Back to Squawk list
  • 29

Problem-plagued plane hits ISIS: F-22 goes into combat

Übermittelt
 
Washington (CNN) -- The problem-plagued F-22 Raptor took part in its first combat mission Monday night, hitting ISIS targets in Syria. The price tag for those jets, which were in development for decades, is a staggering $412 million each -- triple its expected cost, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). (www.cnn.com) Mehr...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


bbabis
bbabis 4
As far as the cost per aircraft goes, remember that figures lie and liars figure. To keep top secret projects top secret imaginative accounting needs to take place. If the military asks for 20 billion to fund a secret project then the jig is up. What you do is assign 30 billion to a 10 billion project that is out in the open and you have your funding. Yes, as tax payers we regularly get ripped off but not all of the excess from that $300 hammer goes to partying.
pdhoffmann
pdhoffmann 4
I'm surprised to hear so many people rant against the F-22. I understand the F-35 issue(s), but the F-22, albeit it overdue and over-budget, is a stunning piece of technology that will serve us well for years to come. As for the cost per unit, or even cost for the entire program, it seems that it is hard to measure because, as another user mentioned, it was cancelled with a low production run and much of the technology is brand new and is being used in the F-35 and other applications. Defray the cost over all of the projects the development of this aircraft will support and I am sure one will find it to be much more reasonable. I'm not sure how this program compares to others in terms of setbacks and issues (remembering that again much of this technology is more complicated than ever), but I am more willing to forgive on this program that the F-35. One final interesting fact - if this is such a useless aircraft, why is it against the law to export it? Seems like Lockheed is getting the stick in the eye.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I'm a whole lot more in the corner of the F22 than the F35, but I'm not seeing the F22 do anything that an F18 or F16 can't
Macmnii
Jim Preston 3
My son has 4000+ hrs in a hornet n 1000+ traps. He says they went up against the F-22 lots of times n couldn't see them. He said u can't kill something u can't see. Radar or visual.
ronash13
Ron Nash 0
And a couple of thousand $100,000 drones will soon make 187 mega-million dollar fighters jet, utterly obsolete.
Not to worry, it's only long-suffering U.S. taxpayers money that was poured into those F-22's!
bbabis
bbabis 1
You're way off on drone costs Ron. As tax payers, we would love to find $100,000 drones but you need to add three more zeros and then some.
ronash13
Ron Nash 1
I'm sure, that with volume production the cost of drones will end up a whole lot more reasonable than a small number of limited production, exceptionally complex fighter jets, that always seem to need constant mega-million dollar upgrades, fixes, and modifications.
We bought 43 of the F-111C's for Australia, and after 40 years of redesigns to cure all the structural and design faults, 40 years of unbelievably costly avionics and weaponry upgrades, plus tens of millions in costs, disabilities and deaths associated with the toxic chemicals used in the F-111 tank sealing - we finally had a usable fighter aircraft, about the time they became obsolete.
This is not to mention the deaths of 12 RAAF fighter pilots and navigators and the loss of 8 of the 43 RAAF F-111's in training exercises.
That's a pretty high toll to pay, in both money and lives, to get fighters of dubious reliability that were never used in anger.
If we had Lemon Laws for military equipment, then the F111's would have been recalled and we would have got our money back.
Drones will make all manned military aircraft obsolete within a relatively short space of time.
bbabis
bbabis 1
Sorry about all your issues with the (Pig) but there is a reason they were never used in anger. You had one of the most feared weapons system in the region during that time. Their mission was ground hugging at extreme speed which is a dangerous regime. Crews signing on knew this and I salute every one of them. Drones or UMACs though only move the pilot/operator off site. They are not eliminated. Complexity and systems upgrading will continue as usual if not more so. Some of our one trip missiles will soon cost a million or more if they don't already. As far as drones making all manned military aircraft obsolete within a relatively short space of time, well, you'll have to define "relatively." Even the B-52 is scheduled in service until 2050.
plcreary
Peter Creary 1
Tomahawk missile cost- $1.5 mil. Ten targets -cost $15 mil. Smart Bomb Appox. $25,000 -$40,000 per unit. Ten targets $400,000. Do the math and in the end you will always need boots on the ground.War is hell and will never be anything but that. Air power alone will never be enough.
preacher1
preacher1 2
$412 million a copy. At least they are halfway working. I wonder what the F35 is up to now and not really working?
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 2
That's crazy having a price tag like that in the name of defense!!!
tf51d
Thomas Cain 4
