@Helge129 compared to who? Kenya? Estonia? Even the Russians and Chinese arent upto the standard of US airpower, whether its USAF, Navy or Marines. The largest allies of the US are far below current levels, Whether its Britain, Israel, Japan or south Korea. Or are you seriously comparing airforces of Iran and North korea can match them?
@Helge129 Sorry, but that makes no sense, Seeing as the US is number 1 in arcraft technology and firepower, so they cannot be behind "current" technology when they are already number 1. As i said in my previous post, the Chinese and russian airforces are still years behind the US. The F22 compared to the rest of the world is like comparing WW1 Dreadnaught battleships to Ironclads from the american revolution.
@angel102ify The F-22's onboard computers have about as much power as does my fricken calculator. The Titanium-frame near the engines have microfractures because it's not up to the stress. And its maintenance is very expensive and time consuming. Europe and Russia both beat them in that regard. The Eurofighter Typhoon for instance, can pull 9g turns for as long as the pilot stays concious, the F-22 would have lost its wings by that time...
Yeah, that's why almost all spending should be on the state level. The federal reserve facilitates this reckless spending. You can't stop the waste without dealing with the federal reserve.
@Guitarisforgrins No it's illegal to sell an F-22 to any nation beside the US did Canada want it?fuck yeah but lockheed martin is selling them the f-35
"we own the sky" No thats completely false, China is surpassing us in the aero industry. For the most part there not concerned with russia (they sold most of there military armorments off). There more concerned about china.
@Lokivoid It is higly doubtful that China, as of right now, has a superior aerospace industry. For example the J-20 has just entered flight testing, the F-22A has already completed production (well short of the original target, one of the reasons it is so expensive), and they are mean't to have had trouble reserve-engineering the Su-33. Only in the last decade have they released an indigenious 4.5gen fighter, long after all other majors powers made the switch. So I will have to disagree with you
F22 was not focused around stright up dogfighting, Its focus was electronic warfare and stealth. The reason the project budget was really scrapped was the F-33 is cheaper to produce and more versitile (such as VTOL capabilities)
$66 billion is alright... it's two apollo lunar landings. comon, would you rather put four peolpe on the moon or build a bunch of awesome fighter planes?
If your refering to the typhoon you do realize there not even in the same catagory of fighter, so such a compairson is errelivent. Typhoon does not have Stealth or Ewar capabilities.
@Lokivoid The Eurofighter has EWar capabilites, but it's not built to do that, they have the Tornado for that. And the Tornado is damn good at it. The Typhoon doesn't need stealth, personally I find stealth a convenience, but out of place if it reduces the plane's effectiveness (You can't carry as much weapons). Yes, the F-22 may have the signature of a bird - but you can track supersonic birds!
@StrigonLead pretty sure he means by air force and coverage. PAK-FA is just an upgraded F22 shell. Lockheed can make a killer plane but that doesn't make good business sense so like a drug dealer they making money on the comeback a fault here and there minor upgrades and recycled parts you get what I mean $
The typical thing for Cenk is he seems upset by the 66 billion but doesn't place the blame for the cost where it belongs, union labor. Want to build a 20 million dollar project for 66 billion? Use union labor. Oh, and don't even mention that the UNIONS LOBBIED FOR THE RAPTOR! You are such a fake Cenk. You sicken honest people.
Not the "bridge to nowhere" lie again. The bridge wasn't to provide transportation for the residents, it was to allow for tourism. The bridge may have been a so so idea that should have been funded by Alaska, but it was nowhere near the Big Dig by Ted Kennedy projected to cost 2.8 billion but actually cost 22 billion and 4 lives. Wonder why Cenk didn't cite that as an example of pork spending? Oh yeah, he's a fake liberal mouth piece (of shit).
yeah tyt each one of those planes costs about 22 million dollars a pop, some of the money they are asking for seems a bit excessive; I know how much they cost because I inquired at a boeing company near where I live. they are using that money to buy quite 3,031 of those planes and then some based on what they are asking for.
lockheed had a great deal with the corrupt minister of defense in germany in the 60's. they sold 900 crappy "starfighter" jets that where in service until 1991.
292 of them crashed, 116 pilots died.
funny enough the airport in munich is named after the guy who made that deal, franz josef strauß ..
There are over 100 of these planes delivered. That is one heck of an expensive plane, maybe they should sell one or two of them to pay for our Social Security that we already paid for and they spent, then they could sell one or two more to pay for the old folks medicare. While they are at it, stop dropping bombs on everybody and their brother, bring the troops home and we could really cut that deficit and still defend ourselves. Oh, cannot do that, the arms producers might go broke, unbelievable
As an F-22 "Fan" I should be flaming you but I am not gonna do that. Why? Because you are absolutely right! The SYSTEM is BROKEN. Better said, The SYSTEM has been CORRUPTED BY DESIGN. The F-22 is an amazing jet and dominates the skies but it's way too damn expensive. Why? Because they WANT to "waste" your money to make themselves richer. They want more and more and more. This entire programe (F-22) could have been done for less than 1/5th of the cost if the system was not corrupt. What a shame!
I was enlisted as a logistics specialist in the army. In garrison, contractors were hired to do the exact same work that we were trained to do. Since they don't need that many people to run the warehouse/motor pool, we the soldiers were sent out on meaningless tasks like pulling weeds by the side of a railroad track. Waste doesn't just stem from faulty equipment, it also comes from contractors living off of government largesse.
Aside from lobbying of the military-industrial complex, there's compelling argument to why the U.S (and some other countries for that matter) spends so much in defense: Offensive Realism, an international relations theory laid out in the great book The Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John Mearsheimer. I assume it's rather heavy read if you're not knowledgeable in international politics (and theory), but it delivers, whether you accept realpolitik or not (I'm a structural realist myself).
@bobbytiger your right its Obamas fault...Corruption shitty government and Fucked up policy just started with the nigger got in..every white man that was in there before was 100 percent clean as a whistle...Get the fuck outta here man...get with reality..Obama and every other president are just pawns in a Game. You sound Racist when you go there ..cuz this president has tried to do the most for the people than the last one ever did..even though its Painfully clear hes not in charge.
Thus resulting in the single largest push back of the PAK-FA development timeline, well after we already had the F-22 ready. Thusly, the 16 years too early that you cite so frequently is likely the result of timeline uncertainty that surrounded the Su-47 and the Mikoyan Project 1.44
Then in 1997, the Su-47 Berkut made its maiden flight, and it wasn't immediately apparent how close to being a production model it was or if it was merely going to be a testbed for new technology. The uncertainty that resulted from this and other developments likely led to the pressing forward with the F-22's production model finishing touches. It is only after the PAK FA winner announcement in 2002 that we learned with clear certainty that Sukhoi was going to redo the design from scratch
However, entering 1995, information that Sukhoi is still developing the PAK-FA project in spite of having to fund it themselves in the absence of government funding made it imperitive that we would need to complete the ATF program and get the F-22 ready for production, and a lot of the specs were becoming known, most notably that it was going to be a stealth fighter design. Mikoyan Project 1.44 was also becoming more known about.
The YF-22 is announced as the winner for the ATF program in 1991, but it took Lockheed 5-6 years to make preparations for the production model F-22. It seems it could have been done much faster, and indeed, it seems the PAK-FA could have been developed and prepared for production much faster as well... but something occured during 1991 as well. The Soviet Union collapsed. This likely removed the urgency in preparing the F-22 as fast as possible and crippled development on PAK-FA prototypes
These planes ARE the greatest planes the world has ever seen. When they work. A great plane is expensive, but 24 million is not much in terms of federal spending (and 1/3rd of 1 percent of the entire F22 program). If that's all it takes to get them in the air when they've been grounded SINCE MAY, its worth it. Did we need it in the first place? Perhaps not. But we've got it now. And it will cost comparative chump-change to fix. Just do it.
@gekapat This is EXACTLY how the 1% steal from us 99% - they line up at the public tax trough and suck up all they can, then return for seconds and thirds. THEN the Republicans tell us that we need no government. If so then how will their 1% pals suck up US tax money in the future? Oh yeah, they'll give tax breaks to the too-rich first THEN let's get rid of government so the poor, elderly, retired, etc. won't be able to get ANY tax money the 1% steals from us! Disgusting 1% and Republicans!
my sister saw this video and was like "OMG YOUR STUPID WE NEED THIS CUZ WE GOT ATTACKED ON 9/11". so i responded, yeah cuz they used high tech weaponry -__________-
I used to work on Apache Helicopters in the Army... They would send us broken parts all the time, charge us for it, then charge us again when they sent us a new part... Which sometimes was broken and the process repeated... Eisenhower is rolling in his grave
@gekapat don't forget Sergeant Curtis Culin. He was given tanks with a terrible defect, the inability to plow through hedgerows. He simply salvaged German Scrap to fix the problem.
