| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| WSJ: Pentagon Has Approved F/A22 Full Production |
| 2005-04-01 |
| The Defense Department has approved Lockheed Martin Corp.'s F/A-22 fighter for full production, people familiar with the matter said, giving the stealthy supersonic jet the seal of approval just when the White House is targeting it for budget cuts. The decision is a critical milestone for the complex and controversial aircraft, which has been under development since the Cold War and whose costs have soared. The green light could provide ammunition for advocates of the F/A-22 ahead of congressional budget votes and a broader Pentagon review of long-term acquisition priorities. That is because the approval by the Defense Acquisition Board, the Pentagon's top procurement panel, is an endorsement of the plane's capabilities as well as Lockheed's ability to produce it at the rate and cost determined by the Air Force. A Pentagon spokesman said only that the board met Tuesday and that a formal written decision is being drafted. Tom Jurkowsky, a spokesman for Lockheed, of Bethesda, Md., said the company hasn't been officially notified of the decision. To maintain global air superiority, the Air Force says, it needs 381 F/A-22s, which can fly at supersonic speeds for prolonged distances. The F/A-22 "is really the only plane either manned or unmanned" that has both the speed and the radar-evading capability to counter surface-to-air missiles and advanced fighters being built by other countries, Gen. John Jumper, the Air Force's chief of staff, told a House appropriations subcommittee last month. Over the service's objections, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and White House officials seized on the high-profile program to show their determination to rein in Pentagon weapons spending. President Bush's latest budget proposes buying only around 180 F/A-22s and halting production at the end of the decade in order to save $10.5 billion. Central to the swirling debate about the jet has been its cost. Critics say that including development spending, each F/A-22 costs some $250 million. Air Force generals counter that going forward, the price tag will be about $110 million apiece, not much more than the current top-of-the line F-15 fighter. The Pentagon's approval is a boost for Lockheed, which had to overcome crippling software problems in the F/A-22. Modern fighters are analog platforms for battle software ... HUGE numbers of lines of code, which must operate in real time. no small challenge & nothing in the civilian world comes close in complexity or difficulty |
| Posted by:too true |
| #18 Ship, throw in a US-citizenship special offer to the remaining skeleton of the Canadian armed forces who are disgusted at the situation there. Right after they march on Ottawa. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2005-04-01 7:08:48 PM |
| #17 I'm all for selling the F22 to the UK, Japan, Australia. But I think the current build price around $110-130 million. Any additional quantities won't lower the cost that much. Then factor in R&D cost, some of which the USAF may want to recoup on any overseas buy. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-04-01 5:24:00 PM |
| #16 It means catapults can be retrofitted. This seems foolish since they are starting with a partially capable carrier. The bow has a ski slope, so only the side landing strip can later accommodate a catapult. Hope they angled the deck enough so that a fully extended E2C won't hit the ski slope on launch. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-04-01 5:18:50 PM |
| #15 British large platform carriers .. Hehe very funny Shipman .... |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 5:14:01 PM |
| #14 Ship, throw in a US-citizenship special offer to the remaining skeleton of the Canadian armed forces who are disgusted at the situation there. |
| Posted by: too true 2005-04-01 5:11:43 PM |
| #13 The British large platform carriers may have a "cat capable" build... whatever that means. Meanwhile sell them some F-22, give some to the IDF and allow Japan to buy all they want. And the Aussies cut 'em a deal, they need 24... you will note ima bring down unit costs. Give Canada a nice picture and a few airshows, unless they can find the dough, thisn the big time. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-04-01 5:01:03 PM |
| #12 Aye , I remember a story about you having stability problems with the VTOL system of the F-35 |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 4:25:22 PM |
| #11 My feelings are that we have enough VTOL fighters , and they are handy and versitile , but we need supplimentry air support to complement what we do have ( a complete overhaul of air defence would be a financial disaster). The F=22 in small numbers would be more beneficial especially in todays operational enviroment of *cough* *splutter* rapid response. |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 4:23:12 PM |
| #10 BTW the planned F35 buy was 150 planes and the British were a tier 1 partner (specification input, part of the design and build work) |
| Posted by: ed 2005-04-01 4:18:07 PM |
| #9 I think the F35 buy is for the two planned large deck carriers (and maybe the existing Harrier carriers). There is no alternative to the vertical takeoff F35 since the two carriers are not scheduled to have catapults (last I heard). This is really interesting because without catapults, the carrier won't have any E2 early warning and control planes, thus becomming a really big version of a Harrier carrier. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-04-01 4:11:36 PM |
| #8 Unfortunately the MOD hasnt much foresight when it comes to purchases , and as a joint venture we felt obliged to buy Typhoons , to show how good they are (insert laughter here ) As regards the F-35 (although I confess to knowing little about it ) I feel we would get more use out of the F-22 ... Then again , the MoD knows best , right ? |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 3:52:26 PM |
| #7 Don't the Brits have too many fighters that they are committed to buy? I read somewhere that the UK gov is trying to sell off at least half of the 232 Typhoons even before they are delivered? Last I heard, the cost is now over 80 million euros a copy. Then there is the upcomming F35 buy. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-04-01 3:40:55 PM |
| #6 When I mean give ... I dont mean for free :p ( our military is not quite yet a charity case !) |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 3:13:43 PM |
| #5 Give us Brits a few .. I am embarrased that our pilots are still flying around in scrap metal ... Preferably without a magic "off" |
| Posted by: MacNails 2005-04-01 3:11:41 PM |
| #4 I dunno Mrs. D. Once upon a time I thought the rapid approach the 40th birthday of the buffs would keep the B1-B in production. Having not learned my lesson I later thought the rapid approach of the 50th birthday of the buffs would keep the B2 line open. I predict the DOD will get no more than 1/3 of the F/A22s they've requested. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2005-04-01 2:31:41 PM |
| #3 Mrs Davis - Exports with a magic "off" switch hopefully. :) |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2005-04-01 2:13:01 PM |
| #2 We can ignore the build numbers, because once this line is started, it will be hard to shut down till the plane loses consistently to UCAVs. Then there will be the export market. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2005-04-01 1:54:02 PM |
| #1 Good, strike missions can be handled by RPVs, but to gain air supremacy requires a man in the cockpit. F-15s and 16s are getting old and are not stealthy. When we go up against China in the future, we'll need this plane to counter their advantage in numbers. |
| Posted by: Steve 2005-04-01 1:20:31 PM |