President Obama and defense secretary Gates are still determining whether to end production, 183 planes in, of the F-22 Raptor, the world’s most advanced Air Superiority fighter. The rationale of those who are advocating cutting off the program is as simple as it is misguided: a belief that “the fighter, conceived in the Cold War, is a vastly expensive and over-capable weapon irrelevant to current threats.”
As several observers have pointed out in recent years, the global threats America faces now and is likely to face in the future demand that we do not declare ourselves technologically advanced and capable “enough,” and proceed to rest on our laurels until an opponent engages us in another Cold War-type development-for-development tech and arms race.
For evidence that resting on our laurels on national defense is the last thing we should be doing, we need look no further than the recent actions of our old Cold War adversary, which, in an effort to make itself internationally relevant again (and to take advantage of a president who has sent, in his first two months in office, the strong signal that he is hopelessly in over his head on policy, both domestic and foreign), is replicating its 1980s efforts to expand both influence and footholds into the Western hemisphere.
Back then, a strong president rebuffed the Soviet Union’s attempted advances into the American half of the world (and, ultimately, drove the USSR to destruction). Now, though, we appear to lack the strong, principled, intelligent leadership that we had during the 1980s — a fact that makes it all the more important that we have the best tools of national defense available.
As has been well documented here and elsewhere, as well as in ads recently taken out by Lockheed in newspapers around the country, the F-22 program means jobs for Americans — 95,000 in all — in a time when such things are hard to come by.
Even more importantly, though, the potential F-22 program cutoff comes at a time when a huge swath of the Air Force’s active fighter fleet is likely to be retired earlier than originally scheduled. InsideDefense.com reported last October that, in budget planning for FY10, the Air Force was taking a close look at the possibility of retiring “137 F-15s, 177 F-16s, and 9 A-10s…early after 2010″ — a cut of nearly 20% in the total active fighter fleet.
This means that the 183 F-22s commissioned by the DOD, as well as the remainder of the aging (the F-15 was introduced in 1976 and the F-16 in 1978) fighter fleet, will be tasked with shouldering the entirety of the American Air Force’s air power workload.
Add to that the fact that the F-16 has been shoehorned largely into an air-to-ground (primarily close air support and Wild Weasel) role, and that the F-15C is the only version of that venerable platform that actually performs an air superiority mission, and that only 178 of those are receiving necessary upgrades to keep them on the cutting edge of military flight technology, and you can begin to see the growing problem with America’s air superiority hardware: namely, that it’s growing thin very quickly, and, if the F-22 program is halted, it will not be replenished.
SecDef Gates’ reference to the Raptor as being “irrelevant to current threats” is a head-scratcher at best (and a scary confession of ignorance at worst). Whether it be continued action in the War on Terror or a conflict against another nation, the involvement of ground troops in war is a given. Any current or former ground operator will tell you, though, that there is one prerequisite both for ground operations themselves and for effective air support of those operations: air superiority.
America hasn’t fought a battle in quite some time in which our air superiority wasn’t a given at the outset. A major reason for that is that we have remained on the leading edge of aviation technology, always making sure to stay ahead of our opponents and allies alike. As decision day for the F-22 program approaches, President Obama and Secretary Gates need to think long and hard about how much America has benefited in the past from ensuring we were always on the cutting edge of military aviation — and how great the cost would be of giving up that edge and resting on our laurels while our current and future enemies race to catch up.
Moe Lane
Steve Maley
Dan McLaughlin
Neil Stevens
Daniel Horowitz
How much
omar Wednesday, March 18th at 11:52AM EST (link)Would the savings be? What’s the cost?
Rummy had it almost right...
JLenardDetroit (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 12:13PM EST (link)As stated here – RS: Obama Surrender First Doctrine and Defense Cuts: “Remember when Donald Rumsfeld said ‘you have to go to war with the army you have?’ What he should have said was “We had to go to War with the diminished Armed Forces that the Democrats and the Clinton Administration left us!” — More-so, we have to deal with the Military, as a whole, that ANY/EVERY Democrat Administration cuts, weakens, reduces, diminishes, etc… and the “Peace Through Surrender” attitude they base their Foreign Policy on.
While you have to indeed Arm for the Wars you might have to Fight NOW, you must ALSO have to prepare for the types of (past/future) Conflicts you may be forced into Fighting in the Future…. Waiting to Build-up once engaged is a dangerous strategy, especially in our Nation with its pathetically diminished Industrial capacity.
Regards from NoMoTown (the MOTORlessCITY)
“Liberals, looking to do for? America what they’ve done for? Detroit! which is DESTROY IT!”
“I think, therefore I am Conservative”
“Conservative by choice, Republican by necessity”
“You can lead a Liberal to the Truth/Facts, but you cannot make them THINK!”
“Romney [No, not my first choice] does NOT have a MORMON problem. He has a, far too many Americans; these days; are MORONS problem!”
Follow @JLenardDetroit
(RS:Help) (JLD) (Hollyweird) (Brain-deads) (SPIN-cycle) (Obamaocare) (Party of kNOw) (Conservatism) (TEApeats) (respectful) (message) (Warning: Children Will Die!!)
Heil “O” Hell No Obamao is NOT MY PRESIDENT! “No U won’t”
I want “O” to FAIL (here, here, & whole Diary (Ofail) here, is why)
“The first Liberal was Satan” – a Rush caller (other Quotes)
The F-22's a bit of a hangar queen.
Old_Crow (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 12:47PM EST (link)Maintenance of the F-22′s stealth features is much more difficult than planned, resulting in roughly a 60% availability rate. There’s no solution on the horizon for this problem.
We will always need conventional fighters and bombers that can be deployed and operated out of ‘non-ideal’ airfields and without robots to repair stealth exterior features. The USAF should look at more F-15/F16′s with UAV’s to build out the current F-22 fleet.
The F-22 is only needed when penetration of Gen-IV air defense systems is required.
Just like the B-2 did not replace the B-52 (most cost effective bomber). The F-22 should not replace the F-15C / F-16.
“Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm.” — James Madison
Jeffs right, air superiority is a must.
djemi (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 1:05PM EST (link)Simple demographics, if we let them catch up before we replace and improve they win because of simple numbers. The fact that in the meantime while we wait for them to catch up we lose that knowledge that the 95000 replacers and improvers have.
“If I can’t shoot rabbits,then I can’t shoot fascist”
“With age, comes Wisdom, but only if you are paying Attention, son” my ‘Old Man’
RS Help files (h/t JLenardDetroit) Grassroots in Michigan
Moes Strategy
F-15s and F-16s will be with us for a long while
fmaidment (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 5:52PM EST (link)The question is, what do we do when the F-15s/16s are as outdated and ineffective as F-4s are today? Or as F-104s were 20 years ago?
The issue isn’t one of what we need now. It’s an issue of what we’ll need in 20, 30, 40 years.
As for the B-2 being cost-inefficient, remember that it was conceived at a time when our perceived need was for 200 of them. As it is, they are so few and (as a result) so expensive that we can’t afford to lose even one. If we’d built all 200, they would have been much more cost-effective like the B-52 (of which we built hundreds. Even if we’d built, say, 60 of them, they would be far more cost effective and useful to us today.
Canceling the F-22 program would be a huge mistake leaving us vulnerable to nations equipped with advanced Chinese, Russian and European fighters, which are getting better and better all the time. The F-35 is an amazing aircraft in itself, but like the F-16 with the F-15, it cannot supplant the F-22.
Follow Me on Twitter
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
– - Thomas Jefferson, to Archibald Stuart, 1791
I liked Top Gun as much as the next guy, but...
mallcopsaysno Wednesday, March 18th at 12:50PM EST (link)The publicity campaign surrounding this fighter jet turns me off. Jobs, jobs, jobs! That’s what is at stake here!
This doesn’t fit my view that the purpose of national defense is defense for the nation, not jobs for the nation. Wasteful government spending, even at the Pentagon, needs to be brought under control.
I refused to apologize for chickenhawking when told to.
Eisenhower was right.but most of our modern toys comes from
djemi (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 1:09PM EST (link)Past Pentagon spending, nescessity drives inovation. Simple numbers means we simple have no choice but to be the best when it come the military kit
“If I can’t shoot rabbits,then I can’t shoot fascist”
“With age, comes Wisdom, but only if you are paying Attention, son” my ‘Old Man’
RS Help files (h/t JLenardDetroit) Grassroots in Michigan
Moes Strategy
Reagan
PridianPontification (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 1:11PM EST (link)“‘Of the four wars in my lifetime, none came about because the U.S. was too strong.” – Ronald Reagan
More technological development and more financial aid to engineering students are imperative to keep us on top.
You have a point, but all the developments in the world
janis (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 1:16PM EST (link)won’t matter if the guy at the top refuses to allow the spending to move them from drawing board to airfield. I’d like to see Obama figure out how to mobilize his sycophants to defend this nation.
Yes
PridianPontification (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 2:19PM EST (link)Oh, we’re in complete agreement there. My assumption is that the President is so insipidly sophomoric he still believes he’ll be able to talk our way out of any conflict, regarding as he does war as a type of misunderstanding between parties. Don’t be surprised if DARPA starts testing mobile bulletproof teleprompters suitable for forward deployment
Fighting the last war
Kyle-MI (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 1:17PM EST (link)The danger in military planning is fighting the last war instead of anticipating future conflicts. Currently the last war is Iraq and Afghanistan, superior technology against a persistent low-tech enemy. Against such foes the F-22 does not look cost effective. However future potential dangers include a rearmed hostile Russia, a China with greatly improved technology, and a North Korea supplied by China and/or Russia. Rebuilding technological superiority does not come quickly or easily. I don’t want to see us on the edge of some future war, having to scramble to overcome a technology gap. I am very worried that Obama is literally (and I mean it in the proper sense of the word) mortgaging our future.
Especially true if you look at the etymology of mortgage
civil truth (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 3:45PM EST (link)Its root meaning is “death pledge” which means that failure to honor the terms of the loan means that the item pledged is forever forfeited (dead) to the borrower.
In the case of Obama and our military, his “borrowing” (actually robbing) against our military security will likely leave us all physically if not repaid, which the Democrats evidently have no intention of so doing.
Thus the Clinton era rises from the dead to face a changed and far more menancing world. Zombies walk; hopefully millions of Americans will not die as a result.
The greatest evil…is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the offices of a thoroughly nasty business concern. -C.S. Lewis
http://www.gmsplace.com/
We are showing weakness at the wrong time
franklinslocke Wednesday, March 18th at 1:40PM EST (link)We have our enemies pushing us around in the Middle East, Asia, and South America and this guy wants to cut defense spending and programs!?
We are just showing them we don’t understand the threat and are not taking them seriously. All this does is encourage them to keep intimidating us.
“Peace through strength…”—Ronald Reagan
“To be prepared for war, is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.”– George Washington, First Annual Message, January 8, 1790
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
F-35 JSF?
Yil Wednesday, March 18th at 3:02PM EST (link)Isn’t everybody getting ready for the F-35 or Joint Strike Fighter? It is stealthy (though not as good as the F-22), far cheaper, and all the services plan a version of it. The cost of replacing a lot of currently flying F-14/15/16/18 or whatever gets replaced means it have a huge price tag overall though. So I guess someone is making a choice: get 3-5 F-35′s or 1 F-22. Given the limited role of the F-22 that might not be a bad choice.
Your analysis of the current F-35, F-22 debate
robmikpet (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 3:27PM EST (link)is incorrect. The F-22 and F-35 are very different aircraft. If fact due to the fact that F-22 R&D costs are paid for each current F-22 costs only $140 million, each F-35 over $150 million. While the F-35 will drop in price after hundreds are built buying F-22 now IS CHEAPER. They also represent different missions the F-22 is an airsuperiority fighter, the F-35 is a stealthy bomb truck with some air to aiir capability.
F-22 is faster, stealthier so is much more survivable than the F-35. The US needs at least 250 to 381 (the Air Force’s stated requirement) F-22′s. Please read Rebecca Grant’s articles at Spacedaily.com she is a PhD defense analyst much smarter than I am.
The US needs system for system overmatch to such a degree as to deter any and all agressors.
The DOD needs about $50 billion a year extra for re-equiping and modernization the force. The $787 billion stimulas would have been close to 15 years of necessary spending for weapons. Instead it went to ACORN and other crap.
Since the Democrats have neglected/abandoned the nuclear deterrent mission we better have conventional systems that are not slightly better than current foreign systems – some say the SU-30/35 series of Russian fighters are better than the F-15/16/18 series – but so much better that any enemy will think twice before taking provocative actions globally.
Totally different roles, Yil
Jeff Emanuel (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 3:35PM EST (link)F-35 is a strike fighter, designed to be the next-generation version of the F-16CJ and the A-10 (sheds tear for the stupid decision to retire the beloved Hog), conducting Air-Ground, Wild Weasel, and CAS operations. F-22 is air to air.
JE
Much like the M-2/3 debate...
fmaidment (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 6:17PM EST (link)Anyone recall Congress getting uppity about the M-2/3 Bradley and how it wasn’t a very good tank?
Of course, the M-2/3 isn’t a tank, it’s an infantry fighting vehicle. It was an excellent vehicle for its role, but Congress didn’t understand it.
Seems the same goes for the detractors of the F-22 vs the F-35. The F-22 is an air-superiority fighter with air-to-ground capabilities, like the F-15 and later versions of the F-14. The F-35 is a strike fighter, the mission of which is to fight its way to a target, bomb it, and fight its way back. The F-22s take control of the skies while the F-35s pound ground.
Yeah, and retiring the A-10 was a huge mistake. Sure it ain’t sexy, but find me another aircraft that can obliterate a battalion of tanks then lose half its fuselage, an engine and the better part of a wing, and still bring its pilot home.
Follow Me on Twitter
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
– - Thomas Jefferson, to Archibald Stuart, 1791
Ever so minor correction Fred...
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:46AM EST (link)The F-15C has no Air to Ground capabilities…
But I’m sure you mean the F-15E… carries all kinds of Air to Ground goodies.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
Ever so minor correction Fred...
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:46AM EST (link)The F-15C has no Air to Ground capabilities…
But I’m sure you mean the F-15E… carries all kinds of Air to Ground goodies.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
My only question is what happens to the technology if we decide not to keep it and fund it...
Aaron Gardner (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 3:18PM EST (link)Is it possible that the tech behind the F-22, and the F-35 for that matter, could end up in the hands of our enemies?
conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!
“We’d be much better off if We The People had desired small government enough to keep it.” acat
Follow @Aaron_RS
And by the way
robmikpet (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 3:34PM EST (link)This is a conservative issue as it is a Constitutional issue. “Provide for the Common Defense”
I am a defense hawk who would double the defense budget. I would build the Next Generartion Bomber, replace the MMIII, deploy a Conventional Prompt Global Strike Missile as well as Space Based Weapons even SHARKS WITH FRIGGIN LASER BEAMS ON THEIR HEADS!!
There is no higher mission for the federal government than PROTECTING THIS NATION!!
Gotta look at it from both sides
splanxna Wednesday, March 18th at 3:50PM EST (link)“America hasn’t fought a battle in quite some time in which our air superiority wasn’t a given at the outset. A major reason for that is that we have remained on the leading edge of aviation technology, always making sure to stay ahead of our opponents and allies alike.”
That is probably because it has been a long time since the US engaged an enemy with a functional air force. The F-22 has flown 0 missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
splanxna...how did the Apache do in Desert Storm?....nt
Aaron Gardner (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 4:01PM EST (link)conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!
“We’d be much better off if We The People had desired small government enough to keep it.” acat
Follow @Aaron_RS
Well...
fishbreath (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 5:12PM EST (link)To be fair, the vast majority (all?) Apaches in the US military inventory are operated by the army, not the air force.
Hey fishbreath that doesn't make a difference to the point I was making......
Aaron Gardner (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 6:48PM EST (link)And I know that helos aren’t airforce…but the point is, does it make sense to judge future combats systems (whatever they may be) solely on current battlefield testing? The answer is no.
conform and celebrate diversity….or else!!!
