User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 2:35:49 PM EDT
[#1]
[img]http://www2.acc.af.mil/library/factsheets/F-22.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.suchoj.com/andere/FA-22/riss/FA-22_01.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 6:12:20 PM EDT
[#2]
[img]www.gunwares.com/images/public/F22.jpg[/img]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:32:40 PM EDT
[#3]
Their are operational F-22's at Tyndall AFB, the training command for the F-22.
About 20 of the radar-evading, supersonic jets have been built and flown in Marietta and sent to Air Force bases in California and Nevada. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:43:09 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: [url]http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=28131[/url] Lockheed fighter plane scheduled for Rose Bowl flyover The Associated Press - MARIETTA, Ga. Lockheed-Martins F/A-22 Raptor fighter will fly over the Rose Bowl on New Years Day in Pasadena, Calif., the largest public display yet for the Georgia-built warplanes. A single Raptor fighter will join a B-2 Spirit bomber and an F-117 Nighthawk fighter in the flight over the 100,000-seat stadium. A television audience of about 18 million people are expected to watch top-ranked USC and No. 4 Michigan compete in the Rose Bowl. The [red]$200 million[/red] F/A-22 is the most costly fighter in history. About 20 of the radar-evading, supersonic jets have been built and flown in Marietta and sent to Air Force bases in California and Nevada. The planes will undergo a series of war games against other U.S. fighters to determine how well the planes will perform in combat. The Air Force expects to purchase [red]381 Raptors[/red], which are scheduled to go to front-line U.S. fighter squadrons in 2005. That's almost $80 Billion! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:46:01 PM EDT
[#5]
the F-22 is quite possibly the coolest plane ever
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:46:05 PM EDT
[#6]
381 F-22's at $200m each?!?!?! I thought they were $100m.
And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:47:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Quoted: [url]http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap_newfullstory.asp?ID=28131[/url] Lockheed fighter plane scheduled for Rose Bowl flyover The Associated Press - MARIETTA, Ga. Lockheed-Martins F/A-22 Raptor fighter will fly over the Rose Bowl on New Years Day in Pasadena, Calif., the largest public display yet for the Georgia-built warplanes. A single Raptor fighter will join a B-2 Spirit bomber and an F-117 Nighthawk fighter in the flight over the 100,000-seat stadium. A television audience of about 18 million people are expected to watch top-ranked USC and No. 4 Michigan compete in the Rose Bowl. The [red]$200 million[/red] F/A-22 is the most costly fighter in history. About 20 of the radar-evading, supersonic jets have been built and flown in Marietta and sent to Air Force bases in California and Nevada. The planes will undergo a series of war games against other U.S. fighters to determine how well the planes will perform in combat. The Air Force expects to purchase [red]381 Raptors[/red], which are scheduled to go to front-line U.S. fighter squadrons in 2005. That's almost $80 Billion! "A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money...." -The late Sen. Everett M. Dirksen, (R-Illinois) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 7:52:14 PM EDT
[#8]
When I see "Flyover" I can't help but hear "Ahh negative GhostRider, the pattern is full...BOOM!"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 8:00:14 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: 381 F-22's at $200m each?!?!?! I thought they were $100m. And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. [rolleyes] [banghead] Yes, the AF brass are world class morons to let the A-10's fade away. History has shown them to be one of the best assets on the battlefield. Problem is they aren't cool, aren't stealth, don't go Mach 2 and are ugly (not to me). Idiots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 8:06:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: That's almost $80 Billion! Yeah I know... And Gray Davis is now saying SHIIIIIT Less than half of that would have bailed my ass out!!! Speaking of which... I think he is now a tour guide on the universal studios tour. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 8:36:51 PM EDT
[#11]
The 2 B2 stealth bombers flew right over my house last year. This year I'm going to stand out there early to watch them fly by, and also I will be waving the USA flag. I'm pretty sure they can see me, because I could see the outline of their canopy when they made the turn to good west bound.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 8:43:33 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: the F-22 is quite possibly the coolest plane ever maybe the 2nd coolest... [img]http://www.wvi.com/~lelandh/ladc1.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 9:19:03 PM EDT
[#13]
And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. The A-10 is nothing but a flying tank that can destory anything in its path. The problem is the AF brass only care about air superiority, not supporting the troops on the ground. Fucking politics as usual. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 9:50:11 PM EDT
[#14]
[Croc Hunter Voice]She's a beut[Croc Hunter Voice]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 9:57:40 PM EDT
[#15]
ARFCOM scientists: The F-22 prolly comes in at about twenty five tons or so...at $200 million per copy, is it literally "worth its weight in gold"?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 10:03:46 PM EDT
[#16]
My vote for the SR-71 too. Not bad for late 50's technology.
And that is a great picture. The A-10 would have been gone by the early 90's except for the outstanding performance in GW1. Pretty hard to argue with the success there especially when you don't have something in the pipeline to replace it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 10:16:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: (snip) And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. Fighter jockeys, who run the USAF, look down on everybody else, esp. bomber and transport pilots, but the lowest of the low, in their eyes, is ground attack. When my dad was in the USAF, the TAF types all got hand-me-down F100s and F105s, and many of these were lost in VietNam. No glory, but lots of guts. No glory means no advancement. Guts don't count for much in a post-modern world in which the military receives sporadic support when conservatives are in power, but that world barely tolerates the military whenever there's a Democrat congress or prez in office. The tool AKA Wesley Clark notwithstanding, it would seem sacrifice and bravery are not much appreciated by the ex-hippies that run the DNC nowadays... That must be why the AF lets women fly the A-10s. They just don't care about ground attack, hand the planes off to their unwanted stepchildren, and wish it would all just fade away.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 10:24:55 PM EDT
[#18]
I want Winston_Wolf to weigh in about how the AH-64 got CREAMED in a massed attack in the Iraq war. Something like 35 Apaches attacked some Republican Guard divisions close to Baghdad, and nearly all of them were turned away by small arms fire. Yet the Army's buying more Apaches, while like I said before, the beloved A-10 is completely shafted.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 11:36:11 PM EDT
[#19]
: The Associated Press - MARIETTA, Ga. The $200 million F/A-22 is the most costly fighter in history. "Most Costly"? I'm pretty sure that's bad English. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2003 11:46:00 PM EDT
[#20]
As a tactical aviator, I have to agree that the F22 is too expensive for what we get. The JSF would be more than adequate, and the current F15 and F16 inventory could be stretched until the JSF comes online.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 2:26:10 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: : The Associated Press - MARIETTA, Ga. The $200 million F/A-22 is the most costly fighter in history. "Most Costly"? I'm pretty sure that's bad English. No. I'm pretty sure you're wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 2:50:04 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: ARFCOM scientists: The F-22 prolly comes in at about twenty five tons or so...at $200 million per copy, is it literally "worth its weight in gold"? By my calculations, it's only worth $250.0 per ounce. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 3:52:20 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: (snip) And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. Fighter jockeys, who run the USAF, look down on everybody else, esp. bomber and transport pilots, but the lowest of the low, in their eyes, is ground attack. When my dad was in the USAF, the TAF types all got hand-me-down F100s and F105s, and many of these were lost in VietNam. No glory, but lots of guts. No glory means no advancement. Guts don't count for much in a post-modern world in which the military receives sporadic support when conservatives are in power, but that world barely tolerates the military whenever there's a Democrat congress or prez in office. The tool AKA Wesley Clark notwithstanding, it would seem sacrifice and bravery are not much appreciated by the ex-hippies that run the DNC nowadays... That must be why the AF lets women fly the A-10s. They just don't care about ground attack, hand the planes off to their unwanted stepchildren, and wish it would all just fade away.... Then transfer the planes, support equipment, and volunteer pilots/personnel to the ARMY, and let them do the job. I think there just might be room for advancement in Army Aviation for some good Warthog jocks. The Marines do well with their integral CAS. No reason why the Army can't do as well, either. Except that they haven't been permitted the right tools, I.E. properly designed fixed-wing aircraft, to do the job right. Time to get rid of the silly, Truman-era agreement between the Army and the Air Force which gutted Army fixed-wing aviation. This business of CAS being the red-headed stepchild of the Air Force is costing lives, folks. Time to put the horse before the cart, and let the Army be responsible for its own CAS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 4:42:03 AM EDT
[#24]
Actually it would be better if the Army funded the A-10 program for the USAF, just like the USAF funds part of the EA-6B program.
