TOPICS
TOPICS
Pentagon seeks to buy more F-22 fighter jets
The Pentagon plans to buy additional F-22 Raptor fighter jets from Lockheed Martin in fiscal 2009, a move that would not only augment the Air Force's fighter fleet but also would delay production-line closures expected to begin next year.
In a Monday letter to lawmakers, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England said the Pentagon will request money for more F-22s in the military's fiscal 2009 war spending request to replace other aircraft lost in "war-related" operations. The letter did not specify an exact number of aircraft, but a Pentagon official said today that the military would request money for four more F-22s.
England cautioned that the additional money for the program does not signal a significant revision of the Pentagon's plans to buy only 183 Raptors -- nearly 200 fewer than the 381 the Air Force would like to buy. The Defense Department's current plans for the F-22 program, England wrote, are sufficient to deal with the military's strategic needs.
"The department has examined the mix of tactical aviation forces and capabilities needed to execute the national military strategy," England wrote. "The evaluation shows that investing in [fifth] generation fighters for all three services by buying the more modern F-35 [Joint Strike Fighter] provides more effective capability to the joint force commander than concentrating investments in a single service by buying more F-22s."
Under the department's longstanding plans for the F-22, the last fighter would be assembled at Lockheed Martin's plant in Marietta, Ga., in 2011. But many second- and third-tier subcontractors, which supply parts years before the final assembly of the planes, would begin to shut down their production lines next year. Any additional aircraft would delay -- albeit briefly -- the production-line closures.
With more than 1,000 suppliers in 44 states, the F-22 has strong support on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers already have begun expressing concerns about ending production of the fighter jet. Twenty-eight senators sent a letter to Defense Secretary Gates last month urging the Pentagon to buy more of the fighter jets.
COMMENTS
- What many people don't understand is that terrorists are only the most immediate threat which we face. Many more are likely to materialize within the coming decades. I was surprised to hear secretary Gates saying that the F-22 program is an example of misplaced funds as they have never been used in Iraq or Afghanistan. I wonder if he (the man in charge of the structure of the US military) even understands the nature of current and future threats to America. The only reason that no F-22 has yet been used in the war on terror is that we have already managed to establish air superiority there so lighter, less expensive aircraft can be used in strike missions. However I believe it should be obvious that when the US becomes involved in other conflicts around the world in the coming decades we will need to establish air superiority once again, it will not be a given and it never was. The F-22 is the only aircraft for the future which will be able to do this for the future. The F-15, while a great aircraft, is older and will be retired soon. We need somthing to replace it in the air superiority roll. Also, many other countries have fighters which are more capable than the F-35. The F-22 is also a multi-roll fighter which will have the capablility to attack ground targets. It is easily the most capable fighter ever built and is a critical asset to our military. Keven Guimaraes Posted October 25, 2008 2:02 PM
- Guys and Gals, Cheaper doesn't mean better and the other factor to consider is sustainability. The F-35 is a single engine fighter... while your car is a single engine auto... the difference is when the engine in an aircraft conks out you can't just pull off to the shoulder and call AAA. You eject or crash either way you lose a jet. The F-16 is proof of that... during my time at Luke AFB we lost 13 aircraft over 2 years...8 of them for engine failure. That's not saying the Viper is a bad jet... it's a very good one actually. But a bird up the intake.. a fuel pump fails, etc and you just lost a 40mil aircraft. F-15 crashes have been almost nil for engine failure.. so there's a cost factor also..not to mention that the F-22 has a longer combat radius and has better air to air capability. Russia, China and India all have aircraft either in design or in the air that directly challenge if not outperform the F-15 in air to air arenas... and to the brainiac that says we should wait till we phase out the 15's and 16's... it takes YEARS and lots of MONEY to bring aircraft online...there has to be a gradual shift...by the way..the time for our F-16 fleet and F-15 fleet to retire...is upon us now...you can't just replace them all in one year or even 10.. and islamic terrorists are not our only threat in this world... Rob Posted February 21, 2008 1:52 PM
- Don Jones, you said (regarding F-22s): "They are irrelevant to the threats we face and will face for another 20 years." That's a pretty bold and very arguable statement. In 1988 could you have predicted the state of the world and its threats in 2008? Are you willing to risk your life on your prediction? Because that's what you're asking our sons and daughers to do in 15-20 years if we cancel our top air superiority fighter and you turn out to be wrong. K Posted February 21, 2008 10:53 AM
