ALERT F-22

[northern watch]

Defence Today þ@DefenceToday · 2m2 minutes ago

Reports: U.S. Air Force to assess cost of reconstituting F-22A production. Plans for 194 additional aircraft via @insidedefense

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...gislation-orders-f-22-restart-study/83248788/

House Legislation Orders F-22 Restart Study

Lara Seligman and Joe Gould, Defense News 9:09 a.m. EDT April 20, 2016
Comments 5

WASHINGTON — Almost five years after Lockheed Martin shut down production of its F-22 stealth fighter jet, House legislation released Tuesday would direct the Air Force to look into restarting the assembly line.

At the direction of then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Lockheed terminated F-22 production at its Marietta, Georgia, and Fort Worth, Texas, facilities after producing just 187 aircraft — far short of the original requirement for 749 jets. But in light of the growing perception that the US military is losing its technological edge to adversaries like Russia and China, Congress has expressed keen interest throughout this year’s budget season in restarting the line. The F-22 has also drawn attention recently from several high-profile deployments to Europe and the Middle East.

However, Air Force officials have consistently dubbed reviving the Raptor line as a nonstarter, citing the enormous cost of the project. A 2010 RAND study commissioned by the Air Force placed the cost to buy just 75 more F-22s at $17 billion in 2008 dollars.

AIR FORCE TIMES
How the improved F-22 trains for future wars (with F-35s)

AIR FORCE TIMES
F-22 Raptors are back in Europe

The House Armed Services Tactical Air and Land Forces subcommittee's markup for its section of the 2017 defense policy bill directs the Air Force secretary to conduct a study of the costs associated with procuring at least another 194 F-22s. The legislation would require a report on the study to the congressional defense committees no later than Jan. 1, 2017.

“In light of growing threats to U.S. air superiority as a result of adversaries closing the technology gap and increasing demand from allies and partners for high performance, multi-role aircraft to meet evolving and worsening global security threats, the committee believes that such proposals are worthy of further exploration,” according to the bill.

DEFENSE NEWS
Northrop, Raytheon Get Contracts for JSTARS Radar Development

Elsewhere in the bill — following schedule slippage for the Air Force’s next-generation ground surveillance fleet — the subcommittee is seeking information about accelerating the effort to recapitalize the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or JSTARS.

For JSTARS, the 2017 budget request projects a delay of as much as six months in awarding the engineering and manufacturing development contract, shifting it to fiscal 2018 and at least a one-year delay in the initial operating capability, shifting it to 2024.

Because the Pentagon expects a shortfall of 10 JSTARS aircraft in its fleet of 16 operational aircraft by late fiscal 2025, the bill calls on the secretary of the Air Force to develop two plans to accelerate the JSTARS recapitalization program — to 2022 and 2023 — and to brief the committee by Dec. 1.

The bill also expressed disapproval of the Air Force’s efforts to increase the scope of work within the technology maturation and risk reduction (TMRR) phase, which was initiated late last year after the Pentagon approved “Milestone A.” The Air Force should instead pursue alternative radar technologies outside the program of record.

DEFENSE NEWS
JSTARS Contract Award Slips; IOC in ‘mid-2020s’

Meanwhile, the bill would also require the US Comptroller General to analyze the sustainment support strategy for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and report to the congressional defense committees by April 1.

Because the procurement strategy relies on other nations to partner with the US, the F-35 joint program office, according to its chief, Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, is striving to build a “global sustainment enterprise.” He has cautioned the F-35 supply base may not be able to juggle the workload associated with production spikes and everyday maintenance.


DEFENSE NEWS
At Crossroads, F-35 Still Faces Challenges

Email: lseligman@defensenews.com, jgould@defensenews.com
Twitter: @laraseligman, @reporterjoe

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/276915-congress-looks-into-restarting-the-f-22-fighter-jet

Congress looks into restarting the F-22 Raptor

By Kristina Wong - 04/19/16 07:50 PM EDT
Comments 210

Congress is looking into restarting production of the F-22 fighter jet, according to a defense bill proposal released Tuesday.

The House Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee released its portion of the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act, which included a provision to look into restarting production of the stealthy fifth-generation fighter jet.

Production of the F-22 ended in 2009, at 187 aircraft — far less than the planned buy of 749, and an Air Combat Command requirement of 381 aircraft.
However, the subcommittee offers language that says exploring the idea of restarting production is worthy "in light of growing threats to U.S. air superiority as a result of adversaries closing the technology gap and increasing demand from allies and partners for high-performance, multi-role aircraft to meet evolving and worsening global security threats."

In addition, there is interest within the Air Force and the Pentagon in potentially restarting production of the F-22, it said.

The provision directs the Air Force secretary to conduct an assessment of the costs of resuming production and to provide Congress with a report no later than Jan. 1, 2017.

The subcommittee bill would also require the Government Accountability Office to review sustainment strategies for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program and provide a report to Congress by April 1.

The bill also supports the National Commission on the Future of the Army's recommendations to allow the National Guard to keep four Apache attack helicopter battalions, versus the Army's plan to transfer all of the helicopters to the active side in exchange for unarmed Blackhawk utility helicopters.

