A major flaw with the F-22 Raptor about to be exposed on 60 Minutes

[danikerhino]

Originally Posted by AR Guy

^They just mothballed the assembly line. So no more F22s

You really seem know your $$%#. Is this a permanent move, or is it completely axed?
F-35 is coo, but, people fail to realize that the F-22 whoops its #*! in every way. I've continued to read about it the last 10 years and the way it performs maneuvers in the air is amazing. The Russians have great jets also, but, they lack the funds to even be considered close to us in numbers and overall technology.

 

[ar guy]

Originally Posted by DaNiKeRhiNo

Originally Posted by AR Guy

^They just mothballed the assembly line. So no more F22s

You really seem know your $$%#. Is this a permanent move, or is it completely axed?
F-35 is coo, but, people fail to realize that the F-22 whoops its #*! in every way. I've continued to read about it the last 10 years and the way it performs maneuvers in the air is amazing. The Russians have great jets also, but, they lack the funds to even be considered close to us in numbers and overall technology.

The final F22 was delivered to the AF 4 days ago and the tooling I believe is preserved for 10 years.

 

[crcballer55]

Originally Posted by AR Guy

Originally Posted by crcballer55

Originally Posted by AR Guy


Ask someone on the ground who they want providing them with close air support; a pilot who you can communicate with over head who has direct eyes on, or a drone operator half a world away.

If you stick the "pilot" in a simulator with full visuals & sensations, is there really a need to have an actual human in there? It's not only safer for the pilot, but much cheaper as well since you don't need all the support systems in the cockpit taking up valuable resources and adding additional weight to the machine.

Of course we're both coming at this from an armchair perspective, but since we have basically trained much of our ground force with the aid of video games, why not take the next logical step and do the same with our air force as well?

The human element in CAS is invaluable, even though the Air Force sucks at, and should not try to be replaced. About a year ago a Marine and a Navy Corpsman where killed by a drone due to a miscommunication. There is a HUGE disconnect on what the Air Force thinks the Army needs and what the Army knows it needs. Video game training is only supplemental and can never replace the real thing. I've done a little training on some Army systems and all I can say is I was not really impressed and would only use them as a way to change things up a little but never more than that. 

It's unfortunate, but ground troops are killed all the time by manned aircraft too. It seems the problem lies more with communication among networked devices than who is pulling the trigger. This could be prevented if there was some sort of jamming ability against friendly fire.

 

[nocomment6]

I'm still sad that such amounts of cash are being pumped into military operations and developments.

 

[fraij da 5 11]

F-18 Super Hornet>>>

 

[danikerhino]

Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11

F-18 Super Hornet>>>

F-15>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Super Hornet

 

[kash money23]

Well since im in the air force and a f-16 crew chief, I know that the f-22 is having a oxygen ring problem were oxygen is not getting supplied to the pilot so the jets that had the problem are getting fixed while the others that dont have the problem are getting the hell flown outta of them to see if the problem persists. The 22 is suppose to replace the f-15 and the f-35s are suppose to replace the f16s but that wont happen for awhile. As far as I know the 22 will soon see action as soon they get this problem fixed. The 22 is too far advanced for not to see action, it can target other aircrafts with the pilot using his helmet, talk to other 22s withs it secure line. The f35 is suppose to be the last jet flown by a manned pilot soon they will have unmanned fighter jets

 

[fraij da 5 11]

Originally Posted by DaNiKeRhiNo

Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11

F-18 Super Hornet>>>

F-15>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Super Hornet

Pretty different aircraft though... 2 person cockpit dog fighting machine with a perfect record of 100+ kills in combat vs 1 pilot fighter bomber.

Both are appreciated but I'll take the Hornet.

Especially in modern day warfare... There's not too many occasions where the US needs to be getting in dogfights with enemy aircraft anymore... The Super Hornets ability to provide air support and go A-A if needed gives it the edge for me.

 

[ar guy]

Originally Posted by DaNiKeRhiNo

Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11

F-18 Super Hornet>>>

F-15>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Super Hornet

The Super Hornet's sensor and rader package is really top notch is in all actuality its a very close fight. The F22 however outclasses them both.

 

[danikerhino]

Touche to both of you. The super hornet is a respectable jet.

 

[fraij da 5 11]

Originally Posted by DaNiKeRhiNo

Touche to both of you. The super hornet is a respectable jet.

Nobody can put down the F-15 though... Never been shot down.

Hell of a machine.

(I wanted to be a fighter pilot since I was like 5 so I've always read about military aircraft.

)

 

[scshift]

So is it actually legal for a civilian to own military aircraft, assuming they're stripped of their weapons/radar jamming and equipped with the proper safety features?

Cause owning a fighter jet or one of these would be quite interesting.

 

[crcballer55]

Originally Posted by scshift

So is it actually legal for a civilian to own military aircraft, assuming they're stripped of their weapons/radar jamming and equipped with the proper safety features?

Cause owning a fighter jet or one of these would be quite interesting.

From my understanding, the last military jet that was legal to own was the F-104 Starfighter. I believe it had something to do with the computer systems of modern aircraft. I believe it's possible to buy scrap parts from them though just as long as they don't suspect that you're actually buying them to assemble your own jet.

They use jet engines all the time when building the super sonic cars for Bonneville.

 

[yeah]

Originally Posted by scshift

So is it actually legal for a civilian to own military aircraft, assuming they're stripped of their weapons/radar jamming and equipped with the proper safety features?

No.

 

[scshift]

The reason I asked was cause I remember the 2 Russian SU-27s for sale for $5mm apiece... that's a lot of jet for that money.

http://www.wired.com/auto...olest-jet-on-your-block/

I thought it was an anomaly though because I've been lurking on other forums and the people there say there's no chance

 

[elderwatsondiggs]

Actually there is a company in Ohio that was selling two SU-27 Flankers that had all the weapons related  avionics removed, they also put English instrumentation in them, and made it FAA legal so yes you can buy a fighter jet. If you really had money you could go to Rosonboronexport and buy anything you want. 



Also as far as the F-22 goes, what makes it stand out from the rest of the crowd and the only TRUE 5th generation fighter is something that is almost never mentioned and for good reason...it has nothing to do with flying. The Russians aren't far behind with the PAK FA T-50.




Also the biggest threat to the F-22 isn't even another fighter, it's those darn Russian SAMs. 

 

[elderwatsondiggs]

Too late the Flankers have been sold.



Actual Pics Below.

Pride Aircraft is responsible for the first and only pair of privately-owned, airworthy Sukhoi Su-27 Flankers in the world. Both are two-seat 'UB' models (NATO Code Flanker-C) with full flight instrumentation and controls in both cockpits.

These aircraft eclipse every other jet warbird in performance, technological sophistication, and "wow-factor." There simply is no comparison with any other aircraft on the civil register.

They were licensed by the FAA as N131SU and N132SU. 
 
Both aircraft have freshly-overhauled (zero-time) airframes with zero-time engines, and have completed extensive inspections and Westernization by skilled factory technicians. All cockpit markings were relabeled in English. The aircraft have full IFR U.S. instrumentation and avionics, but retain every bit of character, pedigree, and performance they had in foreign military service.

 

[scshift]

I think you were the one who posted that thread and got me interested 

 

[zk1mpls]

Wow, NT knows their fighter jets.

Sad to hear about the F22. I've heard the F-35 underperforms as well. 

Don't need to own a fighter jet... I've heard you can pay to ride/fly a MIG fighter jet somewhere in Russia. 

 

[fraij da 5 11]

Originally Posted by zk1MPLS

Wow, NT knows their fighter jets.

Sad to hear about the F22. I've heard the F-35 underperforms as well. 

Don't need to own a fighter jet... I've heard you can pay to ride/fly a MIG fighter jet somewhere in Russia. 

Yea there's a lot of places (relatively speaking) where you can go for a ride-along in a jet... It's expensive as hell though.

I've looked into it because its a dream of mine but its not really feasible at this point.

 

[kingtre]

Originally Posted by scshift

So is it actually legal for a civilian to own military aircraft, assuming they're stripped of their weapons/radar jamming and equipped with the proper safety features?

Cause owning a fighter jet or one of these would be quite interesting.

holla at Yuri...

 

[kdawg]

I always thought it would be cool to buy something like that so you could visit family thousands of miles away in only a couple of hours - I mentioned that to a pilot once though and he just laughed at me - I think it's the range that is the problem. You'd need a tanker out there at least once to make it across the Atlantic.

That and the fuel cost - from that link:

There’s always a catch, isn’t there?

The $5 million price tag is only the beginning. Even if you’re flying around without the afterburners lit, the Flanker burns 1,000 to 1,200 gallons per hour. With Jet A currently selling for $4 to $5 a gallon, this isn’t a cheap thrill. We won’t even go into the potential maintenance costs.


Cheaper flying everywhere first class - just not as fast.