Register

APACHE CLIPS IS A NOT FOR PROFIT SITE DEDICATED TO OUR ARMED FORCES.

ALL PROFITS GENERATED WILL BE DONATED TO THE WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT OR THE SEMPER FI FUND.


WELCOME GUEST, BE SURE TO REGISTER AS A MEMBER, SO THAT YOU CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ALL THE FEATURES WE HAVE TO OFFER!
BE SURE TO CHECK OUT FAQ SECTION IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: Goodbye F-22

  1. #1
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default Goodbye F-22

    I think it's a good move to acquire more unmanned aircraft though.


    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced a 2010 Pentagon budget Monday that reflects major changes in the "scope and significance" of Defense Department priorities.
    One of the high-profile programs on the chopping block is the Air Force's most expensive fighter, the F-22 Raptor.





    The proposed budget cuts several traditional big-ticket items while investing in programs designed to bolster the military's ability to wage an ongoing conflict against terrorists and other extremist elements in multiple regions at the same time.
    Gates acknowledged that parts of the budget are likely to run into significant opposition on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are concerned in part about preserving valuable defense contracts for their districts and states.
    "This is a reform budget, reflecting lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan," Gates said. "There's no question that a lot of these decisions will be controversial."
    He called on Congress to "rise above parochial interests and consider what is in the best interests of the nation as a whole."
    House Armed Service Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, acknowledged that congressmen have concerns about job losses in their home districts but said that ultimately, "the national interest overrides anything."
    "The buck stops withus," he said. "We still have a lot of hard work ahead of us."
    Three key priorities are reflected in the changes, Gates said.
    The priorities are a stronger institutional commitment to the military's all-volunteer force, a decision to "rebalance" defense programs to better fight current and future conflicts, and "fundamental overhauls" of the military's procurement, acquisition and contracting process.
    Don't Miss




    Among other things, Gates called for production of the Air Force's most expensive fighter, the F-22 Raptor, to be phased out by fiscal year 2011.
    He also called for terminating a proposed fleet of 23 presidential helicopters estimated to cost more than $13 billion. The proposed fleet, he noted, was originally projected to cost $6.5 billion. It "has fallen six years behind schedule and runs the risk of not delivering the requested capability," he said.
    Gates maintained that a new fleet of presidential helicopters will still ultimately be necessary, however.
    See a list of winners, losers and break-even programs »
    At the same time, he said he did not want to pursue a development program for a new Air Force bomber "until we have a better understanding of the need, the requirement and the technology."
    Gates did request 50 Predator and Reaper-class unmanned aerial vehicles by fiscal year 2011, translating to a 62 percent increase in capability over the current level and 127 percent from a year ago.
    The Predator has been used extensively by the military in operations along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region.
    Turning to the military's overall troop levels, Gates proposed spending an additional $11 billion to complete a planned expansion of the Army and Marine Corps while halting reductions in the Air Force and Navy.
    A planned 547,000 troop increase, while capping the growth of Army brigade combat teams at 45 as opposed to a previously discussed level of 48, will be sufficient to "ensure that we have better manned units ready to employ and help put an end to the routine use of stop-loss," Gates maintained.
    "This step will also lower the risk of hollowing the force," he said.
    Gates also proposed a reduction in the use of support service contractors from 39 percent of the Pentagon work force to a pre-2001 level of 26 percent.
    The contractors, Gates added, would be replaced with full-time government employees.
    To help create a more mobile, flexible force, Gates proposed boosting special operations personnel by 2,800, or 5 percent, as well as purchasing aircraft designed to provide greater lift mobility and rapid transportation of those forces.
    Among other things, he cited a proposed increase in the purchase of "littoral combat ships, a key capability for presence, stability and counterinsurgency operations in coastal regions," from two to three ships.
    The Pentagon's ultimate goal, he said, is to acquire 55 of these ships.
    Another $500 million is directed toward boosting "global partnership capacity efforts" through enhanced initiatives for "training and equipping foreign militaries to undertake counterterrorism and stability operations."
    In what may prove to be one of the most controversial aspects of his proposed budget, Gates announced the cancellation or reduction of key elements of the Pentagon's missile defense system, including the installation of additional ground-based interceptor missiles in Alaska.
    The proposed overall missile defense system budget was trimmed by $1.4 billion.
    A bipartisan group of senators released a letter during Gates' announcement that urged him "not to allow deep cuts in U.S. missile defense programs that are critically important to protecting our homeland and our allies against the growing threat of ballistic missiles."
    "The threat from ballistic missiles is significant and on the rise. [It] has been underscored by Iran and North Korea's recent missile tests," they argued.
    The letter was signed by both senators from Alaska -- Republican Lisa Murkowski and Democrat Mark Begich -- among others.
    Although Gates was initially appointed Pentagon chief by former President George W. Bush, his overall budget received what appeared to be a mixed reception from congressional Republicans.
    "Republicans appreciate Secretary Gates' effort to shape the Department of Defense so that we more effectively fight the wars our troops are engaged in today. However, we are concerned about the tradeoffs involved in re-balancing the Department," New York Rep. John McHugh, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services committee, said in a written statement.
    "It remains the Congress' responsibility to provide for the common defense," he warned.
    Former Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, however, said Gates' budget "is a major step in the right direction."
    "It has long been necessary to shift spending away from weapon systems plagued by scheduling and cost overruns to ones that strike the correct balance between the needs of our deployed forces and the requirements for meeting the emerging threats of tomorrow," he said.
    "I believe Secretary Gates' decision is key to ensuring that the defense establishment closes the gap between the way it supports current operations and the way it prepares for future conventional threats."
    Georgia Republicans slammed President Obama for Gates' announcement about the phase-out of the F-22 Raptor, which is assembled in Cobb County, Georgia.
    Rep. Tom Price, whose district includes the Raptor production facility, called the cut "outrageous" and said Obama's "priorities are deeply flawed." Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss said he was "disappointed" in the cuts and accused the administration of being "willing to sacrifice the lives of American military men and women for the sake of domestic programs."




    Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Connecticut, was also dismissive of the F-22 phase-out, although he said he generally supported Gates' moves to modernize the military. Some F-22 production takes place in Connecticut as well.
    The proposed overall fiscal year 2010 Defense Department budget is almost $534 billion, or nearly $664 billion when including the costs of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The current Pentagon budget totals slightly over $513 billion, or almost $655 billion including the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.
    E-mail to a friend













    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/...uts/index.html






  2. #2
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    57
    Like
    14
    Dislike
    2

    Default

    I think the reality of the situation is that our military is now acquiring weapon systems that are just too incredibly expensive to build or maintain particularly when we have a history using these weapon systems for only a decade or two.
    If you can employ 10 capable F-16 Falcons for the price of just 1 F-22...it's hard to justify the upgrade.
    We are not resisting a superior enemy. Al of our "potential" rivals are far behind the U.S not only in technology and numbers...but satellite capabilities as well.
    Our quest for state of art weapons is exactly what makes fighting insurgencies so difficult today.
    You need boots on the ground, first class Infantry tactics, communications and surveillance from drones.
    I think our military is quickly learning what our real threat is today.
    If war ever comes with China or Russia...it won't really matter anyways because we will all be dead.
    Even the Russians and Chinese know this. Do Americans???

  3. #3
    The big Kahuna
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,283
    Like
    77
    Dislike
    2

    Default

    Holy shit - they gonna ditch that aircraft?

    I mean it really makes sense - there isn't a country at this stage that has better military equipment than the US with or without the Raptor - and if you want to believe the overall prediction that an all out war with a country like russia china or any other country that has near to equal military power will probably very unlikly happen why keep an aircraft like this? They know how to build it and by 2011 they have enough of them, so why waste money.

  4. #4
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Rhode Island, USA
    Posts
    283
    Like
    27
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stark View Post
    Holy shit - they gonna ditch that aircraft?

    I mean it really makes sense - there isn't a country at this stage that has better military equipment than the US with or without the Raptor - and if you want to believe the overall prediction that an all out war with a country like russia china or any other country that has near to equal military power will probably very unlikly happen why keep an aircraft like this? They know how to build it and by 2011 they have enough of them, so why waste money.

    Yep, from what I have read, I think the F-35 is the plane for the future.

  5. #5
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    34
    Like
    21
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    It would be a sad thing to see that gracious plane disappear.

    However Stark do not be so sure about the equipment of the chinese and russians. Especially the russians. Because it is now not the matter of having a superior plane but what you put in and on them.

    I can remember a clip (not sure if it was here on AC) that showed that although planes like the F-22 have farout better stealthcapabilities, the Russian planes are equiped with farout better jamming capabilities and missles with a longer range.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but will stealth and jamming cancel each other out hense leaving dogfights with guns blazing and it comes down to supermanuevrability?? Won't the russian planes be in a commanding position if you look only to the manuevrability of their current planes?


    EDIT

    Totally agree with EXCONservative. enough boots one the ground and predators in the sky will make the difference.
    Last edited by Blazuhhh; 04-10-2009 at 03:01 PM.

  6. #6
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blazuhhh View Post
    It would be a sad thing to see that gracious plane disappear.

    However Stark do not be so sure about the equipment of the chinese and russians. Especially the russians. Because it is now not the matter of having a superior plane but what you put in and on them.

