Thread: Langley seeks third squadron of Raptors

What's the reasoning behind trying to get a third squadron to assigned to Langley? Will it make the Senators feel more secure when they're staying in DC? Seems to me we'd want to base them on the periphery somewhere, like Hickam or Elmendorf for a faster response time.

The other problem I see is the limited number of airframes we have (production was stopped at 187); where are they planning on getting the "extra" airframes for a third Langley squadron? Edwards? Tyndall? Both?

Have they stopped production of the F-22 Raptors production line? If so, that truly sucks. Why can't the Air Force embark on an improvement programme on a gradual basis as a way to keep F-22 in the forefront?

For example, I would embark on a programe that can convert F-22 to an ground attack platform. And also boost the long range capabilities such as by adding stealthy conformal fuel tanks or boost the numbers of weapons it can carry by adding stealthy conformal detachable weapon bays.

I think 150 Raptors out of the planned 187 have been completed already.

My guess is that with F-35 cost overruns, and Chinese/Russian fighter projects that they'll probably start production again, after trying to modify it to strengthen the wings and for better fuel capacity.

third????? they have not even crashed the first one yet, what is next?? live ammo???

Originally Posted by Blademaster

Have they stopped production of the F-22 Raptors production line? If so, that truly sucks. Why can't the Air Force embark on an improvement programme on a gradual basis as a way to keep F-22 in the forefront?

They have. Block upgrades have been planned for several years already.

For example, I would embark on a programe that can convert F-22 to an ground attack platform. And also boost the long range capabilities such as by adding stealthy conformal fuel tanks or boost the numbers of weapons it can carry by adding stealthy conformal detachable weapon bays.

There were tentative ideas for an FB-22, but it's not really worth the investment based on the return. It would be even more expensive and wouldn't deliver any capabilities that would justify it.

"Stealthy" conformal fuel tanks would destroy the RCS. It took two decades to iron out the current design. You can't just plug something into the side and cover it with RAM and call it good, especially at the low levels of energy return we're talking about. As far as conformal AND detachable...there's a huge risk that detaching something like that would damage the skin of the aircraft. In a best-case scenario it ruins your low RCS. Worst-case is it cripples the aircraft and leads to an ejection or the loss of a pilot.

Edit: On the actual topic...I'm not sure if these Congressmen are trying to get the AF to buy more Raptors or just reassign an additional squadron to Langley. In either case, they're not going to accomplish anything. The AF can't fund another squadron, and they can't just reassign one without a DAMN good reason. Like being told by a congressional committee specifically formed for that purpose (BRAC).

Originally Posted by Jimmy

They have. Block upgrades have been planned for several years already.

The line hasn't idled yet Jimmy, just procurement. #4161 was delivered last month. So add the 2 EMD frames and the 6 PRTV frames, there are 169 F-22A's delivered as of June 28. At the currrent rate of ~1/month, we'll be at 174 or so at the end of the year.

The remainder of the 20 frames in the FY09 base budget will be delivered in 2011, and the final 4 from the supplemental in 2012. Production on those last 4 won't start until the 20 are off the line, according to Lockmart. So Feb or March of 2012 and the line will be fully idled.

Certain areas will be stopped earlier- the (8) F119's for lot 10 will be delivered sometime in early 2011, obviously the foundries will have already shut down, etc.

I know they're still trickling out, but when I was in training at Tyndall there were already plans for Block 10. That's all I was saying.

Edit: Ah, I see what happened. My first response was poorly worded...I meant "they have embarked on an improvement program" not "they have stopped the line." My bad.

It sort of llooks like a semi- underhanded attempt o get a few more procured. There is going to be a lack of airframes somewhere with the numbers in place at the rate f-22 is procured. The acceptance of the lightening, and the wear and retirement rates for 15's and 16's. Something has to give somewhere. Personally I think it will be the air force before the joint chiefs saying that we can't support all the calls for our aircraft in the 2014 - 2015 time frame which will have an emergency procurement bill passed for about 24 to 36 f-16's which will be simply stupid , and have a number of missions passed on to the navy which will then strain their super hornets a bit earlier than expected..


Maybe and hopefully I'm just paranoid about the small number of airframes of the f-22, and the mission tempo increase in the early 2000's which while slowing somewhat will force aircraft to retire much more quickly than they are being procured.

I agree with your bottom line, though the ops tempo in the 2000s didn't affect the dedicated fighter community much.

Looks to me like a bit of political posturing before an election.

Th F-15 squadron is leaving. Which means jobs are leaving also. Gives the Congress Critters a chance to show they are trying to "Bring jobs/Save Jobs for our Hampton Roads citizens" before the election.

Alan Boyd is real good about this same type of thing with "Jobs for Tyndall".

Originally Posted by Jimmy

I know they're still trickling out, but when I was in training at Tyndall there were already plans for Block 10. That's all I was saying.

You mean Lot 10? That is the 4 additional frames in the FY09 Supplemental. There are titanium shipsets for 16 frames in that procurement that wasn't cut, so in theory we could up the order by another 12 frames- not that I think it's going to happen. But once those forgings are done, the dies will probably be cut up.

The Block Upgrades curently call for 63 combat-coded Block 30's and 83 combat coded Block 35's. That funding was in the FY10 budget. The remaining 34 are Block 20's used for test and training. So in reality, we won't have 180 combat capable frames, only 146. And only 83 of those are fully capable with AIM-9X and AIM120-D.

Might as well be France.

Evidently I have the block number wrong, but I have no interest in purchase lots. Upgrades and technology improvements on the other hand...

This was almost 6 years ago, I'm not surprised.

If we freeze the upgrades at what's currently funded, we're in bad shape. Only 83 frames would truly be combat capable, and interoperability would be poor. We need a minimum of tape 3.3 on all combat frames, which would give full datalinking, target tracking, missile detection, IRST, ground avoidance, and enhanced SDB/AAM capabilities.

We're about halfway there...

Excuse my ignorance, but if the line is closed, and something happens, e.g a war that requires the line to be re-opened, how long would it take? And what about training losses? Where are the reserves? If an F-22 crashes, then thee is no replacement. How would that affect the combat capabilities of the squadrons?