Price is only that high because the project was canceled at only 187 aircraft. Per unit price would have dropped over time due to volume if production was allowed to continue.I would have canceled the F-35 over the F-22.
eew5040
Elliot Walker 1
Forget canceling the F-35 program, it should have never been started. The cost for design and acquisition of the F-35 program could have been better spent on the fairly new F-22 program. By the time the F-35 program is complete, we would have spent the same amount of money as if we stuck with the F-22 program. With all the money that will be spent, we will be left with a lesser preforming aircraft, the F-35.
zennermd
zennermd 1
Then you don't want to know the price tag per plane of a B-2...
preacher1
preacher1 2
Didn't it wind up about $2billion per copy or something like that
zennermd
zennermd 1
744pnf
744pnf 2
DoD or Department of Offense?
dedonad
Mr Hoffmann is correct. For pure performance, which of you would prefer to enter Syrian airspace, reportedly defended by some of Russia's best technologies, in an aluminum target. As to UAVs, they are no more capable of penetrating defended airspace and performing the missions performed by F-22s and other stealthy aircraft today than any aluminum aircraft without an extensive support capability. On cost, I'll guarantee if you keep slipping development for an extensive period, then cut the buy from over 600 to 180, the cost per unit will go up enormously, though the actual production cost won’t change much. Bottom line is all arguments but the first miss the point. One can quibble about the scenarios the services are directed by our elected and appointed officials to plan for, but among those scenarios are serious threats that only aircraft like the F-22, F-35 and B-2 can penetrate, operate effectively, and have good odds of return. Given this, I have a question for FlightAware. In addition to highlighting this ridiculous CNN piece, written by people who clearly never intend to fly a mission in defended airspace (high or otherwise) or consider what that might require, how about offering a useful, or even a balanced counterpoint. There is a short, but reasonable effort in AvWeb (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/101/2911-full.html?ET=avweb:e2911:229830a:&st=email#222809). Even there, I’d quibble a bit. There were no high level defenses in Iraq or Afghanistan that justified stealthy fighter capability, and their use would have fed denigrators raw meat to claim their use was political or for publicity (probably correctly so). Would like to see an article published taking CNN to task, and using readily available evidence. You might even offer CNN a chance to reply, but next time they would have to actually prepare.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Well, they got to get the raptors in there to show they work but personally, I don't see them doing anything the F18's can't do.
bbabis
bbabis 2
Yeah, its basically OJT for the crews. I wish them success and safety.
preacher1
preacher1 2
Yeah, it beats a training range. LOL
blueashflyer
blueashflyer 1
Is this how the arab countries are helping us? by letting us take of from U.A.E.
topcat1952
Dennis Knepper 1
Yes, Army Air Corp. Forgot. Putting some shields over the exhaust stacks could minimize SAM targeted heat signatures I rekon. Come in fast and low, equipped with high-tech weapons (plus the 50 cals) and yes, they would do a fine job tearing up the ground targets. Let the German pilots use them too. That would be a touch of joyful irony. We could also give the Marines some Corsairs.
topcat1952
Dennis Knepper 1
Let's bring back the P-51 and P-47 to do the job. Now THOSE were good airplanes for the USAF!
bbabis
bbabis 2
USAAF! I like your thinking. Against the Toyota pickups they would do pretty good. The SAMs would give a little more trouble though.
Macmnii
Jim Preston 1
Who says it is a problem-plaqued plane? Only the Press. The Pilots love it.
UAL012
Is this a report or an editorial? How about neutral facts instead of slanted opinions?
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 1
Sorry, that is the title that CNN used for the article.
joelwiley
joel wiley 0
It's CNN, is there a difference there?
SootBox
SootBox 0
20 years from start to sputter and just now earning it's keep...this and WAAAY over budget....Lockheed Martin should be ashamed.
jwmson
jwmson 0
Typical CNN --- "problem plagued". Try to always say somethig negative about the US military. Rehash old, now fixed problems. The idiots should be glas we are finally getting some value out of the F-22s.
onceastudentpilot
tim mitchell 0
Only 187 in service...sounds like a job for the Pibot mentioned in another squawk.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 3
Then you'd have to get more funds to fund the Pibot!!!

Anmelden

Haben Sie kein Konto? Jetzt (kostenlos) registrieren für kundenspezifische Funktionen, Flugbenachrichtigungen und vieles mehr!
Wussten Sie schon, dass die Flugverfolgung auf FlightAware durch Werbung finanziert wird?
Sie können uns dabei helfen, FlightAware weiterhin kostenlos anzubieten, indem Sie Werbung auf FlightAware.com zulassen. Wir engagieren uns dafür, dass unsere Werbung auch in Zukunft zweckmäßig und unaufdringlich ist und Sie beim Surfen nicht stört. Das Erstellen einer Positivliste für Anzeigen auf FlightAware geht schnell und unkompliziert. Alternativ können Sie sich auch für eines unserer Premium-Benutzerkonten entscheiden..
Schließen