Delivery of Raptor delayed

..

And at almost $200 million a piece! But at least this aircraft lives
up to its name "Raptor"- a dinosaur... which should get Congressional
extinction!

It's funny that people who don't want America to be a powerful nation also
want to axe the F-22 (among other things).

Not at all... it's a wasteful, obscene amount of money to pay for an
aircraft the USAF hasn't been able to justify by any means. The
Eurofighter by comparison can fulfill most of the Raptor's job at
one-third of the cost. If Sukhoi built the Su-47 it would still be
less costly, more heavily armed, and more powerful with dogfighting
skills we can't duplicate. Hell, even the Superflanker costs just a
fraction of the F-22. Ansd since the USAF knows its a wasteful program
they have tried to sell other proposed versions, turning it into the
F/A-22, FB-22, and even a more distant X-44 MANTA version. Give us
taxpayers a break- buy the F-35 for all services.

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

I was using dinosaur in context of the wasteful overbudget program.
The Europeans and Russians have aircraft that could take the F-22 on:
Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, Superflanker, Su-47, etc...

By the time full production is achieved the aircraft won't amount to
any significant number, not being able to replace the F-15 by any
means.


You do realize that we only have 342 active F-15C's right now, right? Seems
to me that the 339 Raptors we ordered will be able to take over their role
quite well, all things considered.

Uh I believe the DoD only approved 295 back in 2001 and the current
USAF inventory of all F-15s (including the Beagle) is 613 aircraft
plus 116 of the ANG. How many F-22s will be produced ultimately with
the ungodly cost overruns and FY budget adjustments? Nowhere near
enough... destined to follow the B-2 bomber's reduction.

Rob

p.s. Did you know that the reputed cost of the black project ASTRA is
an incredible 4 billion each! How many of those do we have- one maybe?

From: (Denyav)
Date: 7/14/2004 11:41 AM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

Anything that "flies" less than speed of the light is obsolete,and as the
funds
used to develop "obsolete" equipment must come at the expense of the
development of "post paradigm shift" weaponry,devolopment of obsolete
equipment
is detrimental to National defense of "any" country in long term.


Time to get your medications checked again.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Time to get your medications checked again.


HPM weapons as tectonic and climatic weapons already in use,but wait till 2020s
for other uses.period.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:13:55 -0600, "Tex Houston"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:35:59 -0600, "Tex Houston"
wrote:


"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...


http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-43...ry?coll=dp-hea
dlines-topnews
The long-awaited F/A-22 Raptor fighter jets will not arrive at
Langley
Air
Force Base until next May -about five months later than previously
planned.

Has any other aircraft program ever been delayed this much and still
gotten
full scale production?

-HJC

What makes you believe 'full scale production'? What is being planned
now
is but a fraction of the original 'full scale'.

Tex


You *do* know what the term "full scale production" means don't you?

Yes, a changing figure projected to a fictious date sometime in the distant
future when the final example rolls off the line at a rate to be determined.
You take yourself so seriously you don't seem to have a sense of humor.

Hardly. It would be nice to see something original is all.

On 14 Jul 2004 16:41:23 GMT, (Denyav) wrote:

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

Anything that "flies" less than speed of the light is obsolete,


Good thing those Flankers have Warp drive huh? Oh wait, that was the
Klingon cloaking device. . .on the cancelled wannabe. . .oh well.




and as the funds
used to develop "obsolete" equipment must come at the expense of the
development of "post paradigm shift" weaponry,devolopment of obsolete equipment
is detrimental to National defense of "any" country in long term.

On 14 Jul 2004 11:56:06 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

.

And at almost $200 million a piece! But at least this aircraft lives
up to its name "Raptor"- a dinosaur... which should get Congressional
extinction!

It's funny that people who don't want America to be a powerful nation also
want to axe the F-22 (among other things).

Not at all... it's a wasteful, obscene amount of money to pay for an
aircraft the USAF hasn't been able to justify by any means.


You do realize that a significant portion of the total amount has
ALREADY BEEN SPENT don't you? You know that thing called R and D?






The
Eurofighter by comparison can fulfill most of the Raptor's job at
one-third of the cost.

So it's what. . .$40 million. Damn let's buy some.





If Sukhoi built the Su-47 it would still be
less costly, more heavily armed, and more powerful with dogfighting
skills we can't duplicate. Hell, even the Superflanker costs just a
fraction of the F-22. Ansd since the USAF knows its a wasteful program
they have tried to sell other proposed versions, turning it into the
F/A-22, FB-22, and even a more distant X-44 MANTA version.

X-44 "Manta"???? You're an idiot. Do you know what the "X" in X-44
stands for? (I'll give you a hint: it doesn't stand for "X-Men")






Give us
taxpayers a break- buy the F-35 for all services.

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

I was using dinosaur in context of the wasteful overbudget program.
The Europeans and Russians have aircraft that could take the F-22 on:
Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, Superflanker, Su-47, etc...

The *Gripen*???? A Block 60 F-16 would kick it's ass up around it's
ears let alone an F-22.

Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
On 14 Jul 2004 11:56:06 -0700, (robert arndt) wrote:

.

And at almost $200 million a piece! But at least this aircraft lives
up to its name "Raptor"- a dinosaur... which should get Congressional
extinction!

It's funny that people who don't want America to be a powerful nation also
want to axe the F-22 (among other things).

Not at all... it's a wasteful, obscene amount of money to pay for an
aircraft the USAF hasn't been able to justify by any means.


You do realize that a significant portion of the total amount has
ALREADY BEEN SPENT don't you? You know that thing called R and D?






The
Eurofighter by comparison can fulfill most of the Raptor's job at
one-third of the cost.

So it's what. . .$40 million. Damn let's buy some.

My mistake, I should have said "one-half"- my apologies.





If Sukhoi built the Su-47 it would still be
less costly, more heavily armed, and more powerful with dogfighting
skills we can't duplicate. Hell, even the Superflanker costs just a
fraction of the F-22. Ansd since the USAF knows its a wasteful program
they have tried to sell other proposed versions, turning it into the
F/A-22, FB-22, and even a more distant X-44 MANTA version.

X-44 "Manta"???? You're an idiot. Do you know what the "X" in X-44
stands for? (I'll give you a hint: it doesn't stand for "X-Men")

And the X-44 is based on what airframe?- the F-22.






Give us
taxpayers a break- buy the F-35 for all services.

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

I was using dinosaur in context of the wasteful overbudget program.
The Europeans and Russians have aircraft that could take the F-22 on:
Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, Superflanker, Su-47, etc...

The *Gripen*???? A Block 60 F-16 would kick it's ass up around it's
ears let alone an F-22.

Have any F-22s been over Sweden lately? I bet an old Viggen could down
a Raptor!!!
You know you guys only have fun with air superiority when it comes to
striking poor, third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript
pilots... under ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with
no spare parts. I'm so F**king impressed by America's aerial combat
record over the last quarter century. Let's compare it to the Israeli
record or at least try flying air superiority over Russia, China, N.
Korea- nations that will appear in numbers and fight back with modern
equipment.

Rob

From: (robert arndt)

snip

Have any F-22s been over Sweden lately? I bet an old Viggen could down
a Raptor!!!

A Fokker Dr.1 could take down an F-15 under the right circumstances.

You know you guys only have fun with air superiority when it comes to
striking poor, third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript
pilots... under ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with
no spare parts.

Aha, you admit you aren't American!

I'm so F**king impressed by America's aerial combat
record over the last quarter century. Let's compare it to the Israeli
record or at least try flying air superiority over Russia, China, N.
Korea- nations that will appear in numbers and fight back with modern
equipment.

Rob

The
Eurofighter by comparison can fulfill most of the Raptor's job at
one-third of the cost.

So it's what. . .$40 million. Damn let's buy some.

My mistake, I should have said "one-half"- my apologies.


The mistake you and many others keep making is that you keep trying to
compare apples to oranges. The F-22 is in a league of it's own. It's
a Ferrari in a world of Mustangs and Cameros. Sure, a Camero *might*
equal a Ferrari on one specific point (though admittedly I can't think
of one except maybe weight) but the whole package together is an
entirely different deal. Your Eurofighter isn't a stealth aircraft.
Your Eurofighter doesn't compare in the sensor department. Your
Eurofighter comes up short in the speed department and a plethora of
other areas.








If Sukhoi built the Su-47 it would still be
less costly, more heavily armed, and more powerful with dogfighting
skills we can't duplicate. Hell, even the Superflanker costs just a
fraction of the F-22. Ansd since the USAF knows its a wasteful program
they have tried to sell other proposed versions, turning it into the
F/A-22, FB-22, and even a more distant X-44 MANTA version.

X-44 "Manta"???? You're an idiot. Do you know what the "X" in X-44
stands for? (I'll give you a hint: it doesn't stand for "X-Men")

And the X-44 is based on what airframe?- the F-22.


And again I say, so what? It was a proposal -years past- for a
modification to ONE prototype to test flight controls. Big friggin
deal. Pretty much every aircraft out there has been used for test
purposes at one time or another. It has absolutley ZERO influence on
whether any of them are bought or not.











Give us
taxpayers a break- buy the F-35 for all services.

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

I was using dinosaur in context of the wasteful overbudget program.
The Europeans and Russians have aircraft that could take the F-22 on:
Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, Superflanker, Su-47, etc...

