Frank...don't be dumb. The F-22 is using new technology that we were developing as we went along. Besides once it come off the drawing board, it only took about 6 years to get fully functional jets to the Langley flight line.

Why shouldn't it have gone into service? Maybe because the AF needed a new fighter considering the in service dates of the F-15/F-16 were the early 1970s and the latest generation of fighters from around the world were coming dangerously close to their performance, if no surpassing it. We had already gotten rid of the F-4 and F-111 in the 90s and that left us with very few options.

BTW...check the number of air to air kills and ground targets destroyed by the F-15 and I think you'll find it's better then the F-14. Still haven't lost one in Air to air combat either

We stopped producing them in the late 80s. It's actually been in the AF inventory since 85 or so. It's just not a viable aircraft anymore since the B-2 can do everything the F-117 can with more bombs

 

Heritage flight

 

most of that technolgy is in the super horent. the F-22 is a waste of money. why does the af feel the need to build an airplane for each indiviual mission. why not do like the Navy and build one airplane for every mission. F/A-18E/F would have been a much better choice then the F-22 for the AF to buy. its a bomber, fighter, tanker, recon jet, and jammer. thats 4 planes in 1. to be honest there is not really a strong need for air superiorty fighters anymore.

so your F-15/16 have went to service in the 70. im not goin to argue with you about working on old aricraft bc until youve done it you have no clue. but maybe you talk to some guys that work on EA-6B's. and maybe if the AF hadnt sold most of its newest lot of F-16 to the Isralis(sp) they wouldnt have old planes. the navy is runing out of planes that Legecy Horents gettin to many flight hours and traps. are having to be gotin rid of. VFA-87 had to get rid of all there early lot F/A-18C to go to F/A-18A+ bc of the amount of hours on the airframe.

as far as the kill ratio between the F-14 and F-15 maybe you should look at there missions before you compare them. F-14 is a fighter inceptor and the F-15 is an air superiorty fighter. and most of the F-14 missions where theyve shot a missile is still classifed bc the AIM-54 and AIM-7.

im not sayin that the F-22 isnt a bad ass plane bc it is. but its a cold war design thats where it should have stayed.

 

We don't. The F-22 is both a fighter/interceptor and a bomber. We're getting rid of the F-15/F-16s in lieu of the F-22 and the a-10 has been on the chopping block forever. The U-2 is on it's way out and the only reason the AF has the B-1, B-2 and B-52 is that we have a strategic bombing mission whereas the Navy doesn't. It's all cool to be able to drop 1 or 2 2000lb bombs on a mission but I'd rather drop 30 or so from one plane. Besides the AF has been using the F-15/F-16 for both air and ground attack (Strike Eagle anyone?)for years. We need numerous airframes to do the numerous mission.

When the Army wants an Airborne division somewhere RIGHT NOW they don't call the Navy, they call the AF. Why? Because we have the ability to deploy a large scale movement in a short time, vice loading shit on a ship and waiting. The Navy doesn't have or need massive air mobility capability

BTW...How do you differenciate between a fighter/interceptor and an air superiority fighter? Answer...there isn't. It's just a terminology difference. Both are used in the denial of airspace to the enemy.

Besides the AF and Navy can never agree again on an airframe. Witness the F-4 and F-111.

And there has never been an F-15 lost in air to air combat dating back to the beginning

 

im not aruge with you about jets anymore its pointless bc even though i work on them i know nothing and the people who sit in desk and work in fuel labs that just read the write up on jets. apartently know more them me.

WHY DOES THE NAVY NEED TO WORRY ABOUT MOVING THE ARMY. WE HAVE MARINES TO WORRY ABOUT.

thats why the air forces uses the EA-6B right. thats why the F-35A is the verison and the F-35C is the navy version of the JSAF but know we cant argee on airplanes

 

Umm...the AF doesn't have any EA-6s. We use the EC-130.

And I'm still waiting for the difference between a fighter/interceptor and a Air superority fighter

 

TURNING A WRENCH ON THE SON OF A BITCH AND KNOWING WHAT THEIR CAPABILITIES ARE, ARE TWO DIFFERENT FUCKING THINGS. You've proven that quite well.

Just for fun... please post one more time that you think this:
F14 > F22.

You're a Top Gun fan boy and don't want to believe anything else. Give it up.

 

So if the Super Hornet does everything and the Navy doesn't need multiple planes, why do you need the JSF?

 

prob has something to do with parts..

 

the JSF is replacing the F/A-18 A-D the legecy.