Comments on: AF Likely to get 60 More F-22s; Allies Out of Luck

By: Mark Stewart

Mark Stewart — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 12:17:43 +0000

Clearly the Obama administration is so heavily invested in defeat that it has all but scrapped the F-22. This diservice to the Us defence force is inexcusable. The consequences to our allies, Japan, Israel, Australia and others who have and/or supported fought with us is disgraceful. That the only possible consideration is a watered down version is disgusting. Do we really want them to consider Russian equivalents…This myopic view can only lead to the further emboldening of the wests enemies and make them increasingly vulnerable. Economically too this is more than a little silly putting thousands out of work, loosing export revenue and all in one of the deepest recessions since the 1930’s. Absalotely “brilliant!!!”

By: Capt John Reagor

Capt John Reagor — Sat, 16 May 2009 19:59:17 +0000

Learn about the world and its military’s.….We are 10 to 20 years ahead of every 1 with the f-22…This whole discus is why we created the f-35 joint operation’s aircraft..There should be no talk what so ever about selling the Raptor, that is unless you dont like your freedom!!!!,and if that is the case MOVE SOME WHERE ELSE YOU SNAKE!.

By: Capt John Reagor

Capt John Reagor — Sat, 16 May 2009 19:54:54 +0000

First of all WE CANNOT AND WILL NOT SELL THIS AIRCRAFT TO ANYBODY. Yea herb smith WAKE UP.…No 1 other country can ever be trusted EVERrrrrrrr.….

By: stoka

stoka — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 23:27:25 +0000

Looks like the primary consensus here is to sell the F22 to close allies like Australia and Japan. Frankly, the decision not to is irrational. Adversarial powers will see this as a sign of weakness. The Russians have no such qualms — they are developing their own version of the F22 and it will be on the market as per their other sophisticated SAM missile and radar technology.
Exporting the F22 would not only gain the US valuable export revenue; it would keep the production line open and save thousands of jobs.
Apart from such domestic considerations, a country like Australia has been a faithful ally through numerous conflicts. Australia shares many similar values and democratic and legal structures. Arming Australia with the best military technology (not some watered down version by the way) not only affirms the close friendship between our countries — it also provides a strong military backup in case of a real war scenario, taking some of the pressure off the US. (hypothetical case China attempts to retake Taiwan etc).
Informed commentators cite the relative lack of range of the F35 and its single engine configuration as a clear strategic disadvantage in its choice as a replacement for the F111. 50 x F22 Raptors would be an excellent choice for Australia given the geographical size and the rapid buildup of Russian Sukhoi aircraft going on in the region.

By: Rye

Rye — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 04:53:33 +0000

The comments made by Schwartz are ridiculous.
Australia is perhaps our closest ally, they are the ONLY country in the world to have stood by us in every major conflict since WWI.
To make comments relating to security issues is simply condescending…

By: stoka

stoka — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:57:53 +0000

The future of the US air force in any major conflict is likely to be very mediocre in the face of current and future challenges.(see “Will the US be annihilated in the next war” http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-170209–1.html)
Refusing sale of the F22 to close allies is going to be a monumental strategic error.

By: kamal

kamal — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:01:08 +0000

aire force

By: rbrenzelsr

rbrenzelsr — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 00:53:31 +0000

It is well said by others that anything America has on the drawing boards, stimulates opponents to initiate counter-development, counter-measures. How many of the USSR’s aircraft, externally, look like copies of US or Western designs? Several, I can think of. The guts, the internals, seldom, match our end product. I haven’t heard that Australia has been penetrated by foreign intelligence but Japan is another matter. Soviet industrial spies penetrated Japanese license mfrs of US designs, both military and commercial. F-22 or any cutting edge design is hardly safe, indefinitely. We have been penetrated (industrial and commercial espionage). When today’s cutting edge is off the drawing boards we had better have the follow on-started. Only a fool rests on yesterday’s design (F-22’s design is now 15 years old). (or forget supremacy/dominance, later in this century).

By: Speak Easy

Speak Easy — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 20:59:36 +0000

Sorry about that LTC Mike to leave you so short
but had to answer phone call and hit submit on a accident… There is no secrets to hide… or is there some really small things that the Mil. keeps from us/them for the good of both of us (you&me)…or is there stuff so bizzer out there one cant belive is real. Time well tell us and only when the time is right; well they let us/them know. I cant belive it has anything to do with money.

By: Speak Easy

Speak Easy — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:32:02 +0000

Dan 8:40PM has put it in a nut shell so to speak-but let us not forget when the program started…Hi to all class of 66…

It’s funny how the average joe still dont know even after all these YR’s… I dont think Schwarts even knows…but then again who knows!!

LTC Mike 1:55PM does have the RT. answer there is no secrets to hide…

By: Max january24th.19:00

Max january24th.19:00 — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:51:11 +0000

If the planes are not the best we can field for our pilots, maybe we should go pilot-less.

Who wants to place in harms way a replay of 50 torpedo planes not even getting one strike and ending up with one returning aircraft. The question is Are we purchasing the very best aircraft in the world or just in our world? let that be the deciding factor.

By: clyde

clyde — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:45:42 +0000

LTC Mike has the answer!

There are no secrets!

So, acknowlege that, export to allies with all the trimmings, and realize that:

“war is an extension of politics by other means”

By: 8 Shooter

8 Shooter — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 21:46:35 +0000

Keep the Military Superiority in USA, in terms of technology and anything else.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:08:31 +0000

Personally I think that having this would help in the event there is a war with either Iran or North Korea, to strike them or once we have them maybe it could curb these two countries and maybe help turn them around?! Israel asked for them and only received the F-35’s but if any nation needs them it’s Israel!!

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:50:40 +0000

And you’d think a site like Military.com could get an up-to-date picture of the F-22. Stop using the YF-22 already!

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:40:14 +0000

Even if Congress announces the USAF will get 60 more F-22s, this is not the end of the story. It will take approximately three years to build those planes. When tail number 247 rolls off the line sometime in 2012, we will have had another mid-term election and be heading into another Presidential election. Who knows where things will be at that point? My guess is that the Republicans will regain (slight) control of Congress, and it’s possible that the current SECDEF may be replaced sometime between now and then. The environment may be more favorable for adding another 20 or so here and there, until the USAF gets its 381 sometime around 2017 (exactly 20 years after the rollout of Raptor 01).

Am I grasping at straws? Probably. But everyone agrees the F-35 is not as capable as the F-22, either in speed, range, payload, or stealth. The biggest thing it has going for it is its multi-service appeal (USAF, USMC, USN) and its exportability. The F-22 was never intended to be a “silver bullet,” and as F-15s continue to have structural problems, you will see the cries grow louder for more F-22s.

By: Mr.ISaac Benson Kolima

Mr.ISaac Benson Kolima — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:03:28 +0000

In the cold war turbulence of this 21st century, the world looks on America as the only capitalist nation to maintain peace on the globe.
A few concerted effort by a few beurocrats to curb lawlessness with technologies of high tech definition must be supported so that less casualties of civilians and committed soldiers is minimised.
Gen.Schwartz is too short sighted and unfocussed on his role as a peace keeper. He should realign his duties as a soldier who swore an oath to defend his country and to maintain peace in the world. Should be ashamed of himself.

(any comments to this,please email to me. Delighted to share your critic.)

Mr.Isaac Benson Kolima
address : kolimaisaac@hotmail.com
Papua New Guinea

By: wtpworrier

wtpworrier — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 13:43:13 +0000

“Schwartz then poured cold water on any hopes the Japanese and Australians might have of buying F-22s, saying some of the technologies in the plane are just too sensitive to export. However, he said “it was a possibility” that allies could pay for planes that were modified extensively enough to eliminate the export concerns. Given how expensive that would be, Schwartz has probably put the kibosh on export sales.”

I know this is the Chief of Staff of the Air Force but the Gen should be careful not to “over step” his boundaries. That call is not his to make, the last time a A.F. Gen did that he got fired for his efforts. Mabe he is trying to get fired, if I were the SECDEF I would oblige him, real quick.

By: clyde

clyde — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:45:27 +0000

1) There are no secrets-when we develop something new, all it does is validate the same effort in other countries, who will also do it.

Remember, the Soviets beat us to the H-bomb? Spunik?

Unfortuneately, when we see a good foreign product, we sort of ignore it and keep on with our own thing, which is really an expensive, short sighted thing to do.

2) Haven’t we been all thru this F22 thing? Didn’t Congrtess alresady say “no”, and the AF said “OK! We’ll buy them out of our current budget” that was already slotted for other things, that apparently weren’t any more important than the legal issues involved in getting money for thing and spending it on something else, andnow, we’re right back to thesame thing, again.

The air Forcehas about the most institutionalized thinking of all the DoD-I mean, we’d all like a new car every other tear, but most of us can’t aford it, and I doubt that the Russians can, either, just as much as Id doubtwe’d ever use F22’s in a convention war against Russia or China oranyothernuclear power-Nuclear Power? Get it? The End? Nobody wants that. That was the lesson of the Cold War. So,get off your AF bicycles and start jogging the counter insurgent track like everyone else.

By: Tony Conner

Tony Conner — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:36:34 +0000

The F-22 took billions of dollars to develop and about 20 years to get a working system. It was designed to penetrate and defeat any air defense system or fighter then in development.
It makes sense that with these technologies (like the B-2 bomber) are extremely sensitive and should not be exported, that is why the F-35 is being developed for both our needs and export. The F-35 is not as stealthy or as capable as the F-22, which is why it will be a bomb truck. The F-22 will fly combat air patrol for the F-35’s.