F-22 Woes and Keeping the Program Alive

Former Air Force Engineer Rick Abell discusses the F-22 woes and keeping the program alive years after he was involved with the ATF selection. From his entry into the USAF as a Civil Servant in 1964 till his retirement in 1997, Mr. Eric "Rick" Abell worked on or led the development and fielding on almost every aircraft and related system in the USAF including the A-7, A-10, F-15, F-16, YF-17, F-117, YF-22, YF-23, F-22, B-1, B-2, and several classified programs. He has also worked extensively with the US Navy and US Army.
ABSOLUTE VENGEANCE eBook by C.W. Lemoine is only $0.99 for the month of October! books2read.com/Absolute-Venge...
Check out The Mover and Gonky Show Mondays at 8PM ET LIVE. • The Mover and Gonky Show
Buy one of C.W. Lemoine's books: www.cwlemoine.com
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Views presented are my own and do not represent the views of DoD or its Components.

[@WhydoIsuddenlyhaveahandle]

The F22 is so advanced that we wont even sell it to our closest allies. But we retire it. Awesome.

[@TheKitsuneDuke]

We wouldn't sell them because they are prohibited from doing so by law

[@dexterplameras3249]

The F22 was designed for a turning dog fight (fighter maneuvers), which has limited place in modern aerial combat where First Look First Kill capability supersides close in combat. They teach pilots Basic Fighter Maneuvers and even Advanced Fighter Maneuvers but warn all pilots not to engage in "Dog Fighting" because modern missiles are too good. Google "USAF F-16 Pilot explains why he would rather fly the F-35".

[@Mthammere2010]

Just like the F-14.

[@neohimself]

@@dexterplameras3249 And when the adversary has the same advanced capabilities in their jets it´s down to dogfighting again.

[@dexterplameras3249]

@@neohimself Nope, an aim9x can shoot targets at a planes 6. All a pilot has to do with a plane with the right sensors needs to do is look behind.

[@blacklake13]

I've always enjoyed how the Navy stayed in ATF just long enough to get a vote on which fighter the USAF should get before bailing on the program.

[@TheBelrick]

USA today is far less capable than USA of 30 years ago. The demographics have collapsed, expect significant decline in the capabilities of US military (which is already observable) Think the end of the Roman empire when there were only a few hundred centurions left where there were once thousands. People matter

[@major__kong]

Just so y'all know, all the modern stuff, manned or unmanned, is getting modern information architectures. Flight critical stuff is separated from mission stuff so you can update mission software without impacting airworthiness. Mission stuff is on a service oriented architecture, which makes upgrades even easier. And we're doing a lot of development using containers, which should make deployment and sustainment a lot easier and cheaper. You could do this with the F-22, but it would be very expensive to gut it and put new stuff in. And you'd still have an old airframe that's difficult to maintain.

[@BobSmith-mu5kg]

Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff.

[@dplameras]

I doubt they are using docker containers in fighter computers. It uses a real time operating system and the overhead container emulation brings isn't worth the miniscule benefit that containers bring to a military platform.

[@GregWampler-xm8hv]

Yeah just ask the f-35 community how well that's going 😎

[@major__kong]

@@dplameras Not yet. But read what I said. The flight critical stuff is being separated from the mission stuff. And we are starting to use and deploy containers on the mission side on things I'm not going to discuss on KZbin.. All the stuff in the pipeline is basically taking this approach. You have the truck. And then we load the mission sensors and computers onto the truck. OMS (open mission systems) and containerization allows us to basically take this stuff from platform to platform with minimal effort and also update it very quickly without impacting airworthiness.

[@dplameras]

@@major__kong I would have thought that continuous integration (true continuous integration with real testing), would be more benefit in the software release cycle then software isolation using docker. I've seen many companies think that using docker will solve their woes when they have no true continuous integration (and CI is a practice, not just the use of a CI server which was designed in history to show the results of the software tests). I couldn't imagine what kind of tests outside of CI tests an F35 needs.

[@vxe6vxe6]

After seeing the Military rewire the C-2/E-2 aircraft, after seeing F-14 hydraulic lines being replaced, after rewinging A-6 Intruders and then tossing them in the ocean, after all of the center barrel replacements on the F-18 legacies, all of the stuff that I have seen, I know that the F-22 can be reworked with new electrical/avionics systems, that a MLU can be planned and executed and that the stealth coatings on the plane can be upgraded/replaced with new coating systems.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

It is already being done with younger planes. The Block 20 planes are the oldest and are simply not worth upgrading due to airframe fatigue and hardware being far too outdated to bother with.

[@baileyparadis1815]

​@@andrewsuryali8540I don't know where all these claims about airframe fatigue came from, but it's simply not true. The block 20 jets do not have a significant difference in airframe hours than any of the operational jets.

[@andrewsuryali8540]

@@baileyparadis1815 Block 20 jets were the ones used for conversion and training in the early stages of the program. They are the ones reaching 3000-hr, with at least one closing in on 4000-hr fatigue life. The average for the fleet in 2023 is 2100. None of the fleet is anywhere close to the 8000-hr limit, and that's why the block 20s are going to be STORED, not scrapped. The point is to stop them accumulating fatigue until some other time in the future when there's funding or pressing need to upgrade them and rerurn them to service. Plus this cuts billions in operating costs.

[@baileyparadis1815]

@@andrewsuryali8540 I have yet to see any block 20 jet with significantly more hours on it than any of their operational counterparts. In fact, it's typically the opposite.

[@stupidburp]

Now is the time to rebuild them all with life extension and capability upgrades, not mothball them as is. We are going to need them soon and NGAD is still over a decade away from volume production. There will not be time for upgrades when things get hot quickly and the result will be pressing them back into service as is for combat missions against capable near peer adversaries. Better to be ready for that possibility.

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

This is amazing! Right from the horses mouth! Keep these great topics with Rick coming!

[@NCmtnMan89]

I think it’s more needed now then ever with the state of the world

[@pollylewis9611]

Mover and Gonky thank you for having Rick on, again I can watch and listen to him all day long!

[@bic1498]

Same thing happened to the Seawolf class submarines. They built 3 and instead of continuing that program, they went all-in with the Virginia class. The Seawolf is faster, dives deeper, carries more weapons, and has better combat survivability than the Virginia class. Now, 10 years later, the Virginia boats cost just as much as a Seawolf did. Virginia has better modularity in design/construction, but they cannot come close in being the open-ocean warship a Seawolf is and we are now facing a 2-ocean threat from Russia and China with not enough Virginia class submarines to combat them both and only 2 warfighting Seawolf boats (SSN-23 has "other" missions, just as vital) and SSN-22 is laid up for the next couple years getting a new bow (whoopsie!!). Someone needs to teach our lawmakers and budget bean-counters that the same mentality they should apply to investing is applicable to warfighting. You don't put all your eggs in 1 basket. Diversify your investments. Yes, having a couple "blue chip" stocks to anchor your portfolio is necessary for stability (F-22, Seawolf, CVN, B-21). The mid-grade stocks do a bunch of "bang for the buck" work (SSN-774+, F-35, F-18E/F, F-16 Block 70) and lower grade stocks are risky but can produce great returns when used correctly (Look at Ukraine's drone warfare).

[@FalconWing1813]

Well put !

[@sferrin2]

And the Zumwalts. They're in dire need of a Ticonderoga replacement and here they sit with their dicks in their hands while the perfect hull goes out of production.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

You can also make the argument it's time to invest in diplomacy rather than making more swords and enemies. We're not trying to be the modern version of Sparta here.

[@tomwilson1006]

@WALTERBROADDUS try telling that to every administration that’s ever been in office

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@tomwilson1006 war is a failure of diplomacy. It's a very blunt instrument tool for solving problems . And pricey in funding and blood.

[@EricPalmerBlog]

Good Luck. Ten years ago USAF briefed on pending airframe fatigue issues. One idea was even to restrict G-warm up turns. Should have stayed in production. What the AN/ALR-94, in cooperation with the rest of the combat system does is amazing.

[@lawless201]

I love it whenever Rick say's, "I'll tell ya what actually happened...", that's code for, shut your mouth, open the ears and listen to the horse.

[@sferrin2]

"China won't have a stealth fighter for 20 years." - Bob Gates SecDef F-22 production cancelled. Next time he visited China they rolled out the J-20 prototype just for him.

[@BlyGuy]

That's what happens when you have CCP moles and co-opted politicians in your gov.

[@SVSky]

Gates screwed us super hard in a lot of areas.

[@ro-86alkonost78]

Indian radar: You call the J-20 stealth?

[@Roflcopter4b]

@@ro-86alkonost78 Yes. They have a feature that deliberately vastly increases their radar cross section at will if they want them to be seen. Good for peace time and for giving your enemy false overconfidence.

[@stupidburp]

J-20 is stealthy enough to be a serious threat. Especially when operating near their air defenses and we are operating far from our own.

[@garyramirez1420]

I honestly don't think the Air Force even knows what they want to do anymore

[@TheBelrick]

proper pronoun usage. more diversity aka less competent demographics

[@user-gm2qc3np5o]

I love the F-22! and I respect many test pilots and engineers invention and effort!

[@UFO721]

You want to keep your military as diverse as possible to be able to counter any foreseeable threat.

[@mrsamuel5572]

What the actual Heck?! This plane is not garbage!

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

That doesn't mean it fits into the future of the Air Force inventory.

[@BlyGuy]

Certainly not garbage, just a maintenance nightmare

[@arthurdraper6801]

Rick is awesome! That is good insight.

[@airshowguy916]

Thanks for making these videos. :)

[@TAGE_FPV]

Great podcast episode!

[@Angel9932]

Around twenty years ago I worked across the street from Dobbins ARB in metro Atlanta when they were testing the F-22. They flew over my office building several times a week back then. We pretty much had free F-22 air shows while they were doing test flights. Including one time where one guy made a relatively low level pass from behind some apartments next door over our parking lot and scared the hell out of my manager back then as he was going to the loading dock to smoke. :)

[@abazizjaafar9121]

Greetings from Malaysia... Hi gonky..hi mover...

[@82saw3]

Because of being an 80s kid I always loved the F-14. Thanks the top gun. The F 18 just didn’t have that presence, but the raptor had me sold😂

[@gonepostal9101]

“We’ll send some guys up to fiddle with it, but we’ll ignore it.” Love the Rick-isms.

[@regalplays7135]

All the comments are missing the point. The F-22 is slated for retirement because its systems run off of 1990s technology, and it’s becoming more and more expensive to make them compatible with newer munitions and missiles. It’s like trying to upgrade a 1990 Toyota Corolla with a touch screen and Bluetooth like a modern car. At some point you just hit the ceiling of what’s possible and what’s economically viable to do

[@MiquelGorbiviUS]

Good point but then again, they upgraded the F15 and F16. F16's maintenance was more costly the first decade after it was built then the logistics for the plane was improved and the cost of maintenance went down.

[@regalplays7135]

@@MiquelGorbiviUS True, but there's a pretty big difference. The F-16 and F-15 production lines stayed open, since the USAF ordered a ton and exported a ton more. This meant that spare parts were relatively easy to come by, and newer versions could be produced to phase out older blocks. The F-22s production line was completely shut down after the production run was finished, leaving the Air Force stuck with whatever spare parts it had for the rest of the F-22s service life. There's also economy of scale to worry about: only 195 F-22s were ever built (if you include prototypes) compared to some 1200 F-15s. It's harder to offset the overall production costs for such a small run (this is also why the B-2 was so expensive). It's the same reason why the F-15EX is about as expensive as an F-35: the costs of setting up the production line and manufacturing processes.

[@hansgruber8357]

Exactly, it’s an 80’s design with 90’s technology and we build far too few of them to make it cost effective.

[@regalplays7135]

@@hansgruber8357 not just cost effectiveness, shutting down the production line meant that we don’t have a source of spare parts

[@DNowlan1]

Some other stuff to add after Rick's sage comments. The two key factors that bedevilled the F-22 program was it's truncated production run and the way LM went with the stealth coatings. That is what contributes to the F-22 high cost per flying hour. However the true tragedy of this is had the F-22 been allowed to go another 50 - 100 airframes the fly away cost would have been on par if not cheaper then the F-35. Welcome to what happens when you persevere with the wrong aircraft and the solution is right in front of you.

[@simonoconnor7759]

Especially galling when you consider that they refused to sell any to Australia. That would have been another 75.

[@nobleman-swerve]

Frankly F-35 would play the role of an air superiority fighter better than F-22 could ever play the role of a strike fighter. You sure as hell aren't packing a 2,000 pounder into a raptors internal weapons bay. And with the conflict in Ukraine it's pretty freaking apparent that in a near peer conflict, strike is what will win the wars more than anything else. Better to crater the airfield and level C&C that engage in some righteous air duel.

[@DNowlan1]

@@simonoconnor7759 The F-22 were actually offered to Australia and they where on the table for the Israeli's as well. Back in the late 90's Gen Mike Ryan who was then USAD Chief who had done an exchange in Australia told the RAAF if you want the F-22 you got it.

[@DNowlan1]

@@nobleman-swerve that is actually completely inaccurate. The F-35 doesn't have the shaping for broad based stealth the F-22 has, nor does it posses the aero propulsive performance to kick down the door and deal with a threat like the J-20/Su-57/35 if detected. This would be put into sharp relief if the F-35 was deployed in Ukraine and the Russians had the same competence as in the former Soviet Union. If you pay very close attention to the JORD that defined the F-35 the fundamental assumption was the F-22 would be there in numbers to protect it.

[@nobleman-swerve]

@@DNowlan1 Interesting claim, now here's a direct quote from Hostage: "The F-35 is geared to go out and take down the surface targets. The F-35 doesn’t have the altitude, doesn’t have the speed [of the F-22], but it can beat the F-22 in stealth.” I'm certain that you, random youtube poster knows more about the stealth chrematistics than a four-star general. Henceforth, I kneel - your incredible knowledge surpasses all subject matter experts and direct lived experience with the platform. Also handwringing over Su-35. Lmao. 2001 is calling and is wondering why Russia isn't able to field frontline fighters with AESA radars in 2023.

[@phillm156]

Modular cross branch commonality…a McNamara 60s catch phrase that spawned the flying pigs, Aardvark & Thuds.

[@michaelgrey7854]

The Thud was way before McNamara.

[@kennieg]

I was part of the JIAWG (Joint Integrated Avionics Working Group). It did actually create some useful results for F-22. What really hurt was…

[@kennieg]

… the Obey amendment (which would let us get foreign funds like F-16 and F-22) and “not a pound for air-to-ground” (which led to expensive redesign later)

[@mbmann3892]

So if I understand correctly, the F-22 is too expensive to maintain because its advanced engineering. And the A-10 is too expensive because it too basic?

[@Angel9932]

Sometimes I think the Air Force secretly makes pretzels given how they rationalize some of their decisions. Seriously twisted logic.

[@lethalweaboo8662]

Yeah I don't get how the, A-10, an indestructible gun with wings is less expensive and easier to repair than a 4 billion dollar computer with wings. I don't know much about logistics, aerospace, engineering, or financing but as a redneck with 30-06 (that should be a degree somewhere😂) simpler is better is usaully the best option.

[@troys3757]

@mbmann3892 sounds contradictory, but you're kind of right in a way. Upgrading one is prohibitively complex, the other is too old to upgrade any further. Same end result, upgrading both would be too expensive in light of more up to date options that are, or will become available in the near future.

[@dmac7128]

With respect to the A-10, no. If one looks at the maintenance cost during and aircraft's life cycle, cost per flight hour peaks during the initial rollout and again when the air frames reach towards the end of their expected life spans. Every aircraft regardless of design will spend more time in maintenance as they get older because more stuff breaks or has to replaced. The A-10 is an old aircraft (twice as old as the F-22) and anything old will have more problems especially an aircraft that has seen a lot of combat. One thing that can be said of the A-10 vs the F-22 is that the Air Force has gotten much more for the dollar out of the A-10 than it will ever get out of the F-22.

[@mortifiedpenguin6431]

@@dmac7128 The A-10 is simply a death trap with the current prevalence of manpads. Also, they lack adequate sensors and are #1 in friendly fire incidents of all Air Force plane. And just look how the Su-25 performs in the Ukraine war. Not a single cent more should be invested in them. There's a reason the Ukrainians don't even want them for free.

[@bryanmaloy4797]

I love tis guy.

[@KlingbergWingMkII]

Stealth technology is evolving so rapidly, trying to "save" previous designs becomes pointless. If a designer starts with a clean sheet, then he can take maximum advantage of all the tech developments. That's not always possible by modifying an old design. This is why that within as little as 10 years, aircraft went from wood to all metal. No designer in his right mind would have put a metal skin on a wood frame as an upgrade to a WWI fighter. This is the same situation. And it is extremely difficult to predict because tech breakthroughs sometimes come at the most inconvenient times. When the breakthroughs come, it's time to start from scratch - you'll get a much better benefit/cost ratio.

[@codymack8977]

Not quite see the de Havilland DH.98 Mosquito

[@KlingbergWingMkII]

@@codymack8977 Why would an old wood airplane be good for stealth? Radar would see through the wood to all the reflective internal components such as metal frames, instruments, seats, etc. That and none of the external shape is correct for stealth. You need to study-up before you pontificate.

[@toodlepop]

im sure someone else has said this before. but it has just now entered my mind. it must be very difficult to upgrade a stealth airplane, as you cannot really tinker with the outside shape. with other planes, it's inconsequential to add an antenna here or there or throw on a targeting or data pod, but that would compromise the purpose of the f22's stealth.

[@markwybierala4936]

It’s a damn nice lookin airplane and so is the B1. But this is the cost of new tech. Can’t wait to see the next plane.

[@indy500tabasco8]

We can change name from Raptor to 'Balloon Buster'😊

[@ecleveland1]

Freedom is never free, and keeping the peace is expensive! The same people that want to cut costs for projects such as the F-22 always say we are not AT war so we don’t need this. They almost never understand that the reason we aren’t at way is because of our superior technology and abilities. War is so much more expensive than peace. Yet during a war, especially the beginning these same people can’t spend enough money! It’s not the expensive equipment I’m worried about during war it’s the lives of our military personnel that are much more expensive to me. I’d sure rather be king of the hill and always buying a new and bigger stick and never have to swing it!

[@Gizmomaster]

The F-22 beats literally any other aircraft fielded by any other country in the world and we’re here talking about storing them in hangars and ditching the rest. Ridiculous

[@cbspock1701]

Because our military is a clown show. A bunch of transformers and officers in dog masks

[@RW-zn8vy]

It doesn’t do anything the f35 can’t at less the cost. If you’re wasting money how do you expect to win wars? same issue with the Tomcat the raptor is dealing with.

[@nml5536]

​@RW-zn8vy especially when ngad is the main thrust right now anyways.

[@DeltaEntropy]

If you can have two F-35s or an NGAD for the same price… Not much reason to keep them around. Everything comes and goes with time. Some things stick around long past their expiration date but it’s not the norm, or at least shouldn’t be.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

It's a 30-plus year old design whose biggest success is taking out some balloons. The next generation of aircraft are already on the planning process. It's basically an orphaned airframe.

[@entvisual]

*The strange part* is not single NGAD, has been built at all it intended to replace F-22😢

[@entvisual]

ye

[@starexcelsior]

Ok first did you just agree with your own comment? Second yes that’s how it works, they want that money to FINISH the NGAD program sooner then later

[@pogo1140]

One of the USAF big wigs stated that the NGAD will probably cost more per aircraft than any aircraft ever built and may not be a fighter plane at all.

[@cdyjv118]

You sound so confident about this

[@flippinnickelproductions298]

Back in the day a lot of fighters had short service time due to advances in technology. Just sayin

[@jmorrison5206]

More so now.

[@joostvisser8537]

Back in those days there were so many advances in technology because there was a cold war going on. Personally I prefer the "slow" innovation over a cold war but you do you.

[@slol144]

It's the culmination of all of the little subtle differences between the Blocks that more or less call for this retirement of airframes. Box is the same, but the gift and packing inside are different. Does it even have a job to do other than shooting balloons?

[@Grouse2275]

Even without the stealth “coating” these aircraft are low observable and very effective. Is keeping a non-stealth version an option?

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

Would you intercept me? I'd intercept me

[@capitanvonchickenpants8492]

Here in the uk we can't even build a high speed train

[@donnievinson9478]

America needs to keep the F22 program alive. It out preforms any other fighter jets. The F22 program should stay alive.

[@operator9858]

But at what cost?

[@mbukukanyau]

The Airforce needs to restart the production lines, basically Fund Northrop Grumman for an additional fuselage line alongside the F35. Sharing the production line with the F35 would significantly reduce costs and improve delivery times. In addition, the block can use a lot of the F35 critical components with a detour for F22 specific parts

[@blacklake13]

It's already been looked into. The costs of restarting the production line on a 30-year-old airframe are ridiculously high. Expertise and even tooling no longer exists. The money is much better spent developing NGAD (which being "black" has a decent chance of being a not-stupid plane). The F-up was not procuring enough airframes in the first place because history had ended or something, and there's no way to un-F that.

[@zulgadams5837]

2 engines are always better than one when flying a plane!!!!👍

[@crazypetec-130fe7]

Two engines means double the chance of engine failure.

[@capella95]

@@crazypetec-130fe7it also means if you have one engine failure you still have an engine

[@crazypetec-130fe7]

And one engine will get you all the way to the crash site.

[@FalconWing1813]

Sounds like the system is a little bit broken,. And there is a lot of disconnect between Uncle Sam and Aircraft developers.

[@txkflier]

I have a radio-controlled 90mm Freewing F-22 Raptor EDF and it flies better than any of my other planes. It just looks right from every angle, almost like it’s a sea creature. I wish we’d built the original 750 and skipped the F-35. The F-35 reminds me of McNamara’s Folly, the F-111.

[@FalconWing1813]

Yea ditch the F-35 , use the money to fund the F-22

[@rFlightFPV]

The Freewing F-35 actually flies like crap, she drops a wing out of nowhere, sold her after 3 nerve wracking flights. Horrible. The F-22 however as you say flies like charm.

[@txkflier]

@@rFlightFPV I haven't flown the F-35. I have about 20 EDF's, but I'd had no desire to buy an F-35..

[@brianlinton910]

Being so electronically hardened against being screwed with that it won’t play nice even with other US jets, doesn’t seem all bad. Other than that, sure they’re cool but so were the Iowa class big boats with boomsticks. It would have been cheaper to finish the Illinois and Kentucky as planned than a new class later but it seems to have worked out without continuing to light money on fire.

[@tomwilson1006]

The Mover & Gonky Show will gladly accept 1 airframe for storage, and 1 for a spare. Thank you. Sincerely, The fans

[@captaintoyota3171]

I mean its too good, no powers today can compete, the su57 is not even close in stealth etc. Sad the f22 is maybe going away just cause its too good. Still legendary aircraft i hope they keep some squadrons going

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

You folks just got to let the Fanboy love go....

[@markymarknj]

But the Su-57 is SUPER maneuverable! It can do better in a dogfight than anything we have.

[@BigSmartArmed]

Both Su-57 and MiG-31 set world records in longest combat BVR kills with R-37M. F-22 has ZERO combat kills.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@BigSmartArmed and where did you acquire this information? In What conflict would they be engaging in?

[@Oldman1600]

Where does the f22 fit in today's BVR and Skynet world? It's had Link 22 issues. There has been some upgrades done by LM but hangs on external hard points , increasing the RCS. It's not fast anymore - hypersonic is here. It's not quiet and creates a sonic boom. It has a high thermal signature. Cannot be flown unmanned. Let the beauty die a graceful death.

[@benokanruzgar8863]

Back in the day US Military out sourced some types of aircrafts from its allies. Like Marines AV-8 Harrier and Goshawk. There are opitons to consider now. S.Korean and Turkish Aerospace companies both have American origin. 🇰🇷 KF-21 Bromae and 🇹🇷 TF-23 Kaan are both 5th gen capable airframes. Maybe KF-21 can accomodate some smaller version of next gen smaller engines instead of GE F414. or TF-23 can be a test bed / limited imported airframes to accommodate GE engines that perform better than current PW F-35 engines. There are cost effective options out there. US must trust its allies and alliances.

[@stupidburp]

Should upgrade all of the F-22 and keep them all until 2040. Divestment of F-22 now to invest in NGAD later makes no sense when the threat of war with a major power is highest during the 2020s and early 2030s when NGAD won’t be available in volume or in fully operational condition. Divest to invest is crazy when the adversaries are already in war production mode and selling off US treasuries to reduce their exposure during war.

[@vindigga6]

Between the raptor and lightening, they Shoulda just put the money into the silent eagle, coulda saved billions.

[@posmoo9790]

where is 'fiba'?

[@gregorymaupin6388]

Literally the best fighter in the world so sad

[@86309]

I got the 69th like......Shack.

[@billymania11]

The F-22 is old now. While the airframe and engines can be kept in top notch condition, the stealth coating is a real problem. The biggest issue is the avionics and computers and the backbone (system bus). They are from the original Intel Pentium era and are woefully inadequate for today's requirements of data fusion and mesh communications. I'd say send the F-22's to National Guard units. Assuming the F-35 gets the new engine, that platform will finally have the performance and general capabilities to fulfill the F-22's mission. Also, an unspoken reality is that the US gets to dictate operation use of the F-35's when allies purchase that aircraft. Think of a kill-switch installed in each one of those foreign purchased F-35's.

[@JonnyBarmCake]

Let it go. It’s only ever shot down a balloon.

[@capella95]

With the growing threat of China/Iran would you not want the best available tool in the toolbox for absolute air superiority? You can’t win a war without controlling the sky

[@mikemontgomery2654]

You guys forgot to throw up the disclaimer while “the iPads” were being talked about…..

[@CWLemoine]

It’s at the beginning of every video and in the description.

[@mikemontgomery2654]

@@CWLemoine that’s true.

[@zlm001]

Give the F-22’s to the demo team and make the Thunderbirds cool again.

[@RW-zn8vy]

The thunderbirds are already cool and the demo is best with the viper

[@zlm001]

@@RW-zn8vy What's that? I can't see it, but I hear the thunder roaring! *Crowd goes wild as seventy foot, twin engined invisible knives, powered by kerosene and American glory, dance on towers of flame as they shred through and cut up the sky.* Ask a kid to draw a race car and he'll draw it red. Ask a kid to draw an airshow jet and it'll be blue and yellow. Giving the Thunderbirds F-22's would just take the game to a whole new level psychologically, which just so happens to be the Raptor's strongest arena. Best future investment for the Raptor program is a Thunderbird upgrade initiative.

[@RW-zn8vy]

@@zlm001 that just makes no sense, if it’s too costly to use for combat how would a demo team that flys every week just about use it without having maintenance issues and keep a full schedule? It’s improbable sorry to say.

[@Shoot_and_Scoot]

They already demo f22s and f35s at air shows and they are a sight to see fly.

[@stealthfinger]

Biggest shame in the world the 22 had nothing worth fighting.

[@perryrush6563]

He never got to eat meat

[@operator9858]

A nice plane but when the russians are releasing stealth fighters for sale at 1/3rd to 1/6th the cost with comparable capability which way you think people are going to go?

[@Grouse2275]

What stealth aircraft? And who is buying them? Why aren’t these aircraft flying missions in Ukraine?

[@operator9858]

@@Grouse2275 su75's are going to soon be up for sale at $20 million a pop. folks are going to be buying them up like hotcakes. soon even 3rd world countries will be able to afford a stealth fighter.

[@UFO721]

I do think you should keep some operational and the rest at bay in reserve. The plane is still top of the line and compared to the F35 highly classified. If you can’t upgrade all them upgrade only a few. The F22 upgraded to latest available technology would still be the most lethal option out there. We already spend a huge chunk of money making it might as well upgrade a few to secure air superiority until the sixth gen is ready for deployment don’t leave a gap. And the F35 compared to F22 is not that special. Starting with the fact that is not highly classified technology when compared to the F22.

[@icer1249]

Behold one of the worlds most expensive paper weights. 30 years and countless trillions spent to shoot down a single balloon. Now if the coldwar has gone the other direction it would of been a very different story.

[@mastersheff37]

*would've

[@masafarmi7709]

Cold war is still going on, it just got bit warmer though.

[@gureno19]

Then it served it's purpose? You have a plunger not because you want to use it every day, but because when you are knee deep in shit you want the right tool at hand.

[@jairo8746]

The US also spend billions upon billions on nuclear weapons and its maintenance, yet i am sure you are alleviated you haven't used them yet.

[@icer1249]

@gureno19 but you do use a plunger, you also don't spend trillions of dollars on it.

[@cup_and_cone]

Invisible money for an invisible airplane.

[@SpinStar1956]

If it can be fubar’d, trust that the government can and will do it; just like B-2 Spirit 😢

[@UFO721]

F22 shares a similar relationship with F35 as the Virginia Class Submarine with the Seawolf Class Submarine. The F35 is a jack of all trades and a master of none and a cheaper exportable and less classified aircraft. The F22 is an Air Superiority Fighter and Apex predator in the skies. In a similar manner the Virginia is a jack of all trades master of none while Seawolf is an Apex Predator extremely classified and insanely expensive. There is one thing that unfortunately, is always true. Quality costs money. And in a similar it cost a lot of money to have the edge. The Seawolf are old if you consider the years they have been in service. But they are still top of the line and the pinnacle in naval warfare surveillance and interception as a hunter killer. That’s why they are still around despite limited numbers. The F22 should be the same lower the number of F22s in active duty and upgrade a few of them not all of them to lasted standards. Put to good use the billions that were spend making them. I’ll end my discussion by saying this. “Cheaper things are more expensive in the long run.”

[@TheJustinJ]

The F-22 was born out if an era prior to the fall of the wall. It was designed to beat all eastern bloc fighters with as close to an infinite to zero kill/loss ratio as practicably possible. And thus far, it seems to have been exactly what is was intended. As it can easily gain a 100:1 ratio against F-15s in training, which has over 100:0 kill/loss in reality against aircraft up to and including Sukhoi SU-27s. So, the F-22 certainly is a world beater. And it has been nice to have in this Putin dominated eastern Europe of the last 20 years as he has become more belligerent. Its also nice to have as China developed the J-20 with their stolen F-35 technology. But seeing how Russia engages against Ukraine, and cannot gain air superiority in spite of having SU-35 and S-400 in spades. They have no chance against the west if they cant even soundly destroy '80s model SU-27s with their 2010s model aircraft and pilots. The F-22 has no equal, both in performance and cost. The F-35 will have little issue against the enemy of their world. The USN and USAF have flown F-35s in close proximity to the J-20 and im sure that data gathered was a tell-all to the F-35s sensors about what it can and cannot do. The F-35 can probably quantify the threat and they now know the F-22 is no longer needed in this day and age. And the next new thing might be really, really good. And need every penny.

[@tomwilson1006]

Somebody very important somewhere saw what the NGAD program is promising and saw with their own eyes what the NGAD prototype can do, and said, “Forget Fat Amy & the Raptor, the USAF needs these!” And so it was then decided to divert the F-22 money to NGAD.

[@khandimahn9687]

The F-22 was cancelled too soon.

[@thescarletandgrey2505]

The F-22 is so advanced no more of them can be made. Aliens helped Boeing engineers with the technology but now they’re gone.

[@CWLemoine]

If they helped Boeing, why'd they lose?

[@saisr1]

Ultimately delays in the program and cost overruns pushed it's procurement so far out that it was starting to push into the development of the F-35 along with the increased budget need to conduct combat ops for what turned into more than 3 decades straight were the problem. The F-35 could not fail as it involved USMC and USN as well as foreign buyers. Properly funding the F-22 would have endangered that program massively and that was a reality DoD was not willing to confront. So they pretended the F-22 would be fine with an order less than half what was needed.

[@tylerdurden4383]

Playback speed 1.25x. You’re welcome

[@johnsteiner3417]

Mine's an amateur opinion, but it seems to me that all the complexity of the technology might've damaged the F-22s longevity.

[@justin8894]

I just flew in from Philadelphia. My arms are tired.

[@STUBBISUPREME]

The rest will probably be dismantled and be used for other planes or jets

[@Daniel-on1uj]

The F-22 is only about 50% mission capable, which is what I see at airshows. Half the time it is supposed to perform, it's not even airshow worthy.

[@hankrearden5460]

It blows my mind that the F-22 platform is on life support but the F-35 program is still alive and well. Between the two platforms one is worth saving the other isn't.

[@TheBelrick]

F-35 was a failed program 10 years ago. Too big to fail so they persevered at all costs Imagine instead the F-22B , F-22 with the F-35 skin, software, helmet , radar improvements.

[@drksideofthewal]

There's a lot of misinformation about the F-35, it's more useful than the F-22 in many ways, while being cheaper. This isn't a popularity contest.

[@TheBelrick]

@@drksideofthewal Speaking of misinformation...

[@drksideofthewal]

@@TheBelrick Cute. But you can’t point out what was incorrect in my statement.

[@TheBelrick]

@@drksideofthewal You only made a single point. F35 cheaper than F22 Which is hard to quantify as the F22 never had a full production run but if it had it would of cost 150-180 million vs. $135 million for a single engine F35 so even then your point was bad Otherwise, your comment was limited to: Me right, everyone else misinformed (no supporting evidence)

[@TeViiNz]

Didnt DOD say teh same thing during Vietnam when the F-4 was released. Ohh everything will be missiles shooting at bombers from long range. They found out quickly that they were wrong. I think the major issue with the F22 is that it never had a worthy adversary.

[@RW-zn8vy]

They were actually right, most kills came from missiles but the technology back then was unreliable. Nowadays you’re never getting close enough for a dogfight unless it’s like an intercept gone wrong or something.

[@ro-86alkonost78]

But homing missiles have improved a lot nowadays since technology has advanced.

[@TylerF35A]

It astounds me to no end that they cannot put an HMD, EOTS or put HAVE GLASS V coatings on the F-22. Is the architecture that restrictive? There is so much potential to really turn the F-22 into a supplementary air superiority fleet for the NGAD. We need to stop wasting money on projects like the F-15EX. The F-22 is still relevant.

[@kevm243]

This is insane to me, the F22 is BY FAR the most capable best fighter in the World it makes absolutely no sense to be retiring any of them.

[@templarknight1981]

NO its NOT the reality IS it was hanger queen from the beginning its had a pot full of problems its expensive to operate and other aircraft have been doing what the raptor can do before and after its inception for along time much cheaper especially Russian 27's 30"s and 35's

[@andreim841]

@@UDontCare0 no you don't...all you have is a printer :)

[@templarknight1981]

@@UDontCare0 thats a ridiculous statement but from someone ridiculous thats fully expected ...carry on

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

It's an airplane that doesn't really have a mission. Is too few in numbers to support logistically. And has software which is no longer updated. We already are working on the next generation of planes.

[@johanbtheman]

@@templarknight1981lol Russian junk. Both Russia and China has copied the design of the f-35 and f-22.

[@garyeuscher4499]

The F-23 was a better weapons system!

[@Grouse2275]

Based on what? It never matured into an actual aircraft so your statement is meaningless. Purely speculation and a biased opinion…..

[@StudSupreme]

Brilliant. The best fighter plane in the world and not only does the AF not want to make more of them, but wants to abandon them. Sounds like an excuse to engage in another phenomenally expensive airplane development program that will turn into another ocean of red ink like the Edsel that is the F-35, both in program cost and maintenance, as well as lack of mission effectiveness.......

[@idolhanz9842]

Air force mismanagement..

[@tristantriton8115]

If you’re broke you find yourself not playing with your expensive toys so makes sense.

[@RealFluse]

What the hell!? Is the ngad in service?! No?! Then figure it the f out!!!!!

[@82saw3]

I also thought the F-16 was an awesome looking platform specially, with that desert camo paint job from iron eagle lol

[@hueydevotedUH1]

Leave it to Congress....F it up....then blame YOU. Lol

[@bdh985]

absolutely the wrong decision to cut the F-22A, in favor of the F-35 and all its associated problems and delays, and NGAD, which we have no idea how well it will work, and could face delays and problems itself, when we are potentially facing a near peer, two front war.

[@johnnycab8986]

This is called making up problems for new tax money gibs for a new program.

[@nathanielrose6782]

There's only 3 aircraft you need, F-22's, F-14's, and A-10's

[@Grouse2275]

F-14’s we’re beautiful but would have zero current combat usefulness…..

[@nathanielrose6782]

@craigc2275 I would disagree, you can't launch Raptors or A-10's from a carrier. And I would imagine that if the F-14 became the Navy's only carrier capable aircraft over the Hornet, I think we would have seen upgrades to it like we have with the Super Hornet. I could write a ton of what ifs. And at the same time one could argue Navy variants of the F-22 or even the A-10. I guess I believe in the need for a Fleet Defense fighter. Does the Super Hornet really fill that role? I question the Hornets power plants and long range weapons for that mission.

[@bravo0105]

So ATF was ultimately perverted into a money-laundering joke…

[@rnginu59]

Maybe we should quit sending money to other countries and spend it on our own equipment.

[@RW-zn8vy]

Still doesn’t make the f22 any cheaper

[@nobleman-swerve]

Literally what we're doing. Clearing old inventory to backfill it with new production. Unless you think a bunch of M113's or Bradley's collecting dust in the desert are critical to national defense.

[@ldl0021]

With all the aid we’ve sent to Ukraine 🇺🇦 we could of completed NGAD & funded the F-22… Forever!

[@blacklake13]

And how much of Russia's conventional armed forces would that destroy? To compare apples to apples, how many Su-35's have been shot down over Ukraine compared to how many have been shot down by F-22? (Then add in Su-25's, Su-34's, helicopters, and all the aerial assets destroyed on the ground too.) F-22's a good plane and a good deterrent, but there's a huge difference between potential capability against a strategic threat and actual, active degradation of a strategic threat.

[@ro-86alkonost78]

The problem is letting Ukraine fall without helping them will send a wrong message to the world.

[@victorzvyagintsev1325]

@@blacklake13 So now you got Russia on war footing and working on new inventory to replace destroyed ones. And all that with lessons learned in a peer war. Yeah, thats definately a better option than upgrading the F-22 to modern standards.

[@calvinlee1813]

Drop in the bucket. Look into the Littoral Combat Ship at between $500 to $600 Million per ship, which are defenseless, and aid in the KC-46 which continues to waste money and the units like the Maryland,Montana,Michigan Air National Guard Units who transitioned between multiple platforms. And don't forget BRAC2005 which wasted billions. What we give Ukraine is nothing compared to what is lost in mismanagement.

[@MrTakin00]

@@blacklake13why are you so afraid of Russia 😂. They obviously have no chance of invading nato nations. And if they did USA would be way more effective than Ukraine

[@cjshortsnsnips]

Very spendy aircraft zero combat experience, except for a freaking Chinese Balloon.😂😂😂

[@garyeuscher4499]

It’s a POS, Cmon it’s 30 years old! Build a new weapon system! Lockheed screwed up the F-22, It’s too delicate!

[@user-cw1zb5fe7i]

I don’t believe these stories. There’s more to this story.

[@colinboone9920]

This is preposterous.

[@jairo8746]

You might want to verify that source before giving it any thought. EurasianTimes is outright garbage most of the times.

[@scottlink183]

No mention of the F-22 pilots suffering hypoxia like symptoms when flying the F-22 You also ignored that the F-22 is restricted flying above 25,000 ft. Also no mention that the F-22 is must fly within a given range of an airfield due to the problems. The F-22 is a failed program.

[@CWLemoine]

None of that is true.

[@billquillin1952]

Shameful

[@wedgeantilles8575]

I guess the F-22 is not diverse enough... Maybe if they defined the F-22 as female and black?