F-22 shouldna t fly

F-22 shouldna t fly

There are 75 comments on the Berkshire Eagle story from Jul 20, 2009, titled F-22 shouldna t fly. In it, Berkshire Eagle reports that:

What constitutes a federal pork barrel project is often in the eyes of the beholder, but the F-22 fighter jet is an indisputable, textbook example.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Berkshire Eagle.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Rob

Berne, NY

#1 Jul 20, 2009
The Eagle's out of touch stance is lets fight on our shore. There are some real idiots writing for this paper, lucky there are way out of touch. This, like most of the eagle's opinions belongs in the trash. Keep up the sub par work!
A-paper-that-can t-spell

Berne, NY

#2 Jul 20, 2009
"shouldna" - the eagle shouldna write such stupidity.
Democrats and Dishonesty

Phenix City, AL

#3 Jul 20, 2009
The F-22 is the absolute finest military fighter in the world and deserves to make a full production run based on it's own merits. Continuing production now is far cheaper that resuming production a decade from now when the need for more jets arises. Lockheed jobs are good jobs and laid off Lockheed workers don't need to be standing in obama's unemployment lines.
ed dartford

Greenfield, MA

#4 Jul 20, 2009
The EAGLE suggests that the F22 fighter aircraft is unnecessary. Existing F15 and F18 fighters are the equal of anything flying today, although not superior to several Russian and Chinese aircraft. Perhaps the F22 is only slightly superior to what we have now and money can be saved by not deploying it.

This reminds me of the history of the British Spitfire fighter of WW2. The Spit is characterized by its elliptical shaped wing: an aerodynamically ideal shape. It was also very difficult and expensive to build compared with a simple tapered wing. Within the British air ministry there were many who thought that the elliptical wing was not worth the extra cost. Fortunately the Spitfire was built as originally designed. Thanks to a very slight advantage in maneuverability attributable to the elliptical wing it could handle the excellent German ME109 fighters while the more conventional Hurricanes went after the bombers. But, as the Brits say, it was a very close run thing. It is arguable that the marginal performance improvement provided by the elliptical wing won the battle of Britain, and that was the turning point of WW2.

If our sons and daughters must go to war I for one want them to have the most effective weapons we know how to make. Cost be damned

And anyway, 1.75 Billion to save thousands of jobs is peanuts compared with the money Obama intends to spend on "make-work" jobs that produce nothing useful.
reeltime

Cedar City, UT

#5 Jul 20, 2009
From Brandon Friedman at VetVoice: "In the midst of the debate over whether or not to suspend production of the Air Force's F-22 fighter jet, the Washington Post has revealed exactly how much it costs to fly and maintain each aircraft. It's dizzying.

The F-22 costs more than $44,000 an hour to fly. That's nearly 50 percent more than it costs to maintain its predecessor, the F-15. Think about that. That's what most Americans make in a year. And while the Air Force says the cost to fly the plane for an hour is $44,300, the Office of the Secretary of Defense says it's actually $49,800. They throw these numbers around like they're nothing.

Of course, I don't have an issue with spending whatever it takes to keep America safe. The problem with expanding production of these extravagantly priced F-22s is that they represent the cost to use something we'll likely never need--a Top Gun-style fighter jet which would've come in handy in the 1980s--at the expense of things we could really use at home and abroad--now.

Let's look at this another way. Let's look at it in terms of domestic issues and national security ones. Most operational F-22s are based at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia. According to the state Department of Education, the average annual salary of a Virginia public school teacher in 2009 is $51,900. So a public school teacher in Virginia deals with unruly fourth graders for an entire year to earn the amount it costs to fly an airplane for an hour. An airplane America will not need unless we find ourselves in all-out war with China or Russia. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

But let's not stop there. Let's turn to Afghanistan where troops have faced equipment and personnel shortages since 2001. The average infantry staff sergeant serving as a squad leader there--a person without whom counterinsurgency operations simply could not take place--makes around $32,500 a year. A first lieutenant platoon leader commanding a rural outpost in Pashtunistan makes around $41,800. You can add on, say,$10,000 to these positions for hazardous duty pay, housing, etc. Either way, the annual salaries of these critical personnel are more or less in line with what it costs to fly an F-22 for an hour.

That we would spend as much money in an hour flying a nearly useless fighter jet as we do paying critical personnel to fight the war on the ground is obscene. Many would say the teacher salary comparison is even worse. If I thought this jet would help enhance our national security at any time in the next 25 years, I'd offer a full-throated defense for its continued production. But because the program lives on as a contractor-driven Cold War zombie hunting for Congressional brains, it's just not something I can support. The money presently being allocated for more F-22s should instead be used to address the threats we might face in the near- to medium-term future--and not our Cold War foes."
http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do...
wilbur

Boulder, CO

#6 Jul 20, 2009
i guess the 1 billion dollar federal funding to study the wildhorse program is o.k...
puzzledatlantan

United States

#7 Jul 20, 2009
Democrats and Dishonesty wrote:
The F-22 is the absolute finest military fighter in the world and deserves to make a full production run based on it's own merits. Continuing production now is far cheaper that resuming production a decade from now when the need for more jets arises. Lockheed jobs are good jobs and laid off Lockheed workers don't need to be standing in obama's unemployment lines.
So they should manufacture a piece of junk aircraft that costs $50000/ hr of flight and 30 hrs of maintenance/hr of flight and one that has never been used in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan??? And you are calling democrats hipocrites?

You are looking to save your job by spending tax payer money on a useless program... yea the democrats are hipocrites!!! You are the worst form of a commie ... a commie parading as a capitalist
puzzledatlantan

United States

#8 Jul 20, 2009
ed dartford wrote:
The EAGLE suggests that the F22 fighter aircraft is unnecessary. Existing F15 and F18 fighters are the equal of anything flying today, although not superior to several Russian and Chinese aircraft. Perhaps the F22 is only slightly superior to what we have now and money can be saved by not deploying it.
This reminds me of the history of the British Spitfire fighter of WW2. The Spit is characterized by its elliptical shaped wing: an aerodynamically ideal shape. It was also very difficult and expensive to build compared with a simple tapered wing. Within the British air ministry there were many who thought that the elliptical wing was not worth the extra cost. Fortunately the Spitfire was built as originally designed. Thanks to a very slight advantage in maneuverability attributable to the elliptical wing it could handle the excellent German ME109 fighters while the more conventional Hurricanes went after the bombers. But, as the Brits say, it was a very close run thing. It is arguable that the marginal performance improvement provided by the elliptical wing won the battle of Britain, and that was the turning point of WW2.
If our sons and daughters must go to war I for one want them to have the most effective weapons we know how to make. Cost be damned
And anyway, 1.75 Billion to save thousands of jobs is peanuts compared with the money Obama intends to spend on "make-work" jobs that produce nothing useful.
Do you know how many flights F22 made in Iraq/Afghaistan wars to "save lives"?... ZERO!
Peppy

Lynchburg, VA

#10 Jul 20, 2009
puzzledatlantan wrote:
<quoted text>
So they should manufacture a piece of junk aircraft
When you start out with these words, you merely showed your ignorance. One can make the case that we need these planes or that we already have enough or perhaps that the jobs are too important to lose or they cost too much to operate, but to say they are junk aircraft is an absurd statement. The technical superiority is unquestionable.

To that end, I will entrust the Pentagon to make these recommendations and will be comforted knowing that fools like you have no say in the matter.

Since: Jul 09

United States

#11 Jul 20, 2009
F-35 has more toys.
ed dartford

Greenfield, MA

#12 Jul 20, 2009
puzzledatlantan...There is no need for the F22 in Iraq/Afghaistan so of course none have been used.

If we some day go up against China (which will hopefully never happen) the F22 will be important. Just having the F22 is probably enough to discourage China from mixing it up with us.

“0 0' 00"”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#13 Jul 20, 2009
ed dartford wrote:
...Just having the F22 is probably enough to discourage China from mixing it up with us.
That'll never happen - they're holding too much of our national debt.
ok sorry lemon aircraft

United States

#14 Jul 20, 2009
Peppy wrote:
<quoted text>
When you start out with these words, you merely showed your ignorance. One can make the case that we need these planes or that we already have enough or perhaps that the jobs are too important to lose or they cost too much to operate, but to say they are junk aircraft is an absurd statement. The technical superiority is unquestionable.
To that end, I will entrust the Pentagon to make these recommendations and will be comforted knowing that fools like you have no say in the matter.
Is that better? Your arguement is like saying Ford knew Pinto was to be a failure. The 'superior' aircraft is full of problems. no matter how superior the features are its only useful if the aircraft is reliable. As someone mentioned they should take the money and spend on F-35. Do you know how the govt makes a lot of decisions? Based on the lobbying... sorry stakeholder's persuasion. Look at F22... they have 40+ states supporting the project to ensure that this program is not cancelled. This is a game. Eisenhower's MIC in full force.
Jeffrey Reel

Stamford, CT

#15 Jul 20, 2009
ed dartford wrote:
puzzledatlantan...There is no need for the F22 in Iraq/Afghaistan so of course none have been used.
If we some day go up against China (which will hopefully never happen) the F22 will be important. Just having the F22 is probably enough to discourage China from mixing it up with us.
China isn't going to mix it up with us. They are sitting back ad practicing something just short of infinite patience as we bankrupt ourselves and continue to borrow trillions of dollars from them, even for a fighter jet the military doesn't even want.

In the meantime, they are building up their own forces, including their space program at a time when we are winding down ours. They are patient. No bravado, no thumping of their chests like we do. We are paying for their military and space programs.They are flush with cash -- ours.
Peppy

Lynchburg, VA

#16 Jul 20, 2009
ok sorry lemon aircraft wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that better? Your arguement is like saying Ford knew Pinto was to be a failure. The 'superior' aircraft is full of problems. no matter how superior the features are its only useful if the aircraft is reliable. As someone mentioned they should take the money and spend on F-35. Do you know how the govt makes a lot of decisions? Based on the lobbying... sorry stakeholder's persuasion. Look at F22... they have 40+ states supporting the project to ensure that this program is not cancelled. This is a game. Eisenhower's MIC in full force.


The F-35 is a fine plane too. I know, my son is an engineer with Northrup Grumman.

Look, I am not looking for an argument. It's just that anyone proclaiming the F-22 is a junk aircraft is grossly misinformed. Despite some technical issues which were fixed along the way, it is an amazing machine that can run circles around anything else out there. If you took the time to research the performance in military maneuvers like the Northern Edge exercises, you wouldn't say such things.

Is it too expensive? Probably so, but we also have twenty years of sunk cost in it. This means we can build these far cheaper than any next generation plane that will need years of engineering.

Do we need more? Probably not and if so, don't build them (or any other planes for that fact).

Are politicians at work? As always.

My only issue is with any moron that insists the F-22 raptor is junk. That is so far from the truth that it is just nonsense. And, please don't cite wikipedia accounts of crashes as proof of anything. It's not.
Peppy

Lynchburg, VA

#17 Jul 20, 2009
ed dartford wrote:
puzzledatlantan...There is no need for the F22 in Iraq/Afghaistan so of course none have been used.
If we some day go up against China (which will hopefully never happen) the F22 will be important. Just having the F22 is probably enough to discourage China from mixing it up with us.
I will tell what, if we ever do employ the F-22, we are going to blow our enemy away.

In afghanstan they are still throwing sticks and stones and then hiding in caves. The F-22 wasn't built to attack rat holes.
Sanity

Midland, TX

#18 Jul 20, 2009
Barack Obama is a bigoted dishonest incompetent, who, when given a teleprompter, can package trite and empty phrases, interspersed with the occaisional demagogic fear- and/or smearmongering.

He, his administration, and the Democratic leadership are guilty of criminal negligence, if not malfeasance.

For the good of the country, as well as mankind, the impeachment of him and his administration should be seriously considered.

Have a pleasant evening.
Francis A

Springfield, MA

#19 Jul 20, 2009
Sanity wrote:
Barack Obama is a bigoted dishonest incompetent, who, when given a teleprompter, can package trite and empty phrases, interspersed with the occaisional demagogic fear- and/or smearmongering.
He, his administration, and the Democratic leadership are guilty of criminal negligence, if not malfeasance.
For the good of the country, as well as mankind, the impeachment of him and his administration should be seriously considered.
Have a pleasant evening.
And the previous administration was just plain criminal.
Sanity

Midland, TX

#20 Jul 20, 2009
Francis A wrote:
<quoted text>
And the previous administration was just plain criminal.
The previous Admin was ok...with the notable and egrious exception of making Hank Paulson (Democrat) SecTreas. THAT was a huge mistake.
Francis A

Flagstaff, AZ

#22 Jul 20, 2009
Sanity wrote:
<quoted text>
The previous Admin was ok...with the notable and egrious exception of making Hank Paulson (Democrat) SecTreas. THAT was a huge mistake.
And which planet have YOU been living on? The only saving grace about W was that people like someone who appears to be as dumb as they are. Some people seem to hate it when smart people are in office.

Anyway, this is about the F-22 That amendment has no business being part of the health plan. Of course, that's the way the legislative branch works... and has worked through many administrations of either persuasion. It's like being at a stoplight and it turns green, but you aren't allowed to go until you pick up the knife-wielding, wild-eyed neanderthal who has just "washed" your windshield.... Let the bill stand or fall on its own merits or the lack thereof. That goes for the F-22 as well as for the health plan.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Saxby Chambliss Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Perdue the better choice for Georgia in Washington (Oct '14) Jan '18 Taxpayer 2
News White House first discussed Bergdahl prisoner e... (Jun '14) May '17 Lottery Traitors ... 95
News Georgia Special Election Likely Advances to Jun... (Apr '17) Apr '17 He Named Me Black... 2
News Tea Party Whisperer Pleads Guilty to Making Fal... (Sep '15) Oct '15 LeDuped 14
News Threat To Bergdahl Led To US Action, Officials Say (Jun '14) Mar '15 Dubya Tee Eff 33
News What qualifies Michelle Nunn to be Georgia's US... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Sam in Ellijay 1
News The 2014 election might stretch into 2015, than... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Marine Corp Pat 6