[QUOTE]Originally posted by steve c
The reality is our requirements have changed, all we want to do these days is drop sh*t on folks. The need for interceptors etc is no longer there.

 

Let's not be too short-sighted now. Remember back in the 60's they said the age of dogfighting was over too, and they decided to remove guns from airplanes. Bad idea. We haven't had too many aerial engagements lately b/c we're beating up on low-tech thugs who've bought fancy hardware but no electronic stuff. Who knows what will happen in the next 10-20 years? If we go up against someone like China, I think the need for a long-range interceptor will become readily apparent. And given the nature of the military today, it behooves us to try and wring as much capability out of a platform as possible. IIRC correctly, the F-22 can carry 6 AMRAAM's and two Sidewinders. How much more capacity do you want? The development of the Small Diameter Bomb also enables the F-22 to carry some air-to-ground weapons. The Strike Eagle it ain't, but 6 SDB's will still ruin a bunker's day.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by steve c

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gymniac
P&W just started testing their F135 engine for :surprise:F35:surprise: in West Palm Beach.

 

Nothing wrong with it. In fact, that was my point. I was respectfully disagreeing with steve's notion that F-22 was utter "nothing we need" or "waiste of money" since it's pretty ovbious that JSF is going through pretty exciting EVOLUTION process. I'm willing to bet my lunch money that when LM did their kick-off meeting for F23, the first thing on their agenda was to dig through "old" F-22 drawings.

 

Hey Drew, I just realized that since you work in Hollywood, you might actually know the man I'm talking about. First name is Mitch. ???

I think I must be getting "oldtimers" disease , because I got some of my facts totally wrong. It's not a napkin, it's a piece of stationary from AF1. While it may have sold at a recent private auction, I'm sure it's still available if someone wants to spend the money. Here's what you'd get:



I also got myself confused about the humador. Rather than being from AF1, this box had originally been a gift, from Bill to Jack Kaneally, who was (get this) the Pepsi Distributor for the White House.

Off topic, but related to your comment about things that are priceless, for one reason or another... Mitch has a bass guitar that I've seriously considered trying to buy myself. Every time I see the thing, I want to take it home. Nothing special, except that it has been autographed by all four of the "Fab Four." This piece was valued in the six figure range when three of the four were still alive, and has no doubt increased in value since then. I could bring it home for WAY less than the appraised value, but it's still a LOT of money, and so far I've been able to resist the temptation. However, I'm sure the piece would make a sound investment (no pun intended).

I don't want to post his full name, but I'm sure if you do know Mitch, you know exactly who I'm talking about. He has more than a few friends in the movie business, and has lots of friends and contacts in Hollywood. Do you know who I'm talking about?
(If so, you probably also know why I like the guy so much. A very cool dude. )

PM to follow ...

RED

 

[QUOTE]Nothing wrong with it. In fact, that was my point. I was respectfully disagreeing with steve's notion that F-22 was utter "nothing we need" or "waiste of money" since it's pretty ovbious that JSF is going through pretty exciting EVOLUTION process. I'm willing to bet my lunch money that when LM did their kick-off meeting for F23, the first thing on their agenda was to dig through "old" F-22 drawings.

 

Actually, from what I hear the F22 won because it was actually going to be the design. The F23 wasn't meeting its specs, and Northtrop/McD were basically saying "oh, that's not the final design..." The 22 had the variable geometry engines, the 23 did NOT (at the time). The 22 was much more maneuverable as well.

Why do you think the 22 won? I do hear that Northrop Grumman is still developing the 23 in hopes of winning a contract.

BTW, my father was a PM at GD, so he knows. He was also a RF-4 pilot in 'nam and a F-111 A, E, and F pilot, stationed on the german border flying less than a mile from the MiGs in the other side, constantly "spiking" each other.

 

There are a number of reasons that go into any decision like this, but in the end the 22 won based on politics.

The 23 was / is the better platform, not to mention quicker and stealthier. Lockheed built to the specs, MD/Northrup built what would be needed in the future.

Being a project manager, I doubt your father would really "know" very much .. but then I'm no expert and just rendering an opinion, nothing else.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by steve c
Actually I was referring to the YF-23 that competed against and lost (due to politics) to the 22.

The 22 should have been dead the moment the need for an interceptor was pulled back. The fact that it isn't is pure politics, nothing else.