A 1990 design will do the job in 2030? Okay, if you say so. Given that most Squadrons field 12-14 aircraft with a 90% OR, the implication is that six or more may be hangar queens but if you're cool with that, so am I...Against what?F-35 can't get the job doneTrue -- that last. At all. highly possible.and we won't have another fighter till 2040-2050 at best - if at all.I doubt it but we'll certainly have to wait and see who's correct.Stopping the F-22 at an unsustainable 187 ties our hands for the next 30 years.You can't use the total loss rate if you're going to talk the F-22, look at the air to air rate only. Adjust it for the fact that Thuds which had no business even being there but were all the AF had due to bad purchasing decisions got attacked by Mig 21s, SAMs, ADA and small arms. Defending them with a long range missile launcher of a big Fox 4 against an agile Mig took some adaptation. So to did the CAS mission performed by supersonic fighters which got knocked down in the south by small arms fire. You're comparing Apples and Mangoes. Even so, the VN loss rate was far better than that in Korea or WW II. A ratio of roughly 0.4 losses per 1,000 sorties compared favorably with a 2.0 rate in Korea and the 9.7 figure during World War II. LINK. Note the sheer number of aircraft types.We certainly had localized air superiority at best over Vietnam, and lost a lot of aircraft. We could not afford that loss rate now, at least not with 187 Raptors.Doesn't the 'dead' bit remain to be seen from an aircraft still in design proof stage? Not as survivable against SAMs based on its lesser stealth characteristics and speed -- or its more modern avionic fit?the F-35 is inferior to the F-22 in many ways, especially in air-to-air and DEAD. Not as survivable against SAMs either - the F-35 needs the F-22 to be a viable platform in the face of any adversary with double digit SAMs.
Where's John T.? He was the guy who first brought up the F22 on this thread.
In any event, Cliff, I appreciate your defense of the program but you and I are unlikely to agree. You're an airplane driver and I'm a gravel cruncher, so your opinion ought to count more...
Thus I cede the ground, er, air, to you and will stick to the thread henceforth.
Bookmarks