blog on this subject several months ago? Search doesn't bring it up, but I'm pretty sure you wrote on this. I seem to recall you said the Air Force doesn't want the F-22, and it was a good idea to cut the program?

Ed Rasimus said...

I had the opportunity to work with Northrop on F-23. Even at the early stages, the contract winner was going to be superior to anything it might have to face. That hasn't changed a bit.

If you saw someone suggesting that the operators (as opposed to the butt-kissers) in the AF don't want the F-22 in reasonable numbers, you can be certain that it wasn't me.

I've never harbored such a notion.

Carter Kaplan said...

Thanks, Ed. I must have read that somewhere else.

What did you think of the YF-23? I am sure the 22 won the run-off for good reasons, but I always thought the 23 was a better looking aircraft. I look at these things from a modeler's perspective.

This is a more science fiction fiction kind of question, but what would a F-105 look like that incorporated modern composites and alloys, and was powered by a modern engine? How would it perform? (So fast it would melt, maybe!) Do you know how Republic came up with the basic shape of the thing? Were they just extrapolating from the Thunderflash? Or was there a lot more too it?

I guess a more sensible question might be what kind of a mission could it perform?

Here's a question having more to do with aesthetics: Why do you think the F-105 is some people's all-time favorite fighter?

Carter Kaplan said...

Back to the topic. Is there a parallel here with the Navy's decision to pull the F-14 and give the air superiority/fleet defense role to the F-18? If the F-18 can do it all, is it not possible that the F-35 (assuming they work the bugs out) can do it all too?

Just as the F-15E Strike Eagle fighter/bomber was derived from an air superiority fighter, is it not also possible that a fighter/bomber could be developed from the F-22? If so, I wonder if there might be some savings to be had if they made that F-22 bomber, and then cut down on the number of F-35s. All hypothetical of course.