Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Problem-plagued plane hits ISIS: F-22 goes into combat
Washington (CNN) -- The problem-plagued F-22 Raptor took part in its first combat mission Monday night, hitting ISIS targets in Syria. The price tag for those jets, which were in development for decades, is a staggering $412 million each -- triple its expected cost, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). (www.cnn.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
As far as the cost per aircraft goes, remember that figures lie and liars figure. To keep top secret projects top secret imaginative accounting needs to take place. If the military asks for 20 billion to fund a secret project then the jig is up. What you do is assign 30 billion to a 10 billion project that is out in the open and you have your funding. Yes, as tax payers we regularly get ripped off but not all of the excess from that $300 hammer goes to partying.
I'm surprised to hear so many people rant against the F-22. I understand the F-35 issue(s), but the F-22, albeit it overdue and over-budget, is a stunning piece of technology that will serve us well for years to come. As for the cost per unit, or even cost for the entire program, it seems that it is hard to measure because, as another user mentioned, it was cancelled with a low production run and much of the technology is brand new and is being used in the F-35 and other applications. Defray the cost over all of the projects the development of this aircraft will support and I am sure one will find it to be much more reasonable. I'm not sure how this program compares to others in terms of setbacks and issues (remembering that again much of this technology is more complicated than ever), but I am more willing to forgive on this program that the F-35. One final interesting fact - if this is such a useless aircraft, why is it against the law to export it? Seems like Lockheed is getting the stick in the eye.
I'm a whole lot more in the corner of the F22 than the F35, but I'm not seeing the F22 do anything that an F18 or F16 can't
My son has 4000+ hrs in a hornet n 1000+ traps. He says they went up against the F-22 lots of times n couldn't see them. He said u can't kill something u can't see. Radar or visual.
And a couple of thousand $100,000 drones will soon make 187 mega-million dollar fighters jet, utterly obsolete.
Not to worry, it's only long-suffering U.S. taxpayers money that was poured into those F-22's!
Not to worry, it's only long-suffering U.S. taxpayers money that was poured into those F-22's!
You're way off on drone costs Ron. As tax payers, we would love to find $100,000 drones but you need to add three more zeros and then some.
I'm sure, that with volume production the cost of drones will end up a whole lot more reasonable than a small number of limited production, exceptionally complex fighter jets, that always seem to need constant mega-million dollar upgrades, fixes, and modifications.
We bought 43 of the F-111C's for Australia, and after 40 years of redesigns to cure all the structural and design faults, 40 years of unbelievably costly avionics and weaponry upgrades, plus tens of millions in costs, disabilities and deaths associated with the toxic chemicals used in the F-111 tank sealing - we finally had a usable fighter aircraft, about the time they became obsolete.
This is not to mention the deaths of 12 RAAF fighter pilots and navigators and the loss of 8 of the 43 RAAF F-111's in training exercises.
That's a pretty high toll to pay, in both money and lives, to get fighters of dubious reliability that were never used in anger.
If we had Lemon Laws for military equipment, then the F111's would have been recalled and we would have got our money back.
Drones will make all manned military aircraft obsolete within a relatively short space of time.
We bought 43 of the F-111C's for Australia, and after 40 years of redesigns to cure all the structural and design faults, 40 years of unbelievably costly avionics and weaponry upgrades, plus tens of millions in costs, disabilities and deaths associated with the toxic chemicals used in the F-111 tank sealing - we finally had a usable fighter aircraft, about the time they became obsolete.
This is not to mention the deaths of 12 RAAF fighter pilots and navigators and the loss of 8 of the 43 RAAF F-111's in training exercises.
That's a pretty high toll to pay, in both money and lives, to get fighters of dubious reliability that were never used in anger.
If we had Lemon Laws for military equipment, then the F111's would have been recalled and we would have got our money back.
Drones will make all manned military aircraft obsolete within a relatively short space of time.
Sorry about all your issues with the (Pig) but there is a reason they were never used in anger. You had one of the most feared weapons system in the region during that time. Their mission was ground hugging at extreme speed which is a dangerous regime. Crews signing on knew this and I salute every one of them. Drones or UMACs though only move the pilot/operator off site. They are not eliminated. Complexity and systems upgrading will continue as usual if not more so. Some of our one trip missiles will soon cost a million or more if they don't already. As far as drones making all manned military aircraft obsolete within a relatively short space of time, well, you'll have to define "relatively." Even the B-52 is scheduled in service until 2050.
Tomahawk missile cost- $1.5 mil. Ten targets -cost $15 mil. Smart Bomb Appox. $25,000 -$40,000 per unit. Ten targets $400,000. Do the math and in the end you will always need boots on the ground.War is hell and will never be anything but that. Air power alone will never be enough.