MovieChat Forums > Dogfights (2005) Discussion > What do people think of Gates' decision ...

What do people think of Gates' decision to purchase fewer F-22s?

posted 15 years ago by freyw
10 replies | jump to latest

I'm sure all of my fellow military aviation fanboys (and fangirls, didn't mean to be sexist) have heard of the decision by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to cut back on F-22s (only 187 to be bought instead of over 300), and ramp up production of the F-35, and I was wondering what the general opinion of it was on this board.

Since the F-35 is cheaper, more versitile, and better in air-to-air combat than anything aside from the F-22, I tend to think that Gates made the right decision. I just hope 187 Raptors are enough.

[–] politic_swatch 15 years ago

With the proliferation of Sukhoi Aviation Corporation's Flanker family of air superiority fighters (which outclass the legacy US Gen 4 fighters, i.e. teen-series) and next-gen double-digit SAMs, 187 Raptors are insufficient to survive attrition.

Robert Gates made a woefully bad decision. I wouldn't have done that as a defense minister or secretary.

Five hundred or more would be the ideal number.

It's the only air superiority in the world which technologically outclasses the Eurocanards (i.e. Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon), the Flankers (nearly all variants) and the Sinocanard i.e. J-10.

[–] sexyloser1128 14 years ago

It was the right one. Insurgents don't have high end fighter jets. We need to pay more attention to the wars we are fighting now rather than some hypothetical war in the future. Gates is fighting the military-industrial complex and for that I applaud him.

[–] debaryman101 14 years ago

You sir are ignorant. We have aging fighters some going on 30 years plus. who cares what the insurgents have!!!! you call them that, I call them terrorists. It was a bad decision because gates is not a military man. whoever holds that position should be former military.

We need to have them for the countries that have high performance fighters. not some terrorists that drive around in pick up trucks to fight an M-1 Abrams tank. Sorry you will lose everytime.

[–] Mug_Costanza 14 years ago

Personally I think Gates' decision was a bit short sighted. I understand the reasoning for it, the fact that the wars we are fighting today are essentially a series of limited unconventional contests, however that may not likely always be the case. It's very possible, if not probable, that we will again fight a more conventional war in the near future. Just look what's going on with the Koreas as of this posting. North Korea has a fairly large conventional military, the kind of military the F-22 was designed to fight against. Should something happen, as it seems like it may, we could be looking at the resumption of armed conflict between North and South Korea, and you know the US will get involved.

Granted, that's all speculation, but the bottom line is that the climate exists now that there does exist the possibility of warfare in that country. And that's not the only place of course. Still many hotspots in the Middle East, and as history has told us, a friend today could potentially become an enemy tomorrow, so you really never know who's going to piss off the international community enough that another war is declared.

Again, I say Gates decision was certainly logical for today's conflict, but I don't think we've seen the end of conventional warfare.

"Tonight....you."

[–] ChakatBlackstar 14 years ago

We need to have them for the countries that have high performance fighters

We don't have any conflict with countries that have fighters that are comparable to the F-22 or the F-35. In this day and age the F-22 is overkill, which makes the order reduction all the more surprising since the US military is all about overkill.

Does anyone else understand this, and if so can you explain it to me?

[–] mhansen2 14 years ago

In this day and age the F-22 is overkill . . .

Today, maybe. But this world is so unpredictable, who knows what country we'll have to fight next. China is a huge user of the latest Russian aircraft.

[–] debaryman101 14 years ago

when i was in the military i asked one of my NCO's why do you need all that stuff in the field?? he came back "Better to have and not need, then to need and not have" military is about overkill? of course, why shouldn't it be. how many personnel in the military counting reserve and national guard?? maybe 2 million protecting 300 million and other countries populations are more than that? you see a billion chinese or muslims coming for you, I'm sure you would want something that does overkill.

but i'm talking to an armchair commando right?

[–] rmax304823 11 years ago

We should have hundreds of F-22s because anything can happen in the future. The problem is that they are far from free and their purchase has to be considered in context. We're genuinely unlikely to face another war with a technically sophisticated, uniformed, territorial nation. Our chief threat -- now and for the foreseeable future -- is from gangs of terrorists who are suicidally intent on inflicting maximum damage on us and the rest of the Western countries. The instruments required to combat these sorts of enemies are more translators, drones, effective intelligence networks, drones, and special ops personnel. All of them put together don't cost as much as a fleet of Raptors.

Practically speaking, the hell hole that is North Korea continues to pound its chest and funnel what little resources it has into projects that fizzle. And currently a new government is tweaking itself and may become more rational instead of invading the South and being obliterated. Who knows?

China has just built its first and only aircraft carrier, the size of the Staten Island ferry. They have little history of colonialism. And it's difficult to imagine that they'll build up enough of a military to attack the United States and its allies -- or that they would WANT to, considering our debt to them. Alexander Hamilton observed, when he created the Bank of the US, that one of the best ways to keep people loyal and have them concerned about your welfare is to owe them money.

Of course, fielding hundreds of Raptors would show the rest of the world that we have muscle. The thing is they already know that. It may be time to show them we have brains too.

[–] cooperdave-85715 9 years ago

you have to plan for the future but right now the F15 is still miles ahead of most other fighters so the money saved can be spent on health care etc.. besides they'll already be working on the next generation, that and the fact the F22 is only slightly behinds the F35 makes it the right call to make.

but don't worry you'll always have our RAF to help you out lads.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]