Quote Originally Posted by Cliff View Post
FYI While I don't fly Raptors, I have flown with it a lot, and while it has had issues in the past, it is getting the job done now. Most recently, the PACAF IG gave Elmendorf AFB an ORI (full war dress rehersal) during which the F-22 did very well in all respects - resulting in an "outstanding" grade. Results talked about here. Oh by the way, the legacy aircraft aren't doing much better because they are simply wearing out - the cost of maintaining them is steadily increasing and their FMC (OR) rates are falling.
I have to say, I see the F-22 as an article of faith for the USAF. "Good Fighter = must be good."

I am fascinated by air power theory, but the lack of any real theory kinda prevents me taking it seriously. F-22 is a very good example.
  • Stealth Aircraft, with a radar!!! yeah. I know you can turn it off and be "networked," -see next point
  • Currently available networked electro-optic air defence and passive radar, may make "stealth" greatly less effective.
  • Very manoeuvrable, but cannot out manoeuvre many in service missiles, without injuring the pilot.
  • 80% of the cost only got a 20% improvement. There is no evidence that it justifies it's return on investment.
  • It also rests on the case that air power capability is absolutely related to aircraft performance, - which history shows not to be true.


Now, if someone tells me that there are sound political and industrial arguments for building F-22, then OK, but the operational arguments are pretty weak. Historically, the majority of the evidence shows that Pilots and Air Forces are the least qualified to choose their aircraft. Everyone wants a Ferrari, when what is needed is a pick-up or a Volvo Estate.