Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14?

Andrew C. Toppan wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 14:36:35 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote:

The F-35 is basically the same plane as the F-22. It has been
modified to be a carrier aircraft.

Huh? The F-35 is absolutely nothing like the F-22.

The F-35 was not "modified" to be a carrier aircraft, it was DESIGNED
AS a carrier aircraft.

And as Andrew well knows, only two of the three F-35 variants have
been designed to operate off of ships.

The F-35A is no more sutiable for shipboard service than the F/A-22
is.

-HJC

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Ian" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...

|The Tomcat is gone quicker than you can think....
|There is a big push by CNO to axe the F-14 sooner than planned,
like
|now is too late...watch and see.
|
|The F/A-18 (I assume you mean the B/C/D models) already has a
|replacement, E/F. I don't think you are following current Naval
|Aviation very well.
|
|There is no need to replace the E/F Hornet, it will be pulling
|fighter/CAP/FAC/Bomber/tanker etc. duties for the next 10 years.
|Totally capable of performing all the above, with no current or
future
|enemy threat that can match it.

Yes, I am aware that the E/F variants are the upgrade to the
current F/A-18 and the F-14. However by the time the FB-22 is
online, even those versions will be dated.

Less dated than the F-22.

You are not considering the F-22's two greatest flaws, the pre-96 Ada
and
the Mil-spec components. The entire procurement of the F/A-18E is a
generation ahead of the F-22.

What language is F-22 software written in? I presume Ada-95?

The F-22 is older than that.

Thats interesting cos I'm sure I've read somewhere that Eurofighter is
written in Ada-95 and flight standard C?

"Ian" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Ian" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...

|The Tomcat is gone quicker than you can think....
|There is a big push by CNO to axe the F-14 sooner than planned,
like
|now is too late...watch and see.
|
|The F/A-18 (I assume you mean the B/C/D models) already has a
|replacement, E/F. I don't think you are following current Naval
|Aviation very well.
|
|There is no need to replace the E/F Hornet, it will be pulling
|fighter/CAP/FAC/Bomber/tanker etc. duties for the next 10 years.
|Totally capable of performing all the above, with no current or
future
|enemy threat that can match it.

Yes, I am aware that the E/F variants are the upgrade to the
current F/A-18 and the F-14. However by the time the FB-22 is
online, even those versions will be dated.

Less dated than the F-22.

You are not considering the F-22's two greatest flaws, the pre-96
Ada
and
the Mil-spec components. The entire procurement of the F/A-18E is a
generation ahead of the F-22.

What language is F-22 software written in? I presume Ada-95?

The F-22 is older than that.

Thats interesting cos I'm sure I've read somewhere that Eurofighter is
written in Ada-95 and flight standard C?

After a series of discussions WRT Ada here at ram with Ada experts i was
willing to accept the idea that Ada was fixed by 1996. Perhaps I am using
an incorrect identifier and it is Ada-95

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...



For some reason I had thought that the C-17 was built by
Lockheed, not McDonald Douglas (now Boeing).

That would McDonnell Douglas


Since Boeing is now
the contractor,

Make that owner.


what do they have in their line up that would be
similar? Basically that would be the short field operation plus
being able load and unload like the C-17 does.


Civilian use doesnt typically require such a facility.

I am not a fan of idea of taking an airliner design and making it
a cargo plane.


Most civilian cargo planes are just that.

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

The F-35 has a chance of being more successful than the F-22 based solely on
it being post '96 Ada

Ada-95. Like a lot of the F-22 software, which got recoded because it
was easier to support. Which is why a good part of the F-35 software is
based on the F-22 software...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...

| | Remember that we are planning for a war with China by the end of
| | the decade.
| |
|
|Are you planning to fight them all yourself or do
|you have a couple of buddies lined up to help ?
|
|Keith

Ok, ok!!!

Not everyone keeps up with various policies and DoD planning.
the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen Myers, was picked
to plan for this potential war. China has let it be known, there
are a number of papers coming out of their post graduate officers
school, that they plan to challenge us for control of the far
east. That means control over India, most of SE Asia (down to
Australia), Japan, the Philippines and Siberia.


Hey if they choose to take on India and Russia they'll
have enough on their plate that they wont take on the
USA as well

Also China has sent it agents off its soil as it never has in
5000 years. They now run the Panama Canal.

No they dont , Hutchison Whampoa who own the Panama Canal
Co are a Hong Kong based limited company run the canal.

Have bases all
throughout the Caribbean. Now own a port (former naval base) in
San Diego.

Last time I checked the port of San Diego was a Public Benefit
Corporation

Keith

And they have extensive operations all throughout
North Africa.

It is going to be interesting starting somewhere between 2008 and
2012.

Yeah I'll be watching as you and your buds invade China

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...

| Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
| for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)?
|
|Lots of luck making a carrier landing in an F-22
|
|
| I know that the current F-22 was
| not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
| re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
| version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
| Why not upgrade it then?
|
|
|3 x 2000 lbs perhaps certainly not 30
|
In a bomber version, the fuselage would be longer and the wings
far larger to give the bomber greater range more than 1,600
miles, compared with the F-22's 600-plus and bomb-carrying
capacity.

That takes a little more than stretching the airframe to achieve this.
The suggested FB-22 does not have the range or mods you
claim. Such an aircraft would be a new design and given the
progress being made with UCAV's is unlikely to happen
IMHO


The FB-22 would replace the Air Force's F-15E and take
over some missions for long-range bombers such as the B-2 and
B-1. The initial design envisioned a plane that could carry 24
Small Diameter Bombs, which weigh only 250 pounds. Using Global
Positioning System guidance, the small bomb would be as lethal as
a 2,000-pound bomb.

No sir , GPS guidance systems are already available for
2000lb bombs

A regular F/A-22 would carry eight Small
Diameter Bombs. An FB-22 would carry 30.


Which would make a bomb load of 8000 lbs not
60,000

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

The F-35 has a chance of being more successful than the F-22 based
solely on
it being post '96 Ada

Ada-95. Like a lot of the F-22 software, which got recoded because it
was easier to support. Which is why a good part of the F-35 software is
based on the F-22 software...

Was to be, but tabbing to the F-22 would be foolish now.

"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...

| The F-35 has a chance of being more successful than the F-22 based
solely on
| it being post '96 Ada
|
|Ada-95. Like a lot of the F-22 software, which got recoded because it
|was easier to support. Which is why a good part of the F-35 software is
|based on the F-22 software...

I thought that we had moved beyond ADA?

How?

Pete,

You are even closer than you think. 1- Whomever said the F35 is almost the
same as a F22, I have this reply, gee, that Honda 250 Dirt Bike looks just
like my sons Mongoose BMX bike.

2- The F22 is officially headed to the reserves and ANG as soon as the F35
comes on line. Kind of turns on the lights as to the operating parameters
of the 22 vs the 35.

Having flown both, they are not even close to being the same aircraft. The
35 is already light years ahead of the 22. My X/F35 experience was one of
my most memorable test programs I have been involved in. Stepping out of
the Sims and into the aircraft, you found you could push the 35 well past
what the Sims prepared you for. That was a first in my career.

Although the Raptor is a very capable aircraft, If I had the choice and had
a 35 on the line, I wouldn't leave home with out it. It looks like they got
it right the first time out and the F35 will be with us for some time to
come.

Jake

"Pechs1" wrote in message
...
steele- Should we be thinking of using the FB-22 Raptor as a replacement
for the F/A-18 (and the F-14)? I know that the current F-22 was
not designed to be heavy enough for naval use, but it could be
re-engineered. They are planning to bring the FB-22 (bomber
version that carries 30 2000 lbs bombs) online in the future.
Why not upgrade it then? BRBR

F35 better, cheaper, sooner and designed for shipboard use. Why not scrape
the
F-22, and replace it with F35? These things are 'expensive', to say the
least.

P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer