Military Review

According to the US Air Force Command, the F-35 fighter without F-22 is useless

44

In an interesting, honest, one might say, striking interview, US Air Force Commander General Michael Hostage told the Air Force Times about the difficult decisions made by the Air Force as a result of budget cuts, and voiced an opinion about the F-35 fighter.


First, there is no way to keep the A-10 attack aircraft in service. According to Hostage, one of the few ways to save money is to abandon obsolete weapons. And while the “Warthog” still performs its tasks, it is completely unpromising for future conflicts.

A less radical solution - to leave half the fleet of A-10 aircraft - does not make sense, because in this case most of the costly supporting infrastructure that exists now will remain.


Another area of ​​concern is information gathering, surveillance, and intelligence. Politicians are pushing to continue buying Northrop Grumman’s Global Hawk drones. But given the amount of funds allocated, the Air Force cannot afford both the U-2 reconnaissance plane "Dragon Lady" and "Global Hawk" at the same time. Most likely, the command will abandon the first and spend a lot of money trying to force these massive drones to perform the same tasks that U-2 aircraft have coped with for decades.

Speaking of the unified shock fighter F-35, Hostage said he would "fight for him to the last breath." Putting into operation the X-NUMX units of the F-1763 (“no less”) is the only way to keep up with opponents who are creating their own air force, which will surpass the existing US air force.

No matter how modernized the F-15 and F-16 are, they will still become obsolete in the next decade.


But to support the F-35, the F-22 Raptor fighter is needed, and a new problem arises here. When building the aircraft "Raptor" they were put so outdated on-board computers that such "you will not find even in the game console of the child." And yet the US Army was forced to use these stealth fighters in this configuration, because it was spelled out in technical terms. But now the F-22 aircraft need to undergo costly upgrades with extended life.

“If you do not keep the F-22 fleet in working condition, the F-35 airplanes, to be honest, will do little. F-35 is not intended as a fighter of air superiority. He needs the F-22, ”said Hostage.
Originator:
http://theaviationist.com/
44 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 13 February 2014 08: 42
    +12
    "Firstly, there is no way to leave the A-10 attack aircraft in service."

    Well dear, Thunderbolt is a good workhorse.

    "But now the F-22s need to go through costly upgrades to extend their lifespan."

    That's where the dog rummaged, give me the money.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 13 February 2014 09: 22
      +1
      Quote: Vladimirets
      Well dear, Thunderbolt is a good workhorse.

      It is long out of date. To spend a lot of fuel on the transportation of almost two-ton GAU-8 which is not used is simply stupid. It is impossible to dismantle it, the alignment is violated, against the goals that the Thunderbolts have to work with their cannon, the GSh-23 weighing 50 kg is enough + shells. In the arsenal of the US Air Force, a lot of guided munitions allow you to work outside the zone of small arms and MZA with MANPADS, which makes armor unnecessary. Those. Thunderbolt carries an extra mass in the form of useless armor and an air gun.
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 13 February 2014 12: 45
        +1
        Quote: Nayhas
        In the arsenal of the US Air Force, a lot of guided munitions allow you to work outside the zone of small arms and MZA with MANPADS, which makes armor unnecessary. Those. Thunderbolt carries an extra mass in the form of useless armor and an air gun.

        Yes Yes. Only in the same Iraqi companies was this the most efficient device. He sat down with serious injuries, but sat down. With a gun, of course, questions, but he did his rough work on the battlefield.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 13 February 2014 16: 37
          +2
          Quote: Vladimirets
          Yes Yes. Only in the same Iraqi companies was this the most efficient device. He sat down with serious injuries, but sat down. With a gun, of course, questions, but he did his rough work on the battlefield.

          So when it was that ... In 1991. the proportion of guided munitions used was no more than 30% (I don’t remember exactly, maybe less), after 12 years in 2003. already exceeded 50%, and now (after 11 years) already 80% reaches all. Now detection tools (USA, NATO) allow with 10km. heights to distinguish between armed man or not,
          Sniper xr

          LITENING targeting pod

          and kits for remaking unguided munitions into managed ones are already installed on ordinary NURSs.

          It makes no sense to go down to 500m. substituting for automatic guns and MANPADS.
          PS: In the United States, they are seriously carried away by "adding brains" to conventional ammunition. For example, we have developed a kit for 155mm. artillery shells Precision Guidance Kit (PGK), which is screwed in instead of a fuse, using GPS guidance, control planes can increase the CEP from 200m. up to 30m., and plans to increase the accuracy to 15m. At the same time, when the CEP is exceeded over 150m. PGK blocks the fuse.
    3. tilovaykrisa
      tilovaykrisa 13 February 2014 20: 37
      0
      Perhaps they will not find Obama (Gorbachev) for a period of 3,4,5!
    4. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 14 February 2014 05: 42
      0
      Does the inscription on the tail of the BF-02 aircraft mean that the aircraft was assembled using BF-2 glue or is it just a coincidence? :)
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 14 February 2014 11: 20
        0
        Quote: VseDoFeNi
        Does the inscription on the tail of the BF-02 aircraft mean that the aircraft was assembled using BF-2 glue or is it just a coincidence? :)

        I believe that most of your jokes have not been understood because for many years nothing has been heard about BF-2, and it was sooooo good glue! Anything good ...
  2. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 13 February 2014 08: 47
    +13
    F-35 aircraft, frankly, will do little. The F-35 is not conceived as a fighter for air superiority. He needs an F-22

    Said nothing surprising

    Front-line fighter-bomber + heavy interceptor = standard scheme of the US Air Force
    Such were the F-15 and F-16. Or their deck interpretation of F-14 and F / A-18

    F-35 is focused on performing percussion tasks. Stealth bomber - loading up to 8 tons of bombs using external sling. Able to fend for himself in aerial combat
    1. Lomikus
      Lomikus 13 February 2014 09: 01
      +1
      It turns out the F-35 is a rough analogue of the Su-34?
      1. Nayhas
        Nayhas 13 February 2014 09: 25
        -2
        Quote: Lomikus
        It turns out the F-35 is a rough analogue of the Su-34?

        Our Air Force will have an analogue of the Su-30SM and Su-35.
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 13 February 2014 16: 48
          +3
          Quote: Nayhas
          Our Air Force will have an analogue of the Su-30SM and Su-35.


          You don't compare correctly at all. The F-35's analogue is the MiG-35, a lightweight 4 ++ fighter.
      2. Odysseus
        Odysseus 13 February 2014 09: 31
        +3
        Quote: Lomikus
        It turns out the F-35 is a rough analogue of the Su-34?

        No, in the USA after F-111 they do not create front-line bombers at all. The only analogue of the Su-34 is the JH-7A. A remote analogue can be called the F-15E.
        According to the tactical niche, the Su-35CM (adjusted for the difference in weight and technology) can be called some analogue of the F-30A.
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 13 February 2014 16: 51
          +1
          Quote: Odyssey
          In the USA, after F-111 they do not create front-line bombers at all.


          This is of course yes, but the de facto receiver of the 111th is the F-15E Strike Eagle.

          Quote: Odyssey
          According to the tactical niche, some analogue of the F-35A can be called the Su-30SM


          They are similar in purpose, but it is more correct to compare the "Penguin" not with Sushki, but with the MiG-35.
          1. Odysseus
            Odysseus 13 February 2014 19: 35
            +3
            Quote: supertiger21
            They are similar in purpose, but it is more correct to compare the "Penguin" not with Sushki, but with the MiG-35.

            I did not write about the MiG-35, since there is no such aircraft, de facto sad
            When there will be then and there will be an opportunity to say something real.
      3. Wedmak
        Wedmak 13 February 2014 09: 40
        +2
        In no case. We have no analogues at all.
        1. Odysseus
          Odysseus 13 February 2014 09: 59
          +1
          Quote: Wedmak
          In no case. We have no analogues at all

          F-35A? Well, I wrote it to some)) Both the Penguin and the Su-30SM are multi-purpose, though the F-35 is hypothetically more of a striker, the Su-30SM is still more in the air.
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 13 February 2014 10: 29
            +4
            And Penguin and Su-30SM multi-purpose

            Do you think they should be compared? Two pilots and one is already a huge difference. The United States signed up for a very expensive program - in one fell swoop to make three essentially different aircraft. And now they will catch glitches and modify cars for a long time to come.
            They do it differently with us, they made an excellent platform in the form of the Su-27 and on this basis modifications are already being developed. There is already a front-line bomber, a fighter-interceptor and a naval one. The Su-30SM is multi-purpose, but debate about its use is still ongoing. What prevents to do, developing a theme, attack aircraft?
            1. Odysseus
              Odysseus 13 February 2014 19: 41
              0
              Quote: Wedmak
              Two pilots and one is already a huge difference. The United States signed up for a very expensive program - in one fell swoop to make three essentially different aircraft. And now they will catch glitches and modify cars for a long time to come.

              This, of course, is true, the planes are completely different, but I had in mind precisely the analogy in the tactical niche.
              Of course, a somewhat distant analogy ...
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 13 February 2014 09: 56
      +4
      Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
      Front-line fighter-bomber + heavy interceptor = standard US Air Force scheme These were the F-15 and F-16.


      All right. And if you dig even further (earlier), you can see that after I-16 Polikarpov created the highly maneuverable and light I-153.
  3. FunkschNNX
    FunkschNNX 13 February 2014 09: 12
    +1
    it’s cool at his wheels (pictured), with the working fan running they can also create lift. Well this is what a smart computer should manage all this when changing modes. It may cause controversy as a combat unit, but as a technical device, it is magnificent in its manufacturability and amazing in complexity of the device.
    1. Odysseus
      Odysseus 13 February 2014 09: 33
      +2
      Quote: Фкенщь13
      It may cause controversy as a combat unit, but as a technical device, it is magnificent in its manufacturability and amazing in complexity of the device.

      But I am plagued by vague doubts as to how this truly amazingly complex device will work in "field" conditions when normal maintenance is difficult.
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 13 February 2014 10: 02
      +3
      Quote: Фкенщь13
      Well this is what a smart computer should manage all this when changing modes


      Sophisticated car. Hence the cost.
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 13 February 2014 16: 56
        +1
        Quote: Vadivak
        Sophisticated car. Hence the cost.


        A complex machine is the F-35B VTOL (in your photo) .F-35A and F-35C are simpler machines, and they are better than the VTOL variant and cheaper than it.
    3. iwind
      iwind 13 February 2014 10: 15
      +2
      Quote: Фкенщь13
      it’s cool at his wheels (pictured), with the working fan running they can also create lift. Well this is what a smart computer should manage all this when changing modes. It may cause controversy as a combat unit, but as a technical device, it is magnificent in its manufacturability and amazing in complexity of the device.

      There the computer is VERY smart, it takes a huge part of the pilot’s work on itself, right up to taking the plane out of a tailspin. In terms of integration of electronics, he is ahead of the rest.
      Quote pilot relocated with the F-16.
      “Although the controls are very different, the f-35 does NOT require strict control, and critical errors in piloting will be leveled by the computer.
      1. supertiger21
        supertiger21 13 February 2014 17: 02
        0
        Quote: iwind
        “Although the controls are very different, the f-35 does NOT require strict control, and critical errors in piloting will be leveled by the computer.


        Inside the cockpit, the F-35 is straight "like in a starship." Even with the Raptor and the PAK FA, it looks more classic like that of the 4th generation aircraft. In terms of maneuverability, of course, the Penguin is far from us, but in avionics it clearly has no analogues.
        1. iwind
          iwind 13 February 2014 22: 40
          0
          Quote: supertiger21
          Inside the cockpit, the F-35 is straight "like in a starship." Even with the Raptor and the PAK FA, it looks more classic like that of the 4th generation aircraft. In terms of maneuverability, of course, the Penguin is far from us, but in avionics it clearly has no analogues.

          On the one hand, I do not agree with the other, for example, in the SU-35, the cockpit looks even more futuristic.
          But the F-35 is a new word in avionics, the display has auxiliary functions, the main flow of information goes through the helmet. If interested, I can write a little more detailed somehow.
          "There is no need to be distracted and look away while flying and using weapons, which is very convenient" - F-35 pilot.
          I now read new entertainment and listen to pilot interviews.
        2. dmitrij.blyuz
          dmitrij.blyuz 14 February 2014 13: 48
          +1
          And, most importantly, the "loop" of the catapult. bully
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 14 February 2014 13: 51
            +1
            Hi Dim, "bones" overboard, sacred cause laughing
            1. dmitrij.blyuz
              dmitrij.blyuz 14 February 2014 13: 58
              0
              Sasha! drinks Well, as without it. It is not so striking in our eyes. Red color. And they seem to be the main "device" for practice. wassat
    4. askort154
      askort154 13 February 2014 15: 28
      +1
      Fkenschen13 ... he has cool wheels (in the photo), while the working fan is working, they can also create lift. Well this is what a smart computer should manage all this when changing modes

      Actually in the photo, he already left the deck, i.e. with horizontal incoming V.
      And not a smart computer ....?
      1. FunkschNNX
        FunkschNNX 17 February 2014 09: 53
        0
        Quote: askort154
        Actually in the photo, he already left the deck, i.e. with horizontal incoming V.
        In fact, an ordinary aircraft with such a rudder position would not even come off the deck, and when the deck ended, it was re-qualified as an underwater vehicle. Here, the diving moment created by the rudders is compensated by the draft of the fan.
  4. Duke
    Duke 13 February 2014 09: 25
    +2
    F-22 Raptor
    Type stealth multirole fighter
    Developer Lockheed Martin Corporation
    Manufacturer Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
    US Flag Boeing Defense, Space & Security
    First flight YF-22: September 29, 1990 [1]
    F-22: September 7, 1997 [1]
    Start of operation December 15 2005
    Status in use, mass production completed
    Key Operators US Air Force Flag US Air Force
    Years of production 1997—2011 [2] [3]
    Units produced in total: 195 [4]
    serial: 187 [3]
    Development program cost $ 66,7 billion [5]
    (together with the cost of serial production of $ 74 billion) [6]
    Unit cost $ 146,2 million (excluding R&D)
    $ 379,5 million (including R&D) [7]
    Base Model YF-22
  5. AnaBat
    AnaBat 13 February 2014 09: 28
    +1
    During the construction of the Raptor aircraft, they were equipped with so obsolete on-board computers that such “you will not even find in the child’s game console”. And yet, the US Army was forced to use these stealth fighters in this configuration, because it was registered in the technical specifications. But now F-22 aircraft need to undergo costly upgrades with extended life.

    It seems that the Americans will have to invest an enormous amount of dough also on the modernization of the raptors ... yes
  6. vorobey
    vorobey 13 February 2014 09: 40
    +1
    Yesterday I just read these articles.

    But the blog also provided comparisons.

    American corporation Lockheed Martin will continue production of the F-16 series even after the start of mass production of the fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets, which were initially positioned as a replacement for the F-16. New modifications may be in demand in the markets of many countries because of the low cost compared to the F-35, DefPro reports, citing research data published by the American analytical center Forecast International. In particular, as the newspaper notes, the latest modifications of the F-16 50 / 52 and 60 / E / F are not only more affordable than new fighters, but also meet the most modern requirements for aircraft of this class. In addition, F-16 is still in demand by consumers ... According to Forecast International experts, the production of F-16 will continue at least until 2016, although it is possible that after this period, Lockheed Martin will receive orders for fighters.

    Totally here
    http://nnm.me/blogs/OlDi/mify_i_realnost_razbor_poletov/
    1. supertiger21
      supertiger21 13 February 2014 17: 11
      0
      F-22 price of 350 million, Su-35 price of 35 million


      One of the stupidest tables I've seen. The F-22 costs 146 million (2,5 less than the table), and the Su-35 costs 83 million (2,5 more than the table). Not a raptor fan and very I love our Su and MiG, but the table is very far from reality.
  7. Odysseus
    Odysseus 13 February 2014 09: 40
    +3
    In the face of budget cuts, the US Air Force is fighting like lions ... For every penny))
    And give them F-35 in astronomical quantities, and upgrade F-22. But the Navy will not leave them behind, they have no less influence and no less appetites.
    Apparently, as everything is always being cut off at the expense of the fleet, in the USA the Ground Forces will have to puff for all.
    1. patsantre
      patsantre 13 February 2014 14: 00
      -2
      You say with such gloating)) they have every penny the size of our entire budget.
      1. Odysseus
        Odysseus 13 February 2014 19: 42
        +1
        Quote: patsantre
        You speak with such gloating))

        Rather sarcasm smile
  8. sinukvl
    sinukvl 13 February 2014 09: 43
    +7
    "According to the US Air Force Command, the F-35 is useless without the F-22." The F-35 class is useless without the F-22, and the F-22 is useless both without the F-35 and with the F-35, it is generally useless. In before they created, in truth the USA became the homeland of elephants!
  9. mountain
    mountain 13 February 2014 09: 48
    +1
    Fussed, s, smell the smell of panties. I am glad that this situation, they lose strategically, they are used to attack. It's time to defend yourself.
  10. ia-ai00
    ia-ai00 13 February 2014 10: 07
    +1
    During the construction of the Raptor aircraft, they were equipped with so obsolete on-board computers that such “you will not even find in the child’s game console”.

    Well, at least some PLEASANT NEWS about US Air Force flight equipment!
    ... US Army forced to use these invisible fighters in this configuration because it was spelled out in the technical conditions.

    It means that there are also Serdyukovs there, and this, excuse me, pleases! It is necessary to recommend them (in a "partnership"), take this Mr. as an advisor, if he is not imprisoned, for even greater "efficiency" of the US Air Force, he ate a dog on this.
  11. Andronic
    Andronic 13 February 2014 10: 13
    +1
    All eggs in one basket. In principle, this is very good, they invested a lot of money, and the output was bullshit.
  12. ars_pro
    ars_pro 13 February 2014 10: 17
    +4
    I’m interested in F35 will be allowed to export, and referring to this general, without F22 which are not for export, they are less functional, in general, foreign customers suffer again with what I congratulate them fellow
  13. tomket
    tomket 13 February 2014 13: 25
    0
    Quote: sinukvl
    "According to the US Air Force Command, the F-35 is useless without the F-22." Class F

    Yes, who would doubt .....
  14. spirit
    spirit 13 February 2014 13: 41
    0
    It's funny Our generals, for the most part conservatives, constantly complain that it’s not necessary to take too hard, but here they complain that the computer on the raptor is already old belay !!!
    I think the computer there just right)) just in someone’s understanding it is already old, but in someone’s too complicated))))
  15. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 13 February 2014 14: 04
    +1
    The command of the Russian Air Force may also say that the Su-25 without the Su-35 are useless, and will be right. What is the intrigue, it is not clear.
  16. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz 13 February 2014 14: 22
    0
    And we will not declare. Su-35S. It is possible that the Americans are simply panicking, despite the fact that Russia is producing. Their "pregnant" Raptor is also much inferior to our generation 4 ++. It was created as an air combat fighter, and it turns out, it can mainly work on the ground.
    1. supertiger21
      supertiger21 13 February 2014 17: 24
      0
      Quote: dmitrij.blyuz
      It was created as an air combat fighter, but it turns out that it can work mainly on the ground.


      Everything is exactly the opposite. The F-22 is not the best drummer, inferior in this to his younger brother F-35. The reptor was created for air combat, entering Dog Fight in an emergency. In the world, no not a single serial fighter, capable of fighting the Raptor at medium / long distances. Only a number of 4 ++ fighters are able to soak the Raptor in a "dog meat grinder". The F-35, on the contrary, is not the best in aerial combat, but it is excellent as a strike machine. The US Air Force has two multipurpose vehicles, but with a different bias in anti-air and anti-ground work.
      1. SV
        SV 13 February 2014 21: 03
        +1
        .F-22 is not the best drummer. In the world there is not a single serial fighter capable of fighting with the Reptor at medium / long range.


        Well, apart from statements about him, little is known, especially in terms of its combat use.
        known with a coating problem, etc. can it be protected from prying eyes due to insolvency?
        1. supertiger21
          supertiger21 13 February 2014 21: 51
          0
          Well, I talked about the theory of what F-22 is. And in practice, of course, he still hasn’t shown himself, but I don’t think he will.
  17. dmitrij.blyuz
    dmitrij.blyuz 13 February 2014 14: 26
    0

    Id = RnYlM24np3k]
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. nightingale
    nightingale 13 February 2014 15: 33
    +2
    another American bluff and some fell for it
  20. supertiger21
    supertiger21 13 February 2014 18: 14
    +1
    F-22 and F-35 will be complementary to each other in the form of an air and strike fighter. We have the role of a heavy fighter 5P assigned to the PAK FA.Light version 5P, that is, an analogue of the F-35, we do not have.