Question about the F-22 and it's radar.

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"John Cook" wrote in message
...

snip


You might be right, it may go into service, and if reports are to be
beleived - despite the cost, despite the reliability problems, despite
the obsolete architecture, the only credable justification is avoiding
an embarrising procurement fiasco, 200 odd hanger queens.....
astounding...

Yes, it is amazing--you, Cobb, and Tarver are the only ones gifted enough
to
realize what a true dog it is, huh? All of those blue-suited folks being
too
darned dumb to figure it out, right?

Oops--spoke too soon; looks like you can add Denyav to your rabidly
anti-F/A-22 cohort! My, what a fine, reputable group you have there... :-)

Brooks


Again, thank goodness you are not in the decisionmaking chain.

Brooks



Cheers

John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...


Oops--spoke too soon; looks like you can add Denyav to your rabidly
anti-F/A-22 cohort! My, what a fine, reputable group you have there... :-)

I was on my own here at ram in '98, but now GAO says I was always correct.

We must now all bow to the Kevin Brooks troll.

Fifty B-2s that never were ...

Kevin,

Ye doth protesteth too much...

F-22 is not a 'dog.' But its clear that absent SIGNIFICANT upgrades to its
avionics suite it will have nowhere near the AG capability of the F35.
That's why the USAF is spending the money, and for their efforts, they
should get a nice capability to go with the signature, speed and other
attributes possesed by the airframe.

Remember, that's a capital 'B' behind that $ sign. These are not trivial
amounts. You remember that line -- a billion here, a billion there, before
you know it we're talking real money...


"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"John Cook" wrote in message
...

snip


You might be right, it may go into service, and if reports are to be
beleived - despite the cost, despite the reliability problems, despite
the obsolete architecture, the only credable justification is avoiding
an embarrising procurement fiasco, 200 odd hanger queens.....
astounding...

Yes, it is amazing--you, Cobb, and Tarver are the only ones gifted
enough
to
realize what a true dog it is, huh? All of those blue-suited folks being
too
darned dumb to figure it out, right?

Oops--spoke too soon; looks like you can add Denyav to your rabidly
anti-F/A-22 cohort! My, what a fine, reputable group you have there... :-)

Brooks


Again, thank goodness you are not in the decisionmaking chain.

Brooks



Cheers

John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

"Frijoles" wrote in message
ink.net...
Kevin,

Ye doth protesteth too much...

F-22 is not a 'dog.' But its clear that absent SIGNIFICANT upgrades to
its
avionics suite it will have nowhere near the AG capability of the F35.
That's why the USAF is spending the money, and for their efforts, they
should get a nice capability to go with the signature, speed and other
attributes possesed by the airframe.

Actually, any protestations "too much" are due to trying to correct the
ridiculous assertion that it has *no* air to ground capability as is. I
understand fully that the optimization of that capability requires
money--which is why there is a spiral development plan in place. Recently in
this NG we have seen folks try to claim the $11 billion estimate was solely
directed at turning the F/A-22 into a strike platform; not the case, as it
also includes air-to-air upgrades, ISR upgrade, etc. IMO, the F/A-22 does
indeed have its share of problems, chief among them being the change in the
nature of the threat it was originally intended to counter; I went on record
supporting a 180 aircraft buy before that number even became fashionable in
the DoD rumor mill. Currently I'd support a 200-220 number. Nobody has (with
any factual basis) accused me of being a rabid supporter of the program--but
I don't think there is any point in making up negative points about it
either, which is largely what we have been seeing of late.

Brooks

snip

Kevin Brooks wrote:
Actually, any protestations "too much" are due to trying to correct the
ridiculous assertion that it has *no* air to ground capability as is. I
understand fully that the optimization of that capability requires
money--which is why there is a spiral development plan in place. Recently in
this NG we have seen folks try to claim the $11 billion estimate was solely
directed at turning the F/A-22 into a strike platform; not the case, as it
also includes air-to-air upgrades, ISR upgrade, etc. IMO, the F/A-22 does
indeed have its share of problems, chief among them being the change in the
nature of the threat it was originally intended to counter; I went on record
supporting a 180 aircraft buy before that number even became fashionable in
the DoD rumor mill. Currently I'd support a 200-220 number. Nobody has (with
any factual basis) accused me of being a rabid supporter of the program--but
I don't think there is any point in making up negative points about it
either, which is largely what we have been seeing of late.

So let's make lemonade here.

Give the F/A-22 as close to the same sensors, computers and software as
the F-35 as possible so that not only is the JSF kickstarted but also
the F/A-22 will have an upgrade path in the future as improvements are
made to the JSF.

-HJC

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
Actually, any protestations "too much" are due to trying to correct the
ridiculous assertion that it has *no* air to ground capability as is. I
understand fully that the optimization of that capability requires
money--which is why there is a spiral development plan in place.
Recently in
this NG we have seen folks try to claim the $11 billion estimate was
solely
directed at turning the F/A-22 into a strike platform; not the case, as
it
also includes air-to-air upgrades, ISR upgrade, etc. IMO, the F/A-22
does
indeed have its share of problems, chief among them being the change in
the
nature of the threat it was originally intended to counter; I went on
record
supporting a 180 aircraft buy before that number even became fashionable
in
the DoD rumor mill. Currently I'd support a 200-220 number. Nobody has
(with
any factual basis) accused me of being a rabid supporter of the
program--but
I don't think there is any point in making up negative points about it
either, which is largely what we have been seeing of late.

So let's make lemonade here.

Give the F/A-22 as close to the same sensors, computers and software as
the F-35 as possible so that not only is the JSF kickstarted but also
the F/A-22 will have an upgrade path in the future as improvements are
made to the JSF.

Yah, and just restart the development prgram for the F/A-22 all over again
while you are at it, too, huh? I don't think so.

Brooks


-HJC

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
Actually, any protestations "too much" are due to trying to correct
the
ridiculous assertion that it has *no* air to ground capability as is.
I
understand fully that the optimization of that capability requires
money--which is why there is a spiral development plan in place.
Recently in
this NG we have seen folks try to claim the $11 billion estimate was
solely
directed at turning the F/A-22 into a strike platform; not the case,
as
it
also includes air-to-air upgrades, ISR upgrade, etc. IMO, the F/A-22
does
indeed have its share of problems, chief among them being the change
in
the
nature of the threat it was originally intended to counter; I went on
record
supporting a 180 aircraft buy before that number even became
fashionable
in
the DoD rumor mill. Currently I'd support a 200-220 number. Nobody has
(with
any factual basis) accused me of being a rabid supporter of the
program--but
I don't think there is any point in making up negative points about it
either, which is largely what we have been seeing of late.

So let's make lemonade here.

Give the F/A-22 as close to the same sensors, computers and software as
the F-35 as possible so that not only is the JSF kickstarted but also
the F/A-22 will have an upgrade path in the future as improvements are
made to the JSF.

Yah, and just restart the development prgram for the F/A-22 all over again
while you are at it, too, huh? I don't think so.

Although F-35 hardware may be rolled into F-22 production as a block change
later. F-35 benefits from F-22 development and vice versa.

"Paul F Austin" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
Actually, any protestations "too much" are due to trying to correct
the
ridiculous assertion that it has *no* air to ground capability as
is.
I
understand fully that the optimization of that capability requires
money--which is why there is a spiral development plan in place.
Recently in
this NG we have seen folks try to claim the $11 billion estimate was
solely
directed at turning the F/A-22 into a strike platform; not the case,
as
it
also includes air-to-air upgrades, ISR upgrade, etc. IMO, the F/A-22
does
indeed have its share of problems, chief among them being the change
in
the
nature of the threat it was originally intended to counter; I went
on
record
supporting a 180 aircraft buy before that number even became
fashionable
in
the DoD rumor mill. Currently I'd support a 200-220 number. Nobody
has
(with
any factual basis) accused me of being a rabid supporter of the
program--but
I don't think there is any point in making up negative points about
it
either, which is largely what we have been seeing of late.

So let's make lemonade here.

Give the F/A-22 as close to the same sensors, computers and software
as
the F-35 as possible so that not only is the JSF kickstarted but also
the F/A-22 will have an upgrade path in the future as improvements are
made to the JSF.

Yah, and just restart the development prgram for the F/A-22 all over
again
while you are at it, too, huh? I don't think so.

Although F-35 hardware may be rolled into F-22 production as a block
change
later. F-35 benefits from F-22 development and vice versa.

God bless BAE Systems.