LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteCan't. That would mean redesigning the whole structure and skin with non-stealth materials. Essencially a new fighter...Originally Posted by Big K
maybe a non-stealth one?
Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none; be able for thine enemy rather in power than use; and keep thy friend under thine own life's key; be checked for silence, but never taxed for speech.
Can't. That would mean redesigning the whole structure and skin with non-stealth materials. Essencially a new fighter...
There is a real problem with that, many of the workers will have moved on to other places of employment, their skills and talent being elsewhere. The technical gap will be reduced, the worst part is the long lead time required for engines and some other parts. I currently requires a "four year" lead time from the time an engine is ordered to the date of delivery of the engine.
This is all contingent on the threat to the USAF is recognized. Remember England before WW-2, how long did it take them to seriously the threat that was facing them? Would the USA be any different??
Not a bad thing, IMHO.
For this reason alone, that spineless legislative body of political whores known as the United State Congress will most definitely make sure that the F-22A continues production...even if it makes ramming it down the throats of the USAF and the Obama Administration.
Have no fear my friends...the F-22A production line will stay open.
Among the community of nations, Pakistan today stands out on one hand as a petty thug brandishing a dangerous weapon, and at other times as a concubine, sleeping with anyone willing to pay for her expensive tastes. ~ Tarek Fatah
Its not ramming down the throats of the USAF, the USAF wants it. It wants more of them than they are going to get. The secdef wants that money to go to other planes and services. Gates seems convinced that there will be no major wars against a first world foe in the next 20 years for some reason not realizing that the ability to crush the enemy is what keeps the US from being seriously challenged.
BUFFs aren't going to keep flying forever, not enough B-2s, and the Bones are hanger queens. IF nothing else, maybe something based on the P-8 or a 767/A330 airframe.
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.
I can only imagine the sh**storm if the USAF picked an Airbus for its next heavy bomber.
The traditional fighther, such as the F22 will soon be tomorrow's buggy whip. The move taking place is toward the UAV, with the ultimate progression toward a fully autonomous fighter where the pilot is always on the deck.
Some food for thought...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/4296188.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbbMM...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crfLk...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRiPaQ5Y9Ng&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InxOkwMPZZg&NR=1
Last edited by Gallowglass; 08 Apr 09, at 05:56.
Gallow I agree to a point but I think we are talking about vastly different time frames. I am looking at traditional manned fighters being phased out in about 60 years. Currently 3 important things are needed before you can have a successful fleet of unmanned fighters. First and most important is an onboard computer capable of making acceptable kill - no kill decisions without human input. This is the hardest thing to get at the moment, as computer tech is not anywhere close to being trusted at this point with this. Next serious issue is having a fully situationally aware onboard computer, This is what kills the possibility of having a manned mother-ship and UAV fledglings along with part 3. Right now IR sensors don't have the range to protect and sense other planes at long distance, and stealth/jamming can do ugly things to radar and IFF. part 3 of the Issue is call-back/abort/inflight redirection. This causes issues currently especially against a semi-capable opponent. In the current environs that the US is fighting in its not a gaint issue since upload isn't jammed or anything close to it.
For a succesfull unmanned fighter aircraft, you are looking at quite a bit of tech leap before they are ready to go.
I don't think this was the smartest think to do.
After designing the ultimate unbeatable fighter, they halted it.
Now other countries will catch up and USAF will lose that decisive edge.
Now all hopes(if any) of us just maybe getting the Raptors too are gone... :(
" THe SiLEnt KNighT.
I wonder if the existence of classified systems contributed to the F22 decision. Aviationleak was writing about classified high speed UCAVs this month.
If there is not, then I think this is a foolish decision.... and all this to buy more government social services boondoggles.
The Bones. Now there is one beautiful aircraft IMO. Nothing like a B-1.
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.
*Wait until they unveil the newest carrier launched UAV that has three times as much punch as those flying over Pakistan. Not only have you removed the pilot, increased speed and made it stealth but now imagine how many can be carrier based upon one single carrier. Or even better one single hangar onboard. A proverbial hornets nest.
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.
I still dont see the fuss... A squadron or two of F22s is able to pretty much clean aside any air force currently flying short of maybe the Chinese and the Russians. And only then because of the limited amount of Amraams they can get aloft with. I just cant see an enemy that will require more than 187 F22s appear in the next 50 years.
The best part of repentance is the sin
It would still be an awesome bird.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: