Gates to Cut Several Major Weapons Programs

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by gumborue, Apr 6, 2009.

  1. USMTiger

    USMTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    167
    First of all, a 10:1 ratio is improbable. Our current fighters use the same weapons and same countermeasures as the F-22. The F-22 has the advantage of stealth when it uses 6 AIM-120C missiles in it's internal bays. Anything more than that negates the stealth factor. So assuming you score kills with every one of the 6 missiles, you are looking at 6:1 ratio. Now, knowing that the same countermeasures are used on the 15s, 16s, and 18s, you cannot assume that every single missile would score a hit. We can be generous and say 50%. So you have a 3:1 ratio.

    What the other jets can do that the F-22 cannot is crucial in modern war: ground attacks. That is the useful role of our jet flights. Air-to-air is almost useless. Since Vietnam, we have been in countless military conflicts. How many have involved air-to-air combat? How many of our existing jets have been shot down? Zero.
     
  2. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Dems are taking us there anyway so we might as well have some kickass toys.
     
  3. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Libya 1981, Libya 1989, Iraq 1991, and Yugoslavia 1999 involved air-to-air kills.

    Enemy air forces were also engaged in Libya 1986 and Iraq 2003.

    30. Most by SAM and AAA. A couple are undetermined.
     
  4. USMTiger

    USMTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    167
    I should have been more clear. There has been air-to-air combat, but it is rare. My main point is how many of our planes have been shot down by other planes? I can't find a single instance of this since Vietnam.

    Fire from the ground is a threat to any fighter, so there have definitely been casualties that way. But the F-22s role is to kill other planes, and we have much less expensive planes that can do that role just fine.
     
  5. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247
    Cost should not be an issue where National Defense/Security is concerned.
     
  6. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    I agree, but there is a difference between the funds needed to adequately defend the country and the money that is spent on super advanced badassery.

    I think USM's arguement makes a whole lot of sense.
     
  7. Bandit88

    Bandit88 Old Enough to Know Better

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    6,068
    Likes Received:
    511
    Your thinking is too constrained. :grin:
     
  8. saltyone

    saltyone So Mote It Be

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,647
    Likes Received:
    483
    I wish you would say the same about all of obama's welfare state plans.
     
    1 person likes this.
  9. USMTiger

    USMTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    167
    So are my man parts. Maybe your sister could help with that? :wink::wink:
     
  10. Bandit88

    Bandit88 Old Enough to Know Better

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    6,068
    Likes Received:
    511
    There was a time when an air superiority fighter was just that. That time is long, long gone. The F-22 was the F/A-22 a few years ago. You know what changed? The name.
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page