F-22 Raptor info

[Clark Griswold]

True - just my musings on if they really want to do this, what they should do and how to get it funded.

On requirement creep, no doubt it (a Raptor 2.0) would invite some over the top ideas and a new Raptor buy is not financially possible with the procurement bow wave developing (35, 46, LSR-B, etc...) but if we make strategic decisions now to re-plan and re-program it could be.  That's just a nice way of saying CNX some other program to pay for this one but it's possible, not likely but possible. 

If you didn't want to add new capabilities baked into a new Raptor you could build a new Raptor with the ability to easily accept new systems, equipment, etc... without screwing up the LO profile.  That would still be pricey but probably less than the Christmas list of new capes I listed above.  Raptor 2.0 has more room for growth and updated mission software specifically designed to accept / integrate updates or additions for new systems, just another idea...

Addition:

More on the Congressional effort to study a Raptor restart:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/story/defense/air-space/2016/04/21/facing-election-fight-forbes-pushes-f-22-revival/83352746/

Edited April 22, 2016 by Clark Griswold
content addition

[brabus]

At this point, forget anything new. Build the same raptor so we have more than 183 or whatever were at now. Even that plan is most likely a bridge too far at this point. Nice of them to talk about reniging on one of the dumbest procurement moves in decades, but I'm pessimistic these talks will ever lead to meaningful action. 

[StoleIt]

Sounds like we just need to get the ball rolling on the 6th Gen...so we can have it to replace half the Raptor fleet in like 80 years.

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, brabus said:

At this point, forget anything new. Build the same raptor so we have more than 183 or whatever were at now. Even that plan is most likely a bridge too far at this point. Nice of them to talk about reniging on one of the dumbest procurement moves in decades, but I'm pessimistic these talks will ever lead to meaningful action. 

Likewise but you never know, every now and the idea comes back, either like herpes or hope springing eternally.

It has percolated to CNN now:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/21/politics/f22-raptor-congress/index.html

We're coming up on a change in leadership at the top, likely other positions when the new CSAF comes in, there is a narrow gap in a slightly open window at that time for a change in major procurement vector(s) if it is ever going to happen it would have to be then. 

Anyway, some plane porn just because...

 

[Sketch]

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Likewise but you never know, every now and the idea comes back, either like herpes or hope springing eternally.

It has percolated to CNN now:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/21/politics/f22-raptor-congress/index.html

We're coming up on a change in leadership at the top, likely other positions when the new CSAF comes in, there is a narrow gap in a slightly open window at that time for a change in major procurement vector(s) if it is ever going to happen it would have to be then. 

Where did CNN get that $412 mil figure? Seriously, I thought it wasn't even close to that.

[Clark Griswold]

5 minutes ago, Sketch said:

Where did CNN get that $412 mil figure? Seriously, I thought it wasn't even close to that.

Depending on the persuasion of the writer, reporter, staffer it can vary widely.  Wired had a good article on it contrasting some of the various methods of calculation.

https://www.wired.com/2011/12/f-22-real-cost/

[Clark Griswold]

Interesting article on Raptor restart:

https://fightersweep.com/5023/case-re-opening-raptor-line/

worth a read, makes a good case on how to pay for it:

Slow down USAF F-35A procurement down to pay for a new F-22, let the Allies get them first while we continue to buy at LRIP levels

Allowing Aussies, Japan and Israel to buy a B model Raptor to further spread the cost.  

Replace Guard 15C models one to one with new Raptors for cost savings and to get more political backing.

 

Keep swinging for the fences.

[Ram]

Raptor to Japan/Israel will never happen. Aussies are a maybe.

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, Ram said:

Raptor to Japan/Israel will never happen. Aussies are a maybe.

Concur

Japan and Israel would have all their own issues but we've had Aussie exchange pilots already in the Raptor, if we want to make a Pacific Pivot this would put a ring on it.  The trouble then is how to explain it to Japan / Israel when / if we sell it to the Aussies without screwing up those relationships. 

There are a lot of ways to make an export version fighter without completely spilling the beans, the Russians don't sell their absolute best stuff but still supply their allies with good capability.  An export Raptor could have a support package controlled by Americans if we want to limit their access to deep technical details - I give that 0.069% chance of being accepted by foreign buyers but just an idea.

[Lawman]

Concur

Japan and Israel would have all their own issues but we've had Aussie exchange pilots already in the Raptor, if we want to make a Pacific Pivot this would put a ring on it.  The trouble then is how to explain it to Japan / Israel when / if we sell it to the Aussies without screwing up those relationships. 

There are a lot of ways to make an export version fighter without completely spilling the beans, the Russians don't sell their absolute best stuff but still supply their allies with good capability.  An export Raptor could have a support package controlled by Americans if we want to limit their access to deep technical details - I give that 0.069% chance of being accepted by foreign buyers but just an idea.