@TheSaltyAdmiral are you sure you are not confusing the f-22 with the f-35 aka joint strike fighter, last I heard the f22 was barred from export sales.
you know, we have to keep making progress in war machines. we have to remain the top of the world. China is now making a stealth fighter. and the only plane that its inferior to is the f22. Reagan beat the USSR through defense spending. Their communist government couldnt produce weapons like the US because they didnt have a free marketb competitive economy. So yeah, i support keeping the US safe from threats. better than wasting tax dollars on illegal aliens that dont work anyway.
@fatty1443 I've worked at various restaurants where there have been illegals or ppl who have come here because of special programs for a temporary time, and i gotta tell you, they are some of the hardest working ppl I've been around. why do Mexicans get such a bad rap? the answer is because it's easier to blame them for our problems than the government. That's why racism is closely linked to ignorance, you either won't or cant know any better.
... And in waging a conventional large scale war, even dramatic advantages in quantity/quality of tanks and infantry equipment cannot be brought to bear in the absence of air superiority unless terrain allows for it.
Before you start running away with the costs for unit for the F-15 vs F-22, do remember that simulated battles and wargames determing that the F-22 hundreds:0 Win:Loss ratio against F-15s and F-16s.
And having Stealth Fighter capabilities over a rival nation is no small advantage. The Su-30's short lived advantage over the F-15 did not produce grotesque win:loss ratios in simulations either...
Ack, didn't write down my full thought, I meant to say we'll want to stay 11+ years ahead of Russia and China in fighter design specifically since Air Superiority is the single biggest determining factor in a large scale war should one ever break out.
@Szekler11 Wow. Excellent refutation of Cenk's argument. I love how you summed up the crucial points and shot them down one by one using nothing but facts and shrewd logical reasoning. Most people would have resorted to ad hominem and straw man arguments, but not you. Cenk presented a well reasoned critique of the military-industrial-complex and you responded with an equally well reasoned counter-argument. Good show sir, good show.
cenk is definitely not a military man, just because we no no use for fighters now in today wargames don't mean there won't be in the far future, and by the way the Russians now have an aircraft that is very close to replicating our F-22 JSF, so we can sit still for a second and others will try to shoot ahead in weaponizing
@DiamondChrome42 The PAK-FA Fighter is not a replica of the F-22. There are vast differences between the two, and that's because they have different priorities. The F-22 is designed to maximize stealth while maintaining the speed and maneuverability that is characteristic of a fighter while the PAK-FA prioritizes Super-Maneuverability over invisibility, but maintain enough stealth to still maintain first strike abilities.
@DiamondChrome42 In the far future the F22 will be out-dated. Improving technology is one thing, but the F22 is nuts. And what exactly do the Russians have that's 'close to replicating' the F22? The Su-35 is an 80s airframe, and only costs max $65m, while each F22 costs $150m. They're not even in the same league.
Besides nobody with the economy to fight America would bother - economic, political and cyber warfare are more convenient and less likely to cause nuclear war.
@shraka Oh and if you're talking about the PAK FA, not only is it not out yet (so performance isn't proven) while the F22 is already wrapping up production (another indication that the F22 is what set off the fifth generation fighter race), but it's 1/3rd the cost of the F22 and almost certainly will not be able to stand toe to toe with the F22.
@DiamondChrome42 Why are we in this constant arms race with Russia and China? The cold war is over, we won, we're not under siege by the reds. There isn't going to be a conventional war with Russia. We don't need to spend hundreds of billions building fancier warplanes and larger tanks. It's ridiculous.
@Fangtorn but looking at it in a dfense perspective, we as a god defensive force we have to lok for weaknesses in our defenses compared to the rest of the world's weapon systems aka F-22 JSF, even though drones are replacing the F-22s we should still keep some F-22s in the event of a cyber attack that gains control of the drone network links and have to quickly destroy in-flight drones in the world which is what the F-22s were built to counter (multi-role fighter/bomber)
@Fangtorn what's to say our new enemy won't try to disable our drones once we go 100% drone warfare to commence an air preemptive attack on US soil after we piss the Russians off one too many times
@Fangtorn there are none as for economic, it keeps US building and maintenance jobs in defense contracting, in the real world of defense you either engineer new capabilities or your enemies finds a way to out develop you, this has been going on since the 1st human war began, you start out with a stick, so the other man puts an arrowhead on a stick to make him a more effective killer than the guy with just a stick
@DiamondChrome42 What are you talking about? I'm not saying it would be bad PR if Russia launched a pre-emptive strike on the US, I'm saying it would start World War III. No nation with the economy or military might to strike America is going to. The costs monumentally outweigh the benefits. Russia isn't going to start a war that makes WWI and WWII look like a bar fight because the US "pissed them off one too many times."
cont'd Especially in the face of nations ruled by a dramatically different set of values and beliefs from our own. We need the large conventional militaries because we are unwilling to use our own WMDs in all but the worst case scenarios.
...cont'd: But in the first engagement where the F6F Hellcats were used in quantity, the Battle of the Phillipine Sea... well, it's nickname says all you need to know... "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". As a result of the total loss of Air Superiority on the battlefield, the Japanese would also lose 3 Aircraft Carriers.
@Zeknif1 While the Hellcat's superior design was a major factor, other factors such as RADAR, new more effective anti-air shells, and the then-new command and control command philosophy which allowed them to focus anti-air power more effectively then ever before, and the lack of experienced pilots among the Japanese forces who were facing down a more powerful force then ever before were all contributing factors rather then just the superior design of a single type of warplane.
@ChakatBlackstar Should I pount out that most of that post actually enhances my argument since in the event that we had not developed the F-22 or F-35, it would be a case of us having only non-stealth Air Superiority Fighters vs Stealth Fighters... i.e. the Battle of the Phillipine Sea was a case of one side having eyes against the other being blind, much like what our next war would have been had we not invested in Stealth Fighters.
Though what is this "next war" that people keep claiming we'll need these stealth planes for? As far as I can tell we're no longer enemies with anyone who's operating anything comparable to even our F-15s.
@ChakatBlackstar It is true that we cannot gurantee that a war will occur, at the same time we cannot gurantee that a war will not occur. I do Concede that it is very unlikely that China or Russia would become militarily aggressive towards U.S. Interests even in the event we cede significant advantages with our Militaries, there are some nations that are antagonistic towards the U.S. that are looking to update their Air Force. The Iranian Air Force has been seen operating Su-30MKs for example.
@Zeknif1 The Su-35 isn't even considered a fifth generation fighter by it's manufacturer. I understand the need to improve the technology, but the F22 is three times the estimated unit cost of the PAK FA! Not only that, it's wrapping up production while the PAK FA isn't even out yet. There's being early, then there's being silly.
Iran is only a threat because the US wants it to be a threat. I'm constantly shocked at how antagonistic the US is towards Iran.
@shraka I never said the Su-35 is a Fifth Generation fighter... I don't even remember even mentioning the Su-35. It along with other Flanker Variants is the Russian equivalent to the F-15 and its variants as Gen 4.5+ aircraft. The option for additional F-22s if needed will remain open for future production, but our mainstay stealth fighter is going to be the F-35 with well over 2,000 units planned for production...
@DiamondChrome42 You need to catch up on your reading. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has three variants in development. A standard production type, a Carrier Based version, and the VTOL/STOL variant (The one you are talking about), the development of the latter being the one that gets the majority of the attention.
@DiamondChrome42 Actually it's a multi-role fighter much like the F/A-18 (really it should be an F/A-35). It's basically a replacement for the F16 & F/A-18, with the F22 being the F15s replacement. I imagine they'll still use the F/A-18 for carrier duty when stealth isn't as necessary though due to the cheaper cost (about half the price).
lol in my opinion i think they should remove pilots from the F-22s and make it a drone, it's capabilities go far beyond human capability can endure, imagine the increased performance increase
@DiamondChrome42 There is a Stealth Fighter/Bomber design in the works by Boeing that's supposed to have an Unmanned Variant. Personally, while I'm for developing Drone Fighters, I am against all Fighters in a hotzone or in the inventory being drones for strategic and tactical reasons. There is also going to be a need for perfecting an "Optical Depth Perception" System for opponents against whom radar is not fully reliable before "Drone Fighters" can really be practical.
@Zeknif1 My point was the F22 is way beyond what was needed, and way too expensive - no hostile nations that are modernizing their air forces could stand against updated F-15s and F/A-18s let alone the F22. The PAK FA and J-20 wont be operational for another 5-8 years, and then you have to wait for Russia / China to sell them to someone the US might fight, which is likely to be another 5-10 years after that before the F22 really makes sense. So the F22 was at least 16 years early.
@angel102ify Not at all, the BF-109 was superior in many respects (for instant, it had mechanical fuel injection) and had its first flight a year earlier than the Spitfire. The Spitfire was actually developed in an environment much more like what I'm suggesting - at the same time as, or rather with a slight lag behind the competition. Besides the Hawker Hurricane actually did a LOT of the heavy lifting of the Battle of Briton - and really is the unsung hero of that battle.
