Shouldn't the purchase of the F/A-22s wait until they have been tested?

"Henry J. Cobb" wrote in message
m...
http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood021204.html
The Air Force has spent $32 billion on its new F-22 supersonic stealth
fighter. Twenty aircraft have come off the production line and
hundreds more are planned.
...
But rigorous, independent field testing -- to find out if the F-22
actually works -- hasn't yet begun.


Who do you plan on being the 'independent' tester ?

The Russian Air Force perhaps ?

So why not pause production for a few years until the testing is
complete?


Because rigorous testing is worthless unless its done on production
aircraft, the F-22 is in low rate initial production so just that can
happen.

Keith

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Henry J. Cobb" wrote in message
om...
http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood021204.html
The Air Force has spent $32 billion on its new F-22 supersonic stealth
fighter. Twenty aircraft have come off the production line and
hundreds more are planned.
...
But rigorous, independent field testing -- to find out if the F-22
actually works -- hasn't yet begun.

So why not pause production for a few years until the testing is
complete?

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Henry J. Cobb" wrote in message
om...
http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood021204.html
The Air Force has spent $32 billion on its new F-22 supersonic stealth
fighter. Twenty aircraft have come off the production line and
hundreds more are planned.
...
But rigorous, independent field testing -- to find out if the F-22
actually works -- hasn't yet begun.

So why not pause production for a few years until the testing is
complete?

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".

USAF was so hot to contract a fighter to Lockheed that they selected a
design that would not even fly.

In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".

Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.

Contrariwise, any airframe that Tarver ever had any involvement in is,
by his definition, perfect.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:09:49 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

Georgia pork

Explain how the airforce wanting the aircraft is "pork".

Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.

The USAF was so hot to contract an a fighter from Lockheed that they
selected a design that would not even fly.

Contrariwise, any airframe that Tarver ever had any involvement in is,
by his definition, perfect.

I am very careful.

"John R Weiss" wrote in message
news:zxz_b.112749$uV3.605839@attbi_s51...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote...

I am very careful.

...but just last week you told us you are lazy!

Being lazy is an excellent quality in an engineer.

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.

The USAF was so hot to contract an a fighter from Lockheed that they
selected a design that would not even fly.

Funny... I've actually seen an F-22 in the air, as have a whole lot of
other folks. "Would not even fly" has a whole different meaning for
you, eh?

Contrariwise, any airframe that Tarver ever had any involvement in is,
by his definition, perfect.

I am very careful.

Except in your research, your reading comprehension, and your logic...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

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

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
m...

Any airframe that Tarver can't make any money off of is, apparently,
evil.

The USAF was so hot to contract an a fighter from Lockheed that they
selected a design that would not even fly.

Funny... I've actually seen an F-22 in the air, as have a whole lot of
other folks. "Would not even fly" has a whole different meaning for
you, eh?

I mean Lockheed built DG's entry in the design competition.

Didn't you know?

Contrariwise, any airframe that Tarver ever had any involvement in is,
by his definition, perfect.

I am very careful.

Except in your research, your reading comprehension, and your logic...

In your fantasy world things are much different than here on Earth, Irby.

In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

I mean Lockheed built DG's entry in the design competition.

Backpedaling again.

In your fantasy world things are much different than here on Earth, Irby.

Fantasy world?

Like your current "Lockheed Martin sold all of their avionics" bit, when
they still have huge avionics business units making things for current
aircraft?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

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

In article ,
(Henry J. Cobb) wrote:

http://www.newhousenews.com/archive/wood021204.html
The Air Force has spent $32 billion on its new F-22 supersonic stealth
fighter. Twenty aircraft have come off the production line and
hundreds more are planned.
...
But rigorous, independent field testing -- to find out if the F-22
actually works -- hasn't yet begun.

So why not pause production for a few years until the testing is
complete?

Having a production line going takes thousands of people and millions
of $ per day. You can't just stop it because you still have to keep all
those people employed. If you fire them while you screw around, you'll
never get half of them back, and then it will cost you twice as much to
re-start production again. Stopping and re-starting has been tried
before and it's very risky and very costly. It's actually cheaper to
retro-fit an aircraft fleet than stop production.

Your comments strike me as very naive. Suggest you get a job in
industry and a little experience.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur