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

FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 1st 08, 04:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
Michel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/1294.shtml



FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Issue Brief
Jul 16, 2008


This summer marks the tenth anniversary of a powerful metaphor for the
decline of U.S. air power. Air Force Gen. David Deptula was piloting
his F-15C fighter (supposedly the best fighter in the world) over Iraq
in 1998 when all of the cockpit instruments suddenly went dead. He
feared he was going to die, but he managed to fly the crippled plane
back to its base, where mechanics discovered that insulation on aged
wiring had rotted away and caused a short circuit. Then Deptula
discovered he was flying the same F-15C he first flew as a junior
officer in the Pacific in 1978.



Ten years later that same plane is still flying in the Pacific, a
testament to how easily Pentagon policymakers can lose sight of what
really matters when they get distracted by big ideas and the concerns
of the moment. Rather than follow through on plans inherited from the
Clinton Administration to replace F-15s with the more agile and
survivable F-22 Raptor, the Bush Administration decided to embrace
military transformation and embark on a global war against
terrorists. To free up money for those initiatives, it repeatedly
sought to kill the F-22 before the Air Force got the 381 planes it
said it needed to sustain force rotations in a prolonged war.



Today, the Pentagon doesn't have a coherent plan for how it will
sustain global air dominance over the next 30 years without a
sufficient number of F-22s, because it has convinced itself that
unconventional warfare is the wave of the future. In other words, it
doesn't think U.S. air dominance will be challenged. Not
surprisingly, some potential adversaries like Russia see this as an
invitation to begin competing again for command of the skies. The
next administration needs to step back from all the trendy ideas of
the past eight years and focus on some basic facts about military
preparedness...



1. Air dominance -- the ability to control airspace -- is the most
important capability U.S. forces have. Without it, soldiers and
sailors on the surface are constantly in danger from hostile aircraft,
and friendly aircraft cannot safely accomplish missions like bombing
and airlift.



2. U.S. air dominance is at risk today around the world from new
surface-to-air missiles that can shoot down any plane that is not
stealthy or shielded from detection by electronic jamming. Additional
danger comes from new foreign fighters that match or surpass the F-15.



3. Even without these new threats, the current fleet of cold-war
fighters is so old that it cannot be counted on to provide air
dominance in the future. Many Air Force fighters operate on flight
restriction due to metal fatigue, corrosion and other age-related
maladies.



4. The F-22 is the only fighter the U.S. is building that was
designed mainly as an air dominance aircraft rather than as a tradeoff
of competing roles. It can conduct bombing, intelligence gathering
and information warfare, but these do not detract from the air
dominance mission.



5. Most of the money required to build 381 F-22s has already been
spent, and cannot be recovered -- including $24 billion spent by five
administrations to develop the plane. So the real question today is
whether warfighters will get a good return on that investment by
buying enough planes.
  #2  
Old August 1st 08, 09:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
Rob Arndt[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 112
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

On Aug 1, 8:34�am, Michel wrote:
FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.http://lexingtoninstitute.org/1294.shtml

FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Issue Brief
Jul 16, 2008

This summer marks the tenth anniversary of a powerful metaphor for the
decline of U.S. air power. �Air Force Gen. David Deptula was piloting
his F-15C fighter (supposedly the best fighter in the world) over Iraq
in 1998 when all of the cockpit instruments suddenly went dead. �He
feared he was going to die, but he managed to fly the crippled plane
back to its base, where mechanics discovered that insulation on aged
wiring had rotted away and caused a short circuit. �Then Deptula
discovered he was flying the same F-15C he first flew as a junior
officer in the Pacific in 1978.

Ten years later that same plane is still flying in the Pacific, a
testament to how easily Pentagon policymakers can lose sight of what
really matters when they get distracted by big ideas and the concerns
of the moment. �Rather than follow through on plans inherited from the
Clinton Administration to replace F-15s with the more agile and
survivable F-22 Raptor, the Bush Administration decided to embrace
military transformation and embark on a global war against
terrorists. �To free up money for those initiatives, it repeatedly
sought to kill the F-22 before the Air Force got the 381 planes it
said it needed to sustain force rotations in a prolonged war.

Today, the Pentagon doesn't have a coherent plan for how it will
sustain global air dominance over the next 30 years without a
sufficient number of F-22s, because it has convinced itself that
unconventional warfare is the wave of the future. �In other words, it
doesn't think U.S. air dominance will be challenged. �Not
surprisingly, some potential adversaries like Russia see this as an
invitation to begin competing again for command of the skies. �The
next administration needs to step back from all the trendy ideas of
the past eight years and focus on some basic facts about military
preparedness...

1. �Air dominance -- the ability to control airspace -- is the most
important capability U.S. forces have. �Without it, soldiers and
sailors on the surface are constantly in danger from hostile aircraft,
and friendly aircraft cannot safely accomplish missions like bombing
and airlift.

2. �U.S. air dominance is at risk today around the world from new
surface-to-air missiles that can shoot down any plane that is not
stealthy or shielded from detection by electronic jamming. �Additional
danger comes from new foreign fighters that match or surpass the F-15.

3. �Even without these new threats, the current fleet of cold-war
fighters is so old that it cannot be counted on to provide air
dominance in the future. �Many Air Force fighters operate on flight
restriction due to metal fatigue, corrosion and other age-related
maladies.

4. �The F-22 is the only fighter the U.S. is building that was
designed mainly as an air dominance aircraft rather than as a tradeoff
of competing roles. �It can conduct bombing, intelligence gathering
and information warfare, but these do not detract from the air
dominance mission.

5. �Most of the money required to build 381 F-22s has already been
spent, and cannot be recovered -- including $24 billion spent by five
administrations to develop the plane. �So the real question today is
whether warfighters will get a good return on that investment by
buying enough planes.


With F-15s, F-117s, and B-2s falling out of the skies thesedays, the
F-22 will not give any return with its astronomical unit price and the
few hundred (more like 100) will never replace the number of a/c it
was intended to. As for air superiority, that has yet to be proven...

Rob
  #3  
Old August 1st 08, 10:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

SNIP All

I'm a fan of the F-22, but I think we could do better than an article by
this individual. Despite the impressive creds, an "Institute" from which to
base, most everything she publishes is party line eyewash for the USAF.

R / John


  #4  
Old August 2nd 08, 03:14 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
Tiger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 125
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

Michel wrote:
FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/1294.shtml



FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Issue Brief
Jul 16, 2008


This summer marks the tenth anniversary of a powerful metaphor for the
decline of U.S. air power. Air Force Gen. David Deptula was piloting
his F-15C fighter (supposedly the best fighter in the world) over Iraq
in 1998 when all of the cockpit instruments suddenly went dead. He
feared he was going to die, but he managed to fly the crippled plane
back to its base, where mechanics discovered that insulation on aged
wiring had rotted away and caused a short circuit. Then Deptula
discovered he was flying the same F-15C he first flew as a junior
officer in the Pacific in 1978.



Ten years later that same plane is still flying in the Pacific, a
testament to how easily Pentagon policymakers can lose sight of what
really matters when they get distracted by big ideas and the concerns
of the moment. Rather than follow through on plans inherited from the
Clinton Administration to replace F-15s with the more agile and
survivable F-22 Raptor, the Bush Administration decided to embrace
military transformation and embark on a global war against
terrorists. To free up money for those initiatives, it repeatedly
sought to kill the F-22 before the Air Force got the 381 planes it
said it needed to sustain force rotations in a prolonged war.



Today, the Pentagon doesn't have a coherent plan for how it will
sustain global air dominance over the next 30 years without a
sufficient number of F-22s, because it has convinced itself that
unconventional warfare is the wave of the future. In other words, it
doesn't think U.S. air dominance will be challenged. Not
surprisingly, some potential adversaries like Russia see this as an
invitation to begin competing again for command of the skies. The
next administration needs to step back from all the trendy ideas of
the past eight years and focus on some basic facts about military
preparedness...



1. Air dominance -- the ability to control airspace -- is the most
important capability U.S. forces have. Without it, soldiers and
sailors on the surface are constantly in danger from hostile aircraft,
and friendly aircraft cannot safely accomplish missions like bombing
and airlift.


Agreed....






2. U.S. air dominance is at risk today around the world from new
surface-to-air missiles that can shoot down any plane that is not
stealthy or shielded from detection by electronic jamming. Additional
danger comes from new foreign fighters that match or surpass the F-15.


That is why we have a F22 & are building a F-35. To take up where the
f-14/15/16/18 left off as the best in the sky.





3. Even without these new threats, the current fleet of cold-war
fighters is so old that it cannot be counted on to provide air
dominance in the future. Many Air Force fighters operate on flight
restriction due to metal fatigue, corrosion and other age-related
maladies.


Agreed. It is a problem and those planes will be retired.





4. The F-22 is the only fighter the U.S. is building that was
designed mainly as an air dominance aircraft rather than as a tradeoff
of competing roles. It can conduct bombing, intelligence gathering
and information warfare, but these do not detract from the air
dominance mission.



Most fighters start that way. But sooner or later they become bomb
droppers. Like it or Not.




5. Most of the money required to build 381 F-22s has already been
spent, and cannot be recovered -- including $24 billion spent by five
administrations to develop the plane. So the real question today is
whether warfighters will get a good return on that investment by
buying enough planes.



Ah, the punch line finally.............. ATTN. F22 FAN CLUB Your not
getting 381 planes. Stop this endless begging for more. It's not
happening. The Fan club for this plane is more rabid than the Hannah
Montana bunch. Learn to love The F35 Lightning II till we start flying
Rebel X wings or Colonial Vipers. The great repeat of the Battle of
Britain is not happening. We need Bridges that don't fall into rivers
more than we need 381 Mig chasers. By the way Give the Naval air &
Marines some credit. I doubt The non F-22 users would just sit back let
you do all this air dominance alone.

  #5  
Old August 2nd 08, 06:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
Ian B MacLure
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 100
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

Michel wrote in news:ccb194e1-c4ee-4997-ae95-
:

Where is Corny ( HCobb ) and what have you done to him?

IBM
  #6  
Old August 2nd 08, 09:19 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
Andre Ilausky
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

John Carrier schrieb:
SNIP All

I'm a fan of the F-22, but I think we could do better than an article by
this individual. Despite the impressive creds, an "Institute" from which to
base,


I sometimes wonder just how big this operation really is. The "Senior
Advisory Board" and "Working Group" mentioned in some of his articles
sounds pretty impressive, with lot's of retired Admirals, Generals,
Congress staffers, people in the defense industry etc.

most everything she publishes is party line eyewash for the USAF.


Loren Thompson is not a woman.
  #7  
Old August 2nd 08, 01:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
hcobb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 64
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

On Aug 2, 1:19 am, Andre Ilausky wrote:
Loren Thompson is not a woman.


The fees the contractors pay him to pimp their products could buy a
very high class woman indeed.

-HJC
  #8  
Old August 2nd 08, 03:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
John Carrier
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.


"hcobb" wrote in message
...
On Aug 2, 1:19 am, Andre Ilausky wrote:
Loren Thompson is not a woman.


My bad. Thought it was a different Georgetown PHD.

R / John


  #9  
Old August 2nd 08, 10:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
eatfastnoodle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

On Aug 1, 10:34*am, Michel wrote:
FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.http://lexingtoninstitute.org/1294.shtml

FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Issue Brief
Jul 16, 2008

This summer marks the tenth anniversary of a powerful metaphor for the
decline of U.S. air power. *Air Force Gen. David Deptula was piloting
his F-15C fighter (supposedly the best fighter in the world) over Iraq
in 1998 when all of the cockpit instruments suddenly went dead. *He
feared he was going to die, but he managed to fly the crippled plane
back to its base, where mechanics discovered that insulation on aged
wiring had rotted away and caused a short circuit. *Then Deptula
discovered he was flying the same F-15C he first flew as a junior
officer in the Pacific in 1978.

Ten years later that same plane is still flying in the Pacific, a
testament to how easily Pentagon policymakers can lose sight of what
really matters when they get distracted by big ideas and the concerns
of the moment. *Rather than follow through on plans inherited from the
Clinton Administration to replace F-15s with the more agile and
survivable F-22 Raptor, the Bush Administration decided to embrace
military transformation and embark on a global war against
terrorists. *To free up money for those initiatives, it repeatedly
sought to kill the F-22 before the Air Force got the 381 planes it
said it needed to sustain force rotations in a prolonged war.

Today, the Pentagon doesn't have a coherent plan for how it will
sustain global air dominance over the next 30 years without a
sufficient number of F-22s, because it has convinced itself that
unconventional warfare is the wave of the future. *In other words, it
doesn't think U.S. air dominance will be challenged. *Not
surprisingly, some potential adversaries like Russia see this as an
invitation to begin competing again for command of the skies. *The
next administration needs to step back from all the trendy ideas of
the past eight years and focus on some basic facts about military
preparedness...

1. *Air dominance -- the ability to control airspace -- is the most
important capability U.S. forces have. *Without it, soldiers and
sailors on the surface are constantly in danger from hostile aircraft,
and friendly aircraft cannot safely accomplish missions like bombing
and airlift.

2. *U.S. air dominance is at risk today around the world from new
surface-to-air missiles that can shoot down any plane that is not
stealthy or shielded from detection by electronic jamming. *Additional
danger comes from new foreign fighters that match or surpass the F-15.

3. *Even without these new threats, the current fleet of cold-war
fighters is so old that it cannot be counted on to provide air
dominance in the future. *Many Air Force fighters operate on flight
restriction due to metal fatigue, corrosion and other age-related
maladies.

4. *The F-22 is the only fighter the U.S. is building that was
designed mainly as an air dominance aircraft rather than as a tradeoff
of competing roles. *It can conduct bombing, intelligence gathering
and information warfare, but these do not detract from the air
dominance mission.

5. *Most of the money required to build 381 F-22s has already been
spent, and cannot be recovered -- including $24 billion spent by five
administrations to develop the plane. *So the real question today is
whether warfighters will get a good return on that investment by
buying enough planes.


Gates reaffirmed again recently that the top priority of US military
is asymmetrical warfare against insurgent&terrorists. F-22 doesn't fit
either role too well. I figure the next administration won't be too
keen on F-22 either considering the budgetary pressure and the
geopolitical situation the government has to face. Under these set of
circumstances, it's hard to argue for F-22 when budget crisis
  #10  
Old August 3rd 08, 01:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.military,rec.aviation.military.naval
tankfixer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 80
Default FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.

In article 23e9408b-9dd3-4194-8bb7-5b1c7fe50f73
@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com, says...
On Aug 1, 8:34?am, Michel wrote:
FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS.
http://lexingtoninstitute.org/1294.shtml

FURTHER F-22 PRODUCTION IS CRUCIAL TO WINNING FUTURE WARS
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Issue Brief
Jul 16, 2008

This summer marks the tenth anniversary of a powerful metaphor for the
decline of U.S. air power. ?Air Force Gen. David Deptula was piloting
his F-15C fighter (supposedly the best fighter in the world) over Iraq
in 1998 when all of the cockpit instruments suddenly went dead. ?He
feared he was going to die, but he managed to fly the crippled plane
back to its base, where mechanics discovered that insulation on aged
wiring had rotted away and caused a short circuit. ?Then Deptula
discovered he was flying the same F-15C he first flew as a junior
officer in the Pacific in 1978.

Ten years later that same plane is still flying in the Pacific, a
testament to how easily Pentagon policymakers can lose sight of what
really matters when they get distracted by big ideas and the concerns
of the moment. ?Rather than follow through on plans inherited from the
Clinton Administration to replace F-15s with the more agile and
survivable F-22 Raptor, the Bush Administration decided to embrace
military transformation and embark on a global war against
terrorists. ?To free up money for those initiatives, it repeatedly
sought to kill the F-22 before the Air Force got the 381 planes it
said it needed to sustain force rotations in a prolonged war.

Today, the Pentagon doesn't have a coherent plan for how it will
sustain global air dominance over the next 30 years without a
sufficient number of F-22s, because it has convinced itself that
unconventional warfare is the wave of the future. ?In other words, it
doesn't think U.S. air dominance will be challenged. ?Not
surprisingly, some potential adversaries like Russia see this as an
invitation to begin competing again for command of the skies. ?The
next administration needs to step back from all the trendy ideas of
the past eight years and focus on some basic facts about military
preparedness...

1. ?Air dominance -- the ability to control airspace -- is the most
important capability U.S. forces have. ?Without it, soldiers and
sailors on the surface are constantly in danger from hostile aircraft,
and friendly aircraft cannot safely accomplish missions like bombing
and airlift.

2. ?U.S. air dominance is at risk today around the world from new
surface-to-air missiles that can shoot down any plane that is not
stealthy or shielded from detection by electronic jamming. ?Additional
danger comes from new foreign fighters that match or surpass the F-15.

3. ?Even without these new threats, the current fleet of cold-war
fighters is so old that it cannot be counted on to provide air
dominance in the future. ?Many Air Force fighters operate on flight
restriction due to metal fatigue, corrosion and other age-related
maladies.

4. ?The F-22 is the only fighter the U.S. is building that was
designed mainly as an air dominance aircraft rather than as a tradeoff
of competing roles. ?It can conduct bombing, intelligence gathering
and information warfare, but these do not detract from the air
dominance mission.

5. ?Most of the money required to build 381 F-22s has already been
spent, and cannot be recovered -- including $24 billion spent by five
administrations to develop the plane. ?So the real question today is
whether warfighters will get a good return on that investment by
buying enough planes.


With F-15s, F-117s, and B-2s falling out of the skies thesedays, the
F-22 will not give any return with its astronomical unit price and the
few hundred (more like 100) will never replace the number of a/c it
was intended to. As for air superiority, that has yet to be proven...


It's kinda hard for F-117 to fall out of the sky Rob.

--

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.
The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic
feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse.

The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight,
nothing which is more important than his own personal safety,
is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless
made so and kept so by the exertions of much better men than himself.

John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873) English economist and philosopher.
 




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
"Signal jamming a factor in future wars, general says" Mike Military Aviation 23 August 24th 11 02:17 AM
'Winning 2' reviews? Stewart Kissel Soaring 2 May 8th 05 07:39 PM
Winning On The Wind Nyal Williams Soaring 5 November 22nd 04 01:57 PM
Winning on The Wind II Bob Leve Soaring 1 November 21st 04 04:50 AM
Pentagon admits Environment source for future wars Aerophotos Military Aviation 5 February 23rd 04 02:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:28 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.