It also would provide additional funding for UH-60 Blackhawks, LUH-72 Lakotas and AH-64E Apaches, F-35 Joint Strike Fighters , F/A-18s, critical munitions; address modernization shortfalls in National Guard and Reserve component equipment; and support the realignment in the European Reassurance Initiative for modernized and upgraded version of the Abrams tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

The subpanel is headed by Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) and Ranking Member Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.).

 

[Jez]

The Airforce is concerned about the enormous cost of restarting the F-22, but not the enormous cost of the F-35!? Gotta love some people, when they're bought they stay bought.

 

[Mark D]

Dump the F-35 and use all that savings to build new F-22's and A-10's.

 

[northern watch]

Mark,

You may be not too far off the mark.

The Air Force version of the F-35 will be dumped if the F-22 is re-started

NW

 

[Shacknasty Shagrat]

Dump the F-35 and use all that savings to build new F-22's and A-10's.

A new and improved F-22 will be a great plane.
The F-35s should be grounded before they hurt someone.
SS

 

[BV141]

The Russians are pumping out 100 modern fighter per year (mostly Su-27-35 variants), and have been for some time.
Mig-35s now coming on line also.

Then you have Chinese mass production of fighters.

 

[Red Baron]

I totally agree with cancelling the F-35 and cutting our losses now.

Start making the F-22 for the Air Force with the money saved from the F-35 budgetary Black Hole.

The Marines can stay with the F-18. The Marine budget is already blown with the V-22 that is barely capable. I hope the Osprey was worth it for them.

The Navy? Either go with a next generation fighting drone or roll out the F-14 Tomcat again. The single engine F-35 does -nothing- to increase the Navy's capabilities. The F-35 is actually a liability for long range over-water use.

Cancelling the F-35 would send the proper message to government, military and contractors that failure will no longer be rewarded with billions of taxpayers dollars.

Sometimes one needs a good punch in the face to wake up.

 

[Housecarl]

The problem the Navy has is that after years of using a denuded air wing to "save money" having F-18s act as tankers for the strike forces, thus cutting their striking power by at least a third, because of the OPFOR submarine situation changing back to the Cold War era they need to bring back both dedicated tankers and fixed wing anti-submarine and scouting capability as a replacement for the Viking.

As or the intended Hi-Lo mix that the USAF was looking for, both the F-15E and the F-16 are still in production and can both be tweeked and compliment the F-22 for now. Add standoff missiles to them and the day one kick in the door issue pretty much is handled.

 

[NoDandy]

I totally agree with cancelling the F-35 and cutting our losses now.

Start making the F-22 for the Air Force with the money saved from the F-35 budgetary Black Hole.

The Marines can stay with the F-18. The Marine budget is already blown with the V-22 that is barely capable. I hope the Osprey was worth it for them.

The Navy? Either go with a next generation fighting drone or roll out the F-14 Tomcat again. The single engine F-35 does -nothing- to increase the Navy's capabilities. The F-35 is actually a liability for long range over-water use.

Cancelling the F-35 would send the proper message to government, military and contractors that failure will no longer be rewarded with billions of taxpayers dollars.

Sometimes one needs a good punch in the face to wake up.

Yep !

 

[OldArcher]

Yep !

Concur, 100%, NoDandy and Red Baron... Continuing to reward failure is not acceptable... Perhaps a President Trump can take a flame thrower to those who bungle, twist, and pervert contracts that put our fighting men and women in danger... Certainly he has spoken enough about a better, stronger military. One can but hope... Even in the best instance, it may be too little, too late... Time will tell...

GBY&Y's

Maranatha

OA

 

[Richard]

I totally agree with cancelling the F-35 and cutting our losses now.

Start making the F-22 for the Air Force with the money saved from the F-35 budgetary Black Hole.

The Marines can stay with the F-18. The Marine budget is already blown with the V-22 that is barely capable. I hope the Osprey was worth it for them.

The Navy? Either go with a next generation fighting drone or roll out the F-14 Tomcat again. The single engine F-35 does -nothing- to increase the Navy's capabilities. The F-35 is actually a liability for long range over-water use.

Cancelling the F-35 would send the proper message to government, military and contractors that failure will no longer be rewarded with billions of taxpayers dollars.

Sometimes one needs a good punch in the face to wake up.

What about the Eurofighter (instead of the F35) and the F22, F18 combination.

 

[Housecarl]

What about the Eurofighter (instead of the F35) and the F22, F18 combination.

First you've got the "not invented here" thing.

As to a "Low" part of a "Hi-Lo" mix for the navy, the Sea Gripen could fit the bill if you want to keep a European connection, though to be fair the Congress would insist on production in the US. About the only other aircraft I can think of that went that way was the Canberra light bomber. The newest F-18, the Echo, is pretty much a naval F-15 in size and payload, though not in performance.

All that being said, there are some missions and areas of operations where the US is using "top tier" gear (DDGs, CGs, SSNs, CVNs) because we don't have anything else what lower tier gear (PCMs, DEs, FFGs, SSKs, CVLs/CVMs) would be more than sufficient. I'm thinking like off of East Africa, West Africa and shooting galleries like the Persian Gulf and South China Sea, arguably the Baltic and Black Seas easily fit those descriptions as well.

 

[iceblue]

Australia has on order 72 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) planes. The problem? For years many have been saying that they’re simply… not very good. Yet public debate over this large purchase has been largely absent ... at a cost of around A$98 million ($70 million) per plane. The total purchase cost will be, according to the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), around A$12.8 billion, and the same again for upkeep. The F-35s are to replace the RAAF’s 71 Hornets (six Super Hornets are currently in Syria and Iraq).
The criticisms of the F-35 have been swirling for a long time, in Australia and internationally, but have not gained serious purchase outside of those serious about defense and strategy or aviation, who tend to have varied, but strong, opinions. Its fighting capabilities against Russian planes were questioned back in 2008 when a RAND Corp presentation was leaked (you can no longer find it online) and Australian media picked up on it, boiling it down to one apparent slide, “Can’t Turn, Can’t Climb, Can’t Run.” RAND disputes this. It came up again in June, with a Coalition backbencher attacking the F-35 purchase.

Whether or not the F-35 can dogfight hasn’t been proven either way and really won’t be until a few are in the air with experienced pilots under real fire. But one of the tangential questions here became about the nature of warfare: Will the F-35 have to dogfight?

Andrew Davies wrote at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) blog that he’d like to see the plane carry more long range missiles and that yes, dogfighting is almost an antiquated idea. But ASPI’s Malcolm Davis makes the point, essentially, that given the F-35 cannot dogfight well the best strategy of the enemy would be to force it to do so.

Others have pointed out that the F-35 is hardly the first maligned plane in U.S. history. The F-4 Phantom suffered the same slings and arrows, and went on to survive battle with the more nimble MiGs during Vietnam (though as with all military history this is hotly contested: A better plane would have performed better). Still, as FighterSweep put it: “It’s fun to trash the new kid, especially the new kid that’s overweight, wears too much bling, and talks about how awesome it is all the time.”

http://thediplomat.com/2015/11/australia-and-the-f35-debate/

 

[Vegas321]

Dump the F-35 and use all that savings to build new F-22's and A-10's.

Seems a non direct way of saying, the F-35 is junk so they need to fill the gap with F-22's.

 

[Tristan]

A far more reasonable approach would be to fund a study regarding the feasibility of a study to initiate a review of the necessity of analysing the procurement of additional F-22 Raptors while simultaneously considering the re-branding of the platform as the "Flying Unicorn" which distributes Skittles in a very Diverse way.

 

[LightEcho]

At the beginning of the big game, the fighter quality won't matter. It will all be in the missiles: their range, maneuverability, speed, electronic warfare susceptibility, stationing, payload delivery, timely alert capability. After the big die-off of aircraft, the ground forces will dominate.

This means hiding A-10s and helicopters until the first wave of air cleansing happens.

Drones will be only as good as the electronic jammers allow them to be. The big game will have more challenging counterparties to make this a strategerist's complex nightmare.

 

[OldArcher]

At the beginning of the big game, the fighter quality won't matter. It will all be in the missiles: their range, maneuverability, speed, electronic warfare susceptibility, stationing, payload delivery, timely alert capability. After the big die-off of aircraft, the ground forces will dominate.

This means hiding A-10s and helicopters until the first wave of air cleansing happens.

Drones will be only as good as the electronic jammers allow them to be. The big game will have more challenging counterparties to make this a strategerist's complex nightmare.

Extremely prescient, LightEcho... As if Clancy had risen from the grave... Eventually, if nukes aren't used, we'll devolve to rocks and clubs...

Maranatha

OA

 

[northern watch]

Prototype Japanese stealth fighter makes maiden flight
A Japanese-made stealth jet prototype has completed its maiden flight.

By Richard Tomkins
April 22, 2016 at 2:08 PM

TOKYO, April 22 2016 (UPI) -- A stealth fighter by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries conducted its maiden flight Friday in Japan.

The X-2 prototype took off from Nagoya Airport and went through a series of trials to confirm basic maneuvers -- including climbing, descent and circling operations before terminating the 23-minute flight at the Japan Air Self-Defense Force's Gifu Air Base, the company said.

"Control of the aircraft went exactly as in our simulated training sessions," said the unidentified pilot, "and after piloting the aircraft I'm 100 percent positive the X-2 is magnificent and will meet the Ministry of Defense's requirements."

The X-2 integrates an airframe, engines, and other advanced systems and equipment that is adaptable to future fighters. It is also the first stealth aircraft produced in Japan.

MHI has been developing the aircraft's airframe since 2009 with guidance from Japan's Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency and with the cooperation of 220 domestic companies.

"The maiden flight was significant to secure the necessary capability for a next-generation fighter jet," Defense Minister Gen Nakatani was quoted by Japan Times newspaper. "We can expect technological innovation in the aerospace industry as well as application of that technology in different fields."

Additional details of the maiden flight were not disclosed


http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Se...es-maiden-flight/8901461347187/?spt=sec&or=bn


My Comments

America will not buy a foreign made fighter, but other countries will. Other countries that would buy an F-35.