@shraka The typical target for the Hawker Hurricane was the Bombers during the Battle of Britain while the Spitfire pilots typically went for the German Fighters. Nonetheless it did perform admirably and does deserve its place in the formation with the Spitfire and Landcaster in the Battle of Britain Memorial Flights.
@Zeknif1 That was the tactic, but in practice the 109s would usually target the Hurricanes. Because the 109 could out maneuver both the hurricane and the spitfire anyway, the spitfire would just leave the hurricanes to tie up the 109s while the spitfires hit the bombers. The Hurricanes had several advantages too: They were cheaper to repair, less susceptible to damage, and easier to land.
My point remains, the 109 / spitfire were not vastly superior to anything else in the sky.
@shraka I wasn't arguing against that, lol. That other guy was trying to relate the Spitfire vs 109 to the present F-22 vs PAK-FA/J-20. The Spitfire and the 109 were leapfrogging each other's performance the whole duration of the war really.
Now I can't find graphs that break down the fighter kills of the Spitfire and Hurricane during the Battle of Britain.
@Zeknif1 Oh sorry. I didn't notice I was talking to two different people! :D I should read who I'm talking to a little more carefully. And yeah, the 109 and Spitfire is completely different to the F-22 and PAK FA 'race' (or rather the PAK FA trying to catch up). The tech difference between the Spitfire and 109 could be measured in weeks, not decades.
I'd be interested to see the different kill rates for Hurricanes and Spitfires. PM me a link if you find it.
@shraka i completely agree, the hurricane is a very undervalued plane during world war 2 and was the workhorse for the RAF, the spitfire was the race horse tho as you admit.
And the BF109 was a very good fighter, but it didnt have the legs to fight very long over britain so it wasnt perfect either. This is why technology needs to keep pushing the boundaries
@angel102ify Yes, but neither did the Spitfire. And the 109 certainly wasn't perfect, no. The spitfire had aerodynamic advantages too. But my point about the Hurricane is it was really low tech compared to the Spitfire, but was still capable of fielding a strong defense against 109s in great enough numbers. Numbers it could achieve due to it's cheaper cost. But this is really getting away from the main point of this discussion I think, sorry about that. :D
@shraka yes they were a lot cheaper to produce, but the single biggest shortage in the battle of britain wasnt planes, it was pilots.
but you cannot predict that Russia will always be 11 years behind the US, the whole point of the F-22 i it provides capabilities for decades to come, as i said earlier the F-15 has been in service since 1976 and still is an incredible aircraft that hasnt had a single aircraft shot down by any enemy, which is pretty inheard off, but it cant last forevor can it?
@angel102ify No it can't, but that's why I think the F22 was 5-10 years early, not not needed at all. I really think the PAK FA is defined by the F22. If it hadn't been developed you wouldn't see the PAK FA in it's current form. If the F35 had been produced first, the Russians would be trying to keep pace with that, not the F22. By being later you allow China and Russia to develop sooner, but is being 5 years ahead that much worse than being 10 years ahead if it saves you a bucket load of cash?
@shraka well that has the been the first question for every military for 2 thousand years or more, but if you ask the men and women who use it, would they rather have a spitfire or a lightning, a sherman or an abrams, the lexington from WW2 or the nimitz?
@angel102ify Ask them if they'd rather have an F22, or a buddy up there with two F15s? How about an F22, or an F15 and a better education system in the country? It's not like this is new - there's been a strong argument that the F22 was too expensive and too soon since the 90s.
@shraka And to continue along this theme, one thing above all proved decisive the battle of britain, and it never flew at all. RADAR, the british technology advantage proved decisive over the germans, even when they were vastly superior in numbers and training.
@angel102ify Not just radar, but the way fighter command was set up, and the spotters were INCREDIBLY important. And German fighter tactics were actually quite weak. But anyway US only has to remain technologically superior to it's rivals. China and Russia supply the US's rivals, but only with old tech. Even if the US keeps just behind Russia and China, they'll still be vastly superior to the people the US is actually fighting. They do not need to be 11 years ahead of Russia.
@shraka To provide insurance and continued deterrence against conventional military aggression by Russia and China, yes, we're gonna want to stay 11+ years ahead of Russia and China in the event that either decides they have the capabilities to reliably counter our big missiles... especially considering that China has demonstrated that they have the ability to destroy satellites in orbit.
@Zeknif1 Russia doesn't have the economic power to wage a war with the US. China relies on the US for economic stability. I think it's paranoid in the extreme to think either of these countries would attack the US even if it was 'slightly behind' or only just ahead of the Russian and Chinese technology. In the 1990s the F15 was actually slightly behind the Su-30s capability wise, Russia had WAY more tanks and superior infantry numbers and weapons. I don't remember the US being invaded?
@shraka Russia isnt as poor as you think nowadays,in the 1990s they struggled to feed themselves, but thats changed very quickly under Putin, combined oil and natural gas they are the worlds single biggest supplier of fuel, not to mention the mineral wealth in the far east,
As for china, you will find the chinese control the american economy a lot more than the other way round, china is Americas single biggest holder of debt, china can crash the US economy anytime it wants.
@angel102ify Actually, I would say it's more appropriate to describe the PAK-FA not so much as a plane designed to "Catch Up" with the F-22 as I would say it's a Russian Fighter designed to "Fill the same role as the F-22 in a different way". And I'm not convinced that the PAK-FA was going to be built to "Catch up" with the F-35 if it came out first simply because of the company in question. Sukhoi would have stayed with a stealth fighter design with maneuverability as the priority...
@Zeknif1 I doubt it would be so competitive with the F22 if the F22 was only finishing development now. Either that or it would just be even later to target the F22. Perhaps the Russian government wouldn't have selected Sukhoi to design it if they hadn't had the F22 to target?
@shraka I've actually had the opportunity to speak with one of the chase pilots that was involved in the early stages of the PAK-FA development. Apparently it was no contest. Apparently some of the problems discovered during the second flight of the MiG 1.44 project were quite extensive. The Su-47 simply had all the advantages apparently.
@angel102ify Only if it doesn't want it's debts paid. China is actually pissed at this quantitative easing because it reduces the value of the debt they own. China's whole economy turns on supply of goods to America. America doesn't NEED those goods, China NEEDS the US to buy them though. Russia's GDP: 1,479,825. US GDP: 14,526,550. Yeah... Russia could totally economically survive a war with the US. *rolls eyes* They're only a bit richer than Australia for crying out loud.
@shraka so tell me, what does Russia have that the world needs most?
oil and natural gas, not only do they supply most of china they also supply most of europe now, hell even britain buys gas from russia. The world is changing, and they are catching up, they're not there yet, but give it a few years...
@shraka im sorry but thats a rediculous arguement, either you want the fighter or you dont, you CANNOT predict every single outcome in the future, in 1997 you couldnt predict what would happen in sept 11th or afghanistan or iraq, or libya, iran and so on and so on. With every major weapon system you take chance it will be needed in x amount of years, turns out you never needed the minutement misiles, does that make them a waste of money? surely the weapon you never have to use is the best one.
Even though I love this plane, its basically useless because the enemies you're facing are so far behind right now that F-22s aren't necessary
If the goal of military might is to save and protect American lives, if you spent that amount of cash on healthcare you'd save infinitely more American lives than you ever would with these jets. Same can be said for much of the spending on defense.
cont'd because large sized super-maneuverable fighters are what Sukhoi's most experienced with. Toss in the fact that they have experimented with Stealth designs and materials in the past and that convinces me it was going to be a stealth design from the get go. Also, I do believe it is worth noting that PAK-FA was first announced back in the 1980s and because the threat of it was always hanging over the heads of the U.S., likely catalyzed the development of the F-22.
@Zeknif1 Rubbish. Sukhoi was only chosen to lead the design in 2002. Meanwhile the US had the F117 in service 1983. As for air superiority, the YF-23 was first flown in 1990! Considering the PAK-FAs maiden flight was just last year I think it's fairly obvious who was responding to who. Even if Russia was toying with Stealth in the 80s, the US had them beaten to it easily.
@shraka I said "Catalyzed", you do understand the definition of "catalyst"? And also, the maiden flight for the tech demonstrator that sukhoi used to compete for the contract (Su-47) was back in 1997.
@Zeknif1 I know what a catalyst is. Do you? '97 is still 7 years after the F23's maiden flight - and well after the early stealth fighters. Proof is in the pudding anyway - the PAK FA is estimated to be a third of the price of the F22.
@shraka I said "Catalyzed the development of the F-22". Let me put out the timeline. The Advanced Tactical Fighter program was first drawn up in 1981 in response to Flanker and MiGs becoming more widespread, and the Soviet response to ATF was announced later in the decade. Both the YF-22 and the YF-23 are test flown in the 1990s. Sukhoi puts out the Su-47 demonstrator in 1997 and the Mikoyan Project 1.44 flies twice in 2000 and never flies again. The Su-47 is still 7 years late...
@shraka I'll throw out a worst case scenario then. The PAK FA and J-20 come into service, but the U.S. has no F-22 or F-35 or has only started development on them. Word gets out that during a test simulation, the PAK FA or J-20 are capable achieved 200/0 Kill ratios in war games involving the best pilots available to test with. Extremists in China push for the rapid deployment of the fighters and pushes out against the west on all fronts and our F-15s and F-16s are swatted like flies.
@Zeknif1 That straw man was a little paranoid. For starters, China won't give their top tech to anyone who will fight the US. And I didn't say the US shouldn't develop a fifth gen fighter - or even not be first at it. Just that it did it mega early. An interim test bed would have been better, something more like a cheaper F35 (no bloody STOVL version). Then your competition uses that as their target, and while they do that you develop your F22 for 2010 as they release their F35 beater.
@shraka That's why I called it a "Worst Case Scenario". There is a saying, "Prepare for the Worst, hope for the best."
The F-22 coming out "Super Early" is one such case of this in practice. I personally have no trouble with our Air Power always being .5 Gen ahead of the rest of the world.
@Zeknif1 It's incredibly expensive to be so early, and often a waste of time. I hear the F35s radar can already jam the F22s, and Russia has ground radar that can see through the F22 stealth - and had it since before the F22s first flight.
As I said I think it would have been far cheaper to make the F35 (or something a little cheaper) first, then used what you learn from that on an F22. The US could still be ahead of the curve, having spent significantly less.
...cont'd And on Iran, if you ask any Cavalry Scout that's served in Iraq where the IED's that are blowing up our tanks are coming from, you'll understand that our government has been very lenient in their dealings with Iran.
Cont'd Another example is Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez (Personally, I think he's a paranoid conspiracy theorist) being something of a wild card. He's definitely antagonistic towards the U.S. and definitely looking to update the country's Air Fleet in the near future and has already taken steps towards doing so. He's also shown a willingness to sell military assets to other nations and in one such occurrence over the F-16s, and named Iran specifically.
The reason why paying for the research, development and production of a new generation of Air Superiority Fighters while we already have a large fleet of Air Superiority Fighters that can outperform any other fighters currently in production is because of the speed at which air superiority can be lost as a result of a new fighter appearing on the side of the enemy. This was seen most prominently in the case of the A6M Zero that commanded the skies in the early parts of WWII...
@Zeknif1 That's true of course. The question though is whether or not we'll ever see a war like WW2 again, and whether a huge military is really necessary for defense during this era of WMD availability.
@wtfdoihavetodohere Could you tell me of the willingness of Western Nations to actually use Nuclear Weapons in the face of aggression? As far as I can tell, Nuclear Weapons have only been used twice aggressively and within 3 days of each other. Our access to Nuclear Weapons did nothing to hold China back from aiding North Korea, or from North Korea from invading the South. Neither did we respond to either event by using our nuclear arsenal. The Western Mindset makes nuclear weapons necessary
I've said it before and I've said it again. The air force is the worst of the worst when it comes to spending. There's a lot of marines on the ground that couldn't get proper body armor so these clowns could spend 66 billion on fighters they didn't need to begin with. "missile defense" and "air superiority" are the biggest spending lies since the term "job creators" keep in mind, I'm a COMBAT VETERAN. Not some punk bitch chair force pog....
@angel102ify Air superiority is one thing, but the latest round of fifth generation fighters was triggered by the F22. The F22 wasn't in response to a threat, it was the threat. The F22 was first flown in '97, while the first of it's competitors only just completed it's first flight in 2010, and will cost 1/3rd (est.) of the F22. And against the kinds of enemies the US is going to be fighting, Air Superiority could still be taken care of by modernized F15s easily.
@shraka for how long? the f15 has already been in service since 1976, the airframes will only last so long, by which time it costs more to repair and maintain than to replace with new platforms.
And saying the f 15 is "just fine" is like saying that all infantry soldiers should use the M1 garand as a weapon instead of newer and better weapons.
Weapons dont last forevor, and it takes time to build and design modern weapons systems, whether its a destroyer, a fighter, a tank or a body armour.
@Helge129 your a retard I swear I used to maintnance those things when I was in the USAF and their fucking badass
Iwanakillxx 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Obama has a plan the American people do not know about
He is working on a plan
where the American people can not prosecute him and his business friends after they have destroyed America
He deceives the people by pretending to look like a president.
Wake up!
CamillioD 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
Did Romney really just say that the US air force is out of date? o0
angel102ify 2 months ago
@angel102ify It's out of date currently. 175 raptors, those are the most advanced Jets the Airforce has currently - and they are partially outdated!
Helge129 2 months ago
@Helge129 compared to who? Kenya? Estonia? Even the Russians and Chinese arent upto the standard of US airpower, whether its USAF, Navy or Marines. The largest allies of the US are far below current levels, Whether its Britain, Israel, Japan or south Korea. Or are you seriously comparing airforces of Iran and North korea can match them?
angel102ify 2 months ago
@angel102ify Compared to the current state of technology.
Helge129 2 months ago
@Helge129 Sorry, but that makes no sense, Seeing as the US is number 1 in arcraft technology and firepower, so they cannot be behind "current" technology when they are already number 1. As i said in my previous post, the Chinese and russian airforces are still years behind the US. The F22 compared to the rest of the world is like comparing WW1 Dreadnaught battleships to Ironclads from the american revolution.
angel102ify 2 months ago
@angel102ify The F-22's onboard computers have about as much power as does my fricken calculator. The Titanium-frame near the engines have microfractures because it's not up to the stress. And its maintenance is very expensive and time consuming. Europe and Russia both beat them in that regard. The Eurofighter Typhoon for instance, can pull 9g turns for as long as the pilot stays concious, the F-22 would have lost its wings by that time...
Helge129 2 months ago
@Helge129 (cont.) The Eurofighter also is, despite absence of TVC, more maneuverable than the F22 :P
Helge129 2 months ago
Yeah, that's why almost all spending should be on the state level. The federal reserve facilitates this reckless spending. You can't stop the waste without dealing with the federal reserve.
stuart00knight 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
You assholes are selling this bullshit plane to Canada too.. thanks.
Guitarisforgrins 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@Guitarisforgrins No it's illegal to sell an F-22 to any nation beside the US did Canada want it?fuck yeah but lockheed martin is selling them the f-35
anthony777100 1 month ago
"we own the sky" No thats completely false, China is surpassing us in the aero industry. For the most part there not concerned with russia (they sold most of there military armorments off). There more concerned about china.
Lokivoid 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@Lokivoid It is higly doubtful that China, as of right now, has a superior aerospace industry. For example the J-20 has just entered flight testing, the F-22A has already completed production (well short of the original target, one of the reasons it is so expensive), and they are mean't to have had trouble reserve-engineering the Su-33. Only in the last decade have they released an indigenious 4.5gen fighter, long after all other majors powers made the switch. So I will have to disagree with you
SuperDJBling 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
Those F22's came up short against F-15's in dogfighting training with the Pakistani Airforce.
DrJReefer 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@DrJReefer
F22 was not focused around stright up dogfighting, Its focus was electronic warfare and stealth. The reason the project budget was really scrapped was the F-33 is cheaper to produce and more versitile (such as VTOL capabilities)
Lokivoid 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
$66 billion? that could get Ireland out of half outta debt! we don't work right either but at least you can have a nice holiday here...
eggnchip 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
$66 billion is alright... it's two apollo lunar landings. comon, would you rather put four peolpe on the moon or build a bunch of awesome fighter planes?
smadzenites 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@smadzenites Not really gotta take inflation into account.
Lokivoid 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@Lokivoid my figures are in 2010 US dollars
smadzenites 2 months ago
The F22 isn't even state of the art now nevermind in 20 years, The Euro Fighter is a far superior jet.
sookmahroot 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@sookmahroot
If your refering to the typhoon you do realize there not even in the same catagory of fighter, so such a compairson is errelivent. Typhoon does not have Stealth or Ewar capabilities.
Lokivoid 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@Lokivoid The Eurofighter has EWar capabilites, but it's not built to do that, they have the Tornado for that. And the Tornado is damn good at it. The Typhoon doesn't need stealth, personally I find stealth a convenience, but out of place if it reduces the plane's effectiveness (You can't carry as much weapons). Yes, the F-22 may have the signature of a bird - but you can track supersonic birds!
Helge129 2 months ago
I watch the f22 fly all the time. They are cool.
jimisback 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@osamasho1 Look at the big dig.
FactChecking101 2 months ago
um, we own the sky? (ahem PAK-FA T-50) but yea, f22 sucks.