Quoted: Then transfer the planes, support equipment, and volunteer pilots/personnel to the ARMY, and let them do the job. I think there just might be room for advancement in Army Aviation for some good Warthog jocks. The Marines do well with their integral CAS. No reason why the Army can't do as well, either. Except that they haven't been permitted the right tools, I.E. properly designed fixed-wing aircraft, to do the job right. Time to get rid of the silly, Truman-era agreement between the Army and the Air Force which gutted Army fixed-wing aviation. This business of CAS being the red-headed stepchild of the Air Force is costing lives, folks. Time to put the horse before the cart, and let the Army be responsible for its own CAS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 6:06:11 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. The A-10 is nothing but a flying tank that can destory anything in its path. The problem is the AF brass only care about air superiority, not supporting the troops on the ground. Fucking politics as usual. My thoughts exactly - That is one bad ass close support aircraft! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 6:31:11 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: And they're not going to spend a dime on the A-10, or bother to develop anything worthy to take its place. The A-10 is nothing but a flying tank that can destory anything in its path. The problem is the AF brass only care about air superiority, not supporting the troops on the ground. Fucking politics as usual. My thoughts exactly - That is one bad ass close support aircraft! As former Infantry, I vote for the A10 anyday! [img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=20973[/img] Edited to add: I have a 1128X900 size of this if anybody wants it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 7:27:19 AM EDT
[#27]
Another A10 pic...
[img]www.gunwares.com/images/public/a10.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 7:38:53 AM EDT
[#28]
The thrust vectoring system was already outdated before the first plane was produced. This is only one example. It is a plane that never should have been purchased or placed into service.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 7:51:47 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Quoted: the F-22 is quite possibly the coolest plane ever maybe the 2nd coolest... [url]http://www.wvi.com/~lelandh/ladc1.jpg[/url] point taken |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 4:32:49 PM EDT
[#30]
The F-22 is the "World's Most Expensive Airshow Airplane", displacing the B-1B from that role.
Don't hold your breath until they are ready for war fighting - I'll retire first. Low Observable is good. Thrust vectoring is good. Lockheed's execution is actually about on track to match the crappy value they give the taxpayer on every airframe contract they win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 4:40:59 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: The F-22 is the "World's Most Expensive Airshow Airplane", displacing the B-1B from that role. Don't hold your breath until they are ready for war fighting - I'll retire first. Low Observable is good. Thrust vectoring is good. Lockheed's execution is actually about on track to match the crappy value they give the taxpayer on every airframe contract they win. Someone sounds a little bitter about losing the JSF [;)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 4:55:11 PM EDT
[#32]
As someone once said about a high-level conference on military aviation:
"If you know about it, it's obsolete and its replacement's replacement is being developed as we speak." Mind boggling for sure, folks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 4:58:54 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Quoted: the F-22 is quite possibly the coolest plane ever maybe the 2nd coolest... [url]http://www.wvi.com/~lelandh/ladc1.jpg[/url] DEFINATELY SECOND! The SR71 is the king. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 6:11:07 PM EDT
[#34]
I submit the P-38, the P2V, the P-3, the C-130, the U-2 and the SR-71 as examples of the EXCELLENT value on airframe contracts that Lockheed won and produced.
I'll agree that the F-22 suffers from "program bloat". I think that once it is on line and it has been developed it will be a great warbird. Look how long it took Northrop to get the B-2 program going into production and how long it has taken to get it upgraded to its full design capabilities. AeroE has quite the "inside" knowledge of the aircraft industry. Quoted: Lockheed's execution is actually about on track to match the crappy value they give the taxpayer on every airframe contract they win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 6:40:41 PM EDT
[#35]
The SR-71 is the coolest.
[img]http://jbowman90.dyndns.org/Pictures/Planes/SR71/EC95-42883-4.jpg[/img] [img]http://jbowman90.dyndns.org/Pictures/Planes/SR71/EC94-42883-2.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 7:47:03 PM EDT
[#36]
ok a few questions here....
Was that F-22 Built to take on the latest and greatest that russia has produced? (that china now has) Focusing mostly on A/A and dogfighting? While the JSF is more of a cheaper jack of all trades basic fighter that will still have capability but isnt really a huge advancement over what we now have? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2003 7:55:48 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: As former Infantry, I vote for the A10 anyday! ....as did the Wehrmacht for the A-10 of its day, the Henschel Hs123A. Read and look at the following, and see how the more things change, the more they stay the same. Substitute "A-10" for "Hs 123", and update the names, dates and places, and much still applies. A good close-support a/c is always loved by its pilots and the troops it protects, but its air force looks upon it as an unglamorous stick in the mud of progress and glory. [url]http://1000aircraftphotos.com/HistoryBriefs/HenschelHs123.htm[/url]Henschel Hs 123 The Henschel Fleugzeugwerke AG designed the Hs 123 as a stop-gap until an more advanced dive-bomber type should emerge, what ultimately became the Junkers Ju 87 [It] (snip) flew for the first time at Johannisthal near Berlin 8 May 1935. (snip) A further 229 production Hs 123A-1 and B-1 aircraft were built by Henschel and AGO Flugzeugwerke, the latter building 129, production ended April 1937. The Hs 123 shed first blood in 1936 as five aircraft were used by the Condor Legion in the Spanish Civil war. Later these and 11 more were sold to the Spanish AF, and 12 were exported to China. The outcome of a 1938 exercise led the Führungsstab of the Luftwaffe to believe that an aircraft of this configuration could play no roll (sic) in a future war and withdrew the aircraft from the frontline service, these being than allocated to dive-bomber trainings units. Henschel and Ago were instructed to scrap all jigs, models and tools for production. With the outbreak of world war 2 the Hs 123 was used in all theatres, Poland, France, the Balkan and finally Russia and the aircraft was used up to its limits. [red]It was a big surprise that this aircraft was such a tremendous success in tactical and aircraft sturdiness aspects, being also used in the ground-attack configuration. It was nearly the only aircraft that always had operational readiness during the Russian winter of 1941/1942.[/red] The Hs 123 soldiered on until mid-1944. [img]http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/avenue/vy75/planes/hs-123.gif[/img] [url]www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/henshs123.html[/url] Hs123, by Frans Bonne, Remarks: The Hs123 was a remarkable airplane. It was tested in war conditions during the Spanish Civil War and was moderately successful. At the end of the Spanish Civil War the Junkers Ju 87 was operationally ready and was more promising. It (the Hs123) was taken out of production and first-line service in the fall of 1938. 1 Geschwader (Lehrgeschwader) was still operational at the outbreak of war in 1939, and the aircraft were used once more. Their usefulness continued until 1944, in the campaigns against Poland, North-West Europe, the Balkans, and Russia. It became so popular that there were demands to reinstate production, even in 1942. At the end of its long life there were just too many damaged and destroyed aircraft, and the last few aircraft were taken out of service in late 1944. Strengths: Extremely tough, capable of absorbing punishment Pinpoint accuracy in dive bombing. Very effective. Weaknesses: Slow speed. [url]http://www.angelfire.com/ab4/airplanes/Henschel/HS123/History.html[/url] The Henschel Hs 123 was designed as the first dive bomber to equip the new Luftwaffe. It was first tested in 1935 and entered service in the autumn of 1936. During the Spanish Civil War the Hs 123 was used with great success in the close support role and gained great popularity for their reliability and rugged construction. When the Second World War broke out the Hs 123 had been almost completely replaced by the Ju87B and only one group was available for the Polish campaign. These remaining aircraft were so effective that they were retained for use in the battles in Belgium and France. With the attack on Russia the elderly biplanes were again in action, [red]often operating when conditions were so bad that more modern aircraft were grounded.[/red] The Henschel Hs 123 normally carried four 110lb bombs and two fixed machine guns. The 870 h.p. BMW engine gave a maximum speed of 212 m.p.h. Wing span was 34ft 5ins and length 27ft 4ins. [img]http://www.angelfire.com/ab4/airplanes/Henschel/HS123/Hs123_2.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW3/hs123-002.jpg[/img] Note: to spare the sensibilities of GB's employers, who host this site, I've kept views of the a/c with the Hakenkreuz on the rudder to a minimum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2003 4:39:14 AM EDT
[#38]
If you are talking about CAS for the Nazi's I would pick the Ju 87D.
[img]http://perso.wanadoo.fr/christophe.arribat/stofju87b.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2003 4:02:54 PM EDT
[#39]
I'm not one bit bitter about the Big B losing the JSF contract - both contractors submitted crappy airplanes, albeit constrained by the specification - maximum cost per airplane.
Don't hold your breath 'til you see F-35's blackening the sky, either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2003 4:49:02 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: The F-22 is the "World's Most Expensive Airshow Airplane", displacing the B-1B from that role. The B-1B took itself off the list after Operation Desert Fox in 1998... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
