A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 22nd 04, 06:54 AM
Tony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14?


"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.

And to think that the B2 only carries 16 2000 lb bombs.


  #2  
Old February 22nd 04, 07:18 AM
Ragnar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.


Umm, not 30 x 2000 lb bombs. 30 x SDBs (small diameter bombs), that weigh
about 265 lbs each.

Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community?


Because the C-17 couldn't compete in the mainstream commercial air freight
business. Costs way too much when compared to 747s and such.


  #3  
Old February 22nd 04, 07:19 AM
Ragnar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tony" wrote in message
news:QoXZb.12374$lQ2.9128@okepread02...

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.

And to think that the B2 only carries 16 2000 lb bombs.


Yes, but when the SDB comes on board, it will carry about 150.



  #4  
Old February 22nd 04, 08:44 AM
John Keeney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then?


There are stresses from carrier ops that just aren't allowed for
in the design of Air Force fighters, mainly having to do with the
landing and arrestment. Unless the plane is designed with these
forces from the start, you basically have to redesign the plane's
frame (which means moving dang near *everything*) to get it
ready.

This way there would be cross over between the FB-22 and the F-35
(engines especially).

Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community?


The C-17 was marketed to commercial users with the government
offering incentives. The plane has design elements for its
military missions that make it less economical to operate in
the civilian world that civil designs.


  #5  
Old February 22nd 04, 08:57 AM
fudog50
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


The Tomcat is gone quicker than you can think....
There is a big push by CNO to axe the F-14 sooner than planned, like
now is too late...watch and see.

The F/A-18 (I assume you mean the B/C/D models) already has a
replacement, E/F. I don't think you are following current Naval
Aviation very well.

There is no need to replace the E/F Hornet, it will be pulling
fighter/CAP/FAC/Bomber/tanker etc. duties for the next 10 years.
Totally capable of performing all the above, with no current or future
enemy threat that can match it.



On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 04:20:49 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote:

Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then?

This way there would be cross over between the FB-22 and the F-35
(engines especially).

Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community?


  #6  
Old February 22nd 04, 09:01 AM
fudog50
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sorry forgot to add the Jamming/SEAD/Harm shooter duties on the EF-18G
(growler) as well....


On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 07:57:40 GMT, fudog50 wrote:


The Tomcat is gone quicker than you can think....
There is a big push by CNO to axe the F-14 sooner than planned, like
now is too late...watch and see.

The F/A-18 (I assume you mean the B/C/D models) already has a
replacement, E/F. I don't think you are following current Naval
Aviation very well.

There is no need to replace the E/F Hornet, it will be pulling
fighter/CAP/FAC/Bomber/tanker etc. duties for the next 10 years.
Totally capable of performing all the above, with no current or future
enemy threat that can match it.



On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 04:20:49 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote:

Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then?

This way there would be cross over between the FB-22 and the F-35
(engines especially).

Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community?


  #7  
Old February 22nd 04, 01:18 PM
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then?

This way there would be cross over between the FB-22 and the F-35
(engines especially).

Also why not market the C-17 to the air freight community?




  #8  
Old February 22nd 04, 01:22 PM
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then?


Not as easy as it sounds, re-engineering usually involves rather extensive
redesign of the internal structures. The F-111 was designed multi-service
from the get-go and we all know what a raging success the B model was.

Do you really believe a fighter will carry 60,000 pounds of ordnance or is
that a typo?

R / John


  #9  
Old February 22nd 04, 02:58 PM
Thomas Schoene
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

R. David Steele wrote:
Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)?


The Navy looked at adapting the original F-22 under the Naval Advanced
Tactical Fighter program in the late 80s and early 90s. The work needed for
the conversion was too much and the design ended up being basically the same
engines and avionics in a new aircraft. For example, they needed swing
wings to get the aproach speed down to carrier limits.

The FB-22 strikes me as having some real problems in carrier compatability,
even compared totthe base F-22. What's the approach speed of a heavy tailess
delta like that, for example?

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)




  #10  
Old February 22nd 04, 03:44 PM
Andrew C. Toppan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 04:20:49 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote:

Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was


We already have a replacement for the F-14 in service - the F/A-18E/F.
The switch-over is well underway already.

Since the F/A-18E/F is brand new, it won't need replacement for a long
time yet.

not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.


30x2000 pound bombs? Twice the payload of the B-2....very impressive.

Why not upgrade it then?


Because you can't just "upgrade" the aircraft to be carrier capable.
This was studied a long time ago. The "upgrade" would be a complete
redesign of the aircraft, which would be very expensive and time
consuming, and entirely unnecessary.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more -
http://www.hazegray.org/

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Replace fabric with glass Ernest Christley Home Built 38 April 17th 04 11:37 AM
Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14? Guy Alcala Military Aviation 265 March 7th 04 10:28 AM
Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14? Guy Alcala Naval Aviation 2 February 22nd 04 07:22 AM
RAN to get new LSD class vessel to replace 5 logistic vessels ... Aerophotos Military Aviation 10 November 4th 03 12:49 AM
Air Force to replace enlisted historians with civilians Otis Willie Military Aviation 1 October 22nd 03 09:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.