StrigonLead 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
@StrigonLead pretty sure he means by air force and coverage. PAK-FA is just an upgraded F22 shell. Lockheed can make a killer plane but that doesn't make good business sense so like a drug dealer they making money on the comeback a fault here and there minor upgrades and recycled parts you get what I mean $
eujeeves 2 months ago
@osamasho1 What's wrong? Too stoned or lazy to earn a living?
FactChecking101 2 months ago
@osamasho1 Where did you get the idea that income is a right? Don't like what you earn? Go earn more.
FactChecking101 2 months ago
66 Billion on what is already the most advanced military. Now of course this does not cover maintenance and operation costs.
Not bad for a country that's 15 trillion dollars in debt.
That's 133 939$ for every tax paying US citizen.
Budget deficit of 1.303 trillion dollars per year.
Unemployment is at 8.6% which is at a 2 year low.
How do they keep justifying this spending, why do the people accept it?
A man in debt is not a free man, a country in debt is not a free country.
Kariakas 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
1:29-1:48 all i saw was an invisible airplane?
dontreadmypost 2 months ago in playlist Broken Government
The typical thing for Cenk is he seems upset by the 66 billion but doesn't place the blame for the cost where it belongs, union labor. Want to build a 20 million dollar project for 66 billion? Use union labor. Oh, and don't even mention that the UNIONS LOBBIED FOR THE RAPTOR! You are such a fake Cenk. You sicken honest people.
FactChecking101 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
Not the "bridge to nowhere" lie again. The bridge wasn't to provide transportation for the residents, it was to allow for tourism. The bridge may have been a so so idea that should have been funded by Alaska, but it was nowhere near the Big Dig by Ted Kennedy projected to cost 2.8 billion but actually cost 22 billion and 4 lives. Wonder why Cenk didn't cite that as an example of pork spending? Oh yeah, he's a fake liberal mouth piece (of shit).
FactChecking101 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
Gobebels had nothing on Cenk .
imN0Ttheone 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
the bridge to nowhere would have cost 400 million, and it was to 50 dudes
ideasrule2 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
yeah tyt each one of those planes costs about 22 million dollars a pop, some of the money they are asking for seems a bit excessive; I know how much they cost because I inquired at a boeing company near where I live. they are using that money to buy quite 3,031 of those planes and then some based on what they are asking for.
jamz3243 3 months ago
lockheed had a great deal with the corrupt minister of defense in germany in the 60's. they sold 900 crappy "starfighter" jets that where in service until 1991.
292 of them crashed, 116 pilots died.
funny enough the airport in munich is named after the guy who made that deal, franz josef strauß ..
brotmann86 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
There are over 100 of these planes delivered. That is one heck of an expensive plane, maybe they should sell one or two of them to pay for our Social Security that we already paid for and they spent, then they could sell one or two more to pay for the old folks medicare. While they are at it, stop dropping bombs on everybody and their brother, bring the troops home and we could really cut that deficit and still defend ourselves. Oh, cannot do that, the arms producers might go broke, unbelievable
4390100 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government 6
Cancel the program yesterday
bcourter82 3 months ago
As an F-22 "Fan" I should be flaming you but I am not gonna do that. Why? Because you are absolutely right! The SYSTEM is BROKEN. Better said, The SYSTEM has been CORRUPTED BY DESIGN. The F-22 is an amazing jet and dominates the skies but it's way too damn expensive. Why? Because they WANT to "waste" your money to make themselves richer. They want more and more and more. This entire programe (F-22) could have been done for less than 1/5th of the cost if the system was not corrupt. What a shame!
sadekgheidan 3 months ago 2
@sadekgheidan America controls the sky without the F-22.
zaurakdigis 3 months ago
@zaurakdigis With what?!
sadekgheidan 3 months ago
I was enlisted as a logistics specialist in the army. In garrison, contractors were hired to do the exact same work that we were trained to do. Since they don't need that many people to run the warehouse/motor pool, we the soldiers were sent out on meaningless tasks like pulling weeds by the side of a railroad track. Waste doesn't just stem from faulty equipment, it also comes from contractors living off of government largesse.
GMATveteran 3 months ago 3
Aside from lobbying of the military-industrial complex, there's compelling argument to why the U.S (and some other countries for that matter) spends so much in defense: Offensive Realism, an international relations theory laid out in the great book The Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John Mearsheimer. I assume it's rather heavy read if you're not knowledgeable in international politics (and theory), but it delivers, whether you accept realpolitik or not (I'm a structural realist myself).
Skippa1986 3 months ago
Or,
how about pissing away $535 million in taxpayer money on one of Obama bright ideas, Solyndra?
Was dead from the git go, but hey, it involved Democrats, so what the fuck.
bobbytiger 3 months ago
@bobbytiger your right its Obamas fault...Corruption shitty government and Fucked up policy just started with the nigger got in..every white man that was in there before was 100 percent clean as a whistle...Get the fuck outta here man...get with reality..Obama and every other president are just pawns in a Game. You sound Racist when you go there ..cuz this president has tried to do the most for the people than the last one ever did..even though its Painfully clear hes not in charge.
DJRAKKK 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DJRAKKK
I stopped reading after your first sentence.
Said it all for me.
bobbytiger 3 months ago
Thus resulting in the single largest push back of the PAK-FA development timeline, well after we already had the F-22 ready. Thusly, the 16 years too early that you cite so frequently is likely the result of timeline uncertainty that surrounded the Su-47 and the Mikoyan Project 1.44
Zeknif1 3 months ago
Then in 1997, the Su-47 Berkut made its maiden flight, and it wasn't immediately apparent how close to being a production model it was or if it was merely going to be a testbed for new technology. The uncertainty that resulted from this and other developments likely led to the pressing forward with the F-22's production model finishing touches. It is only after the PAK FA winner announcement in 2002 that we learned with clear certainty that Sukhoi was going to redo the design from scratch
Zeknif1 3 months ago
However, entering 1995, information that Sukhoi is still developing the PAK-FA project in spite of having to fund it themselves in the absence of government funding made it imperitive that we would need to complete the ATF program and get the F-22 ready for production, and a lot of the specs were becoming known, most notably that it was going to be a stealth fighter design. Mikoyan Project 1.44 was also becoming more known about.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
Your country is falling a part... Very corrupt.
remycoteMM 3 months ago in playlist Broken Government
The YF-22 is announced as the winner for the ATF program in 1991, but it took Lockheed 5-6 years to make preparations for the production model F-22. It seems it could have been done much faster, and indeed, it seems the PAK-FA could have been developed and prepared for production much faster as well... but something occured during 1991 as well. The Soviet Union collapsed. This likely removed the urgency in preparing the F-22 as fast as possible and crippled development on PAK-FA prototypes
Zeknif1 3 months ago
These planes ARE the greatest planes the world has ever seen. When they work. A great plane is expensive, but 24 million is not much in terms of federal spending (and 1/3rd of 1 percent of the entire F22 program). If that's all it takes to get them in the air when they've been grounded SINCE MAY, its worth it. Did we need it in the first place? Perhaps not. But we've got it now. And it will cost comparative chump-change to fix. Just do it.
(this is old news btw.)
ypsidan04 3 months ago
@ypsidan04 agreed, think he's just pissed Lockheed won't pay for that shit themselves lol
rsty614 3 months ago
@gekapat This is EXACTLY how the 1% steal from us 99% - they line up at the public tax trough and suck up all they can, then return for seconds and thirds. THEN the Republicans tell us that we need no government. If so then how will their 1% pals suck up US tax money in the future? Oh yeah, they'll give tax breaks to the too-rich first THEN let's get rid of government so the poor, elderly, retired, etc. won't be able to get ANY tax money the 1% steals from us! Disgusting 1% and Republicans!
americanfellow 3 months ago
@chrisbrunok Your sister is a fucking retard.
MrAleksandarDzever 3 months ago
my sister saw this video and was like "OMG YOUR STUPID WE NEED THIS CUZ WE GOT ATTACKED ON 9/11". so i responded, yeah cuz they used high tech weaponry -__________-
chrisbrunok 3 months ago
16 people would like to pay 24 million dollars to get something fixed they recieved broken.
GodEnderX 3 months ago
But look at the angles on that machine. Those are some sexy angles. Worth the $65 billion price tag alone.
554466551 3 months ago
The beauty being of course, that the only people who can change it, are the people being bought.
niemanickurwa 3 months ago
@TrueTriad4Life 1. Exports depend on a thrivng global economy. Europe is Chinas biggest customer, and at the moment Europe isn't buying.
2. True, but then China has had a non-interventionist mindset for everything, not just ears.
3. Chinas growth is impressive sure, but it still only counts for about 10% of global GDP. US+Europe is more like 50%.
4. Would you bet the house agiant it? I guess you'd might as well.
9thgate 3 months ago
I used to work on Apache Helicopters in the Army... They would send us broken parts all the time, charge us for it, then charge us again when they sent us a new part... Which sometimes was broken and the process repeated... Eisenhower is rolling in his grave
gekapat 3 months ago 70
@gekapat don't forget Sergeant Curtis Culin. He was given tanks with a terrible defect, the inability to plow through hedgerows. He simply salvaged German Scrap to fix the problem.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@gekapat
it is utterly discusting isnt it, commercialism,
MrDarkminecraft 2 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
Broken?
I'm from Norway and we just bought 50 of these new F22s... guess we won't get those for another few years...
Not that we should have bought them in the first place....
TheSaltyAdmiral 3 months ago
@TheSaltyAdmiral are you sure you are not confusing the f-22 with the f-35 aka joint strike fighter, last I heard the f22 was barred from export sales.
SprattyD 3 months ago
@SprattyD
Ah you are right, it is the JSF! My bad:)
TheSaltyAdmiral 3 months ago
Did we save our receipt??
progresIVOMind 3 months ago
Tow that line there Cenk.
5 Bucks say's he'll approve of the f-35II Lightning. Another 5 if you can guess why.
Badtreewater 3 months ago
Ex-fucking-actly Cenk.
Laughingblades 3 months ago 2
of those 66,7 billion. can i have 0,7 billion of that?
The8347135 3 months ago
4000 hungry childeren leave us per hour from starvation while billions are spend on bombs, creating deathshowers!
BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM
XDude666999 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Democracy! Ron Paul for president!
TheAstonMartian 3 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
you know, we have to keep making progress in war machines. we have to remain the top of the world. China is now making a stealth fighter. and the only plane that its inferior to is the f22. Reagan beat the USSR through defense spending. Their communist government couldnt produce weapons like the US because they didnt have a free marketb competitive economy. So yeah, i support keeping the US safe from threats. better than wasting tax dollars on illegal aliens that dont work anyway.
fatty1443 3 months ago
@fatty1443 yup you're an idiot :D
MrGarcia2703 3 months ago 14
@fatty1443 You do realise the "Cold War" wasn't a literal war, right?
TheKrisVideos 3 months ago
@fatty1443 I've worked at various restaurants where there have been illegals or ppl who have come here because of special programs for a temporary time, and i gotta tell you, they are some of the hardest working ppl I've been around. why do Mexicans get such a bad rap? the answer is because it's easier to blame them for our problems than the government. That's why racism is closely linked to ignorance, you either won't or cant know any better.
bxeggy 3 months ago
... And in waging a conventional large scale war, even dramatic advantages in quantity/quality of tanks and infantry equipment cannot be brought to bear in the absence of air superiority unless terrain allows for it.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
Before you start running away with the costs for unit for the F-15 vs F-22, do remember that simulated battles and wargames determing that the F-22 hundreds:0 Win:Loss ratio against F-15s and F-16s.
And having Stealth Fighter capabilities over a rival nation is no small advantage. The Su-30's short lived advantage over the F-15 did not produce grotesque win:loss ratios in simulations either...
Zeknif1 3 months ago
Ack, didn't write down my full thought, I meant to say we'll want to stay 11+ years ahead of Russia and China in fighter design specifically since Air Superiority is the single biggest determining factor in a large scale war should one ever break out.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
ok, i fail at typing today, forgive the hundreds of spelling mistakes i have made >.<
angel102ify 3 months ago
"Domination!" "Domination!"
Cenk likes to use big words, but he doesnt know anything about millitary.
but ofcourse he's a liberal. he hates the millitary and americas power.
Szekler11 3 months ago
@Szekler11 Wow. Excellent refutation of Cenk's argument. I love how you summed up the crucial points and shot them down one by one using nothing but facts and shrewd logical reasoning. Most people would have resorted to ad hominem and straw man arguments, but not you. Cenk presented a well reasoned critique of the military-industrial-complex and you responded with an equally well reasoned counter-argument. Good show sir, good show.
The above was sarcastic if you couldn't tell.
Fangtorn 3 months ago
cenk is definitely not a military man, just because we no no use for fighters now in today wargames don't mean there won't be in the far future, and by the way the Russians now have an aircraft that is very close to replicating our F-22 JSF, so we can sit still for a second and others will try to shoot ahead in weaponizing
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 The PAK-FA Fighter is not a replica of the F-22. There are vast differences between the two, and that's because they have different priorities. The F-22 is designed to maximize stealth while maintaining the speed and maneuverability that is characteristic of a fighter while the PAK-FA prioritizes Super-Maneuverability over invisibility, but maintain enough stealth to still maintain first strike abilities.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 i never said it was :)
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 In the far future the F22 will be out-dated. Improving technology is one thing, but the F22 is nuts. And what exactly do the Russians have that's 'close to replicating' the F22? The Su-35 is an 80s airframe, and only costs max $65m, while each F22 costs $150m. They're not even in the same league.
Besides nobody with the economy to fight America would bother - economic, political and cyber warfare are more convenient and less likely to cause nuclear war.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka Oh and if you're talking about the PAK FA, not only is it not out yet (so performance isn't proven) while the F22 is already wrapping up production (another indication that the F22 is what set off the fifth generation fighter race), but it's 1/3rd the cost of the F22 and almost certainly will not be able to stand toe to toe with the F22.
shraka 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 Why are we in this constant arms race with Russia and China? The cold war is over, we won, we're not under siege by the reds. There isn't going to be a conventional war with Russia. We don't need to spend hundreds of billions building fancier warplanes and larger tanks. It's ridiculous.
Fangtorn 3 months ago
@Fangtorn tell that to our generals and the GOP
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@Fangtorn but looking at it in a dfense perspective, we as a god defensive force we have to lok for weaknesses in our defenses compared to the rest of the world's weapon systems aka F-22 JSF, even though drones are replacing the F-22s we should still keep some F-22s in the event of a cyber attack that gains control of the drone network links and have to quickly destroy in-flight drones in the world which is what the F-22s were built to counter (multi-role fighter/bomber)
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@Fangtorn what's to say our new enemy won't try to disable our drones once we go 100% drone warfare to commence an air preemptive attack on US soil after we piss the Russians off one too many times
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 The international political and economic consequences?
Fangtorn 3 months ago
@Fangtorn there are none as for economic, it keeps US building and maintenance jobs in defense contracting, in the real world of defense you either engineer new capabilities or your enemies finds a way to out develop you, this has been going on since the 1st human war began, you start out with a stick, so the other man puts an arrowhead on a stick to make him a more effective killer than the guy with just a stick
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@Fangtorn this is warfare not a tea party playing house
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 What are you talking about? I'm not saying it would be bad PR if Russia launched a pre-emptive strike on the US, I'm saying it would start World War III. No nation with the economy or military might to strike America is going to. The costs monumentally outweigh the benefits. Russia isn't going to start a war that makes WWI and WWII look like a bar fight because the US "pissed them off one too many times."
Fangtorn 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Enemy of Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal,& USA - Jew
1.Goldman Sachs CEO, Lyold Blankfein -Jew
2.IMF Deputy CEO, John Lisky - Jew
3.Ex IMF CEO, Dominic Strauss- Jew
4.World Bank CEO, Robert Zoellick- Jew
5.Ex World Bank CEO, James Woolfesen-Jew
6.Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke-Jew
7.Ex Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan -Jew
8.Obama Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner-Jew
9.George Bush Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson -Jew
Stevie68000 3 months ago
Comment removed
ZombiedustXXX 4 months ago
cont'd Especially in the face of nations ruled by a dramatically different set of values and beliefs from our own. We need the large conventional militaries because we are unwilling to use our own WMDs in all but the worst case scenarios.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
...cont'd: But in the first engagement where the F6F Hellcats were used in quantity, the Battle of the Phillipine Sea... well, it's nickname says all you need to know... "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". As a result of the total loss of Air Superiority on the battlefield, the Japanese would also lose 3 Aircraft Carriers.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
@Zeknif1 While the Hellcat's superior design was a major factor, other factors such as RADAR, new more effective anti-air shells, and the then-new command and control command philosophy which allowed them to focus anti-air power more effectively then ever before, and the lack of experienced pilots among the Japanese forces who were facing down a more powerful force then ever before were all contributing factors rather then just the superior design of a single type of warplane.
ChakatBlackstar 4 months ago
@ChakatBlackstar Should I pount out that most of that post actually enhances my argument since in the event that we had not developed the F-22 or F-35, it would be a case of us having only non-stealth Air Superiority Fighters vs Stealth Fighters... i.e. the Battle of the Phillipine Sea was a case of one side having eyes against the other being blind, much like what our next war would have been had we not invested in Stealth Fighters.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
@Zeknif1 huh...okay, fair enough.
Though what is this "next war" that people keep claiming we'll need these stealth planes for? As far as I can tell we're no longer enemies with anyone who's operating anything comparable to even our F-15s.
ChakatBlackstar 4 months ago
@ChakatBlackstar It is true that we cannot gurantee that a war will occur, at the same time we cannot gurantee that a war will not occur. I do Concede that it is very unlikely that China or Russia would become militarily aggressive towards U.S. Interests even in the event we cede significant advantages with our Militaries, there are some nations that are antagonistic towards the U.S. that are looking to update their Air Force. The Iranian Air Force has been seen operating Su-30MKs for example.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
@Zeknif1 The Su-35 isn't even considered a fifth generation fighter by it's manufacturer. I understand the need to improve the technology, but the F22 is three times the estimated unit cost of the PAK FA! Not only that, it's wrapping up production while the PAK FA isn't even out yet. There's being early, then there's being silly.
Iran is only a threat because the US wants it to be a threat. I'm constantly shocked at how antagonistic the US is towards Iran.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka I never said the Su-35 is a Fifth Generation fighter... I don't even remember even mentioning the Su-35. It along with other Flanker Variants is the Russian equivalent to the F-15 and its variants as Gen 4.5+ aircraft. The option for additional F-22s if needed will remain open for future production, but our mainstay stealth fighter is going to be the F-35 with well over 2,000 units planned for production...
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 no the F35 is a air to ground attack aircraft that will replace the harrier that is very old and completely outdated
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 You need to catch up on your reading. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has three variants in development. A standard production type, a Carrier Based version, and the VTOL/STOL variant (The one you are talking about), the development of the latter being the one that gets the majority of the attention.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 Has anyone actually bought the STOVL (it's not VTOL) F35 yet? As far as I can tell, nobody wants it.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka 300+ units of the STOVL variant are on order for the U.S. Marines and I believe the Italians want a dozen or so themselves.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 Actually it's a multi-role fighter much like the F/A-18 (really it should be an F/A-35). It's basically a replacement for the F16 & F/A-18, with the F22 being the F15s replacement. I imagine they'll still use the F/A-18 for carrier duty when stealth isn't as necessary though due to the cheaper cost (about half the price).
shraka 3 months ago
lol in my opinion i think they should remove pilots from the F-22s and make it a drone, it's capabilities go far beyond human capability can endure, imagine the increased performance increase
DiamondChrome42 3 months ago
@DiamondChrome42 There is a Stealth Fighter/Bomber design in the works by Boeing that's supposed to have an Unmanned Variant. Personally, while I'm for developing Drone Fighters, I am against all Fighters in a hotzone or in the inventory being drones for strategic and tactical reasons. There is also going to be a need for perfecting an "Optical Depth Perception" System for opponents against whom radar is not fully reliable before "Drone Fighters" can really be practical.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 My point was the F22 is way beyond what was needed, and way too expensive - no hostile nations that are modernizing their air forces could stand against updated F-15s and F/A-18s let alone the F22. The PAK FA and J-20 wont be operational for another 5-8 years, and then you have to wait for Russia / China to sell them to someone the US might fight, which is likely to be another 5-10 years after that before the F22 really makes sense. So the F22 was at least 16 years early.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka and in 1936 the spitfire went way beyond anything that was needed at the time, turns out it was money well spent, wouldnt you say?
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify Not at all, the BF-109 was superior in many respects (for instant, it had mechanical fuel injection) and had its first flight a year earlier than the Spitfire. The Spitfire was actually developed in an environment much more like what I'm suggesting - at the same time as, or rather with a slight lag behind the competition. Besides the Hawker Hurricane actually did a LOT of the heavy lifting of the Battle of Briton - and really is the unsung hero of that battle.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka The typical target for the Hawker Hurricane was the Bombers during the Battle of Britain while the Spitfire pilots typically went for the German Fighters. Nonetheless it did perform admirably and does deserve its place in the formation with the Spitfire and Landcaster in the Battle of Britain Memorial Flights.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 That was the tactic, but in practice the 109s would usually target the Hurricanes. Because the 109 could out maneuver both the hurricane and the spitfire anyway, the spitfire would just leave the hurricanes to tie up the 109s while the spitfires hit the bombers. The Hurricanes had several advantages too: They were cheaper to repair, less susceptible to damage, and easier to land.
My point remains, the 109 / spitfire were not vastly superior to anything else in the sky.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka I wasn't arguing against that, lol. That other guy was trying to relate the Spitfire vs 109 to the present F-22 vs PAK-FA/J-20. The Spitfire and the 109 were leapfrogging each other's performance the whole duration of the war really.
Now I can't find graphs that break down the fighter kills of the Spitfire and Hurricane during the Battle of Britain.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 Oh sorry. I didn't notice I was talking to two different people! :D I should read who I'm talking to a little more carefully. And yeah, the 109 and Spitfire is completely different to the F-22 and PAK FA 'race' (or rather the PAK FA trying to catch up). The tech difference between the Spitfire and 109 could be measured in weeks, not decades.
I'd be interested to see the different kill rates for Hurricanes and Spitfires. PM me a link if you find it.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka i completely agree, the hurricane is a very undervalued plane during world war 2 and was the workhorse for the RAF, the spitfire was the race horse tho as you admit.
And the BF109 was a very good fighter, but it didnt have the legs to fight very long over britain so it wasnt perfect either. This is why technology needs to keep pushing the boundaries
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify Yes, but neither did the Spitfire. And the 109 certainly wasn't perfect, no. The spitfire had aerodynamic advantages too. But my point about the Hurricane is it was really low tech compared to the Spitfire, but was still capable of fielding a strong defense against 109s in great enough numbers. Numbers it could achieve due to it's cheaper cost. But this is really getting away from the main point of this discussion I think, sorry about that. :D
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka yes they were a lot cheaper to produce, but the single biggest shortage in the battle of britain wasnt planes, it was pilots.
but you cannot predict that Russia will always be 11 years behind the US, the whole point of the F-22 i it provides capabilities for decades to come, as i said earlier the F-15 has been in service since 1976 and still is an incredible aircraft that hasnt had a single aircraft shot down by any enemy, which is pretty inheard off, but it cant last forevor can it?
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify No it can't, but that's why I think the F22 was 5-10 years early, not not needed at all. I really think the PAK FA is defined by the F22. If it hadn't been developed you wouldn't see the PAK FA in it's current form. If the F35 had been produced first, the Russians would be trying to keep pace with that, not the F22. By being later you allow China and Russia to develop sooner, but is being 5 years ahead that much worse than being 10 years ahead if it saves you a bucket load of cash?
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka well that has the been the first question for every military for 2 thousand years or more, but if you ask the men and women who use it, would they rather have a spitfire or a lightning, a sherman or an abrams, the lexington from WW2 or the nimitz?
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify Ask them if they'd rather have an F22, or a buddy up there with two F15s? How about an F22, or an F15 and a better education system in the country? It's not like this is new - there's been a strong argument that the F22 was too expensive and too soon since the 90s.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka And to continue along this theme, one thing above all proved decisive the battle of britain, and it never flew at all. RADAR, the british technology advantage proved decisive over the germans, even when they were vastly superior in numbers and training.
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify Not just radar, but the way fighter command was set up, and the spotters were INCREDIBLY important. And German fighter tactics were actually quite weak. But anyway US only has to remain technologically superior to it's rivals. China and Russia supply the US's rivals, but only with old tech. Even if the US keeps just behind Russia and China, they'll still be vastly superior to the people the US is actually fighting. They do not need to be 11 years ahead of Russia.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka To provide insurance and continued deterrence against conventional military aggression by Russia and China, yes, we're gonna want to stay 11+ years ahead of Russia and China in the event that either decides they have the capabilities to reliably counter our big missiles... especially considering that China has demonstrated that they have the ability to destroy satellites in orbit.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 Russia doesn't have the economic power to wage a war with the US. China relies on the US for economic stability. I think it's paranoid in the extreme to think either of these countries would attack the US even if it was 'slightly behind' or only just ahead of the Russian and Chinese technology. In the 1990s the F15 was actually slightly behind the Su-30s capability wise, Russia had WAY more tanks and superior infantry numbers and weapons. I don't remember the US being invaded?
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka Russia isnt as poor as you think nowadays,in the 1990s they struggled to feed themselves, but thats changed very quickly under Putin, combined oil and natural gas they are the worlds single biggest supplier of fuel, not to mention the mineral wealth in the far east,
As for china, you will find the chinese control the american economy a lot more than the other way round, china is Americas single biggest holder of debt, china can crash the US economy anytime it wants.
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify Actually, I would say it's more appropriate to describe the PAK-FA not so much as a plane designed to "Catch Up" with the F-22 as I would say it's a Russian Fighter designed to "Fill the same role as the F-22 in a different way". And I'm not convinced that the PAK-FA was going to be built to "Catch up" with the F-35 if it came out first simply because of the company in question. Sukhoi would have stayed with a stealth fighter design with maneuverability as the priority...
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 I doubt it would be so competitive with the F22 if the F22 was only finishing development now. Either that or it would just be even later to target the F22. Perhaps the Russian government wouldn't have selected Sukhoi to design it if they hadn't had the F22 to target?
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka I've actually had the opportunity to speak with one of the chase pilots that was involved in the early stages of the PAK-FA development. Apparently it was no contest. Apparently some of the problems discovered during the second flight of the MiG 1.44 project were quite extensive. The Su-47 simply had all the advantages apparently.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 My point was they may have gone with a multirole, rather than an air superiority fighter.
shraka 3 months ago
@angel102ify Only if it doesn't want it's debts paid. China is actually pissed at this quantitative easing because it reduces the value of the debt they own. China's whole economy turns on supply of goods to America. America doesn't NEED those goods, China NEEDS the US to buy them though. Russia's GDP: 1,479,825. US GDP: 14,526,550. Yeah... Russia could totally economically survive a war with the US. *rolls eyes* They're only a bit richer than Australia for crying out loud.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka so tell me, what does Russia have that the world needs most?
oil and natural gas, not only do they supply most of china they also supply most of europe now, hell even britain buys gas from russia. The world is changing, and they are catching up, they're not there yet, but give it a few years...
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify And again, that's not now. The F22 was 5-10 years early.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka im sorry but thats a rediculous arguement, either you want the fighter or you dont, you CANNOT predict every single outcome in the future, in 1997 you couldnt predict what would happen in sept 11th or afghanistan or iraq, or libya, iran and so on and so on. With every major weapon system you take chance it will be needed in x amount of years, turns out you never needed the minutement misiles, does that make them a waste of money? surely the weapon you never have to use is the best one.
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify
Even though I love this plane, its basically useless because the enemies you're facing are so far behind right now that F-22s aren't necessary
If the goal of military might is to save and protect American lives, if you spent that amount of cash on healthcare you'd save infinitely more American lives than you ever would with these jets. Same can be said for much of the spending on defense.
JDubs878 3 months ago
cont'd because large sized super-maneuverable fighters are what Sukhoi's most experienced with. Toss in the fact that they have experimented with Stealth designs and materials in the past and that convinces me it was going to be a stealth design from the get go. Also, I do believe it is worth noting that PAK-FA was first announced back in the 1980s and because the threat of it was always hanging over the heads of the U.S., likely catalyzed the development of the F-22.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 Rubbish. Sukhoi was only chosen to lead the design in 2002. Meanwhile the US had the F117 in service 1983. As for air superiority, the YF-23 was first flown in 1990! Considering the PAK-FAs maiden flight was just last year I think it's fairly obvious who was responding to who. Even if Russia was toying with Stealth in the 80s, the US had them beaten to it easily.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka I said "Catalyzed", you do understand the definition of "catalyst"? And also, the maiden flight for the tech demonstrator that sukhoi used to compete for the contract (Su-47) was back in 1997.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 I know what a catalyst is. Do you? '97 is still 7 years after the F23's maiden flight - and well after the early stealth fighters. Proof is in the pudding anyway - the PAK FA is estimated to be a third of the price of the F22.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka I said "Catalyzed the development of the F-22". Let me put out the timeline. The Advanced Tactical Fighter program was first drawn up in 1981 in response to Flanker and MiGs becoming more widespread, and the Soviet response to ATF was announced later in the decade. Both the YF-22 and the YF-23 are test flown in the 1990s. Sukhoi puts out the Su-47 demonstrator in 1997 and the Mikoyan Project 1.44 flies twice in 2000 and never flies again. The Su-47 is still 7 years late...
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@shraka I'll throw out a worst case scenario then. The PAK FA and J-20 come into service, but the U.S. has no F-22 or F-35 or has only started development on them. Word gets out that during a test simulation, the PAK FA or J-20 are capable achieved 200/0 Kill ratios in war games involving the best pilots available to test with. Extremists in China push for the rapid deployment of the fighters and pushes out against the west on all fronts and our F-15s and F-16s are swatted like flies.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 That straw man was a little paranoid. For starters, China won't give their top tech to anyone who will fight the US. And I didn't say the US shouldn't develop a fifth gen fighter - or even not be first at it. Just that it did it mega early. An interim test bed would have been better, something more like a cheaper F35 (no bloody STOVL version). Then your competition uses that as their target, and while they do that you develop your F22 for 2010 as they release their F35 beater.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka That's why I called it a "Worst Case Scenario". There is a saying, "Prepare for the Worst, hope for the best."
The F-22 coming out "Super Early" is one such case of this in practice. I personally have no trouble with our Air Power always being .5 Gen ahead of the rest of the world.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 It's incredibly expensive to be so early, and often a waste of time. I hear the F35s radar can already jam the F22s, and Russia has ground radar that can see through the F22 stealth - and had it since before the F22s first flight.
As I said I think it would have been far cheaper to make the F35 (or something a little cheaper) first, then used what you learn from that on an F22. The US could still be ahead of the curve, having spent significantly less.
shraka 3 months ago
...cont'd And on Iran, if you ask any Cavalry Scout that's served in Iraq where the IED's that are blowing up our tanks are coming from, you'll understand that our government has been very lenient in their dealings with Iran.
Zeknif1 3 months ago
@Zeknif1 Saudi Arabia? Oh wait, that's Afghanistan.
shraka 3 months ago
Cont'd Another example is Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez (Personally, I think he's a paranoid conspiracy theorist) being something of a wild card. He's definitely antagonistic towards the U.S. and definitely looking to update the country's Air Fleet in the near future and has already taken steps towards doing so. He's also shown a willingness to sell military assets to other nations and in one such occurrence over the F-16s, and named Iran specifically.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
The reason why paying for the research, development and production of a new generation of Air Superiority Fighters while we already have a large fleet of Air Superiority Fighters that can outperform any other fighters currently in production is because of the speed at which air superiority can be lost as a result of a new fighter appearing on the side of the enemy. This was seen most prominently in the case of the A6M Zero that commanded the skies in the early parts of WWII...
Zeknif1 4 months ago
@Zeknif1 That's true of course. The question though is whether or not we'll ever see a war like WW2 again, and whether a huge military is really necessary for defense during this era of WMD availability.
wtfdoihavetodohere 4 months ago
@wtfdoihavetodohere Could you tell me of the willingness of Western Nations to actually use Nuclear Weapons in the face of aggression? As far as I can tell, Nuclear Weapons have only been used twice aggressively and within 3 days of each other. Our access to Nuclear Weapons did nothing to hold China back from aiding North Korea, or from North Korea from invading the South. Neither did we respond to either event by using our nuclear arsenal. The Western Mindset makes nuclear weapons necessary
Zeknif1 4 months ago
I wouldn't be surprised if they kept calling this oxygen problem "pilot error" before they decided to fix it with taxpayer money.
xyzoneon 4 months ago
I've said it before and I've said it again. The air force is the worst of the worst when it comes to spending. There's a lot of marines on the ground that couldn't get proper body armor so these clowns could spend 66 billion on fighters they didn't need to begin with. "missile defense" and "air superiority" are the biggest spending lies since the term "job creators" keep in mind, I'm a COMBAT VETERAN. Not some punk bitch chair force pog....
LeaveItToBeaner 4 months ago
@LeaveItToBeaner while i respect your views and your past service tell me, when one of your friends gets shot, who do you call to casevac him out?
In your combat experience have you ever had enemy helicopters and planes attacking you in the field?
No because your own air force/marines/army air corps has already cleared the skies.
Saying air superiority is a lie or unnecessary is quite puzzling from someone who says they are a combat vet.
angel102ify 4 months ago
@angel102ify Should have told him to ask a German Vet from WWII if Air Superiority is a lie.
Zeknif1 4 months ago
@angel102ify Air superiority is one thing, but the latest round of fifth generation fighters was triggered by the F22. The F22 wasn't in response to a threat, it was the threat. The F22 was first flown in '97, while the first of it's competitors only just completed it's first flight in 2010, and will cost 1/3rd (est.) of the F22. And against the kinds of enemies the US is going to be fighting, Air Superiority could still be taken care of by modernized F15s easily.
shraka 3 months ago
@shraka for how long? the f15 has already been in service since 1976, the airframes will only last so long, by which time it costs more to repair and maintain than to replace with new platforms.
And saying the f 15 is "just fine" is like saying that all infantry soldiers should use the M1 garand as a weapon instead of newer and better weapons.
Weapons dont last forevor, and it takes time to build and design modern weapons systems, whether its a destroyer, a fighter, a tank or a body armour.
angel102ify 3 months ago
@angel102ify yeah, like we need air superiority fighters against insurgents... insurgents we shouldn't even be fighting.
m4's-m16's have been in commission since the 70's and 80's as well.
Andy180084 3 months ago