Question about the F-22 and cost.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
The impression I'd got was that the Air Force is convinced it can get
295 if the funding was just left alone ie. stable, so they could try
to work the problem.


Air Force will eventually get 80-110 Jurassicfighters and most of them
will
probably be converted to ECM aircraft.

Now now Denyav, little stinky Ferrin is just catching up with the 180 I
posted a year ago. You can't expect him to convert to reality so soon.
Right now there is still a possibility of 160 airframes;180 minus the twenty
FSD airframes. A fantastic waste of money for so small a force.

As much as I hate to say it, America would be btter off making a buy from
the UK.

There is however, that sweet Georgia pork to consider.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:16:47 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Denyav" wrote in message
...
The impression I'd got was that the Air Force is convinced it can get
295 if the funding was just left alone ie. stable, so they could try
to work the problem.


Air Force will eventually get 80-110 Jurassicfighters and most of them
will
probably be converted to ECM aircraft.

Now now Denyav, little stinky Ferrin is just catching up with the 180 I
posted a year ago. You can't expect him to convert to reality so soon.


Strakes.

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:16:47 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Denyav" wrote in message
...
The impression I'd got was that the Air Force is convinced it can get
295 if the funding was just left alone ie. stable, so they could try
to work the problem.


Air Force will eventually get 80-110 Jurassicfighters and most of them
will
probably be converted to ECM aircraft.

Now now Denyav, little stinky Ferrin is just catching up with the 180 I
posted a year ago. You can't expect him to convert to reality so soon.

Strakes.

Yes little stinky, Lockmart tried to use 8 inch strakes to correct their
tail problems. do try and keep up.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:59:34 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:16:47 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Denyav" wrote in message
...
The impression I'd got was that the Air Force is convinced it can get
295 if the funding was just left alone ie. stable, so they could try
to work the problem.


Air Force will eventually get 80-110 Jurassicfighters and most of them
will
probably be converted to ECM aircraft.

Now now Denyav, little stinky Ferrin is just catching up with the 180 I
posted a year ago. You can't expect him to convert to reality so soon.

Strakes.

Yes little stinky, Lockmart tried to use 8 inch strakes to correct their
tail problems. do try and keep up.



You're getting more and more respectable all the time. Still just as
full of **** as ever though.

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:59:34 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 09:16:47 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Denyav" wrote in message
...
The impression I'd got was that the Air Force is convinced it can
get
295 if the funding was just left alone ie. stable, so they could
try
to work the problem.


Air Force will eventually get 80-110 Jurassicfighters and most of
them
will
probably be converted to ECM aircraft.

Now now Denyav, little stinky Ferrin is just catching up with the 180
I
posted a year ago. You can't expect him to convert to reality so
soon.

Strakes.

Yes little stinky, Lockmart tried to use 8 inch strakes to correct their
tail problems. do try and keep up.

You're getting more and more respectable all the time. Still just as
full of **** as ever though.

I was always respectable Ferrin, you have been a fool.

I have already written that I will not oppose the production run any longer,
(Georgia pork) so I don't see why you can't just discuss the numbers issue
in a sober manner. The money is already spent, that is what jumping
straight to production was all about, instead of the 19 airframe FSD that is
real. Perhaps the titanium tail spar is a fix and perhaps not, there is no
way to know until the airplane stacks up some hours. (AV19)

Now go back to aviation and stop your personality attack. The tab to me is
so wide that there is no possibility of discrediting me, so calm down.

You're getting more and more respectable all the time. Still just as
full of **** as ever though.

I was always respectable Ferrin, you have been a fool.

Uh huh. I guess some things still zip right over your head though
huh?




I have already written that I will not oppose the production run any longer,
(Georgia pork) so I don't see why you can't just discuss the numbers issue
in a sober manner.

As far as the numbers go the more F-22s the merrier. My gripe is a
cap was given, the USAF seemed okay with that, and now the **** is
getting stirred about cost again. A cap is a cap. As far as
sobriety goes my rant isn't about how many are being bought but how
the purse strings are being handled. If the Air Force says they can
make do with the cap and aren't asking for money above and beyond it
then I don't see what the problem is. IMO part of the reason the
airforce is okay with the cap is at least it gave them a number to
shoot for and the possiblility of stable funding. Not unlimited
funding. STABLE funding. It's no wonder things are as screwed up as
they are. I suppose it's the nature of the beast but there's got to
be accountability. I completely agree on the issue of PORK (wow
agreeing with Tarver, what's the world coming to). Not all expensive
programs are pork though. Certainly not the F-22. Consider who wants
it and who doesn't. The airforce wants it. The couldn't give a ****
LESS where the damn thing is built or who gets the contracts, they
just want the aircraft. Now look at the C-130J and Osprey. There's
some pork with a capitol "P". Anytime the politicians say "you WILL
buy these aircraft" and the services saying "we don't want them" you
can hear the bacon frying. I like the B-1. The airforce doesn't want
to spend the $$$ to pull those 30 back out of retirement but the
politicians are trying to push them to. Pork. Just because you hate
a weapon system or think it's expensive or even if it IS expensive,
what determines whether or not it's pork is WHO wants it built.






The money is already spent, that is what jumping
straight to production was all about, instead of the 19 airframe FSD that is
real. Perhaps the titanium tail spar is a fix and perhaps not, there is no
way to know until the airplane stacks up some hours. (AV19)

Now go back to aviation and stop your personality attack.

Sorry, did I hurt your feelings "stinky"?






The tab to me is
so wide that there is no possibility of discrediting me, so calm down.

How about in english for the rest of us?

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...

You're getting more and more respectable all the time. Still just as
full of **** as ever though.

I was always respectable Ferrin, you have been a fool.

Uh huh. I guess some things still zip right over your head though
huh?

Scott, consider for a moment that you are not respectable, therefore you
have no connection whatsoever to my credibility.

I have already written that I will not oppose the production run any
longer,
(Georgia pork) so I don't see why you can't just discuss the numbers
issue
in a sober manner.

As far as the numbers go the more F-22s the merrier.

That is not the question. The issue is how many F-22s are necessary to have
a viable force.