Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
associated press file
A newspaper ad touting the virtues of the F-22 Raptor is displayed among stories about the suffering economy. The fighter jet has parts produced in 44 states.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009 | 2 a.m.
F-22 Raptor
Beyond the Sun
Sun Archives
- For the military in Nevada, not much stimulus (3-25-2009)
- Combat tactics refined at Nellis (3-1-2009)
- Nellis in race for best Air Force base (2-10-2009)
In promising to reduce the deficit eventually, President Barack Obama recently told Congress he would “reform our defense budget so that we’re not paying for Cold War-era weapons systems we don’t use.”
That was a poke at the Air Force’s F-22 Raptor.
“The F-22 is the poster child for the dilemma of Defense Department spending,” said Gordon Adams, a professor at American University who served under President Bill Clinton as chief White House official for national security budgets.
The stealth fighter jet was conceived to fight the Soviet Union, but by the time the first squadron was operational in 2005, critics were dismissing the jet as superfluous for today’s wars.
Obama has to choose whether to shut down production of the F-22, which has yet to see combat.
The decision is central to the larger debate about the future of the military: With budget constraints and a changed world, in what defense systems do we invest?
The last of the 183 Raptors purchased will be finished in 2011. If Obama continues production, it’s likely only 60 more will be built — a far cry from replacing the entire aging F-15 fleet or even the 381 requested by the Air Force.
The small number is sufficient for those who think the F-22 is an unnecessary high-tech toy.
“Most of the military missions going to be carried out by U.S. forces in the future will look more like Afghanistan and Iraq than look like World War II,” Adams said. “The F-22 is designed for classic, highly intense conflicts of a massive ground war. It’s the technology of tomorrow for yesterday’s fight.”
Defenders argue that is myopic thinking.
Although no F-15 has been shot down by an enemy plane, the edge it once held is eroding as Russia, China, North Korea and others fly jets with equal capabilities, according to Gary Schmitt, director of strategic studies at American Enterprise Institute.
They will be more willing to take us on as the playing field levels, he added, also noting the advancement of surface-to-air missiles adds to the need for the F-22.
“It’s absolutely phenomenal — light-years ahead of anything I’ve flown before,” said Maj. Micah Fesler, an F-22 pilot stationed at Nellis Air Force Base who previously flew the F-15.
Despite air-to-air combat not being a factor in either Iraq or Afghanistan, the way we are fighting in those countries — mostly with small, lightly armored ground units — depends on our ability to own the skies. Ground commanders assume no one will drop bombs on them and that air-support can be quickly summoned.
And critics ignore a crucial point when noting we didn’t face an air challenge when invading Iraq in 2003. That was only because Saddam Hussein’s Air Force was beaten so badly during the Gulf War that he buried his airplanes rather than attempt to fight.
Another new fighter jet, the F-35, is often touted as a multi-role fighter that is a cheaper alternative to the F-22. But they are not interchangeable.
The F-22 has far superior air-to-air combat capabilities than the air-to-ground-focused F-35. They work best in tandem. Just as the F-15 clears the skies before the F-16 takes out ground targets, the
F-22’s mission is to be first in before the F-35’s ground attack.
Each F-22, with a cost of about $142 million — $354 million including research and development — has about 1,000 parts, manufactured in 44 states, creating a powerful Congressional lobby, particularly with high unemployment crippling the economy. Almost 200 House members requested that Obama continue the F-22 program.
Obama’s decision will indicate not just how he’ll fund the Pentagon but whether he’ll dedicate a bigger piece of the pie to domestic issues.
No-nothing attacks on F-22 are nothing new in "Pentagon's Unwanted Projects in Earmarks Democrats Press Backyard Spending," (March 8, 2009, p. p. A1) Washington Post staff writers R. Jeffrey Smith and Ellen Nakashima quoted a senior defense official stating "the plane has not been used in the Iraq or Afghanistan wars." This criticism makes no sense. The first unit of F-22s was not even declared operational until December 2007. Further, in 2008 the Air Force requested to deploy the F-22 to Iraq and the Department of Defense denied the request. Recently, it was reported that the Air Force Chief of Staff intends to once again request authority to deploy the aircraft to the theater.
Likewise the unnamed official is quoted as saying "Although the F-22 is built as an air-superiority fighter, the U.S. military has not faced a serious dogfight since the Vietnam war." The rationale for pursuing the F-22 after the Cold War is to keep the record in tact. Fielding of the F-22 is to ensure the United States maintains an overmatching edge in air combat against the latest generation of fighter aircraft being fielded around the world. The article also does not mention that the F-22 is necessary for penetrating advanced air defense such as those including the S-300 anti-aircraft missile.
I support the recommendation of our U.S. Air Force leaders and experts - hey, now there's a novel idea - listening to the guys and gals that know the military the best!
Had more Democrats listened to military leaders, like General Shinseki when he candidly testified before Congress about how many troops and how much time would be needed in Iraq - and why he did not support a war in Iraq - maybe, we would not have suffered 90% of the casualtes we have in an unethical, immoral, illegal, unnecessary and Unjust War?
I'm confident that President Obama, as Commander In Chief, is smart enough to know it's time for Democrats to lead - and lead as patriots fully supporting our troops and taking the best advice from our best military leaders!
No F-15 has ever been lost in combat--on the other hand, an F-117 was shot down over Iraq. The F-22 is a fantastic toy, but apparently it's so complicated that it still has a few bugs. Despite our air superiority, we lost the war in Iraq because a tenacious enemy armed with AK-47's and shaped charged IED's made us waste $3 trillion dollars and now our economy is suffering because of that. By the way, the AK-47 is responsible for more death than any other weapons system--ever. That's not bad for a weapon that is easy to manufacture and has mediocre accuracy by some standards. The people who are pushing for the F-22 live in states where F-22 production provides for a lot of jobs.