Ken wrote:
Would brand new ones that incorporate the best motors/radars/avionics and other airframe fixes be an acceptable budget compromise while maintaining a rational level of air superiority capability?
Certainly a valid question.
Unfortunately, "new build" F-15s and F-16s are significantly more expensive than they originally were when built. The F-15Es that are currently being built for overseas customers (The F-15K and F-15SG) cost over $60 million each. The latest F-16s (F-16Is) cost $70 million each. So, roughly double the cost when they were originally purchased by the US 10-20 years ago.
And that's
without the significant improvements in avionics and airframe that would be required to being them up to the same capability as the Raptor.
Plus, such a solution doesn't even address that they're ultimately still 30-year old airframe designs that have the RCS of a B-52, and will be expected to survive in advanced threat environments. If you understand how radar works, one look at the F-15 (with those gigantic square intakes that allow an unrestricted look down them to the face of the engines, and the huge vertical tail surfaces, and all the parasite RCS doodads hanging off the airplane) and is obvious that significant redesign would be required to make it viable.
I do not personally think that's the best option, since by the time such changes were made, the cost of the aircraft would be approaching the fly-away cost of the Raptor anyway.
The Inspector wrote:
Well stated JDK! Pretty much what I was attempting to convey before my argument was dismissed by some who didn't see my unhappiness at being stuck with the bill as a taxpayer
Do you honestly, as a taxpayer, expect that classified capabilities will be revealed to you in order to gain your "happiness" as to what your taxes are being spent on? Even if they were revealed, would you understand what those capabilities meant with respect to the capabilities of threat/adversary systems?
I don't disagree that the US government spends money on some absolutely ridiculous, worthless things. You're right -- they do. And taxpayers to deserve accountability as to how that money is spent. The politicians who spend it deserve to be held accountable for bad decisions they've made.
Unfortunately, the Raptor -- despite what you seem to have heard -- is not one of those worthless things. In my experience, it not only lives up to the 'hype', but exceeds it by a country mile.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your bad feelings about it, though.
_________________
ellice_island_kid wrote:
I am only in my 20s but someday I will fly it at airshows. I am getting rich really fast writing software and so I can afford to do really stupid things like put all my money into warbirds.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Less fields to operate from and less aircraft to patrol our skies. This is one reason why I am not a fan of the high tech new generation aircraft. Because there is only going to be a limited number of them and that leaves a lot of our skies unprotected. The world is always changing and someday we might be outnumbered and unable to protect ourselves. How about leave the F-22/15/35s as frontline fighters and keep F-4's, A-7's, etc to protect U.S. airspace. Thats what I would really like to see. Also wished that Civil A-4 squadron was established. 
