Delivery of Raptor delayed

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Anything that "flies" less than speed of the light is obsolete,and as the funds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.

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Anything that "flies" less than speed of the light is obsolete,and as the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

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Anything that "flies" less than speed of the light is obsolete,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

..

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?

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.

Henry J Cobb wrote in message ...
http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-43...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

Define full scale.

Many of the early British jets.
The English Electric Lightning.
The F-111.
Possibly the F-102
Brewster Buffalo.

If wanted or needed badly enough then mere obsolence is not a barrier.

bendel boy wrote:
Henry J Cobb wrote in message ...

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-43...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?

Define full scale.

The F-111.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...11-history.htm
In 1957 the US Navy requested industry responses for the design of a
low-altitude strike fighter.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...1-variants.htm
During a 1972 - 1973 tour of duty in Vietnam, F-111As flew more than 4,000
combat missions.

That's 15 years from inital request to combat operations.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...22-history.htm
In 1981, the Air Force developed a requirement for an Advanced Tactical
Fighter as a new air superiority fighter.

15 years later would be 1996.

What combat missions did the F-22 fly in 1996? ;-)

-HJC

Henry J Cobb wrote in message ...
bendel boy wrote:
Henry J Cobb wrote in message ...

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-43...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?

Define full scale.

The F-111.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...11-history.htm
In 1957 the US Navy requested industry responses for the design of a
low-altitude strike fighter.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...1-variants.htm
During a 1972 - 1973 tour of duty in Vietnam, F-111As flew more than 4,000
combat missions.

That's 15 years from inital request to combat operations.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...22-history.htm
In 1981, the Air Force developed a requirement for an Advanced Tactical
Fighter as a new air superiority fighter.

15 years later would be 1996.

What combat missions did the F-22 fly in 1996? ;-)

-HJC

In 1957 what was the typical time between design proposal request and
first date of entry?

In 1981, ditto.

Perhaps we should also add 1917 - when the delay was weeks or months.
(But you could argue that the 'new' designs were more derivative than
new.)