Thread: F-22s now require less maintenance than F-15s?

Originally Posted by highsea

JDAM is a 95% hit within 5m cep. LGB is somewhere between 60 and 70% according to the Canadians, based on Kosovo- the US DOD doesn't release that data.

With JDAM you can put 2 or more bombs on the same target, weather and altitude are not a consideration. LGB is good for one shot in clear weather, then debris obscures the target.

You're perfectly correct highsea, I have overlooked this point.

I still remember for instance though, pilots saying that a laser-guided weapon can be dropped down a chimney, whereas the satellite guided bomb will hit the roof.

Originally Posted by highsea

Yes, training is a factor- F-117 is a single mission AC, so pilots trained for that mission only. But that is the only possible advantage- the platform is far inferior to Raptor.

I would I no way compare the Raptor to the Nighthawk as a platform. My point is simply that the F-117 squadrons had a clearly defined mission, and trained as such. What I am questioning, is the amount of training time Raptor pilots get on this type of mission ie. would the USAF employ them in this role tomorrow? It's not a question I can answer, but I just never hear of the Raptor community training much in the air-to-ground role, never mind the first day of war strike mission. Now it's a fairly new aircraft, with capabilities still being developed, so perhaps more time will be dedicated to this in the future.

Originally Posted by Phoenix10

Boomer, respectfully, I have to disagree with some of your points. Please note that I am no expert in these things so if I am misinformed please let me know!

First, I would agree that this would be a gamble if we were talking about F-22s taking out an entire IADS and performing Air Superiority. This is not the case. I am talking about a small number of F-22's flying as tip of the spear for a much larger strike package. I see no reason this would require vast numbers of F-22s.

Second, the F-22 will carry the SDB Increment I. This is hardly the "least accurate weapon in the entire USAF (the USAF does still use dumb bombs after all). While laser guided bombs are more accurate than their GPS-guided counterparts, the SBD is far from inaccurate or ineffective (and has much greater range).

Third, while I agree 100% with your point that the F-117 has the training edge in ground attack, I do not think the F-117 can be considered a more effective asset overall in attacking an IADS. The F-117 would go into an IADS subsonically, at 40,000 feet, no self-escort ability, unable to identify targets in realtime, with all communications off. In contrast, the F-22, by block 35, will fly into the teeth of an IADS at Mach 1.7+, 50,000+ feet, smaller RCS, can provide self escort in and out, can use its AESA to paint very detailed SAR maps to find mobile targets realtime, and can use MADL or IFDL to coordinate with other assets without giving away its position (correct me if I am miss informed on any of this). The F-22 will have 8 SDBs versus the F-117s 2 laser guided bombs. This seems like vast and increase in capability to me.

This is how I see it going down (assume block 35 raptors)... Three 4-ship formations of F-22s are tasked to lead a much larger strike package by taking out 2 SAM sites and a Command and Control bunker. This should be enough to punch a small hole for F-35s and B-2s. Each of the 12 Raptors carries 4 SBDs, 2 AIM-120s, and 2 AIM-9s. This is a total of 48 SBDs, 24 AMRAAMs, and 24 Sidewinders. The Raptors use AN/APG-77 to paint SAR maps and find the mobile SAM sites. On the way in, they encounter fighter resistant but are able to handle this (greater altitude, more energy, stealth, combined 48 A2A missiles, better SA). After the fighters are gone, The F-22s launch a volley of SDBs from 50,000 feet and Mach 1.7 at the SAM sites and C&C bunker. With the targets destroyed, a very large number of F-35s and a couple B-2s fly through the "hole" in the enemy's front line and take out other targets. If F-22s have more missiles, they can stick around and help defend the strike package. Otherwise, they can egress and let the F-35s prove that they can hold their own in A2A. This required only 12 F-22s. Even if that number was doubled to 24, I don't see that as unreasonable in a high-profile conflict. The second batch of 12 F-22s could be in full A2A loadout and defend the entire strike package. The loadout of F-22s in the three 4-ships could be changed to any other combo of SBD, AIM-120, AIM-9s.

This seems like a great capability for the American warfighter. Am I way off base here?

Phoenix, you make a very strong case here. I guess I should explain myself a bit here. I am not saying that the F-117 would make a better first day strike platform then the F-22A. I'm just saying that I'm concerned with the F-22A performing the mission given the level of training pilots currently get in that particular role. Everyone always preaches that the training is the best asset the USAF has over other air arms. I'm not concerned about the platform, but rather the number of airframes and the amount of training in this role. There is currently no other platform that would do a better job then the F-22A at this point. Something like an FB-23 would be ideal, but that's not realistic.

This is a minor point, but perhaps we can both get clarification from someone with more knowledge in the area. But wouldn't the first day of way scenario lend itself more to the 1,000 lbs JDAM as opposed to the SDB? More explosive to ensure you knock out that IADS site.

Phoenix, are you sure the F-117 is unable to identify targets in real time? Just a point of interest. Also, while you're idea of having a few Raptors lead larger strike groups into the area of operations, and take out the highest value/threat targets, won't the F-22A's lack of communications with the rest of the fighter fleet hamper this somewhat?

Bottom line, I like the scenario you have created. I agree that it can be done as the F-22A is an absolutely amazing aircraft. My only problem with it is that I don't think the Raptor squadrons receive training to this effect, making it unlikely they would be used in this capacity. Now I could be WAY off base here, or the training in the air-to-ground strike role could be slowly developing, I'm really not sure on the details.

Most planes follow basically a three phase maintenance schedule. First phase is when its new and all the bugs haven't been worked out and the maintainers aren't familiar with the aircraft. Maintenance requirements are usually rather high. Next is the mature phase where the bugs have been worked out and the maintainers are familiar with the aircraft. This is the lowest maintenance phase. The last is towards the end of the aircraft's life where material condition is breaking down and maintenance requirements go up again.

The F-22 is entering the mature phase and the eagle is falling apart.

Originally Posted by BenRoethig

The F-22 is entering the mature phase and the eagle is falling apart.

While 'falling apart' may be a slight exageration, the Eagles aren't getting any younger. How they expect to keep the Golden Eagles flying until 2028 is beyong me, and how the Strike Eagles are suppose to last until 2035 is also a eyebrow raiser.

The entire tactical fighter community of the US Military is in a real jam .. not sure what the best way to get out of it is (ie. it's not just the Eagles, when will the last F/A-18C be retired from the USN?)