http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8162106.stm

- Is making the cutting of the F22 programme the centre of Obama's new defence budget at all wise? I thought the F22 was still a hell of a fighter, a strong argument could be made for it being equal or still better than the Eurofighter typhoon - though I have heard it is three times the cost of the latter.

Anyone know what is to replace it?

I don't really follow this stuff but maybe the F35 since its cheaper?

Also the article makes it sound like we will just not build additional. It says they still have 187.

The F22 isn't dead. The F22 is still operational and supported and employing lots of people.

What the F22 isn't is cost effective ordnance delivery for anything outside its problem domain. It is now the second generation of US air superiority fighters that have been totally dominant while never shooting anything, that problem domain is very rapidly shrinking. There is no point in building more. The era of theater air superiority is over, as that non-nuclear ICBM article a few months back demonstrated.

Like the F15 before it, the F22 has never fired a shot in anger in US hands against an air threat. Unless we start selling it to Israel and Japan, I suspect it never will.

(ok, the F15 (E, ground attack variant) scored the first and only USAF air to air kill in 1991 -- by dropping a gravity bomb on a helicopter ... good shot! But underscores the point)

When something ends production - it's dead. Of course with 180 floating around, it's not gone, but it's a sign that, as you said, it is regarded as 'old news'.

Is this then about overproduction of a jet the US has enough of? Is nothing then being built in its stead?

Tell that to the F15, which has been out of production for half of its service life. We haven't made nuclear warheads in 20 years either -- is nuclear war dead? These aren't cars that get replaced every 5 years. We can also restart production in about 6 months if we had to do so, as long as we're building some remotely similar planes ...

Like the F35, which is designed to replace pretty much every general purpose fighter with a common, less expensive platform. Don't get me wrong, I grew up wanting nothing else but to fly the F15 (now F22). I'd probably spooge in my pants if I got a chance. But they are relics of a past era, like the most modern cavalry saber.

Great point Malse regarding the Calvary saber. Hanging onto outdated military systems and concepts has disastrous consequences. Like Gen Haig bitterly clinging onto the calvary breakthrough in WW1.

Besides.. the F-35 Lightning II is a GREAT weapon.

Looking ahead.. we made the right decision. 187 F-22s is a shitload. And the only up and coming competitor is the SU-PAK which is due to be out in 2015 at a cost of $200-240 Million a piece. (compared to the $140 for the F-22)

Keep all this in mind as well...this will be the first year in the history of the Air Force that the US will spend/purchase more unmanned aircraft than manned.

Flying megamillion dollar fighter jets is going away...

I thought that most of the funds that was originally marked for the F-22 was being channeled into the JSF project, because that plane is more applicable across the different branches of our military.

I understand the cost issue but considering most countries are just starting thier 4th gen fighters like the F-35 the F-22 is a step beyond into the 5th generation of fighters. The F33 also provides much more rather than just air combat with the electronics package it has it can be a very good first strike weapon or even support fighter.

Why build to be just on even par with everyone else when the F22 will put the US a step ahead for once. Even though we have had air superiority in the past this was due to the pilots not due to the planes as our planes have always lacked behind the rest of the world. Except maybe with the very limited F117a

The new F-35 is plenty good enough to replace production of the F-22. It's a much more versatile system, and the same plane can be outfitted in at least three different ways to serve the various branches of the U.S. military, like a complex gun can be outfitted with different accessories for different situations.

I read in a news article the other day that the F-22 hasn't contributed much at all (if even anything) to the recent fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Besides, as has been mentioned already, those existing F-22s will be around for a long, long time still. Just look at the A-10.

'Keep all this in mind as well...this will be the first year in the history of the Air Force that the US will spend/purchase more unmanned aircraft than manned.'

- That's an exceptional point to note, IMO.

The future of air to air combat may very well be unmanned aircraft. If you take the pilot out of the aircraft and put him in a ground control station, an air-platform can fly under far more G load than would otherwise be the case. That means more maneuverability, probably more speed and possibly a better sharing of the task load as several pilots/weapons officers could be tasked to one drone. There is no cockpit size limitation in the ground control station after all.

Of course, that brings up new vulnerabilities. Like having your control systems jammed or cut off by satellite destruction. We aren't ready for truly robotic combat aircraft yet. I foresee an interim period where both manned and unmanned drone fighters roam the skies at the same time.

The F16 has been a workhorse for the USAF. However, the airframes have been flying THOUSANDS of hours past their expiration dates. 6-8 thousand hours on a small airframe that pulls 9Gs is a lot. However, the F16 is cheap to maintain, and consistently have Time Compliance Technical Orders to revamp the systems. The F35 is the Airframe that is suppose to take the place of the F16, at least here in Homestead in the next 3-4 years.

You all have to remember something about the United States Military. It's not just about the quality of the machines we use in warfare, it's the ridiculous amount of training the fighter pilot endures and the maintenance crew goes through on a daily basis. No country in the world touches our standards, Israel Air Force being the exception.

I look forward to getting rid of the F16, but I do not see the F16 going away completely for a long time.

The cost of and F22 is outrageous. The cost of maintaining an F22 is abhorrent.

:devil

For every hour in the air with an F-22 30 hours of maintenance are required, according to the piece on the nightly news the other day. It costs something like $44k per hour to fly one of them, again citing the nightly news report. That is not a cost effective piece of equipment.