« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The F-22 – Why Does This Surprise You, General?

Elections have consequences, General....

By: Skanderbeg (Diary)  |  August 10th, 2009 at 12:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

There’s a nice little piece over in today’s Wall Street Journal authored by General Merrill McPeak, expressing his dismay at the premature termination of the build-out of the originally-planned fleet of the F-22 Raptor – the kick-*ss air-superiority fighter pictured above.

The piece is rather good, so I’ll let you go read the whole thing via the link.

I’ll just note a couple of things here:

The future air combat capabilities we should build are based on the F-22, a stealthy, fast, maneuverable fighter that is unmatched by any known or projected combat aircraft.

….

It’s been more than half a century since any American soldier or Marine has been killed, or even wounded, by hostile aircraft….

That first item is simply a statement of fact, while the second is a truly-astonishing description of an unparalleled military achievement.

But there’s a kicker at the end of this piece, which we’ll note below the fold….

The kicker comes when you get to the end of the piece, and read the general’s byline:

Gen. McPeak (ret.), Air Force chief of staff from 1990 to 1994, was a national co-chair of Obama for President.

Why does any of this surprise you, General? Weren’t you fully aware of Mr. Obama’s lifelong views on these sorts of topics? Don’t you recall the “surrender lobby” of the 1980s? And of how Mr. Obama made it perfectly clear back then that he agreed with the views of that “lobby”?

Elections have consequences, General. Welcome back to reality.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • mbecker908

    an ignorant fool.

    I have never been able to understand – and I’m not sure I want to – how people like McPeak, etal willfully support politicians who are opposed to that which they’ve spent their lives doing.

    • The_Rebel

      blamed pro-Israel US Jews for the lack of a Middle East peace agreement.

    • Old_Crow

      I’ve seen it happen to many flag and general officers, all services.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    It’s really cute and all that the light is starting to come on for this guy. But as Skanderbeg points out, the evidence that this would happen is laying around all over the place.

    • peg_c

      Another Useful Idiot for the pile.

  • WarEagle01

    As someone who suffered under McPeak’s disasterous “leadership” of the Air Force in the early 90s, I am not surprised at all by this man’s utter cluelessness. I’m just thankful Obama didn’t make him SECAF.

  • jimc1969

    Kinda scary that someone this stupid can be a general in our armed forces.

  • Richard Mullins

    is what we have here. Complaing after the fact of your support of O is a big burden to bear. You should know better General McPeak.

  • mallcopsaysno

    That’s good enough for me, but if it isn’t good enough for you, consider that Obama’s budget deficit is already approaching $1.8 trillion for this year.

    • Martin Knight
      • mallcopsaysno

        But this is looking more like pork than defense. Remember,

        JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!!!

        You don’t want it. You don’t need it. But you should buy it anyway, America, because government spending means jobs!

        Showing their true colors there, they are.

        • Dave_in_Fla

          “You don?t want it. You don?t need it.”

          “Russia unveiled the MiG-35 at the Aero India 2007 airshow in Bangalore, amid Moscow’s keenness to sell these planes to India. It was reported that the MiG-35 made its way from Moscow to Bangalore in less than three hours, assisted by in-flight refueling on the way and flying at supersonic speeds.

          The MiG-35 is a contender with the Eurofighter Typhoon, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, JAS 39 Gripen and F-16 Falcon for the bid of more than 126 multirole combat aircraft to be procured by the Indian Air Force in Indian MRCA competition.”

          I’m sure the Russians will be totally opposed to selling MIG-35s to Syria and Venezuela.

      • ColdWarrior

        n/t

    • oblio

      if Congress got rid of the PORK that has no constitutional support there would be plenty of money for things that are, such as National Defense !

    • jeffreywturner

      Gates is using the right reasons – ie: It’s just not worth the cost to build more air superiority fighters when we already have air superiority and will have it for the forseeable future anyway.

      Obama is using the wrong reasons – ie: Do whatever you can to divert money from national defense to more “important” things like entitlements.

      • Dave_in_Fla

        “we already have air superiority and will have it for the foreseeable future”

        Not everyone is quite so confident. Most of our air superiority is based on the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18. The new MIG-35 is superior to all 3. You better hope that our allies flying the F-16 are better trained when they go into a hot war with someone supplied by the Russians.

    • jeffreywturner

      The F-22 is incredible and can do things that were only science fiction just a few years ago. However, producing them now is equivalent to buying a bazooka when you are already equipped with machine gun and your enemy is only using brass knuckles.

      • gator_hoo

        Jeff, even assuming arguendo that you are right, (which is far from certain), THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT. The real strength of a strong military is its ability to convince the opponent that he has no shot, so that there will not even be a fight. You cannot allow the opponent to think he has a puncher’s chance.

  • SteveLA

    Skanderberg

    The decision to cap production of the F22 was actually formulated under the Bush administration with participation by AF leadership pressured by Secretary Gates.

    While I will agree with you that F22 is one heck of an airplane, there are many issues that are factors in making this decision:

    Per Unit Cost

    Effective force numbers required and O&M cost of same

    Maintenance hours required for each hour of flight

    Threat profile for the next 10 to 20 years.

    By the way airframes wear out due to the high G maneuvering that every day pilot proficiency flights that are required to keep current. 20 years may be a generous estimate of how long the F22 airframe will last. This is actually an issue today with the F15 Eagle fleet and to some extent the F16 Falcon.

    While I may think that Obama and the Democrats have a history of being anti-military, I tend to trust the leadership of Secretary of Defense Gates and he is firmly behind capping production of the F22 as was President Bush.

    If you want to make the jobs argument, well that is a different argument and worthy of discussion related to preserving the industrial base of this country that has served this country well in the past.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      some comments above, I don’t see the budget deficit as relevant.

      I do wish Gates had prevailed upon Obama to seek more limited goals in Afghanistan…

      more later

    • DONTREADONME

      costs for the F22 and please compare that to the realized LCC? How much is the LCCE outside of the numbers as is the actual LCC for O&S or actual PMC and O&M costs let alone never reaching AAO for FRP or FOC? I figured I would knock the middle person out by not searching for the information and rather would have you cite rough figures for me. I am not trying to be confrontational but I just do not have the time to go through the costs so I know the true imbalance in force multiplication to cost.

      • SteveLA

        DONTREADONME

        I’ve never dug out the studies, but if they have been through public release, they are most likely over at the Air War College web site.

        I’d also guess that the fight time to maintenance time ratios are not publicly available, all I know is some anecdotal stores from people who work on them on what it takes. Check AvLeak to see what they have if you’re really curious.

        But again, I’d figure Secretary Gates has reviewed all the data as did President Bush when they came out for capping the F22 production.

        • DONTREADONME

          SteveLA for some direction, if I get some time I have wanted to get the numbers regarding the PMC O&M costs versus the LCCE et al. to just see for myself.

          Again, you could very well be right on the costs, I just do not know the full story… So I was just hoping to siphon off the info you had. Thanks for understanding that I was sincerely asking you a question, sometimes this text thing can be taken the wrong way.

        • DONTREADONME

          SteveLA for some direction, if I get some time I have wanted to get the numbers regarding the PMC O&M costs versus the LCCE et al. to just see for myself.

          Again, you could very well be right on the costs, I just do not know the full story… So I was just hoping to siphon off the info you had. Thanks for understanding that I was sincerely asking you a question, sometimes this text thing can be taken the wrong way.

    • mustango

      The problem with the metric of per-unit cost is that it varies inversely with the size of the production run. So once you start cutting back on a program, its per-unit cost goes up, making it an inviting target for more cutbacks, which boosts the per-unit cost even more, and so on and on until it gets canceled outright.

      But regardless, this isn’t so much about the F22 specifically as it is about EHC. And the general is an utter fool if he was truly surprised by what has occurred.

    • Wubbies World

      I spent 21 years in the Air Force working on F-15 and F-16 aircraft.

      Your arguments sound really nice to an audience who has no practical experience working on a fighter aircraft. The fact that you haven’t is also evident.

      I can go into details about what maintenance problems the Air Force is having with our fighter fleet that is over 30 years old.

      However, the unclassified answer is that we need a new fighter fleet badly and not just from a budgetary standpoint. Metal fatigue is only the beginning. Those wonderful upgrades you refer too are being done because the Air Force is doing what is called “doing its best to do what it needs to do with old airplanes” because they are not getting new ones.

      The entire cut back of F-22′s is dependent on the delivery of the new F-35 aircraft. However, some Googling on your part will show that is is in serious trouble and is not going to be delivered on time.

      The part of Gates/Obama military plan you are not mentioning is the retirement of 250 of the Air Forces main line fighters in the next few years, two years before the F-35 is ready for delivery, if it is still delivered on time. That is 5 entire Air Wings!

      So, not only do you have to argue for the stopping of production of the F-22, but to be honest in your argument, you need to frame it with the retirement of 250 existing fighter aircraft, and the F-35 not even being ready for production.

      So, lets be a little more honest about what is really going on. It is not about a “too expensive aircraft”. It is about gutting the Air Force to save money to make up for 1.8 trillion in debt. The military budget is too juicy for pacifist liberals to find money for social programs.

      .. but hey, that is just me talking.

      • Wubbies World

        You will find the 250 aircraft cuts in 2010, and the others way down the list, after he tells how he is increasing military child care by $200 million.

        http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1341

        • SteveLA

          WW

          The plan to cut the F22 was begun under President Bush and Secretary Gates, did they get it wrong?

          While the Fighter Pilots Union of the AF may not like it, Tankers, UAV’s and Trash haulers are also part, some would argue more of a mission, today and in the future for the AF. The Air Superiority mission is still going to be there, but there are a whole heck of a lot more important things the AF is being called on to do than paying for and maintaining a fleet of aircraft which were designed in the 90′s for a Soviet treat that is long gone.

          By the way, I worked on heavies, 52 G’s and RC 135′s. I test them now and see F 22′s flying every day. I’ve even been inside the enlles. I’ve even been in the engine bay of the JSF that’s over at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, it’s a way cool aircraft.

          • Wubbies World

            This is just like after the gulf war. Bush I created a draw down plan after the gulf war. Then Clinton came into office and went way beyond that planned draw down. Clinton actually cut 50% of the active duty Air Force. That was not in Bush I’s plan.

            Bush had a review and reduced the number of F-22′s that was planned to be built. However Bush II did not plan to gut 250 fighter aircraft in 2010 nor was he going to cancel the F-22 program. Obama is doing that, not Bush.

            There is a big difference.

          • Wubbies World

            I did not know you were in the Air Force. Your previous entry made no mention of first hand knowledge. Having been on Buffs, you know about old aircraft problems then. That surprises me even more.

      • Old_Crow

        Despite the Air Force obstructions.

        • Wubbies World

          NASA retires the shuttle and we will depend on the Russians to get into space because we don’t have a workable replacement yet.

          The current president retires 250 fighters now, as well as cuts the remaining fighter production now. The replacement they are relying on is not ready for delivery due to problems as well.

          Do we rely on the Russians for fighter cover if we get in a war with China on the Korean peninsula?

          just asking….

        • Wubbies World

          I have no problem with ending the program early, I also have no problem with UAV’s being brought to the forefront. They have tremendous advantages.

          What I do have a problem with is the termination of the program, and simultaneous retirement of a big chunk of our fighter fleet with out a viable replacement in place to replace that which we are doing away with. That is dangerous to national security.

          I see all this as nothing but a cash cow the Democrats want to gore for claiming budget cuts and cost savings at a time we can least afford it.

  • rickz77

    The Congress, in its wisdom, saved $1.5 billion by reducing the number of F-22 Raptors.

    Instead, Congress will substitute luxury long range Executive Airliners … anywhere from 4 to 8. Two of them go for nearly $70 million each.

    Nancy Pelosi has been very upset about having the present private jet stop and refuel on the way back to California. So 8 shiney new business jets (two of which each cost $55 million) are in the budget, and three F-22 Raptors are out.

    • SteveLA

      rickz77

      And don’t ask where the studies are that looked at a modernization of the F 15 fleet with some of the avionics goodies in the F22.

      Also don’t forget to ask how to pay for replacement of the KC 135R’s which are 40+ years old, or where’s the replacement for the real AF Senior citizen, 50+ year old B52H’s.

      For sure the F22 is a great airplane, but how does it fit into fighting the next war? Secretary Gates seems to have answered that question.

      • Paul_In_Houston

        For sure the F22 is a great airplane, but how does it fit into fighting the next war? Secretary Gates seems to have answered that question.

        And if the next war is the type where it is needed?

        Who the Hell knows what the next war will be like?

        Or, have they decided that if it ain’t what they planned for, they’ll just pass? (“Ok! No can do. Sorry about that.”)

        -

        • SteveLA

          Paul_In_Houston

          The argument to keep production going for the F22 goes to that very thing, looking at what threats this country faces and what are armed forces are going to need to protect this country.

          The men and women who serve in our Armed forces spend a great deal of time thinking, planning, equipping and making sure our Armed forces are indeed ready for the “next war” , and I’m of the opinion that they do a pretty good job. They are the real professionals who’s tail ends will be on the line when the excrement hits the fan and I’m happy to defer to their judgment and Secretary Gates judgment on this matter rather than the opinion of Tony McPeak or any of the Senate overlords more interested in jobs in their states than the defense of this country.

          • nessa

            Think a cross between the current War on Terror (OIF/OEF) and what we are likely to see in Georgia against the Russian military. The same COIN (Counter-Insurgency) with some good old fashioned Cold War style Tank Battles thrown in for good measure.

            What I’m reading about the reasons for cutting the F22, it’s basically because its “too far advanced.” It requires more maintenance than the current fighters and more training flight time. Ya think? It does things no other airplane does. It is as far ahead of fighter technology now as the F16 (and it’s Pheonix Missile) was when it was new. Both Russia and China purposely design weapons platforms to defeat our weapons platforms. Then they sell them to the lowest bidder. Think the BMP III, specifically designed to outperform and defeat the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The Russian Army can’t afford to field them but Russia made them and sold them. Its been awhile since I had a threat breifing, any info I had frrom my last one is well outdated and undoubtedly been outed by dem congress critters but these generalizations are accurate.

            When the Russians or the Chinese start selling something that significantly outperforms the F15, F 18 etc. what do we do then? The last time we were outperformed in the air was early WW II. Japanese Zero vs the F4F Wildcat or the Zero vs the P38 Lightning or F4U Corsair. We developed what we needed but it was late in coming. Did it cost more to maintain the F4F than it did its immediate Biplane predecessors? Did pilots have to fly them more to maintain proficiency at 300+ MPH vs the 70 MPH of the biplanes?

            IMHO we are capable of designing and building these now, we should build them and use them. Let the Russians and Chinese play catch up and continue to play catch up. Don’t take a chance of anyone pulling ahead.

          • dave_in_atl

            IMHO we are capable of designing and building these now, we should build them and use them. Let the Russians and Chinese play catch up and continue to play catch up. Don?t take a chance of anyone pulling ahead.

            First you are right, we can and have built F22′s… Last I checked we had somewhere around 180 of them.

            Since there is currently nothing that can compete at the same level as the F22 what is the point of having anymore atm? Unless you think that Russia or China will catch us by surprise and suddenly be flying around in jets that can kick our butts?

            Now I guess its not a guarantee that our intelligence agencies would not catch wind of such a development, but I doubt it.

            So the real question I believe is what is to keep us from ramping up production when we actually have a need to?

          • nessa

            My comments were at least partly based on my own knee-jerk reaction to any cuts in the defense budget. Thanks for taking the time to call me out on it and proposing a more correct viewpoint.

            Unless Obama and the dems get their way and we are socalized, the American people can and will, and have proven time and time again that we can mobilize our industry to an absolutely amazing capacity. You can look at the same airplanes I mentioned in WW II, or the ships and equipment from the lend lease program of WW II, or go back to the weapons systems developed during the Civil War, the 1862 Spencer was the rifle the indians described as “load it on Sunday and shoot all week.” The American People, combined with the Free Market, our Freedoms and our Entrepeneurship are a force never before witnessed in the history of mankind.

            But the rhetoric thats being thrown around (nothing specific to this post or the comments) is more of a complete condemnation of the entire program, this is completely in-line with dem propaganda. The Defense budget is evil and unnecessary. It’s amazing that a party which supports increasing the federal deficit to previously unknow and unimagined levels can, with the opposite side of the same nasty mouths, can complain about the defense budget. It’s tanamount to condemning pedophiles while simultaneously being engaged in the act of having sex with a child. Sorry, that’s a powerful and dusgusting analogy but it is accurate.

          • oblio

            , far too small to carry it. The Phoenix platform was the F-14 carrying the Hughes AWG-9 and later the APG-71 (IIRC). In fact the early F-16 could not even support the AIM-7 due to the lack of HPRF (High Pulse Repetition Frequency) capabilities needed by the missile seeker, the lack of liquid cooling limited the transmitter duty factor. Even the AMRAAM had to be downsized due to the limitations of the F-16 airframe.

            [/nitpick]

  • diakrioi

    You don’t make General unless you’ve worked the system and promoted yourself to other generals and politicians. To move up you kiss up. The difference between many/most flag officers and regular soldiers can also be seen in the difference between big city police chiefs and regular line officers. It is the difference between regular working people and the politicians with power over them.

  • naraht

    “It?s been more than half a century since any American soldier or Marine has been killed, or even wounded, by hostile aircraft?. ”

    Hmm. Then what does he think caused the death and destruction at the Pentagon on September 11th?

    Though I do think it would be absolutely incredible if General McPeak was a “truther”.

    • not_neo_just_conservative

      The North Vietnamese had Migs. I assume they shot down a few aircraft. I recognize that SAMs got most of our planes over there, but you’d have to assume that the Migs took out at least one airplane at some point between 1959 and 1975.

      • not_neo_just_conservative

        He meant ground forces, not a fighter on fighter shoot down.

  • omarsuarez

    Unless they don’t.

    Or is it irrelevant that McCain also supports shuttering the F-22 and the exact same thing would have happened if the election had gone the other way?

    • jeffreywturner

      Also, Souter wouldn’t have retired if McCain had won, so the election hasn’t affected the balance on the SCOTUS yet either.

      Still, there are a couple of things that certainly would be better now if McCain had won (ie: no kissing the buts of nations who despise us), so elections still do have consequences.

      • omarsuarez

        …of course they do. I’m just referring to this instance.

        It’s more a matter of the point not making any sense. The general’s naive for supporting Obama who killed the F-22, when the alternative was to support McCain… who would have killed the F-22.

        It’s reaching to make a point that isn’t there. If you’re going to chide the general for making a bad choice, do it on a subject where it actually made a difference.

        I’m of the school that believes your good arguments carry more weight when they’re not buried in BS ones. Maybe that puts me in the minority, I don’t know.

        • konstantine

          Yes. On that point I agree with you.

          For me, the build up to the election with those on our side who did make the argument about the election (because of their extreme dislike of McCain) that it didn’t matter who won – is something that I hope and pray that we don’t go through ever again.

          Since you were commenting on the issue of the F-22 alone, then of course my generalized, election comment doesn’t apply. As I said, I hope that we never have to see another unfortunate run up to the election like we saw in 2008 again.

    • konstantine

      It’s really an insult to suggest that after 4 years, that Obama and McCain would leave the nation in the same shape. Conservatives would have been able to push back against McCain. On amnesty. Or the shuttering of the F-22. Or anything else. When a conservative challenges Obama, his reply is “I won.”

      The people (conservatives, libertarians, whoever) who who said that ‘we’re screwed no matter who wins’ in the 2008 election need to plan their rationale/explanation to the rest of us. Because after the 4 or a total of 8 years of Obama and what he has done to this nation becomes a reality, this whole ‘unless they don’t’ attitude will get really old.

      • omarsuarez

        …but we cross-posted. See above.

  • rick554

    Barry O ans his bean counters- killed the F22 for 1.5 billion dollars, thats all it would have taken to keep the production line open. McPeak had to be aware of Barack’s “Air Superiority” cred and not only supported the Mombassa Messiah, but made himself look like a fool doing it.
    Of course, 8 new Gulf Streams, to be based specifically at Andrews for our “Leaders” and 8 BILLION for ACORN somehow got below the good General’s radar. THIS WILL come back to haunt our AIRMEN, you can bet on THAT

  • Wing Zero

    I love you guys, I really do. I love Red State.

    But not a bleeding last one of you bean counters knows the true capabilities of the F-22, or a bleeding thing about the use of Air Power in combat situations.

    My first thought to the “overpowered” crowd – Where is your head? Did not Reagan himself champion “Peace through Strength”?

    Do you want to send up 30 of our pilots in aged F-15′s and have 15 of them come back, or do you want to send 20 Raptors, and have all 20 come back?

    Yes, the F-22 was designed with an Air Superiority mission in mind, but also has a second and I would say more important mission – taking out “double digit” SAMs ( Surface to Air missles).

    Should we have to strike North Korea or Iran, or God forbid we go to war with China, Surface to Air missiles will HAVE to be destroyed for our other mission objectives to be achieved. These SAMs have such advanced capabilities, that only one Fighter Air Craft will be able to take down an SA-10 or SA-20 – the F-22.

    The F-15 is a fine Air Craft, but is has limitations. It has aged gracefully, but make no mistake, it has aged. You can give it all the neat avionics and engine upgrades you want, but the actual Air Frame has limitations.

    This is what we NEED to have ready – a Fighter Air Craft that can take down anything now or the next 10 to 15 years in the Air or on the ground.

    Wing Zero – Former USAF 1N0 – supported F-15′s AND F-22′s.

    • Wing Zero

      That’s a picture of the YF-22.

      Just nit pickin’.

    • SteveLA

      The AF Times was a bit more open about this SEAD/DEAD re-marketing .

      For 10 years, the Air Force has argued that the F-22?s incredible dogfighting capabilities will ensure the U.S. remains dominant for decades. And for 10 years, critics who say the fighter is an overpriced Cold War relic have steadily whittled down the service?s Raptor budget.

      It?s time for a new argument.

      The F/A 22 whoops not supposed to call it that anymore, is a fine airplane, but it is not a F/A18G, or an F16 Wild Weasel or a lot of other very capable aircraft well suited to real SEAD missions, now and in the foreseeable future. The F22 is a pure bred Air Combat machine that turns and burns like nobody’s business and even if you can find it, it’s darn hard to take on even in a non fair fight. But that’s the problem. It’s an airplane that is looking for a mission and “could be” a SEAD mission vehicle is a pretty weak card to play, as was calling it the F/A 22 a few years back to put the smell of air to mud on it.

      Wing Zero, with respect, unless you’re a whole heck of a lot smarter than Secretary Gates and a whole host of Pentagon types, you’re fighting a loosing battle over a weapon system that while not obsolete, was designed to counter a threat that nobody is predicting will come up anytime soon. The F15 and F16 fleet while old, are still a pretty darn good air superiority sharp end of the stick, and the JSF is not exactly going to be a slouch ether, in both the Air Combat mission and the air to mud missions.

      Sorry arguing a SEAD role for the F22 is just more fighter pilot marketing of the F22.

      • Wing Zero

        I’m not a fighter pilot. I’m an intelligence ANALYST.

        The reason why no one will send an F-18 or F-16 on a mission for SEAD/DEAD is that an SA 10 would see them miles away, and most likely take them down.

        Look up the F-16 that got downed in Bosnia. That was downed by an SA-6.

        The F-22′s stealth capabilities not only make it a great Air to Air platform, but an even better Air to Ground platform. Once we have destroyed the SAMs, and destroyed enemy aircraft, then we can through F-16′s, F-15E’s, F-18′s and the JSF at whatever is left.

        • SteveLA

          Wing Zero

          The F22 has only internal stores, which are limited and if you started hanging external stores the stealth stuff goes to heck. Air to Mud in any form is not what the F22 was designed to do. It’s really that simple and that’s why the 11th hour re-marketing push by the Fighter pilot’s union is not going to work.

          The F16 Weasel and the F/A 18 G are designed and have the avionics to take on the SAM threat. Not to mention that with a small fleet of F22′s, 130 or even 250 aircraft, nobody is going to use them for the SEAD mission for no other reason than the magic golden BB is always out there.

          • Wing Zero

            All the avionics in the world aren’t going to save you from a missile traveling several times faster than you’re aircraft.

            Besides, I’m only the Intel analyst that trained on the air frame.

            Surely I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.

            Second, I think 2 1000lb JDAMS is plenty, especially when you consider that it will most likely be more than one Raptor going after a missile site. And 1000 lbs is all you need when you can release a bomb at faster than the speed of sound.

            Third, I don’t feel like going to jail and spilling all the classified details about that jet.

            Lastly, we aren’t good at predicting the next war. It’s usually the stuff we have in short supply that we need the most when we start fighting.

    • ocleverone
  • misterh

    Looks like General McPeak is having buyer’s remorse. he will not be the last to do so.

    By the way, that’s a beautiful photo of the F-22.

    Mr. H
    http://www.allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/