The F-22 Raptor, Obama’s First Major Weapon Systems Decision
One of the first weapon systems-related decisions the Obama administration will have to make is whether to purchase additional Lockheed-Martin F-22 Raptors, after the last one of a 183 aircraft order has been delivered.
As retired U.S. Air Force and retired Lockheed-Martin, this decision and this aircraft naturally interest me.
According to The Hill, a group of 44 senators—25 Democrats and 19 Republicans—have sent Obama a letter pleading for continued F-22 production, a letter that said in part:
The F-22 Raptor is the nation’s most capable fighter and the world’s only operational fifth-generation fighter aircraft in full-rate production…The F-22 is a model production line and, since full-rate production began, the unit flyaway cost has decreased 35 percent.
Some, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates have opposed buying more F-22s in favor of the F-35, the newest multinational, multiservice Joint Strike Fighter, or “Lightning II” (also a Lockheed-Martin-led production effort) “an aircraft in development that is expected to be cheaper than the F-22.”
“But when Gates released the Pentagon’s request for an emergency supplemental spending measure to cover the remainder of the year, four F-22s were included,” according to The Hill.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a defense appropriator from a state home to Boeing (Lockheed Martin’s subcontractor on the Raptor), said in a statement:
Continued F-22 production is critical to both the national security and economic interests of our country…At a time when we are looking to create jobs and stimulate the economy, eliminating the $12 billion in economic activity and thousands of American jobs tied to F-22 production simply doesn’t make sense.
According to lawmakers quoted by The Hill, more than 25,000 people work for more than 1,000 suppliers in 44 states and estimated that another 70,000 people indirectly owe their jobs to the F-22 program.
Also, according to The Hill:
Bill Lynn, the designee to become the deputy secretary of Defense, said at his confirmation hearing on Wednesday that part of an early strategic review includes the Pentagon deciding on the right mix of F-22s and the Joint Strike Fighter.
Finally, according to The Hill, “The Pentagon and Congress have been at odds over how many more F-22s the Air Force should buy. Senior lawmakers from both parties want the Pentagon to buy more F-22s, but the Pentagon is resisting.”
Without, at this time, getting in the middle of this “at odds” issue, let me just provide some information about this great fighter, the F-22 Raptor, “Dominating the Skies. Overwhelming the Threat.”
The information comes from official Lockheed-Martin sites
GENERAL:
The F-22 is the only fighter capable of simultaneously conducting air-to-air and air-to-ground combat missions with near impunity. This is accomplished with a never-before-seen standard of survivability even while facing large numbers of sophisticated airborne and ground-based threats.
In addition to being America’s most prominent air-superiority fighter, the F-22 evolved from its original concept to become a lethal, survivable and flexible multimission fighter. By taking advantage of emerging technologies the F-22 has emerged as a superior platform for many diverse missions including intelligence gathering, surveillance, reconnaissance and electronic attack.
The Raptor is operational today, protecting our homeland and combat ready for worldwide deployment. Two squadrons of F-22s are assigned to Air Combat Command’s 1st Fighter Wing at Langley AFB, Va. And two squadrons are assigned to the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. Raptor pilots and maintainers train at Tyndall AFB, Fla., while operational testing is conducted at Edwards AFB, Calif., and Nellis AFB, Nev. New F-22s continue to roll from the production line and will soon operate out of Holloman AFB, N.M., and Hickam AFB, Hawaii.
CAPABILITIES:
The F-22 is leading U.S. Air Force transformation efforts. Its ability to penetrate anti-access airspace, while finding, tracking and targeting enemy air and ground-based threats will ensure freedom to maneuver and freedom from attack for all joint forces. The F-22’s unique combination of advanced stealth, supercruise, advanced maneuverability and integrated avionics will allow it to “kick down the door,” and then follow up with 24-hour stealth operations and freedom of movement for all follow-on forces – fully leveraging the Raptor’s technological advantages.
The F-22’s all-aspect stealth and high speed / high altitude capability gives U.S. forces and allies an advantage that will endure well into the future. By incorporating revolutionary advances in technology, the F-22 is ready to dominate any and all adversaries from the outset of any conflict. This capability provides a critical edge to joint force commanders and acts as an effective deterrent to future adversaries.
SPECIFICATIONS:
Length 62 ft / 18.90 m
Height 16.7 ft / 5.09 m
Wingspan 44.5 ft / 13.56 m
Wing area 840 sq ft / 78.04 sq m
Horizontal tail span 29 ft / 8.84 m
Weight empty 43,340 lb /19,700 kg
Maximum take-off weight 83,500 lb / 38,000 kg
Internal fuel
with two external wing tanks 18,000 lb / 8,200 kg
26,000 lb / 11,900 kg
Speed Mach 2 class
Range* > 1,600 n. mi
Power plant Two F119-PW-100 turbofan engines with two-dimensional thrust vectoring nozzles
Engine thrust 35,000 lb / 15,876 kg
* with two external fuel tanks
Share This
Related Posts
-
John McCain Defends President’s Speech After Gun Vote
Posted on Apr 19, 2013
-
NRA Liars and Congressional Cowards
Posted on Apr 18, 2013
-
The Invasion of Our Nation Goes Unpunished (Al-Iraq News, Iraq)
Posted on Apr 15, 2013
-
The Medal of Honor for a Soldier Who ‘Didn’t Fire a Gun…’ – Part II
Posted on Apr 13, 2013
How much do one of those babies cost? Does it have a decent sound system? Seat warmers? Custom paint?
JS:
Good question, and one I didn't address on purpose because “it depends” on a lot of things. Not only on what “version” or “options” you want but also on whether you are talking about “original” cost, “incremental” cost, flyaway cost (basic airframe, engines, etc), whether you include/apportion research and development, testing, etc., into the cost. When you include the latter (which essentially includes taxpayers' money), I have seen figures of upwards of $300 million
When you talk about “flyaway cost” I have seen figures ranging from $ 130 million to $140 million
As to “sound system,” you would have to ask one of the F-22 pilots, but I don't think they have much time to listen to Mozart while flying one of those babies …
The following link has a good article on it http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2006/060…
D.E.'s post illustrates, with rather subtle irony, the byzantine nature of defense spending…and the challenge facing Obama.
The takeaway line, IMHO, is this astonishing one: “Senior lawmakers from both parties want the Pentagon to buy more F-22s, but the Pentagon is resisting.”
I think this line should be branded on the keyboard of every journalist/blogger, whenever there is the usual yada yada about cutting defense.
The Pentagon DOES NOT want to buy more…bipartisan politicians on the Hill want more bought.
It reminds one of Winston Churchill's classic comment on the surreality of defense spending…regarding his time in Cabinet trying to cut runaway spending on Dreadnought battleships (the F-22s of their time, expensive, and of minimal value and use in the First World War that followed):
'In the end a curious and characteristic compromise was reached. The Admiralty had demanded six ships; the economists [at Treasury] offered four; and we finally compromised on eight.'”
good observation and point, Marlowecan
In any huge defense procurement contract there will more than just the pure military/national security, technical/performance needs and interests that play an important role (whether right or wrong):political, national, regional and state ecomomical factors, sometimes pure partisan factors, nationalistic interests(especially when the procurement involves foreing competitiors, such as was the case with the Boeing refueling tanker, etc., etc.
Sorry Marlowecan and DERodriguez, you fell for the OSD cover story. The AF has been legally muzzled by OSD leadership and forbidden to talk to the Hill about Operational force structure needs for the F-22 a/c. Why do you think CSAF Mosely was fired for nukes when it was STRATCOM's job to look at nukes!! Its the USAF that desperately needs 200 more, and absolutely must have at least 60 more as a bare bones operational minimum. OSD leadership are myopically centered on current insurgencies and anti-terror ops as the only possible future scenarios– which is utter crap if you have read any American military history. We as a nation have failed in almost every instance to predict the nature OR timing of the next war we face. From 1812 through 1941, 1950, 1965, 1990, etc we have been caught with our collective operational “intelligence” pants down. This isn't about Corporate profits or the local politics–ITS ABOUT OPERATIONAL NEEDS OF THE USAF.
Moderate Warrior:
I totally agree that the F-22 is “ABOUT OPERATIONAL NEEDS OF THE USAF,” what else could it be about.
But, it is still a reality–perhaps a sad one–that “In any huge defense procurement contract there will more than just the pure military/national security, technical/performance needs and interests that play an important role (whether right or wrong):political, national, regional and state ecomomical factors, sometimes pure partisan factors, nationalistic interests(especially when the procurement involves foreign competitiors…”
Note my “right or wrong”. I am not in any way casting doubt on operational requirements or necessity, nor passing judgment…just pointing out a sad fact of life…as in the refueling tanker procurement.
Thanks for your comment.
OK. No Problem, Mr President. Just so we know where we are going…into historically chartered territory known as future military disaster. OSD leadership is still ignoring 30+ classified analysis studies that say we need 60-200 more F-22s, and in OSD's case ignoring the very WBB study they commisioned to silence the USAF — surprisingly the answer OSD got supported the USAF in a minimum of 240. Of all the aircraft and systems we own today only ONE can kill the latest Russian SA-20/S-300/S-400 in the event the Bear turns on our friends in Europe or NATO–the F-22… but we don't have enough of them…Hmmm. Sounds like a big screw up to me, Mr President. 3 weeks of current OIF war spending or say..1% of the pending stimulus package would buy the USAF another 60 American-made F-22 and preserve US conventional Air Dominance for 30 years, and for a bonus make the Chinese think twice before attacking our little democracy friend, Taiwan. But you know, we need more tax cuts and stimulus checks so we can buy more Chinese-made flat screens or build a few more Post Offices we can name after retired civic leaders. One day our children will wonder WTF we were thinking…. playing fiddle while Rome burned.
200 million to build, and an extra 150 million for the cost of development.