Gates to Cut Several Major Weapons Programs

The top speed is pointless because when you start making turns and maneuvers, you have lost alot of your speed advantage, because the human pilot can only take so much pressure.

Exactly the point I was making. That's how many we will have in the fleet. That's why we don't need to build anymore.

What does it matter if we only use the 180 or so that we've already started production on? It's all fuel and maintanence from there.

You aren't removing the human element. You are relocating it to a safer environment. They could build a simulator that feels like the real thing. The you get the benefits of better performance from the planes, whose frames can handle way more than the limits of a human driver can push it, and you are able to protect your pilots, who are the results of years of training and millions of dollars. You could also replace the pilot safety systems with some upgraded communications gear. You could also give the pilot more control over the way he views his surroundings, since he is not limited to a glass canopy.

It's a win/win if they devoted the resources to getting it done. Can you tell me the downside of a "ridiculous" program like this?

 

Of course this is my opinion. But to say I don't know what I'm talking about is wrong. It is also the opinion of some pretty high level officials in the Government and Military. People who live and breathe this stuff, so I feel that I am in good company.

I didn't imply that the current planes can perform as well. I said that they can perform the job just as effectively. Performance is not always equal to effectiveness. That is what you aren't understanding about my point of view. Can you tell me any sort of scenario in the past decade that the F-22 would have gotten the job done better than the current fleet? Superior performance specs do not mean everything. It's like saying you need a Ferrari because your Porsche is not good enough to race a Honda. Eventually we will need the Ferrari, but not at the enormous pricepoint that it is currently at. The F22 is truly an awesome plane, and it were up to me I'd have a fleet of 3 or 4,000.

Don't forget about the F35 (JSF), coming out in a couple of years. We have plans to acquire more than 2,000 of these jets. Stealth, vertical takeoff, etc... I think that a cheaper, more versatile ground and air fighter is far more practical than a souped up, but marvelous F-22. The cost is expected to be 1/4 less than the F22. I'd also like to see work done on upgrading the A-10s.

But that's just my opinion.

 

from what ive been reading, the uproar about this proposed cut is all about the jobs and not relative abilities of the aircraft.

 

Where have you been living since WWII? :grin: