Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Carmen813
The F-22 would be an incredibly stupid choice for attacking North Korea. The B-2 is the way to go if we ever need to do that.
Why do you say that?
Because the F-22 is an air superiority stealth fighter with limited armament for ground attack. The B-2 is a stealth, heavy bomber that can carry many times the bombs that an F-22 could.
There are a little over one dozen combat ready B-2s. There are dozens of combat ready F-22s. The F-22 is multi-role and can use its radar for ground mapping and ground moving target tracking. It can carry GPS guided bombs. The F-117 was hastily retired and its mission handed over to the F-22. I think any strike on North Korea would make use of F-22s in the ground attack role.
Not to mention, its excellent capabilities of detecting enemy air defense systems, and striking those with the GPS guided bombs.
the F22 is primarily an air superiority fighter. its multi-purpose role is limited, hence the existence of the FA-18 and JSF (F35).
you think an F22 can carry as many bombs as a B2? :laugh:
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Lets scrap the only airframe we have that other countries won't have access to, barring spying obviously, for easily 10-15 years until we can design another airframe.
Both the F22 and F35 are the production versions of programs that started in the 90's. It took 10-15 years before these jets hit production runs. I don't know about you, but personally I'm in the camp of wanting to have a technological edge in addition to better quality pilots/mechanics.
Keep the F22.
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
F-22 is a serious waste of money. It is a very cool toy, no doubt about it. But it is only useful against conventional army with jet fighters and advance radar system.
But which conventional army is gonna mess with the US and its 5500 nuclear warheads?
US will be fighting terrorist and their road side bombs for years to come. Money will be better invested in training intelligence personnel, covert operations, guerrilla warfare type of amored vehicle, gunships.
Sure you can spent money on cool but useless toy when you got unlimited budgets. But let's not forget our historical 1.8 TRILLION budget deficit this year alone alright?
But I suppose China is warranted in building a fleet of stealth fighters....
Why, you want to conquer china or you seriuosly believe China will attack US? Don't forget the billions of trade that's currently going between US and China. What exactly will the US and China be fighting over? Taiwan? Tibet? Really? US will have the conviction to get into those conflicts when it's already fighting Muslim extremist in multiple countries?
I'm certain the official policy of the US is not to "conquer China."
But that really wasn't my question. Does China need stealth fighters?
China has more external threat than the US. They have Japan, who actually invaded China and caused tremendous damage back in WW2, and Taiwan who may attempt to go independant. Both with pretty advanced airforce. They are also geographically connected to countries like vietname, India who they contiue to have border dispute with.
Again I wanna ask, which country with serious airforce is US currently having direct confrontation with?
Plus China spent 70Billion a year on military. Why does US have to spend 700+billion on all these program. Can't the US have a good enough military with maybe just 2~3 times the spending of China, the second biggest millitary spender in the world? (unless you count EU which is 27 countries)
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
How many targets can ~15 subsonic B-2s hit, versus ~100 supersonic F-22s? With small diameter bombs, each F-22 can hit 8 targets, and time time critical ones at that. The F-22 may be primarily an air superiority fighter, but has excellent stealthy strike capabilities.
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
F-22 is a serious waste of money. It is a very cool toy, no doubt about it. But it is only useful against conventional army with jet fighters and advance radar system.
But which conventional army is gonna mess with the US and its 5500 nuclear warheads?
US will be fighting terrorist and their road side bombs for years to come. Money will be better invested in training intelligence personnel, covert operations, guerrilla warfare type of amored vehicle, gunships.
Sure you can spent money on cool but useless toy when you got unlimited budgets. But let's not forget our historical 1.8 TRILLION budget deficit this year alone alright?
But I suppose China is warranted in building a fleet of stealth fighters....
Why, you want to conquer china or you seriuosly believe China will attack US? Don't forget the billions of trade that's currently going between US and China. What exactly will the US and China be fighting over? Taiwan? Tibet? Really? US will have the conviction to get into those conflicts when it's already fighting Muslim extremist in multiple countries?
I'm certain the official policy of the US is not to "conquer China."
But that really wasn't my question. Does China need stealth fighters?
China has more external threat than the US. They have Japan, who actually invaded China and caused tremendous damage back in WW2, and Taiwan who may attempt to go independant. Both with pretty advanced airforce. They are also geographically connected to countries like vietname, India who they contiue to have border dispute with.
Again I wanna ask, which country with serious airforce is US currently having direct confrontation with?
Plus China spent 70Billion a year on military. Why does US have to spend 700+billion on all these program. Can't the US have a good enough military with maybe just 2~3 times the spending of China, the second biggest millitary spender in the world? (unless you count EU which is 27 countries)
The US is technically legally obligated to defend Taiwan. Whether that would happen in times of hostilities is questionable.
And if China has to contend with Japan and Taiwan, the US then has to contend with Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, not to mention what if a regime collapses in any of the well armed Middle East nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, Egypt. In those scenarios the US could potentially be facing Su-30s (Venezuela), F-15s (S.A.), advanced F-16s (UAE and soon Egypt), etc.
Its not about continental defense in either the US or China's case and you know it. Japan is not going to invade China anytime soon. So if China needs stealth fighters for power projection, why can't the US have some as well?
YESSSSSSSS!
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Carmen813
The F-22 would be an incredibly stupid choice for attacking North Korea. The B-2 is the way to go if we ever need to do that.
Why do you say that?
Because the F-22 is an air superiority stealth fighter with limited armament for ground attack. The B-2 is a stealth, heavy bomber that can carry many times the bombs that an F-22 could.
There are a little over one dozen combat ready B-2s. There are dozens of combat ready F-22s. The F-22 is multi-role and can use its radar for ground mapping and ground moving target tracking. It can carry GPS guided bombs. The F-117 was hastily retired and its mission handed over to the F-22. I think any strike on North Korea would make use of F-22s in the ground attack role.
Not to mention, its excellent capabilities of detecting enemy air defense systems, and striking those with the GPS guided bombs.
the F22 is primarily an air superiority fighter. its multi-purpose role is limited, hence the existence of the FA-18 and JSF (F35).
you think an F22 can carry as many bombs as a B2? :laugh:
How many targets can ~15 subsonic B-2s hit, versus ~100 supersonic F-22s? With small diameter bombs, each F-22 can hit 8 targets, and time critical ones at that. The F-22 may be primarily an air superiority fighter, but has excellent stealthy strike capabilities.
Originally posted by: dawp
If you're in stealth mode, you wont be going supersonic, that would kinda defeat the purpose of stealth.
and b2 can carry more load and each bomb can be targeted individually, and it easier to hide 1 big plane than many smaller ones.
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: rchiu
F-22 is a serious waste of money. It is a very cool toy, no doubt about it. But it is only useful against conventional army with jet fighters and advance radar system.
But which conventional army is gonna mess with the US and its 5500 nuclear warheads?
US will be fighting terrorist and their road side bombs for years to come. Money will be better invested in training intelligence personnel, covert operations, guerrilla warfare type of amored vehicle, gunships.
Sure you can spent money on cool but useless toy when you got unlimited budgets. But let's not forget our historical 1.8 TRILLION budget deficit this year alone alright?
But I suppose China is warranted in building a fleet of stealth fighters....
Why, you want to conquer china or you seriuosly believe China will attack US? Don't forget the billions of trade that's currently going between US and China. What exactly will the US and China be fighting over? Taiwan? Tibet? Really? US will have the conviction to get into those conflicts when it's already fighting Muslim extremist in multiple countries?
I'm certain the official policy of the US is not to "conquer China."
But that really wasn't my question. Does China need stealth fighters?
China has more external threat than the US. They have Japan, who actually invaded China and caused tremendous damage back in WW2, and Taiwan who may attempt to go independant. Both with pretty advanced airforce. They are also geographically connected to countries like vietname, India who they contiue to have border dispute with.
