However this part of the post makes little sense:
"Designed to combat the next-generation of Soviet fighters – which never materialized – the planes have sat on the tarmac despite the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya raging in the skies above them. They have no role in today’s wars, and by the time there’s someone to battle, they’ll be obsolete."
Trident nuclear missiles were not used in Afghanistan (Operation: USELESS DIRT 1), Iraq (Operation: USELESS DIRT 2) or Libya (Operation: USELESS DIRT 3). I don't think Mark has a grasp on why no-peer-level air power exists.
Today's wars could suddenly mean N.Korea or an encounter near the South China Sea. The, "by there's someone to battle, they'll be obsolete" statement is valueless. Also, no other aircraft in the U.S. inventory besides the F-22 has a hope of standing up to SU-35, PAK-FA, J-2x, and the Chinese JSF knock-off that is coming.
The strategy that one wants to fight anti-access threats at a peer level or worse is bad. That is exactly where the moribund DOD "strategic" thinking is going.
The F-22 exists so-as to clean any opponents air assets off the table. The fact that the oxygen mess in the F-22 isn't fixed yet points just as much to USAFs thin engineering manning as it does Lockheed Martin incompetence.
If USAF had the proper number of free-thinking engineers, along with the requisite amount of strong moral leadership to back them up, the F-22 would not have reached IOC until a serious matter like oxygen and stealth-skin defects were solved.
With that, restarting F-22 production using resources from the failed F-35 program is the right thing to do.
5 comments:
One of the articles in this publication is creepily similar to the now infamous crash in Alaska, but it is a Navy jet.
http://www.public.navy.mil/navsafecen/Documents/media/approach/App_Nov-Dec11.pdf
Perhaps these two F-22 pilots will spur some new research into modernizing the ergonomics and equipment performance to match the new jet operations. Operating jet fighters is inherently dangerous. Hypoxia is way down on the list of what could kill you. It is a puzzlement why the F-22 is the focus of all this condemnation again. It has the appearance of a coordinated smear, but for what purpose? If these two pilots have fear of flying, they absolutely are in the wrong business, and they are doing the right thing to get out. Undoubtedly, others with the right stuff will take their place.
Soldaten sind zum Sterben da ...
Doubtful it is a "fear of flying". It is more a vote of no confidence of what they are being told by their leadership on program fixes.
Yes, other aircraft use OBOGS however they don't go up to 60k-plus feet as a manner of operational normalcy.
Re:... they don't go up to 60k-plus feet as a manner of operational normalcy...
I don't know if that is a representative altitude for F-22 operations, but the complaints voiced by the "60 minutes pilots" do sound like altitude/decompression sickness with the added so-called Raptor cough, which sounds like the result of breathing too much dry oxygen. My point is that these health issues may be due to a combination of causes that exist in other fighter plane pilots but have become intolerable for F-22 type operations. Unique F-22 operational capability has overflown human capability.
Years ago, F-22s were waivered for 67k ft, then at some point in time it went lower.
Then, during the great unpleasantness of not knowing why the life-support system doesn't work, it has been restricted at some lower heights at various times.
Post a Comment