The *Gripen*???? A Block 60 F-16 would kick it's ass up around it's
ears let alone an F-22.

Have any F-22s been over Sweden lately? I bet an old Viggen could down
a Raptor!!!

LOL!! The Viggen lost out to the F-16 for the European sales so I
guess nobody else agrees with you.





You know you guys only have fun with air superiority when it comes to
striking poor, third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript
pilots... under ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with
no spare parts.

Somebody get me a hanky.




I'm so F**king impressed by America's aerial combat
record over the last quarter century.

Me too. How many US pilots have been downed by opposing fighters?
One? Hell Russian flight demonstration teams (the guys who are
SUPPOSE to be good) have killed more of their own than that.




Let's compare it to the Israeli
record


And who were they fighting? Remind me I forget. Oh yeah , "poor,
third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript pilots... under
ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with no spare parts"




or at least try flying air superiority over Russia, China, N.
Korea- nations that will appear in numbers and fight back with modern
equipment.


They've never really bee stupid enough to start something with us. (So
far anyway.)

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 15:21:14 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:


The
Eurofighter by comparison can fulfill most of the Raptor's job at
one-third of the cost.

So it's what. . .$40 million. Damn let's buy some.

My mistake, I should have said "one-half"- my apologies.


The mistake you and many others keep making is that you keep trying to
compare apples to oranges. The F-22 is in a league of it's own. It's
a Ferrari in a world of Mustangs and Cameros. Sure, a Camero *might*
equal a Ferrari on one specific point (though admittedly I can't think
of one except maybe weight) but the whole package together is an
entirely different deal. Your Eurofighter isn't a stealth aircraft.
Your Eurofighter doesn't compare in the sensor department.

The Eurofighters IRST is much better than the Raptors, its has a wider
range of missile countermeasures, just a couple of areas where the
Raptor 'Comes up short'.

Your
Eurofighter comes up short in the speed department and a plethora of
other areas.

Speed department? are you talking supercruise, or top speed, either
way tactically there's little in it, BTW Cost is better too!!.


All fighters have to trade something, the Raptor is no different, The
Typhoon has a better instantaneous turn rate than the Raptor.... one
could argue that for R&D money the Raptor has cost, it should be
better in _all_ areas regardless, and be cheaper to manufacture and
support...

Its not all one sided you know!.

Cheers










If Sukhoi built the Su-47 it would still be
less costly, more heavily armed, and more powerful with dogfighting
skills we can't duplicate. Hell, even the Superflanker costs just a
fraction of the F-22. Ansd since the USAF knows its a wasteful program
they have tried to sell other proposed versions, turning it into the
F/A-22, FB-22, and even a more distant X-44 MANTA version.

X-44 "Manta"???? You're an idiot. Do you know what the "X" in X-44
stands for? (I'll give you a hint: it doesn't stand for "X-Men")

And the X-44 is based on what airframe?- the F-22.


And again I say, so what? It was a proposal -years past- for a
modification to ONE prototype to test flight controls. Big friggin
deal. Pretty much every aircraft out there has been used for test
purposes at one time or another. It has absolutley ZERO influence on
whether any of them are bought or not.











Give us
taxpayers a break- buy the F-35 for all services.

Please explain, factually and technically, how the Raptor is 'obsolete' as
you consistently assert? Do you not believe that it is an order of magnitude
more capable than any other fighter plane in the world? If so, please cite
by using a direct comparison.

I was using dinosaur in context of the wasteful overbudget program.
The Europeans and Russians have aircraft that could take the F-22 on:
Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, Superflanker, Su-47, etc...

The *Gripen*???? A Block 60 F-16 would kick it's ass up around it's
ears let alone an F-22.

Have any F-22s been over Sweden lately? I bet an old Viggen could down
a Raptor!!!

LOL!! The Viggen lost out to the F-16 for the European sales so I
guess nobody else agrees with you.





You know you guys only have fun with air superiority when it comes to
striking poor, third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript
pilots... under ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with
no spare parts.

Somebody get me a hanky.




I'm so F**king impressed by America's aerial combat
record over the last quarter century.

Me too. How many US pilots have been downed by opposing fighters?
One? Hell Russian flight demonstration teams (the guys who are
SUPPOSE to be good) have killed more of their own than that.




Let's compare it to the Israeli
record


And who were they fighting? Remind me I forget. Oh yeah , "poor,
third world nations, with little or no AF, conscript pilots... under
ground control, and flying import stripped MiGs with no spare parts"




or at least try flying air superiority over Russia, China, N.
Korea- nations that will appear in numbers and fight back with modern
equipment.


They've never really bee stupid enough to start something with us. (So
far anyway.)

John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk