Production of the F-22 Raptor has ended. Sort of a symbol of US air dominance. Instead they will replace it with F-35 and sell them to other Countries.

As an former F-4 guy this news makes me feel really, really OLD. But then I seem to feel that way quite a bit! Maybe it's something in the water.

Sell which to other countries? It was my understanding that the F-22 wasn't going to be sold to other countries.

I'm a bit torn on the news--a part of me hates seeing production of any plane halted; however, considering the fact that the F-22 never even saw combat in Iraq or Afghanistan, it might be time to stop bleeding $150-300 million a pop.

The high performance F-35 replacement is going to be sold to other Countries. It may not be as high tech as the Raptor but the Raptor will no longer be produced. The F-35 is still 2/3 the cost of the Raptor. $100-200 million a pop

I'm curious why the F-22 wasn't used recently. Anyone know why?

It had an oxygen problem. Couldn't produce it, feed it, ???

The windows in my office and in our conference rooms look out to the northwest toward Dobbins ARB, about 6 miles away. Lockheed and the F-22 program are located in facilities adjacent to the base. The Dobbins localizer passes just north of us. Many times meetings have been distracted by sights such as Air Force One climbing out. None have been more impressive than the distinct profile of a Raptor coming down the glideslope nose high, or in the flame-out pattern, or a couple of Raptors coming in hot for the overhead break. All of our front line fighters going back to WWII have been awesome looking in one way or the other. None more than the F-22. It is one purpose built, lethal looking aircraft. It makes you proud.

Lockheed invited 10 people on twitter to Georgia to attend the event today. One of my friends from the #avgeek IRC channel on freenode (which you're all welcome to join) was one of those 10.

Based on his twitter feed for today, it sounds like an amazing experience: https://twitter.com/adamcanfly

Here is an article re why the F-22 wasn't used. In a nutshell it was too much airplane for the mission. They also cite some mechanical problems but I suspect those are red herrings.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/07 ... d-20110807

Here is the comparison of the F-22 and F-35

http://www.afa.org/professionaldevelopm ... arison.pdf

Looks to me a bit like the F14/F18 situation.

It's a sales piece, but still very, very cool.
Robin White
[youtube:v8m5avtb]http://youtu.be/Ki86x1WK ... ure=colike[/youtube:v8m5avtb]

The F-22 has been a monstrosity. Sure, it was the shiny new expensive jet. . . that saw no action in 2 active wars and spent much of its short life grounded for various mechanical issues.

Meanwhile we are refueling with 60 year old airframes and doing CAS with 40 year old iron. . priorities?

And it's a twin, too!



John

I have a friend that works in the sheet metal repair part at Tinker AFB. He works mostly on the 135's (Boeing 707). He has said multiple times that Boeing built a hell of an airplane because some of the stuff he has seen is pretty scary. Most of the problems are just that the 135's are old, wore out aircraft. I'm sure the F-15's are in the same boat. The F-22 looks like a hell of an airplane, the F-35, well, not as much.