It won't happen because it'll bite in the 35 market share.

Countries with more money than brains who really need the hottest sexiest monster to fly around the flag pole (looking at you Saudi Arabia) they would buy Raptors over lightings.

[StoleIt]

3 hours ago, Lawman said:

It won't happen because it'll bite in the 35 market share.

Countries with more money than brains who really need the hottest sexiest monster to fly around the flag pole (looking at you Saudi Arabia) they would buy Raptors over lightings.

We aren't even selling the Saudi's F-35s last I checked...

[Lawman]

We aren't even selling the Saudi's F-35s last I checked...

I'm just using that country as an example of "only the best" when it comes to buying equipment they neither need nor have the training mindset to effectively employ.

For F-35 to truly be the export wonder we want it to be (ala F-16) we are gonna need to sell it to everybody. FMS and the need to keep Lockmart fed and strong will take over and it will end up in the hands of nations currently looking at their fleets and thinking "we need a dozen fighters in the next decade."

Having Raptor on the market Muddies the water where right now there is no question that no... Even if you're England or Japan you cannot get Raptors so if you want 5th gen better get onboard the Lightning train. Especially not when partner nations that are receiving their 35s are starting to waiver on totals and Money.

[Clark Griswold]

5 hours ago, Lawman said:

It won't happen because it'll bite in the 35 market share.

Countries with more money than brains who really need the hottest sexiest monster to fly around the flag pole (looking at you Saudi Arabia) they would buy Raptors over lightings.

Can't deny the logic of that 

Out of all the ideas for restarting the Raptor line, I thought that his (Tyson Wetzel) were reasonable, not likely to happen but reasonable.  

[Clark Griswold]

Since a we've been discussing FMS Raptors, Google coughed up a 2 seat F-22 concept in Aussie colors... this hypothetical would have looked better keeping the single piece canopy but still nice... 

We've already discussed the snowball's chance of a Raptor line restart, the small matter of the probable 10's of billions of dollars in production restart and update being a small hurdle to overcome but thinking out of the container, what if the DoD, USAF, LM & Congress could arrive at some set of capes from the A model Raptor, adjust as required to produce an acceptable B model Raptor cleared for export and then present that to foreign customers for them to fund Design, Test & Production Line Restart?  

The stated interested parties come up with the money for the B model design/development/testing, we come to an acceptable division of the production between LM/US suppliers and their defense companies; maybe just ceed the engines, wings, etc... and/or let them build 50% of the B model.  The catch to this is if they are already an F-35 customer, they have to follow thru with that order, they could adjust delivery but not eventual purchase but allowing them to get B model Raptors first, probably retire other 4th gen in their fleets earlier to free up funds then get their 35's.

Edited May 4, 2016 by Clark Griswold
minor

[Lawman]

I just can't see any country lining up to spend 150ish million on a 35 to not see the 160 or 170 mil on a Raptor and not immediately go for that. Especially with small density fleet upgrades of 8-12 Airplanes like a lot of these outside NATO countries keep getting into.

If we did revisit and actively have a Raptor production line though it might get interesting to see how long even our own Air Force towed the company line on the 35 before chopping it's order to some 5-600 planes and going bring on the F-22B and push to replace the Strike with something like that long range strike Raptor concept.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

6 hours ago, Lawman said:

I just can't see any country lining up to spend 150ish million on a 35 to not see the 160 or 170 mil on a Raptor and not immediately go for that. Especially with small density fleet upgrades of 8-12 Airplanes like a lot of these outside NATO countries keep getting into.

If we did revisit and actively have a Raptor production line though it might get interesting to see how long even our own Air Force towed the company line on the 35 before chopping it's order to some 5-600 planes and going bring on the F-22B and push to replace the Strike with something like that long range strike Raptor concept.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably so - they just don't have enough margin to accommodate two 5th gens but Japan and Australia (outside NATO players) maybe due to their GDP and security situations, I would suggest trying to entice Germany or GB but that's probably a bridge too far for several reasons (political, economic, perceived requirements, existing systems, etc...)

The key to off ramping to a lesser buy of 35s and restarting the 22 line is to keep it steady, un-dramatic, with no overall increase in cost to the AF (considering both programs per tail increase in cost of the 35 aside) and with plausible new / changes to the requirements driving the change in course (i.e. the Raptor B has X % increase in range, speed and X new capability therefore looking at the challenges we face from S-400s, J-20s, T-50s, etc... the B model acquisition with a smaller buy of 35As is now the Acquisition & Modernization Strategy of the AF...).

[AA]

The F-22 ship has sailed. 

[Clark Griswold]

10 minutes ago, AA said:

The F-22 ship has sailed. 

Probably but never say never or just say never.  The B-1 went from cancellation in 77 to production and flying again in 83 in the form of the B model, a way different design than the A model.