“We’d be much better off if We The People had desired small government enough to keep it.” acat
Follow @Aaron_RS
Re:
fishbreath (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 8:44AM EST (link)I’ll certainly grant you that. I’m a bit of a naval warfare buff, and I seethe whenever I see plans to retire current platforms followed by cancellations of the replacement programs.
Just because we don’t need it *now*…
The Trident SSBN hasn't either
robmikpet (Diary) Wednesday, March 18th at 4:33PM EST (link)so what’s your point. Weapon systems take 15 to 20 years from conception to full operational capabilities. We cannot sit back and “guess” what weapons will be needed or not needed in 20 years because if we are wrong IT IS TOO LATE to do anything about it and LIVES ARE LOST.
Air superiority is a crucial mission today and for the next fifty years at least by then I’m am sure we will have unmanned fighters but still have the mission.
Fighters are sexy...
jnsmith76 Wednesday, March 18th at 9:04PM EST (link)But I am far more concerned about the back and forth about the replacement for the KC-135 tanker which is older than anything in the fleet except the B-52.
Call me what you will, I could care less whether Boeing or the Northrop/EADS(Airbus) partnership wins the contract as long as the planes start being built. I say this even though I work for a Boeing subcontractor.
Fighters don’t matter if they don’t have gas.
The saying is..
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:35AM EST (link)You can’t kick _ _ _ without tanker Gas.
It rhymes for those of you having trouble figuring this out.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
The saying is..
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:35AM EST (link)You can’t kick _ _ _ without tanker Gas.
It rhymes for those of you having trouble figuring this out.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
Has anyone here WORKED with the Raptor?
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:27AM EST (link)Look Yall,
I’m about to get REAL Georgian on you…
I was an 1NO at Langley AFB, and was part of the 1st Operational Support Squadron. I provided support to the F-15 AND the F-22. As someone that KNOWS the capability of enemy surface to air missles (SAMs) and enemy fighter aircraft, and the capabilities of the F-22, there is no such animal as overcapable.
It’s 2013. Iran has a nuclear weapon. The President (hopefully a conservative that understand the primary roll of the US Federal Government is to protect is citizens) They have threatened to use it on Isreal. Isreal can not launch a strike into Iran because the SAMS Iran has baught from Russia have such OVERCAPABLE abilities, any fighter they launch will be shot down.
The F-22 is the only fighter that can go in and take out those SAMs.
Lets say we have to go to war with a country that possess the MiG 29, or some Flanker variant. You don’t want to send a pilot in with a 51% chance of victory. You have to give our pilots EVERY chance to win.
I will say it again… when you have American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, or Marines involved… THERE IS NO SUCH ANIMAL AS OVERCAPABLE.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
Has anyone here WORKED with the Raptor?
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:27AM EST (link)Look Yall,
I’m about to get REAL Georgian on you…
I was an 1NO at Langley AFB, and was part of the 1st Operational Support Squadron. I provided support to the F-15 AND the F-22. As someone that KNOWS the capability of enemy surface to air missles (SAMs) and enemy fighter aircraft, and the capabilities of the F-22, there is no such animal as overcapable.
It’s 2013. Iran has a nuclear weapon. The President (hopefully a conservative that understand the primary roll of the US Federal Government is to protect is citizens) They have threatened to use it on Isreal. Isreal can not launch a strike into Iran because the SAMS Iran has baught from Russia have such OVERCAPABLE abilities, any fighter they launch will be shot down.
The F-22 is the only fighter that can go in and take out those SAMs.
Lets say we have to go to war with a country that possess the MiG 29, or some Flanker variant. You don’t want to send a pilot in with a 51% chance of victory. You have to give our pilots EVERY chance to win.
I will say it again… when you have American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, or Marines involved… THERE IS NO SUCH ANIMAL AS OVERCAPABLE.
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.
You guys at RS have to give me an edit button after I post...
Wing Zero (Diary) Thursday, March 19th at 6:29AM EST (link)My sentance starting with “The President” was supposed to finish “has very limited options when dealing with a state with advanced Air Defense systems.”
1-21-09 – We are so screwed… Wait… maybe not just yet.