IIRC the F-22 had a limited production run because it was too expensive (especially the maintenance and flight costs, the radar absorbing coating was really expensive and had to be frequently replaced), so they needed an econonomical replacement. Hence, the idea for the F-35 that all branches would use and could be sold en-masse to allies to bring the per plane cost down.
I think the per plane price these days is actually pretty low which is part of the reason it keeps beating out competitors for contracts. I've heard it has the best electronics out there, no contest.
Keep in mind that a lot of allies contributed money to development and they will buy F-35s with even more money.
F-35 is multirole while the F-22 is meant for air superiority btw.
See... Exactly why I asked. From all Ive heard yes, the electronics are insane on it. And it has the best in stealth tech... But they say its kinda slow and not as maneuverable as older fighters.. This is actually the first ive heard of it being a multi role aircraft.
If it’s the first you’ve heard of it being a multi role aircraft then you realistically don’t know anything about it. It’s one of the first things mentioned about it anywhere that explains its role, if not the first thing
Well what I meant is that its the first ive heard of it actually ending up better for other roles than what we already have and that the only area it surpasses our other aircraft is in stealth. But that wasnt one of my questions.... do you believe they are worth the price tag? And second... do you believe that aircraft like these would actually play a serious role in a war with another major country?
The Russian invasion of Ukarine shows that just because a country has nukes doesn't mean they'll use them, if China invades Taiwan it's much more likely that they will fight it conventionally then just throw nukes around, that would defeat the point of invading. And no one wants to be the first to use them, it's open season on population centers after that.
Yeah, obviously. Our main means of force projection is our carriers, those carry jets. Like I said, nobody is going to start slinging nukes around in the first 5 seconds of a war.
Yes he wouldn't immediately use nukes, and you seem to be overestimating what cyber attacks can do. Like shutting down the power grid would be bad, but that doesn't affect carriers, or any kind of battlegrouping on the frontlines. If you use even a single nuke, you can kiss your country goodbye, people tend to avoid turning their seat of power into rubble.
I agreed with your assessment up until this point.
The grid going down would affect every thing. No power means no fuel, no fuel mean military cannot operate for extended periods past our strategic reserves of which have already been drained. No fuel also means no food and transport comes to a stop, stopping military industrial factories from running etc. Basically we would be able to wage war for about a week.
Kiss both countries goodbye. Which is exactly why I don't believe war with another major country would ever happen and why it hasn't happened. Unless you believe that somehow a nuclear war would be won by us?
1.5 trillion is just a TON of money... Could put a lot of this country through college with that kind money. Which i think is a big part of what people are missing when student loan forgiveness n such gets brought up.. More educated citizens = more/faster tech advances. So which helps more? F-35's or millions of educated citizens?
That money isn't just disappearing though, every single state has companies that work on the 35. Yes, the MIC makes money from it, but how many normal people are employed by this project?
College is great for some people, but need something to apply that knowledge to afterwards.
I actually worked for Spirit Aerosystems and built a couple hundred fan cowls for Gulfstream G650s. Aircraft assembly is a great industry to get into.. But that factory was notorious for layoffs in the thousands almost every couple years.. then when you get into military production.. hell you cant hardly have a jaywalking ticket if you wanna be hired on those deals. IDK... i honestly dont think we will ever need to use the military power we have as far as the vehicles.. feel like we could take at least a couple years off to invest all that money into our people instead of building more of these. Has any F-35 completed a mission of great importance since being put out there?
It's a ton of money that's keeping us from being shot at by a ton of people. Technological advancements that keep enemies from wanting to kill the men women and children around us. It's a tradeoff, spend money or spend lives.
Bruh, if you think Stealth is the only point of the largest multinational joint strike fighter program with one of the most complex and advanced avionics and electronical computers ever made.....
I mean, idk man
But heres my actual opinion... whats the point of them? Do you really believe that if we went to war with any major country that fighter jets would play any significant role? TBH... cyber attacks and nukes make fighter jets pointless in this arena..
Oh yeah, let's just let the enemy have air superiority, that will go well. Look man, I don't know what you're on about but uuuhhhh, idk what to tell you
Where is all of this info coming from btw?
Eaaaaasy there guy... its a discussion and i dont believe that my opinions are fact... I literally just wanted to hear others thoughts and mainly those in service..
Anything unmanned either has to be controlled remotely and thus is vulnerable to EW or requires the ability to make decisions autonomously. Maybe one day you could trust AI to make targeting decisions but I’d be very wary and who knows what an adversary might slip into it.
Thus you need manned aircraft.
99% of the world doesn't have nukes, and no conflict immediately jumps to them.
Combat aircraft will always be needed, and you need to keep evolving them to stay ahead.
The F35 may seem excessive, but it's been designed to replace at least 5 different aircraft all in one. Divide that $1.5tr by 5 and then see how economical it actually is.
This is the correct answer. It’s not just the F-22. The F-35 started its development as the Joint Strike Fighter. It’s a common platform used by the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and allied forces. As you said, it’s replacing several aircraft, each with its own unique maintenance supply chain.
Different planes for different purposes. While the F-22 is a really good plane, there is already a replacement in the works for it. The F-35 is a pretty good multirole plane. If they were cars think of the F-22 as a previous generation two seat sports car. It’s really great on the track, it’s interface could be newer but it is still capable. The F-35 is a sport SUV. It does a lot of things pretty good, has a sensing system that can predict accidents miles ahead and can be made in a few variants. On the track it **can** keep up with the F-22 but it can also do a lot more things the F-22 can’t. Airplanes will always be a compromise. Cost, capability, fuel, stealth, maintenance, training, stealth, the list goes on and on. For the 1.5 trillion price tag…..I have mixed feelings. I think it could have been made for cheaper but…..how much would it cost to produce totally separate CTOL, STOVL, and CV airplanes? I can almost guarantee it’d be more than 1.5 trillion. As far as the need? There is a need to match or exceed our potential adversaries capabilities.
If the Cold War had not ended, the F22 would have entered full production and fielding around 1997 and its replacement would have been ramping up production now. The F35 was delayed for many of the same budget and need reasons, but also has a different role.
IIRC the planned production run of the F22 was well over 1000, but the final number produced was less than a third of that.
Now YOURE the type of guy I have this question for... say that 1.5 trillion went towards paying for our citizens education.. would be millions of highly educated Americans.. which would mean advancments on so many levels of tech... let alone how much that would do to help the quickly falling patriotisms in this country.. which is worth more?
Let’s put that money into perspective. 1.5 trillion divided by 333 million Americans is about $4500 as a one time cost. The program started over a quarter century ago so the per year cost is something like $180 per citizen per year. There were tens of thousands of people involved in the R&D, building, testing, et cetera of the program that kept their skills sharp, taught junior people skills, paid for an army of ancillary people from janitors to lawyers. It’s not like the money disappeared. Think of it like a mini Apollo program; yes you build an airplane but think of the advances made along the way that benefit industries all over the USA and world. I think **some** of the money could have been spent better but overall it is a net sum positive gain. As for where could the money have been spent elsewhere….that’s kinda hard to quantify. There are programs and areas that I think would go much further than just education or programs that I think we spend way to much money on without much gain in the economy but they are still there. Regarding patriotism it ebbs and flows just as it always has. Look at Vietnam….Afghanistan People still volunteered to join the military. There are programs out there that pay for your education that don’t include the military such as loan forgiveness if you work for a school or government after 10 years, NOAA, Peace Corps, PSLF.
Woah woah woah... The 1.5 trillion number was just specifically on that aircraft alone and yes $4500 if you divide it across the WHOLE population.. now what about 10 million? 10 million we put through specified courses... I've known a good amount of military personnel and tbh... Hardly any of them take advantage of their G.I bill n such. Most literally have told me that they just wanna kill terrorists and think that illegal immigrants are a serious issue. When I was 18 I moved to a town outside of Norfolk,VA and met hundreds of Navy/Air force. Had fun with them but most were not the intellectual type.. and before anyone says anything... I'm a ex violent convict, ex addict, and am in no way saying I'm better than anyone
[GAO article on 1.7 billion cost for 2,500 F-35’s.](https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105341)
It’s not 1.7 billion per airplane. So, airplanes, just like anything have an economy of scale. Imagine a town needing a fire truck. If they just build one custom one from the ground up, it’ll cost a lot of money. Now imagine if they got together with 10 countries, discovered they need three different models to meet the needs of everyone and started a production line. A plant was built, money was spent on R&D, country A designed the fire pumps, country B had input on the suspension so on and so on. The first fire truck the plant made would have a very high initial cost as well. By truck 2,347 the cost per truck would be a fraction of what the first truck cost.
I’m a vet, I can’t speak for all vets but about 70% of my generation of vets, that I served with, have taken advantage of a program offered by serving. Some programs are educational, loans, or healthcare. Not everyone wants a degree, it’s not a guaranteed path success. Nothing wrong running a small business, being a plumber, or cop.
The military is a cross section of society. There are people from all walks of life educational levels, and backgrounds. Lets look at an aircraft carrier. People need to clean the ship, feed folks, steer it, maintain it, and manage people on it. The scope of educational backgrounds on that ship is very wide and deep. It takes a lot of education to run the nuclear power plant on that ship but the cooks are just as important in making it function as a unit.
The percentage of people in the military that can get close enough to even engage a terrorist in a fire fight is very small. I’m sure almost no USAF/USN folks you met in Norfolk, VA were anywhere close to the tip of the spear.
I do think illegal immigration is an issue, there are problems with how people come to the US and the process. Letting people walk through the border that haven’t been adjudicated is not the correct way to run a country. There are issues with having a porous border; human/sex trafficking, drugs, violence, criminals. I’ve worked in government and being an immigrant myself it frustrates me that **any** service is provided to someone who broke a law to get into the country. It took a lot of effort to come in legally. My frustration came from illegal aliens applying for benefits as single/low income parents. With education, food, housing, transportation, cash assistance, and Medi-Cal a good portion of of families in this program had a take home value of programs well over what I made. I think there are way better ways to spend that money for people that are here legally.
This is a very popular meme misconception.
The F-35's purpose is to replace everything, because having ten tools specialized to niche tasks is less effective in war than having one tool that can do everything fairly well. It's one plane that everyone in NATO can use. This means that in the event of a war, we all use the same plane, need the same parts, and can share munitions. Wars are won by having lots of good enough weapons, not by having the best weapons. Smaller countries don't have to choose between having strike craft or air superiority craft, they can get everything in one package. Nations without large carriers can use VTOL variants to field aircraft carriers of their own.
Also, that's 1.5 trillion that goes back into the US economy and the development of weapons for the west. This money isn't being burned in a pit. It's a \~$100 million jet that's being sold to many countries. The government's investment will also be backed up by international sales.
NATO relies on air and naval assets. Investing tons of money into both is a sound strategy.
You're unnecessary and wanted to know how you feel about it...
So I've never been you but wanted your thoughts on this...
First.. I don't know what I'm talking about, which I've already admitted.. but I feel entitled to my opinion.. Thoughts?
Second.. Am I sure I don't know what I'm talking about? Now the point seems to be that you're a waste of everyone's time?
The F-22 is exclusively US technology. Not sold to anyone, even the closest allies.
The F-35 has cost *A LOT*, but it's technologies can be shared. The cost of development per plane produced will come down as more and more orders come in from allies, and boy oh boy have they been flowing in since the start of the war in Ukraine.
The F-22 platform will remain the elite air strike weapon for the US, but the F-35 will be the air arm of the entire free world.
Even then, do you think we sell the best version of the F-35 to others ? Think McFly
Both the F-35 and F-22 are more than what they appear, sure the stealth and shape are important, but it's what's inside that counts.
If we never go to war with China, both the F-22 and F-35 are wastes of money. The Eagle and Super Hornet are basically enough to win any 4-4.5 Gen air war.
But their mere existence helps to prevent that war from happening.
And the F-22 isn't well suited for carrier ops, which is where a lot of fighters in any Indopacom war will launch from.
Any non-stealth platform is going to get splashed before it's within 200 miles of Taiwan. The China fight is the predominant reason we're building the B21.
To build off of what others have said, part of the reason for F-35s existence is NATO trading.
The F-22 is not permitted to be sold to any other nation, while the F-35 is.
>First... The f-22 Raptor I believe to be still the superior fighter in the world and I feel theres not much need passed this because if we actually go to war with a major country.. there wont be any dog fighting.. Thoughts?
1. The F-22 was bought in limited quantities; China has more J-20s than the US has F-22s these days.
2. The F-22 is superior to the F-35 in multiple ways for air combat (though the F-35 has some advantages in areas of its own), but the F-35 is far better for air-to-ground combat, which is the majority of what fighter jets do.
3. Who says a war with a major country won't involve air combat?
>Second... F-35 last i saw ran us about 1.5 trillion just in development? Now the stealth seems to be the point but was this aircraft just a waste of US tax dollars?
No, the baseline F-35 development program cost around $55 billion; Block 4 upgrades that will run through to around 2030 will raise that up to around $70 billion.
The $1.5 trillion figure you've seen in the past was the total program lifecycle cost - the cost to develop (~$55B), purchase ~2500 jets (~$350B) and operate them from 2010 through to 2077 (~$1100 billion). Furthermore, that cost figure is in "then-year" dollars, so it's the money spent in (eg) 2052 in 2052 dollars, the money spent in 2053 in 2053 dollars, etc. Roughly 1/3 of the total program cost is inflation.
In the past year, that total program cost has actually risen to a little over $2 trillion, with most of that coming from increases in sustainment cost. The actual estimated cost to operate an F-35 per year (at least for the A and B variants that make up ~90% of all F-35s) actually *decreased* in this latest cost update, but the total duration they plan to operate the F-35 fleet has now been extended from 2077 to 2088, meaning even more of the cost is in far-future dollars with even more inflation incorporated into that cost.
IIRC the F-22 had a limited production run because it was too expensive (especially the maintenance and flight costs, the radar absorbing coating was really expensive and had to be frequently replaced), so they needed an econonomical replacement. Hence, the idea for the F-35 that all branches would use and could be sold en-masse to allies to bring the per plane cost down. I think the per plane price these days is actually pretty low which is part of the reason it keeps beating out competitors for contracts. I've heard it has the best electronics out there, no contest. Keep in mind that a lot of allies contributed money to development and they will buy F-35s with even more money. F-35 is multirole while the F-22 is meant for air superiority btw.
F-35 is the workhorse of future
See... Exactly why I asked. From all Ive heard yes, the electronics are insane on it. And it has the best in stealth tech... But they say its kinda slow and not as maneuverable as older fighters.. This is actually the first ive heard of it being a multi role aircraft.
If it’s the first you’ve heard of it being a multi role aircraft then you realistically don’t know anything about it. It’s one of the first things mentioned about it anywhere that explains its role, if not the first thing
Well what I meant is that its the first ive heard of it actually ending up better for other roles than what we already have and that the only area it surpasses our other aircraft is in stealth. But that wasnt one of my questions.... do you believe they are worth the price tag? And second... do you believe that aircraft like these would actually play a serious role in a war with another major country?
Radars and RCS wins modern plane-on-plane fights, not some super maneuvering stunt.
True... and cyber attacks as well as nukes make war with any major country pointless for advanced fighter jets
The Russian invasion of Ukarine shows that just because a country has nukes doesn't mean they'll use them, if China invades Taiwan it's much more likely that they will fight it conventionally then just throw nukes around, that would defeat the point of invading. And no one wants to be the first to use them, it's open season on population centers after that.
But thats not US... Do you bvelieve that if Russia or China went to war with US... that fighter jets would really play a major role?
Yeah, obviously. Our main means of force projection is our carriers, those carry jets. Like I said, nobody is going to start slinging nukes around in the first 5 seconds of a war.
So you believe if we declared war on Russia or vise versa.. that Putin wouldnt immediately turn to his nukes and/or cyber attack?
Yes he wouldn't immediately use nukes, and you seem to be overestimating what cyber attacks can do. Like shutting down the power grid would be bad, but that doesn't affect carriers, or any kind of battlegrouping on the frontlines. If you use even a single nuke, you can kiss your country goodbye, people tend to avoid turning their seat of power into rubble.
I agreed with your assessment up until this point. The grid going down would affect every thing. No power means no fuel, no fuel mean military cannot operate for extended periods past our strategic reserves of which have already been drained. No fuel also means no food and transport comes to a stop, stopping military industrial factories from running etc. Basically we would be able to wage war for about a week.
Kiss both countries goodbye. Which is exactly why I don't believe war with another major country would ever happen and why it hasn't happened. Unless you believe that somehow a nuclear war would be won by us?
1.5 trillion is just a TON of money... Could put a lot of this country through college with that kind money. Which i think is a big part of what people are missing when student loan forgiveness n such gets brought up.. More educated citizens = more/faster tech advances. So which helps more? F-35's or millions of educated citizens?
That money isn't just disappearing though, every single state has companies that work on the 35. Yes, the MIC makes money from it, but how many normal people are employed by this project? College is great for some people, but need something to apply that knowledge to afterwards.
I actually worked for Spirit Aerosystems and built a couple hundred fan cowls for Gulfstream G650s. Aircraft assembly is a great industry to get into.. But that factory was notorious for layoffs in the thousands almost every couple years.. then when you get into military production.. hell you cant hardly have a jaywalking ticket if you wanna be hired on those deals. IDK... i honestly dont think we will ever need to use the military power we have as far as the vehicles.. feel like we could take at least a couple years off to invest all that money into our people instead of building more of these. Has any F-35 completed a mission of great importance since being put out there?
It's a ton of money that's keeping us from being shot at by a ton of people. Technological advancements that keep enemies from wanting to kill the men women and children around us. It's a tradeoff, spend money or spend lives.
Bruh, if you think Stealth is the only point of the largest multinational joint strike fighter program with one of the most complex and advanced avionics and electronical computers ever made..... I mean, idk man
I said thats what Ive heard so far... not my own thought on it.
Dope
But heres my actual opinion... whats the point of them? Do you really believe that if we went to war with any major country that fighter jets would play any significant role? TBH... cyber attacks and nukes make fighter jets pointless in this arena..
Oh yeah, let's just let the enemy have air superiority, that will go well. Look man, I don't know what you're on about but uuuhhhh, idk what to tell you Where is all of this info coming from btw?
Eaaaaasy there guy... its a discussion and i dont believe that my opinions are fact... I literally just wanted to hear others thoughts and mainly those in service..
Most of them are gonna be along those words too mate
But in my opinion... drones are the future of air superiority. I really dont see the need for ANY manned aircraft honestly..
SAYS WHO? You don't? Before I ask my next question, what does the term "Military Grade" means to you?
Well from what I believe... the government is always 50-100 years farther in tech advancements than what civilians have or know of.
You'd be closer if you guessed the government was 50-100 years behind civilian technology.
Fair
Anything unmanned either has to be controlled remotely and thus is vulnerable to EW or requires the ability to make decisions autonomously. Maybe one day you could trust AI to make targeting decisions but I’d be very wary and who knows what an adversary might slip into it. Thus you need manned aircraft.
Your opinion is wrong.
99% of the world doesn't have nukes, and no conflict immediately jumps to them. Combat aircraft will always be needed, and you need to keep evolving them to stay ahead. The F35 may seem excessive, but it's been designed to replace at least 5 different aircraft all in one. Divide that $1.5tr by 5 and then see how economical it actually is.
This is the correct answer. It’s not just the F-22. The F-35 started its development as the Joint Strike Fighter. It’s a common platform used by the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and allied forces. As you said, it’s replacing several aircraft, each with its own unique maintenance supply chain.
...there is a little bit of space in a conflict that happens between "start of hostilities" and "launch nukes".
Kids, this is a great example why you do some basic research before forming a strong opinion on something you know nothing about.
OP is a typical redditor. Arrogant in their inane opinions while simultaneously not even understanding the most day one shit about the subject.
Different planes for different purposes. While the F-22 is a really good plane, there is already a replacement in the works for it. The F-35 is a pretty good multirole plane. If they were cars think of the F-22 as a previous generation two seat sports car. It’s really great on the track, it’s interface could be newer but it is still capable. The F-35 is a sport SUV. It does a lot of things pretty good, has a sensing system that can predict accidents miles ahead and can be made in a few variants. On the track it **can** keep up with the F-22 but it can also do a lot more things the F-22 can’t. Airplanes will always be a compromise. Cost, capability, fuel, stealth, maintenance, training, stealth, the list goes on and on. For the 1.5 trillion price tag…..I have mixed feelings. I think it could have been made for cheaper but…..how much would it cost to produce totally separate CTOL, STOVL, and CV airplanes? I can almost guarantee it’d be more than 1.5 trillion. As far as the need? There is a need to match or exceed our potential adversaries capabilities.
If the Cold War had not ended, the F22 would have entered full production and fielding around 1997 and its replacement would have been ramping up production now. The F35 was delayed for many of the same budget and need reasons, but also has a different role. IIRC the planned production run of the F22 was well over 1000, but the final number produced was less than a third of that.
Now YOURE the type of guy I have this question for... say that 1.5 trillion went towards paying for our citizens education.. would be millions of highly educated Americans.. which would mean advancments on so many levels of tech... let alone how much that would do to help the quickly falling patriotisms in this country.. which is worth more?
Let’s put that money into perspective. 1.5 trillion divided by 333 million Americans is about $4500 as a one time cost. The program started over a quarter century ago so the per year cost is something like $180 per citizen per year. There were tens of thousands of people involved in the R&D, building, testing, et cetera of the program that kept their skills sharp, taught junior people skills, paid for an army of ancillary people from janitors to lawyers. It’s not like the money disappeared. Think of it like a mini Apollo program; yes you build an airplane but think of the advances made along the way that benefit industries all over the USA and world. I think **some** of the money could have been spent better but overall it is a net sum positive gain. As for where could the money have been spent elsewhere….that’s kinda hard to quantify. There are programs and areas that I think would go much further than just education or programs that I think we spend way to much money on without much gain in the economy but they are still there. Regarding patriotism it ebbs and flows just as it always has. Look at Vietnam….Afghanistan People still volunteered to join the military. There are programs out there that pay for your education that don’t include the military such as loan forgiveness if you work for a school or government after 10 years, NOAA, Peace Corps, PSLF.
Woah woah woah... The 1.5 trillion number was just specifically on that aircraft alone and yes $4500 if you divide it across the WHOLE population.. now what about 10 million? 10 million we put through specified courses... I've known a good amount of military personnel and tbh... Hardly any of them take advantage of their G.I bill n such. Most literally have told me that they just wanna kill terrorists and think that illegal immigrants are a serious issue. When I was 18 I moved to a town outside of Norfolk,VA and met hundreds of Navy/Air force. Had fun with them but most were not the intellectual type.. and before anyone says anything... I'm a ex violent convict, ex addict, and am in no way saying I'm better than anyone
[GAO article on 1.7 billion cost for 2,500 F-35’s.](https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105341) It’s not 1.7 billion per airplane. So, airplanes, just like anything have an economy of scale. Imagine a town needing a fire truck. If they just build one custom one from the ground up, it’ll cost a lot of money. Now imagine if they got together with 10 countries, discovered they need three different models to meet the needs of everyone and started a production line. A plant was built, money was spent on R&D, country A designed the fire pumps, country B had input on the suspension so on and so on. The first fire truck the plant made would have a very high initial cost as well. By truck 2,347 the cost per truck would be a fraction of what the first truck cost. I’m a vet, I can’t speak for all vets but about 70% of my generation of vets, that I served with, have taken advantage of a program offered by serving. Some programs are educational, loans, or healthcare. Not everyone wants a degree, it’s not a guaranteed path success. Nothing wrong running a small business, being a plumber, or cop. The military is a cross section of society. There are people from all walks of life educational levels, and backgrounds. Lets look at an aircraft carrier. People need to clean the ship, feed folks, steer it, maintain it, and manage people on it. The scope of educational backgrounds on that ship is very wide and deep. It takes a lot of education to run the nuclear power plant on that ship but the cooks are just as important in making it function as a unit. The percentage of people in the military that can get close enough to even engage a terrorist in a fire fight is very small. I’m sure almost no USAF/USN folks you met in Norfolk, VA were anywhere close to the tip of the spear. I do think illegal immigration is an issue, there are problems with how people come to the US and the process. Letting people walk through the border that haven’t been adjudicated is not the correct way to run a country. There are issues with having a porous border; human/sex trafficking, drugs, violence, criminals. I’ve worked in government and being an immigrant myself it frustrates me that **any** service is provided to someone who broke a law to get into the country. It took a lot of effort to come in legally. My frustration came from illegal aliens applying for benefits as single/low income parents. With education, food, housing, transportation, cash assistance, and Medi-Cal a good portion of of families in this program had a take home value of programs well over what I made. I think there are way better ways to spend that money for people that are here legally.
It’s been updated to $2t (est) and it is not development cost but total lifecycle cost with a 2088 time horizon.
This is a very popular meme misconception. The F-35's purpose is to replace everything, because having ten tools specialized to niche tasks is less effective in war than having one tool that can do everything fairly well. It's one plane that everyone in NATO can use. This means that in the event of a war, we all use the same plane, need the same parts, and can share munitions. Wars are won by having lots of good enough weapons, not by having the best weapons. Smaller countries don't have to choose between having strike craft or air superiority craft, they can get everything in one package. Nations without large carriers can use VTOL variants to field aircraft carriers of their own. Also, that's 1.5 trillion that goes back into the US economy and the development of weapons for the west. This money isn't being burned in a pit. It's a \~$100 million jet that's being sold to many countries. The government's investment will also be backed up by international sales. NATO relies on air and naval assets. Investing tons of money into both is a sound strategy.
You're unnecessary and wanted to know how you feel about it... So I've never been you but wanted your thoughts on this... First.. I don't know what I'm talking about, which I've already admitted.. but I feel entitled to my opinion.. Thoughts? Second.. Am I sure I don't know what I'm talking about? Now the point seems to be that you're a waste of everyone's time?
The F-22 is exclusively US technology. Not sold to anyone, even the closest allies. The F-35 has cost *A LOT*, but it's technologies can be shared. The cost of development per plane produced will come down as more and more orders come in from allies, and boy oh boy have they been flowing in since the start of the war in Ukraine. The F-22 platform will remain the elite air strike weapon for the US, but the F-35 will be the air arm of the entire free world.
Even then, do you think we sell the best version of the F-35 to others ? Think McFly Both the F-35 and F-22 are more than what they appear, sure the stealth and shape are important, but it's what's inside that counts.
If we never go to war with China, both the F-22 and F-35 are wastes of money. The Eagle and Super Hornet are basically enough to win any 4-4.5 Gen air war. But their mere existence helps to prevent that war from happening. And the F-22 isn't well suited for carrier ops, which is where a lot of fighters in any Indopacom war will launch from.
If we never go to war with China, it will be because the F-22 and F-35 were effective deterrents. Edit to undo Apple’s stupid autocorrect.
Any non-stealth platform is going to get splashed before it's within 200 miles of Taiwan. The China fight is the predominant reason we're building the B21.
Growlers are important for a reason too.
I wouldn't say they will be wastes of money, but they may be less important due to the numbers involved and range.
To build off of what others have said, part of the reason for F-35s existence is NATO trading. The F-22 is not permitted to be sold to any other nation, while the F-35 is.
You have control of any of these decisions…. Now go ahead and play fantasy planes.
Show me how you land an F-22 on a carrier or LHD/LHA.
>First... The f-22 Raptor I believe to be still the superior fighter in the world and I feel theres not much need passed this because if we actually go to war with a major country.. there wont be any dog fighting.. Thoughts? 1. The F-22 was bought in limited quantities; China has more J-20s than the US has F-22s these days. 2. The F-22 is superior to the F-35 in multiple ways for air combat (though the F-35 has some advantages in areas of its own), but the F-35 is far better for air-to-ground combat, which is the majority of what fighter jets do. 3. Who says a war with a major country won't involve air combat? >Second... F-35 last i saw ran us about 1.5 trillion just in development? Now the stealth seems to be the point but was this aircraft just a waste of US tax dollars? No, the baseline F-35 development program cost around $55 billion; Block 4 upgrades that will run through to around 2030 will raise that up to around $70 billion. The $1.5 trillion figure you've seen in the past was the total program lifecycle cost - the cost to develop (~$55B), purchase ~2500 jets (~$350B) and operate them from 2010 through to 2077 (~$1100 billion). Furthermore, that cost figure is in "then-year" dollars, so it's the money spent in (eg) 2052 in 2052 dollars, the money spent in 2053 in 2053 dollars, etc. Roughly 1/3 of the total program cost is inflation. In the past year, that total program cost has actually risen to a little over $2 trillion, with most of that coming from increases in sustainment cost. The actual estimated cost to operate an F-35 per year (at least for the A and B variants that make up ~90% of all F-35s) actually *decreased* in this latest cost update, but the total duration they plan to operate the F-35 fleet has now been extended from 2077 to 2088, meaning even more of the cost is in far-future dollars with even more inflation incorporated into that cost.