Again I wanna ask, which country with serious airforce is US currently having direct confrontation with?
Plus China spent 70Billion a year on military. Why does US have to spend 700+billion on all these program. Can't the US have a good enough military with maybe just 2~3 times the spending of China, the second biggest millitary spender in the world? (unless you count EU which is 27 countries)
The US is technically legally obligated to defend Taiwan. Whether that would happen in times of hostilities is questionable.
And if China has to contend with Japan and Taiwan, the US then has to contend with Iran, Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, not to mention what if a regime collapses in any of the well armed Middle East nations such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, Egypt. In those scenarios the US could potentially be facing Su-30s (Venezuela), F-15s (S.A.), advanced F-16s (UAE and soon Egypt), etc.
Its not about continental defense in either the US or China's case and you know it. Japan is not going to invade China anytime soon. So if China needs stealth fighters for power projection, why can't the US have some as well?
Venezuela with their what, 50 jet figters? Are you kidding me? Which one of those countries have the capability of sending their fighters or armies to the US? And I don't know about you, but I hope people in the US have learn a lession with Iraq that going to other countries with the little advanture is totally stupid. If US don't start a war with any of the countries you listed, why would any one of those countries gonna start a war with the US even if there is a regime change.
Talking about power projection, I already mentioned about the 5500 nuclear warheads. Do you really need a little over hundred f-22 with short range (relative to ICBM) and little bomb capacity to scare people when a single warhead can kill hundreds of thousands?
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
How many targets can ~15 subsonic B-2s hit, versus ~100 supersonic F-22s? With small diameter bombs, each F-22 can hit 8 targets, and time time critical ones at that. The F-22 may be primarily an air superiority fighter, but has excellent stealthy strike capabilities.
As many as wanting, as they can be equipped with 50,000lbs of GPS guided bombs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22#Armament
The F-22 can supposedly carry 4 bombs in it's internal bay. You obviously don't want to put anything on the outside, as that would compromise its stealth.
The B-2 can carry far more than a single F-22. Why send in a large force of F-22s when you can send in a handful of B-2s to do the same thing?
Originally posted by: sciwizam
Originally posted by: dawp
If you're in stealth mode, you wont be going supersonic, that would kinda defeat the purpose of stealth.
and b2 can carry more load and each bomb can be targeted individually, and it easier to hide 1 big plane than many smaller ones.
What? I've never heard of that before!
F-22s and B-2s each have their role to play, F-22s takes out the air force and AA sites to facilitate bombardment by the B-2s and B-52s
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
It's all about actually being able to get bombs to the target when it matters. The B-2s fly non-stop trips from Missouri; only a few can possibly be forward deployed, and at locations which may not even be closer to a target. Waiting for one of the dozen B-2s to get to its target may not be an option against certain adversaries.
The F-22 can be deployed to any airbase, and with more of them flying faster, can bomb more targets with timeliness than the B-2 fleet could ever hope to.
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
It's all about actually being able to get bombs to the target when it matters. The B-2s fly non-stop trips from Missouri; only a few can possibly be forward deployed, and at locations which may not even be closer to a target. Waiting for one of the dozen B-2s to get to its target may not be an option against certain adversaries.
The F-22 can be deployed to any airbase, and with more of them flying faster, can bomb more targets with timeliness than the B-2 fleet could ever hope to.
You're not going to have 187 F-22s forwardly deployed to one spot.
B-2s have been forwardly deployed - Guam has special hangars now just for them, so they don't have to always be flying out of Missouri.
Waiting? What adversaries are we talking about? First you're talking about fixed anti-air positions, but suddenly, we have moving adversaries? If that's the case, then let's keep some armed predators up in the air around those areas with time sensitive targets. And if it is after we've cleared out anti-air defenses, we can just use B-52s to pummel the area.
I'm not downplaying the abilities of the F-22, but you're overstating what it can do by far and what it was designed to do. Yes, it can bomb ground targets, but it's primary goal is to be used as an air-to-air fighter.
We also have the B-1 Lancer heavy bomber, though not stealth, it is a supersonic bomber.
edit:
Hooray armchair generaling!
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Obama didn't say he wanted to melt down all the F-22s. He just wants to stop making more. It's unneeded. The SecDef said the same thing.
Originally posted by: charrison
It is a damn shame. Should have been kept in limited rate production and have an export version developed.
to design and buy?as we have the last 60 years?only the most technologically advanced versions of weapons to keep up with or stay ahead of another superpower adversary, especially one that imploded nearly a generation ago. ? We must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of cost, complexity, and delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built, and that are then usable only in a narrow range of low-probability scenarios.
Originally posted by: charrison
It is a damn shame. Should have been kept in limited rate production and have an export version developed. IF they ever decide to reopen the line, it is going to be very expensive to do so.
Originally posted by: dawp
Originally posted by: sciwizam
Originally posted by: dawp
If you're in stealth mode, you wont be going supersonic, that would kinda defeat the purpose of stealth.
and b2 can carry more load and each bomb can be targeted individually, and it easier to hide 1 big plane than many smaller ones.
What? I've never heard of that before!
F-22s and B-2s each have their role to play, F-22s takes out the air force and AA sites to facilitate bombardment by the B-2s and B-52s
think about it, do you really want to be generating sonic booms if you're trying to be unseen? you don't want to draw attention to you by going supersonic. that's why the b2 can only go high subsonic. and what sacrilege was arguing was that the f22 could take the place of a b2.
*EDIT* A single B-2 carries as many bombs as 25 F-22s.Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Brainonska511
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Originally posted by: Carmen813
The F-22 would be an incredibly stupid choice for attacking North Korea. The B-2 is the way to go if we ever need to do that.
Why do you say that?
Because the F-22 is an air superiority stealth fighter with limited armament for ground attack. The B-2 is a stealth, heavy bomber that can carry many times the bombs that an F-22 could.
There are a little over one dozen combat ready B-2s. There are dozens of combat ready F-22s. The F-22 is multi-role and can use its radar for ground mapping and ground moving target tracking. It can carry GPS guided bombs. The F-117 was hastily retired and its mission handed over to the F-22. I think any strike on North Korea would make use of F-22s in the ground attack role.
Not to mention, its excellent capabilities of detecting enemy air defense systems, and striking those with the GPS guided bombs.
the F22 is primarily an air superiority fighter. its multi-purpose role is limited, hence the existence of the FA-18 and JSF (F35).
you think an F22 can carry as many bombs as a B2? :laugh:
How many targets can ~15 subsonic B-2s hit, versus ~100 supersonic F-22s? With small diameter bombs, each F-22 can hit 8 targets, and time critical ones at that. The F-22 may be primarily an air superiority fighter, but has excellent stealthy strike capabilities.
Originally posted by: sciwizam
Originally posted by: dawp
Originally posted by: sciwizam
Originally posted by: dawp
If you're in stealth mode, you wont be going supersonic, that would kinda defeat the purpose of stealth.
and b2 can carry more load and each bomb can be targeted individually, and it easier to hide 1 big plane than many smaller ones.
What? I've never heard of that before!
F-22s and B-2s each have their role to play, F-22s takes out the air force and AA sites to facilitate bombardment by the B-2s and B-52s
think about it, do you really want to be generating sonic booms if you're trying to be unseen? you don't want to draw attention to you by going supersonic. that's why the b2 can only go high subsonic. and what sacrilege was arguing was that the f22 could take the place of a b2.
Oh God..
You do know what "supersonic" means right? Faster than sound, meaning, by the time you hear the boom, the bomb is already on it's way
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
How many targets can ~15 subsonic B-2s hit, versus ~100 supersonic F-22s? With small diameter bombs, each F-22 can hit 8 targets, and time time critical ones at that. The F-22 may be primarily an air superiority fighter, but has excellent stealthy strike capabilities.