    I can remember a clip (not sure if it was here on AC) that showed that although planes like the F-22 have farout better stealthcapabilities, the Russian planes are equiped with farout better jamming capabilities and missles with a longer range.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but will stealth and jamming cancel each other out hense leaving dogfights with guns blazing and it comes down to supermanuevrability?? Won't the russian planes be in a commanding position if you look only to the manuevrability of their current planes?


    EDIT

    Totally agree with EXCONservative. enough boots one the ground and predators in the sky will make the difference.
    Russian planes equipped with farout better jammng capabilities and missiles? Last I checked that's what made the Russian planes horrible, there electronics are a joke of the past. I could be wrong, have any articles?

    Anyway they're not cancelling the F-22 just halting some of the production. THe missiles with longer range part I really doubt, extremely.

  7. #7
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    34
    Like
    21
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    I'm already trying to find that clip. May take some time though

  8. #8
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    This is supposedly the longest range missile ever, but not in use anymore as it was for the F-14

    AIM-54 Phoenix Missile

    The AIM-54 Phoenix Long-range air-to-air missile, carried in clusters of up to six missiles on the F-14 Tomcat. The Phoenix missile is the Navy's only long-range air-to-air missile. It is an airborne weapons control system with multiple-target handling capabilities, used to kill multiple air targets with conventional warheads. The weapon system consists of an AIM-54 guided missile, interface system, and a launch aircraft with an AN/AWG-9 weapon control system. The AIM-54 is a radar-guided, air-to-air, long-range missile consisting of a guidance, armament, propulsion, and control section, interconnecting cables, wings and fins. The total weapon system has the capability to launch as many as six AIM-54 missiles simultaneously from the F-14 aircraft against an equal number of targets in all weather and heavy jamming environments. The AIM-54 Phoenix Missile was developed in the 1970s as the principle long-range, air-to-air, defense armament of the F-14 Aircraft. The AIM-54 Phoenix Missile is a fielded weapon currently in Phase III, the Production, Fielding/Deployment, and Operational Support Phase of the Weapon System Acquisition Process.
    The three versions of the AIM-54 Phoenix Missile currently being used are the AIM-54A, AIM-54C, and the AIM-54 ECCM/Sealed. The AIM-54 is a radar-guided, air-to-air, long-range missile consisting of a guidance, armament, propulsion, and control section, interconnecting cables, wings and fins. The AIM-54A was the original version to become operational. The improved Phoenix, the AIM-54C, can better counter projected threats from tactical aircraft and cruise missiles. The AIM-54C (sealed) missile is the most recent version and contains improved electronic counter-countermeasure capabilities and does not require coolant conditioning during captive flight. The AIM-54C and AIM-54C (sealed) contains built-in self test and additional missile on-aircraft test capability. The AIM-54C missile has also been designed for greater reliability, longer serviceable in-service time, and a 15 percent reduction in parts.
    Initial Operating Capability was attained in 1974 for the AIM-54A, 1986 for the AIM-54C, and 1988 for the AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed. The AIM-54C and AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed are replacing the AIM-54A. As AIM-54A inventories are depleted they will not be replenished. The AIM-54A Technical Evaluation (TECHEVAL) was completed in November 1973. Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL) was completed in November 1974. The AIM-54C TECHEVAL began in May 1982 and was completed in November 1982. The OPEVAL began in March 1983 and was completed in August 1983. AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile TECHEVAL was completed in June 1985, and OPEVAL was completed in July 1988.
    The AIM-54 Phoenix Missile, used exclusively on the F-14A/B/D Aircraft, is a radar guided, air-to-air missile consisting of a guidance section, armament section, propulsion section, control section, interconnecting surface cables, wings, and fins. The missile is designed for ejection launch using the LAU-93 or LAU-132 launchers. Semi-active and active homing radar and hydraulically operated fins direct and stabilize the missile on course to the target. Propulsion is provided by a solid propellant rocket motor, and lethality by a high explosive warhead. Performance modifications to the AIM-54A were incorporated during and after production. The Reject Image Device (RID), High Altitude Performance (HAP), and Extended Active Gate (EAG) were incorporated during production. The MK 11 MOD 3 Electronics Assembly (EA) modification was installed by retrofit after production. The AIM-54C and AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile have a Built In Self Test (BIST) feature. BIST may be selected in conjunction with Missile On Aircraft Test (MOAT). The AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile provides two major improvements over the AIM-54C. ECCM provides enhanced electronic protection and sealing the missile eliminates the requirement for aircraft supplied liquid thermal conditioning fluid during captive flight. Guidance Section The AIM-54A RID modification offers improved capabilities against low altitude targets over water. The EAG modification improves capabilities against certain Electronic Counter Measure (ECM) threats. The AIM-54C Guidance Section has a new Solid-State Receiver-Transmitter Unit (SSRTU), Digital Electronics Unit (DEU), and Inertial Sensor Assembly (ISA) as well as a modified guidance section wiring harness. Design improvements reduce inherent oscillator drift, provide range discrimination, and improve reliability. In the AIM-54 ECCM/Sealed Missile the DEU front receiver has been modified and an improved version of the program memory has been added to enhance ECCM capabilities. Heaters have been added, operating temperatures of selected subassemblies have been extended, and circuit temperature compensation has been added for sealed operation. The SSRTU has been modified to improve ECCM performance, selected subassemblies have been improved to increase operating temperature ranges, circuit temperature compensation has been added for sealed operation, and the ISA has been modified to include a heater for sealed operation.
    Armament Section The AIM-54A's MK 11 MOD 3 EA modification upgrades the Targeting Detecting Device (TDD) to improve warhead lethality against short targets. The AIM-54C has a new TDD, the DSU-28, utilizing the MK 82 MOD 0 warhead. The MK 82 MOD 0 warhead is used with the DSU-28 on AIM-54C All-Up-Round (AUR), serial number 83001 through 83054. A new warhead, WDU-29/B was incorporated in the FY83 production of the AIM-54C AUR starting with serial number 83055. The new warhead offers a 20-25 percent increase in effectiveness. The AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile uses the same armament section as the AIM-54C.
    Propulsion Section. The AIM-54A, AIM-54C, and AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed Missile use the MK 47 MOD 1 rocket motor assembly.
    Control Section The AIM-54A's HAP modification improves capabilities against very high and fast targets. The AIM-54C Electronic Servo Control Amplifier (ESCA) replaces the autopilot unit in the AIM-54A control section. In the AIM-54 ECCM/Sealed Missile the Electrical Conversion Unit (ECU) has been completely redesigned for sealed operations. The new design requires no heater for temperature regulation. The AIM-54 Phoenix Missile maintenance concept is based on an overall objective to assure All-Up-Rounds are available to fulfill commitments of operational activities and provide the means to restore unserviceable missiles to serviceable condition with minimal downtime. Maintenance requirements are allocated to the organizational, intermediate, and depot levels of maintenance.

    http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/aim-54.htm

  9. #9
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Interesting convo for you here, but it seems like a toss up =/

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread106063/pg1

  10. #10
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    34
    Like
    21
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Yeah the Phoenix is in a league of its own.

    The missile comparisen in the clip were in the class of the AMRAAM and Sparrow. I hope I can find the clip again because it was quite interesting to watch. They compared radarsystems, jamming and armament. Can't remember the title but tomorrow I will search further.

  11. #11
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blazuhhh View Post
    Yeah the Phoenix is in a league of its own.

    The missile comparisen in the clip were in the class of the AMRAAM and Sparrow. I hope I can find the clip again because it was quite interesting to watch. They compared radarsystems, jamming and armament. Can't remember the title but tomorrow I will search further.
    Yeah that's understood, but how would anyone have a clue as to the radar on the F-22.. it's 5th generation top of the line no? Russian tech is available all over the damn world, unless they keep the missiles and radar you're talking about top secret. Many nations have all this technology readily available, including the U.S. it just kind of makes no sense.

  12. #12
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    34
    Like
    21
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Found it.

    [ame="http://www.apacheclips.com/media/1141/Russia_and_China_Challenge_American_Air_Superiorit y/"]Apache Clips - Russia And China Challenge American Air Superiority[/ame]

    For now it is still a toss but the adversaries are comming up strong.

  13. #13
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,667
    Like
    0
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    Seen it, video has so much speculation in it. THe last part is just kind of funny, talking about 5th generation fighters from other countires that are far as hell away. What stealth aircraft do either nations have?

  14. #14
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    34
    Like
    21
    Dislike
    0

    Default

    I would have no insight on which is real (except for the SAM part of the clip) but I do know that the russians will not make stealth planes. My guess is that they have already found a way for getting past stealth technoligy. They are very good in building radarsystems. Always have been.

    Otherwise why wouldn't they have build them yet?? Because if stealth is nothing more then deflecting and absorbing radarbeams they would have built some prototypes already wouldn't you agree? Russia might not be a good social and financially secure country but when it comes to military technoligy they don't have shit for brain scientists running that part

  15. #15
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    58
    Like
    1
    Dislike
    1

    Cool Su-35

    and what about the Russian Su-35? Thats a hell of a plane. can kill 4 air targets simultaneously. Can also detect naval targets at 400km away. Can jam incoming missiles. With its supermaneuverability, it can kill any U.S plane at the moment. A F-15 needs 3km to turn, the Su-35 needs a couple meters.
    And Russia is willing to sell their shit to ANY country.

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to Top