F-35, not F-22, to Protect U.S. Airspace

Dan wrote:
damarkley wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On Feb 1, 1:16 am, T.L. Davis wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 06:32:20 -0800 (PST), Mike
wrote:

...By 1997 officials

had suggested a "four corners" defense, maintaining alert sites in
Massachusetts, Oregon, California, and Florida. By September 11,
2001,only 14 interceptor aircraft were sitting alert in the United
States.
Unbelievable, isn't it? 14 aircraft to protect the entire continental
United States... This was what NORAD was reduced to?? Pitiful.
What was the defense budget in 2001?? Who got all the money?

What if Russia had launched an old style attack with waves of Bears
and long range escorts?

Just incredible. I had thought that we had all of 16 aircraft
available on 9/11. I overestimated. This is what happens when a
country becomes grossly overconfident in its own defenses, and it's
happened before.

At times we are truly "The United States of Amnesia".

And the best is too good for America. F-35s are good enough.

TL

I think the early-warning radar still works. Those waves of Bears are
about gone. Total 64 in service, guess 40 would be the most they could
muster for waves, 15 hour plus flight time, I think we might be able
to handle them. You don't?
Yes, there are no more "waves" of Bears. And the number of Blackjacks
is almost insignificant. There is no plausible reason for Russia to
use those planes in such fashion. I am curious as to what a "ong
range escort" would be.

Dean

"Long range escort" = call girl along for the ride?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
The Russians do claim to be capitalists, so its possible!

On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 17:33:08 GMT, Arved Sandstrom
wrote:

On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 11:01:51 -0600, Dan wrote:
[ SNIP ]
Not to mention Russia has nothing to gain using bombers instead of
ICBM and SLBM if they wish to start something stupid.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

What's your take on the core question? Namely, the adequacy of F-35s for
this role?


The issues are probably will be:

1) detector coverage, AWACS, ground-based and in the interceptors

2) response time

3) weapons compatibility

The job could be done with anything from century series fighters
on, the issue with F15's is the aircraft. wearing out, and the
lower maintenance associated with newer technology.

As potential opponents move into stealth, the money will need to
go into detection (and weapons integrated into better detection).



Peter Skelton

Peter Skelton wrote in
:

[snip]

The 14 aircraft do not include those in Alaska and the Canadian
Forces aircraft. In other words, they don't include the folks
tasked with providing defense against the threat he's ranting
about.

I think the al-Qanadian contribution might have amounted to maybe
8 aircraft on a good day. They only have some 4 dozen or so in
in service.

IBM