Head of the USAF Is Jumping on the F-22 Production Re-Start Bandwagon (2020) | Hacker News Reader

Head of the USAF Is Jumping on the F-22 Production Re-Start Bandwagon (2020)

thedrive.com

18 pointsbelter36 comments

This article is from 2020. It may not represent anything current. It should be marked with the year on the headline.

This article from 2022 talks about ideas to retire the F-22 early:

The Air Force NGAD program to replace the F-22 is moving along. They are currently bidding for fighter part of the program with Boeing and Lockheed Martin as the contenders. The Air Force wants a larger fighter for greater range in the Pacific.

The Air Force seems to have figured out how to rapid development of aircraft. The B-21 was awarded contract in 2015, first flight was recently, and they are already making production aircraft, with entering service in 2027. The B-21 is heavily based on the B-2 so that probably made development faster.

B21 was firm fixed price contract, so contractor has a lot more leeway on their side, but it turns out they didn't expect the massive inflation of the past few years and that has blown their cost models out of the water. They will lose a lot of money on the first 5 small batches.

What a huge mistake it was to stop production on the f22. This article [1] says the decision was made in 2011. I bet it was in part because the f35 was going to be so great and it was going to be cheaper because it was going to be made in mass quantities. It is made in mass q, and we are selling it to many of our allies. It's a fantastic airframe, but still not an f22. If the US ever got into a big battle with a similar top power (ie China and maybe Russia is still counted there), a bunch of f22's would have been great.

That article says ngad replacement coming around 2033! Right in time to matchup against China (which I hope never happens for so many reasons, I don't want a war for anyone, now or in the future). The novel "2034: A Novel of the Next World War" was a really interesting book. It was written by a retired Admiral and talks about what a war might be like. Basically China has hacked all US computer systems including military ones and the US really struggles in the fight, atomic weapons are used, India plays the peacemaker.

1. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/air-force-only-has-18...

2. Elliot Ackerman and James Stavridis, 2034: A Novel of the Next World War

The F-35 seems to still be struggling. Among other things, it still is unable to survive a lightning strike, which is a pretty basic requirement even for civil aircraft. Making it the overriding priority stank of politics.

Have any F-35s been lost to lightning? Maybe the military is more flexible for lighting strike resistance because of their rarity/flight hours/operating envelopes/number of souls on board? Is there any irony that its called the "F-35 Lightning II?"

EDIT: System that injects nitrogen into the fuel tanks was found to be faulty. They're fixing them but have just restricted them from flying near thunderstorms in the mean time.

I spend a lot of time at The Warzone (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone) and the F-35 is now almost unanimously considered a resounding success. Rocky start sure, and at the time it was thought to be too costly. Fast forward in time, and with production going well(1), customers lining up(2,3) and deploying(4), this platform looks now to be a very smart investment.

1- https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/the-1000th-f-35-has-be...

2- https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/romania-unveils-plan-t...

3- https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10362/germany-might-jo...

4- https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/royal-navy-activates-f...

Those customers had almost no option. Now the platform still needs to be tested in combat. Bombing runs on terrorist camps do not count.

You mean like this? https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/israels-f-35i-combat-e...

Or maybe this: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/israeli-f-35-shoots-do...

These are "top level weapons systems", not deployed unless you are okay with your enemy collecting data on your strike. Don't expect the F-35 to be deployed for routine missions when the older platforms (F-16) are still so dominant and also selling well: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/turkish-f-16-deal-now-...

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/36296/new-f-16s-will-a...

The F-35 is truly a next generation warfighting platform (not just fighter/bomber) that will only get better/more capable as combat sorties are logged and the "loyal wingman" program evolves.

I recently saw an article, maybe at the thedrive that was about F35s in Norway practicing landing, refueling, taking off on roads, I think aimed at a dispersal program where in a way they wouldn't have to land at only airbases. Found it https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/09/25/lockheed-fighter-j...

Indeed, the public's tune on F-35 has changed to positive. How much was due to actual improvements in operations and manufacturing versus change of perception, i.e. media no longer blasting perceived failures of then-nascent project?

A lot of hard work has been put into refining the F-35. I'd say it's a mix of both. The "fixes" weren't trusted until we saw deployment, sales, and sorties!

That's my impression as well: the F-35 program materially improved, but it also helps that the media no longer calls it a trillion dollar failure.

I think part of the problem with F-35 was that it took a long time to be developed. First flight was in 2006 and entered service 2015 to 2019. That is a long time to be paying for plane that can't see. I think entering service with foreign countries and the price dropping with full production is what caused it to be accepted.

One hilarious side effect of this protracted timeline is that its central computer is about as powerful as a Pentium 1 from the 1990s.

Not to worry: it’s being upgraded this year to a computer as powerful as the SoC in the first generation Apple Watch.

“Flying supercomputer” indeed…

The US is going to have 1000+ soon, even if they lost half of them they'd still have enough to roll the stealth fighter fleets of China and Russia at the same time.

Source? I see a lot of complaints about issues on the F35 that were fixed years ago. No question its a way over budget project that had a problematic start, but from at least some sources I've seen the program seems to be much better now that its got more operational experience.

I'm in Switzerland, which has (unfortunately, IMHO) ordered a batch of F-35s. We have just been advised to not fly them near thunderstorms, with no fix until at least 2027. We have a lot of mountains. We have a lot if thunderstorms.

If we think of the F-35 as needing to be a dogfighter like previous fighters then it's a dud. However, when you consider the tactics and deployments possible when using a fighter that cannot be seen on radar (until it's a lot closer than, say, an F-18E) then you enable attack plans where the F-35s launch and deploy first and the non-stealth F-18s go second... which prompt enemy fighter pilots to scramble and then say things like "Holy crap, where did that missile come from?" as their final words because the F-35s were already in missile range when they left the runway. This leaves the path clear of enemy fighters for the bomb trucks to come in and do their thing while the enemy reels in confusion at seeing their fighter response removed from the board minutes after going wheels up.

In what universe is the F35 struggling? There are issues being dealt with, but it has a high rate of production as is being flown by major US allies and is flown in regular service.

Do you have any stats or knowledge detailing why the F35 might seem to be struggling?

Note: I've worked on the F35 project, so have fairly decent knowledge on the issue. I'm pretty sure you're making stuff up.

> it still is unable to survive a lightning strike, which is a pretty basic requirement even for civil aircraft

Military aircraft tend to be less robust. From being aerodynamic instability (to be more maneouverable) to engine failure being a game over, the trade-offs you make are different between the domains.

Also, the F-35 has lightning mitigation [1]. We just don't know how well it works, so we're avoiding flying it in lightning when not necessary. If we had to scramble jets into lightning, we'd do it.

[1] https://breakingdefense.com/2022/11/pentagon-wont-lift-f-35a...

Note that this article is from early 2020 and contains links about the F-35 that are much older than that.

An updated article would be very interesting.

It is very unlikely that any new raptors will be produced ever.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operati...

> This has long proven difficult in Congress, as evidenced by a saga over the past 10 years in trying to cut the A-10 Thunderbolt II attack jet and now a push to retire 30 non-combat-capable F-22 Raptors.

> Those F-22s will be retired as the service is ramping up its Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) platform.

> The service plans to award an engineering and manufacturing development contract for NGAD in 2024, as early work starts on the other two programs.

https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/allvin_a...

> To attain the required fighter force, the Air Force must transition its fighter fleet from seven platforms (F-35, F-22, F-16, F-15EX, F-15E, F-15C, A-10) to four platforms (NGAD, F-35, F-15 platform, F-16) and introduce the first operational, uncrewed CCAs. If confirmed, I will work to ensure we have the optimal portfolio mix of capability and capacity to most effectively meet the demands of the 2022 NDS.

I recall reading that Lockheed did quite an extensive documentation project to capture the knowledge needed to resume production. To the point of even making DVDs that show the assemblers showing how they performed each step of the manufacturing process.

I hope they didn't use DVD-Rs, because there's no chance those are still playable.

From a timing perspective would that not have been during the FOGBANK debacle? A lot of military contractors temporarily got very interested in data preservation...

Why rebuild OLD planes? Aren't there any planes that are later designs to build instead of 33-year-old designs from the 1990s?

This sounds a lot like rebuilding Snoopy's Sopwith Camel from WW1 to fight the enemy jets 30-odd years later in the Korean War.

Why spend $$ on a high performance air-superiority fighter when you can have one flying truck (F-35) controlling 20 cheap air to air drones? Even if a drone is just a disposable way to draw fire it's still a deal compared to a manned F-22.

That's the separate robot wingman program that's running in parallel to the F22 - the MIC can multitask. They're working on different jets for that like the XQ-58 Valkyrie [1].

The problem is that for air-superiority the F22 has incredible performance. One of their biggest problem when they launched was that pilots kept blacking out from the g-forces and suffering lasting effects. A drone to match it isn't going to be that much cheaper because the life support isn't really the most expensive part of the package.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratos_XQ-58_Valkyrie

A fighter with a human can only pull so many Gs so a drone fighter will always outmaneuver a manned fighter of the same generation, probably outgun it too now you can pack more missiles where the body used to be.

Theoretically, yes, but someone has to actually design and build a drone capable of doing that first. The F22/F35 are flagships fighter jets so they're built to be far more performant than drones have been so far because before modern AI, a fully automated fighter jet wingman was considered impractical.

Making drones like that is only worth it if an adversary has something worth destroying that can't be done with cheaper hardware like cruise missiles.

They already have drone craft that are actually based on the space shuttle platform that are probably doing things that would be impossible with a human inside, like the x37 orbiting the earth for two and a half years. Their exact capabilities and missions are classified though. These are also just the craft that have been revealed to the public, who knows the true capabilities of whats been built and what exactly is on the table in the near future.

Fighter pilot seems to not understand how the world works. Morons think politicians killed the F-22. LockMart did.

Any threat to the Trillion Dollar Baby will be exterminated. And yes, we have every congressmans direct line to remind them of their district’s gravy. It was designed that way.

don't see why the us needs more than the eagle, the falcon and the super hornet. produced in large numbers. let's remember what eisenhower said about the military-industrial complex.

The Ukraine war shows that 4th generation fighters are obsolete and not suited for front-line combat. Both sides have advanced air defenses which makes it too risky to attack. Air power hasn't had much effect even though Russia has superior air force.

Stealth fighter would be needed to hunt the air defenses. Then the non-stealth fighters could operate safely. Russian has handful of Su-57, Ukraine won't get F-35, neither side does SEAD like the US, and the air will stay stalemated.

Also, the Eagle (Boeing), Falcon (Lockheed Martin), and Super Hornet (Boeing) are firmly militarily industrial complex. F-16 and F-18 are a little less expensive and F-15EX is more expensive than F-35. The US is buying more old fighters because F-35 is too popular.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com