Military Review

Media: Americans did not need to spend money on using F-22 in Syria

61
The Pentagon has spent about $ 400 million on the use of multi-purpose 5 generation F-22 Raptor fighters in Syria, although there was no need for this, it reports RIA News Post ABC News.




“As part of the antiterrorist operation, F-22 carried out 150 sorties and dropped bombs on IG objects around 200,” the publication said. However, the operations carried out did not require the use of such expensive aircraft, which are designed to withstand larger-scale danger.

“The use of F-22 fighter jets is not necessary in Syria,” said Tom Smith, a representative of the US Air Force, to the publication.

He explained that the fighters have an increased potential and were created "in response to a possible threat from the Russian and Chinese aircraft."

However, the F-22 has never been used directly.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. midivan
    midivan 24 February 2016 08: 31
    26
    However, the F-22 has never been used directly.
    Yes, they do not even use the president for their intended purpose lol
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 24 February 2016 08: 33
      13
      In Syria, the Turks spent on terrorists, a video from the Kurds with evidence of Turkish support::
      1. Alex_Rarog
        Alex_Rarog 24 February 2016 09: 01
        +2
        It would be nice at the level of the Foreign Ministry to formally accuse Turkey of supporting terrorism!
      2. Truth
        Truth 24 February 2016 09: 19
        +5
        The Pentagon has spent about $ 400 million.

        For the USAshnikov, this does not matter, there they draw loot as in Russia they make toilet paper - with the same speed and in the same volumes.
      3. karpah
        karpah 24 February 2016 18: 00
        0
        They write nonsense. Given the presence of the S-400, the F-22 is the only machine that can fly unhindered in the sky of Syria
    2. cniza
      cniza 24 February 2016 08: 34
      +7
      Quote: midivan
      However, the F-22 has never been used directly.
      Yes, they do not even use the president for their intended purpose lol



      This is you, let them think now. laughing Grandmas print without thinking - that’s the result.
    3. vovanpain
      vovanpain 24 February 2016 08: 41
      19
      “The use of F-22 fighters is not necessary in Syria”

      In Syria, the presence of a coalition led by the United States is not necessary, they only spoil cattle. yes
      1. demo
        demo 24 February 2016 08: 47
        11
        In general, the coalition countries and the United States themselves are also not very necessary for the rest of humanity.
    4. vyinemeynen
      vyinemeynen 24 February 2016 08: 43
      +4
      2 million cut overhead for one bonbu! laughing impressive!
      1. DMB_95
        DMB_95 24 February 2016 08: 55
        +1
        It is impressive that our SU-25 and SU-24 still of the Soviet model were more effective than the Amer airplane of the 5th generation.
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 24 February 2016 09: 29
          +4
          Quote: DMB_95
          It is impressive that our SU-25 and SU-24 still of the Soviet model were more effective than the Amer airplane of the 5th generation.

          Don’t be silly ... the results are directly dependent on desire. It would have been- would have been bombed no worse than ours ...
          1. DMB_95
            DMB_95 24 February 2016 16: 11
            0
            And I wrote about the effectiveness in a particular situation. And everyone knows about the lack of amers desire to bomb IS.
        2. samoletil18
          samoletil18 24 February 2016 09: 32
          +4
          These 5th generation airplanes back in the late 80s in the "Krasnaya Zvezda" featured a big article with a photograph of both. Moreover, even then ours promised to see them on radars.
          1. samoletil18
            samoletil18 24 February 2016 09: 44
            -1
            I post another post. You can put a minus. You are welcome.
            But what am I wrong in? What didn’t you like? Justify. It will be interesting not only to me, but to everyone who is here. hi
        3. Altona
          Altona 24 February 2016 10: 45
          +1
          Quote: DMB_95
          It is impressive that our SU-25 and SU-24 still of the Soviet model were more effective than the Amer airplane of the 5th generation.

          ---------------------
          Apparently, too, they decided to punt themselves with a new weapon that had been in the hangar for 15 years, but its effectiveness turned out to be no. 150 sorties, pff, it's nothing, and even with such costs. Our aircraft with SVP-24 dropped thousands of obsolete ammunition and dealt ISIS devastating defeats on all fronts, and not like the United States, only expanded chaos zones.
    5. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 24 February 2016 08: 48
      +6
      rolling technology, like us, evolution does not stop ...
      1. yushch
        yushch 24 February 2016 09: 03
        +1
        The last line of the article is the answer to the question of the advisability of using this aircraft in Syria. Putting aside the question of the legality of the use of U.S. aircraft in Syria, we can safely say that striking at a real enemy that does not even have normal air defense is not training bombing, but an excellent opportunity to identify shortcomings of both a technical and tactical plan.
      2. Corsair
        Corsair 24 February 2016 09: 48
        0
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        rolling technology, like us, evolution does not stop ...

        what And what is their plane made of? At prices almost gold, they sorted out aliens somewhere downed to collect raptors?
        Wikipedia says that 40-50 percent of the aircraft was assembled from almost various plastics (non-metal), didn’t others think of using it, or only Americans were ahead of the rest in the production of polymers.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 24 February 2016 11: 03
          +1
          for Corsair:
          "40-50 percent of the aircraft is assembled almost from various plastics (non-metal)," ///

          And it’s not just that. On the screens of the air defense radar, the Reptor looks
          light interference that comp. resets to zero.
          Its EPR is the size of a pin pong ball.
          Enemy pilots will notice him only within the limits of visual observation -
          several kilometers.
          PAK-FA was made very similar to the Raptor for a reason.
          1. Corsair
            Corsair 24 February 2016 12: 00
            +2
            Quote: voyaka uh
            And it’s not just that. On the screens of the air defense radar, the Reptor looks
            light interference that comp. resets to zero.

            fellow I understand that if you are not a fan, then you are clearly not indifferent to this plane. The question is only at the expense of what is such an advantage, albeit polymers on the outside, but inside it is still a metal frame, rockets are also metal, or are ceramics and polymers everywhere?
            Tales of the EPR are all for American senators and Amer’s people, for people who are less familiar with physics, it’s clear that these are very relative values ​​— for what radar is it, at what angle, from what distance, etc. What is the position of certain flaps, slats, interceptors, but there are also spoilers, flaperons.
            They probably measured under ideal conditions (face-to-face in a straight line, etc.) and every 100-500 they were underestimated just in case.
            A simple example: My Ford also says in a book and on websites that he eats 10 liters in the city, but no matter how I try, he eats less than 12-13. Ideal conditions can often only be created on a test bench.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 24 February 2016 14: 43
              0
              I am not happy with the F-22. It checked the latest stealth technology
              for the fighter, but left the old software and electronics.
              Therefore, it is so difficult to integrate with the rest of the Air Force
              and ground forces.
              In short, it is fundamentally impossible to improve.

              This was fixed in F-35, which is a universal platform for weapons
              and appliances for several decades.
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 24 February 2016 14: 57
              +2
              for Corsair:
              "Tales about EPR are all for American senators and American people" ///

              This is not true. Israeli specialists on radar and pilots demonstrated
              what the F-35 looks like (with worse EPR than the Raptor) on the screens of the latest radars.
              It was still in the process of choosing an aircraft for the Air Force.
              And all the fluctuations in favor of Silent F-15 and Super F-18 immediately fell away.
              Declared EPRs are not only underestimated - they are overpriced.

              I do not say a single bad word about the T-50 and its system.
              Perhaps he will be worthy of opponents to American stealth fighters.
              But Russia is not in vain engaged in stealth. This is not America’s whim.
              1. Corsair
                Corsair 24 February 2016 18: 28
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                This was fixed in F-35, which is a universal platform for weapons
                and appliances for several decades.

                what Well, the F35 is not at all invisible, unification always makes the tool worse for individual operations, as this very F35 shows, except that the price is more affordable.
                All these stealths are needed only for delivering precision strikes, let’s say - for special operations, and according to the developers, when opening bombs (compartments), all stealth is practically lost.
                Based on this thought, it turns out that they received an invisibility for the first strike, which after the strike should almost instantly tick away.
                And if we allow the MiG 31 to be equipped with a good radar, then all the advantage of invisibility disappears immediately. request
    6. samoletil18
      samoletil18 24 February 2016 09: 25
      +2
      The latest aircraft. Just driving around landfills is not much cheaper. And so he took part in some business. Sly representative of the Air Force mattress. They figured everything out, came up with and based on the results of the adjustments made to the use of the device.
      Maybe their Republican Air Force is being seduced before the election, and the Democrats are being trolled, one fig, Obamovich has already used contraceptives.
      1. Altona
        Altona 24 February 2016 10: 51
        0
        Quote: samoletil18
        And so he took part in some business.

        -----------------------
        Well, well done, that participated. Our RTVs captured the whole picture of its radiation and, in general, how it behaves on detection devices. But he did not fulfill his mission as an aircraft to overcome layered air defense. He did not overcome our air defense in the form of S-400 at Khmeimim, and dropping bombs on dunes is enough for 60s aircraft that can fly just above the ceiling of the reach of anti-aircraft guns.
    7. Blondy
      Blondy 24 February 2016 09: 57
      +2
      Guys, why don’t you use it - they have all the saws rusting there.
    8. vodolaz
      vodolaz 24 February 2016 14: 09
      0
      Well, I wanted to fly on rapids, what did we attach to? ))))
    9. The comment was deleted.
  2. vitaz
    vitaz 24 February 2016 08: 33
    +4
    "As part of the anti-terrorist operation, the F-22 flew 150 sorties and dropped about 200 bombs on IS objects" what objects? We could have objects, but definitely not IS
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 24 February 2016 10: 59
      -3
      Quote: vitaz
      "As part of the anti-terrorist operation, the F-22 flew 150 sorties and dropped about 200 bombs on IS objects" what objects? We could have objects, but definitely not IS

      The US Air Force supported the Kurds' offensive on the IS; without them, the Kurds would not budge. So the Americans bomb the IG. But the astronauts somehow circumvented the IS by focusing on all sorts of Turkoman, nusra and other bearded men.
  3. Hooks
    Hooks 24 February 2016 08: 34
    +9
    They did everything "right" - they made it possible for the Russian Aerospace Forces and the PLA to directly test the radars to detect this overpriced pepelats. Recently, I have seen articles on the Internet more than once that the Chinese air defense systems can even see the amer's "invisibles".
    1. oblako
      oblako 24 February 2016 08: 47
      0
      It would be interesting to learn about the statistics of the detection of these targets by our air defense systems. Although, for obvious reasons, this information is not for general use. Seen or not and at what range ..?
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. samoletil18
        samoletil18 24 February 2016 09: 35
        +2
        Quote: oblako
        It would be interesting to learn about the statistics of the detection of these targets by our air defense systems. Although, for obvious reasons, this information is not for general use. Seen or not and at what range ..?

        I would, having such information, kept quiet. In the best case, he would throw a desu.
  4. Obstructia
    Obstructia 24 February 2016 08: 41
    +1
    How was not necessary? A clumsy show off, how they forgot about them?
    1. chikenous59
      chikenous59 24 February 2016 08: 55
      +5
      Quote: Obstructia
      How was not necessary? A clumsy show off, how they forgot about them?

      And what about calibers launches then, judging by your logic?
      I am always alarmed by such topics in the media.
      Caliber means released, everyone enthusiastically rejoices in this, although a political motive was traced in such a launch.
      The United States uses F-22, so this is clumsy show off rhinestones))
      Although the goals were clearly the same, the political message + running in with subsequent refinement.
      1. Eugeneleee
        Eugeneleee 24 February 2016 09: 08
        0
        Here, dear, there are small but important nuances ...
        Gauges - running-in (first combat use) and demonstration of capabilities (psychological effect, remember? bully )
        A raptor is not a run-in. It has been discontinued and no modernization is foreseen in the foreseeable future. Demonstration? Here the effect is just the opposite. The Raptor’s reputation a priori rolls over (the first working device of the 5th generation). It would be about if Valuev defeated a third-year student to increase the rating - as a minimum, stupid.
        So your "Although the goals were clearly the same - political message + running in with subsequent revision." - still not about the F-22
        1. chikenous59
          chikenous59 24 February 2016 09: 12
          +2
          Quote: EugeneLee
          So your "Although the goals were clearly the same - political message + running in with subsequent revision." - still not about the F-22

          If the plane had combat experience in Syria and Iraq, then there are all reports. Who knows what data they received. Perhaps they will start production again, they can begin to modernize, on the basis of the received data they can implement some developments in future aircraft and so on. There are many options for the development of events, but not as simple as you say, as if being a general from the Pentagon)
        2. prorab_ak
          prorab_ak 24 February 2016 14: 38
          0
          Actually, they’re running a modernization program and they’ll already have the second account, if I’m not mistaken .... mainly concerns avionics ... well, unification with all the rest of the aircraft .... everyone hated the iron then stamped larger than the Raptors themselves, they must be released into a single combat information system, and this and that should be connected.
          As for their application ... you read the resources where they write not only "they have all the equipment, and they get confused by our peepers of the 17th century, but ours will show Kuz'kin's mother to the whole world."
          Their use in the Middle East is due to one factor (well, maybe not only to them, of course): the Raptor's practical application of the functionality of a bomber and a scout, i.e. he mostly worked "on the ground" as a scout ... and when he needed a couple of 1000-pound surprises on the heads of the bearded men.
          Something like this, from another "golden iron", the Americans are gradually, slowly sculpting a COMPLETE MULTIFUNCTIONAL 5th generation fighter ... how long, is it necessary? ... those who think that they are sitting there, who do not know how to analyze or plan .... are very wrong
          We have so far only the 34th with a big stretch can be put in analogs, all the rest can’t even boast of similar functionality
    2. Maxom75
      Maxom75 24 February 2016 09: 02
      0
      Mastering the budget. From a gun on sparrows. If there is so much money that you don’t know how to spend, then you need a small victorious war, if you cannot win, you need to find the one who prevented you from doing this, but who is it for the USA? Of course, evil Russia.
  5. Polite Moose
    Polite Moose 24 February 2016 08: 42
    +2
    Media: Americans did not need to spend money on using F-22 in Syria

    I believe that the point of using F-22 in Syria is that now they can, with a clear conscience, scream at all angles that they are selling a plane proven in military operations. The advertisement is engine of the trade.
    1. 0255
      0255 24 February 2016 09: 09
      +1
      Quote: Polite Moose
      Media: Americans did not need to spend money on using F-22 in Syria

      I believe that the point of using F-22 in Syria is that now they can, with a clear conscience, scream at all angles that they are selling a plane proven in military operations. The advertisement is engine of the trade.

      Export of F-22 is prohibited, and long before the American imitation of fighting with Daesh in Syria
      1. Pete mitchell
        Pete mitchell 24 February 2016 11: 33
        +7
        You are mistaken, dear - everything is simple. If Ostap Bander "knew about 200 ways of relatively honest money-taking," then the Star-striped military-industrial complex is much more cunning. Ostap is still studying and studying. And in battle "demonstrated" and the ban can be removed if desired. Although I think this is unlikely - such a beautiful packaging, for the forbidden fruit, but inside there is something that does not correspond to the declared one.
    2. Mera joota
      Mera joota 24 February 2016 11: 01
      0
      Quote: Polite Elk
      I believe that the point of using F-22 in Syria is that now they can, with a clear conscience, scream at all angles that they are selling a plane proven in military operations. The advertisement is engine of the trade

      And I suppose you don’t know a damn thing about the F-22, but in the forefront to spit in his direction.
  6. Evil 55
    Evil 55 24 February 2016 08: 42
    -1
    Let them fly, faster, the resource will end ... And this machine, oh, oh, how expensive ..
  7. Tusv
    Tusv 24 February 2016 08: 44
    +3
    I understood what "visible - invisible" means
  8. Flinky
    Flinky 24 February 2016 08: 44
    +2
    Let them spend it. This is only at hand for us.
  9. Appraiser
    Appraiser 24 February 2016 08: 51
    0
    Let the US and NATO spend their budget funds, as they say: "we will introduce them into debt" ... yes
  10. triglav
    triglav 24 February 2016 08: 52
    0
    The raptor will not be used for its intended purpose: our Su-35 (not to mention 50) is not a rival, but it needs to be used somewhere. So we decided to see in Syria. So what?..
  11. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 24 February 2016 08: 53
    -1
    But they felt the ether and looked at their capabilities in practice. And it seems they realized that their vessel was garbage .. laughing
    1. samoletil18
      samoletil18 24 February 2016 09: 40
      0
      Who knows ... Maybe they realized that it’s not even garbage and for the sixth generation they already come up with TTX and TTZ.
    2. Mera joota
      Mera joota 24 February 2016 11: 02
      -4
      Quote: dchegrinec
      And it seems they understood that their dish was garbage.

      Do you have access to their findings? Your people in the US Air Force, or are you just a balabol?
  12. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 24 February 2016 08: 55
    +4
    NEEDED or NOT NEEDED ... the question is of course interesting ... only very narrow-minded politicians and experts think so ... Americans flew in the area of ​​our forces and assets (including aviation, air defense and electronic warfare) ... they drove equipment in different modes with the possibility of combat use ... this is all experience ... all this then go to reports and recommendations for use or to improve performance ...
    And of course the car is very expensive in itself and in operation ...
  13. polite people
    polite people 24 February 2016 08: 56
    -2
    We looked at their capabilities and realized that they were taxed. And ... washed away.
  14. halzan7
    halzan7 24 February 2016 09: 03
    0
    it is more like "and we also have" but good or bad does not matter "it is the same"
  15. bashkort
    bashkort 24 February 2016 09: 04
    +1
    Yes, they will print for a couple of hours more candy wrappers in the US Federal Reserve for this amount, business then!
  16. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 24 February 2016 09: 09
    -1
    Good show off is more expensive than money wink
  17. starschina
    starschina 24 February 2016 09: 10
    0
    let the grandmother burn something !!! Ponte !!
    1. Dryulea
      Dryulea 24 February 2016 09: 21
      0
      Grandmas burn! Why don’t they burn it? Print as needed!
  18. Romanenko
    Romanenko 24 February 2016 09: 21
    0
    Well, they also need somewhere to roll in new equipment, and 400 lyam for them is just 200 kg of paper and two buckets of paint ....
  19. Zurmansor
    Zurmansor 24 February 2016 09: 32
    0
    and where can I read about the use - when there were departures, what are the areas of use? did we have time to "touch"? he probably flew with a "lens", but still.
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 24 February 2016 11: 06
      -1
      Quote: Zurmansor
      he probably flew with a "lens", but still.

      Well, it’s frivolous to send the F-22 with a lens into battle, these are not exercises. But data on its application (truthful) obviously will not be, there will be a secret around which there will be a sea of ​​speculation.
  20. spy008
    spy008 24 February 2016 09: 32
    -1
    Good thing, this Raptor, but the fools got laughing
    A child is also not a problem to make, but if parents, then trouble! hi
    1. spy008
      spy008 24 February 2016 14: 28
      0
      So that you are healthy! Actually, what I meant was that "if the parents of U..y have trouble" - who cares? request , the main thing is that "Raptor" is not praised angry It is evident that the one who is minus the parents hurried to do. Now his emotions are ahead of his mind laughing
  21. nivander
    nivander 24 February 2016 10: 32
    +2
    Syria is a convenient testing ground for testing new types of weapons, and for the Russian Federation it is also a great opportunity to demonstrate to potential buyers the real possibilities of new and modernized weapons. Well, like a cherry in a pie, it’s a great opportunity to get rid of deposits of expired bombs
  22. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 24 February 2016 10: 54
    0
    Do not please ...
    When the F-22 was NOT used there was a cry: "why are they holding it?"
    When YES is used: "ah-ah, not for its intended purpose."

    Shtatniks train with the whole set of their planes, and the Russian Aerospace Forces -
    also. And it is right.
  23. Michael67
    Michael67 24 February 2016 11: 48
    0
    Quote: Corsair
    Quote: Andrey Yurievich
    rolling technology, like us, evolution does not stop ...

    what And what is their plane made of? At prices almost gold, they sorted out aliens somewhere downed to collect raptors?
    Wikipedia says that 40-50 percent of the aircraft was assembled from almost various plastics (non-metal), didn’t others think of using it, or only Americans were ahead of the rest in the production of polymers.

    Wikipedia knowledge is good. It is necessary to be more interested in domestic sources. PAK FA T-50 has a lining made of polymers and composites. And today in all respects it is a champion.
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 24 February 2016 13: 09
      0
      Quote: Michael67
      PAK FA T-50 has a lining made of polymers and composites. And today in all respects it is a champion.

      He was interested, but if you are very persistently interested in secret developments, then you can invite guests from Liteiny, do I need it?
      Polymers and composites are great, only there is a threaded bolt for every tricky nut. And the radars are evolving (they will carry out the appropriate replacement and adjustment, the BC will hang tracking of interference in the form of "tennis balls").
  24. SG11
    SG11 24 February 2016 11: 48
    0
    and where did they get the idea that the raptor bombing was the main goal? looks like a "fig leaf" disguise
  25. The comment was deleted.
  26. Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff 24 February 2016 19: 25
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    for Corsair:
    "40-50 percent of the aircraft is assembled almost from various plastics (non-metal)," ///

    And it’s not just that. On the screens of the air defense radar, the Reptor looks
    light interference that comp. resets to zero.
    Its EPR is the size of a pin pong ball.
    Enemy pilots will notice him only within the limits of visual observation -
    several kilometers.
    PAK-FA was made very similar to the Raptor for a reason.

    Until now, all computers and radars are reset to zero. They never saw him on the radar. He shot down all the planes and left unnoticed
  27. Americandream
    Americandream 9 March 2016 05: 10
    0
    Well, what a cool car it turned out. Neither Russia nor China will have anything like this in the next 10 years. PAK FA - a miserable likeness of the Raptor, made of the likeness without knowledge of invisibility technology.
    Russia did not have specialists in this field, even with the scoop, and even more so now: all the standing physicists and mathematicians dumped abroad a long time ago.

    In general, the cars flew well in Syria. Russian radars identified their characteristics, that is, empty screens.