>1997
>be sole undisputed superpower
>develop most expensive aircraft in the history of mankind and send it into production
>0 kills,
whas the F22 necesary? Us already had the most powerfull airfoce in the world and i dont see what advantage it gave to its operational capabilities.
it was just a dick waving moment?
If NGAD hits full rate production before china starts shit, I'd say the F-22 is ultimately a success, we didn't build a massive fleet and waste a ton of money, we needed to get experience with the tech and manufacturing methods before moving onto 6th gen, and at the end of the day as long as NGAD is a good successor then the F-22 will have been an example of the best airframe of its era that simply never had the opportunity to see real combat due to geopolitical factors of the time.
>i dont see what advantage it gave to its operational capabilities.
Then you should probably do more reading.
None, since the thing became obsolete before even being put to use and got retired. Shooting down chink balloons do not count.
Yeah, reading probably isn't your strong suit.
I'll never get the normie tier war-tech enjoyers why even bother it's too complex of a topic for casuals.
homosexual go back to reading your air force australia or glowie sponsored drive articles for your dose of omg I just fricking love science tier popsci wiener slobbery if you are not going to make any arguments and just hoot and holler like a Black person.
Look at the /misc/ induced brownoid! Look at him and laugh!
Thanks for conceding that you have nothing to say, pajeet.
I don't know another way to respond to rabid stupidiy other than ridicule.
Present your counterargument you Black person.
Keep forcing your meme sweetie, I'm sure it will catch on eventually!
Good that he ran away because now anons who know what they are talking about are chiming in.
homie learn english
>what is R&D
>what is field testing
>what is deterrence
OP is a homosexual
>nooo those things don't count, it's glowBlack person propaganda!!!
Correction, OP is a double homosexual
>what is overkill
>what is only expend the necesary
>what is a balanced budget
the thought of an f22 that costs 320 millions bombing some afghan village was funny, like homie that plane probably is worth more than 1/10 of that country
>waaaahhh overkill
lmao
>muh budget
money printer goes brrrrt, merica still controls global trade
>overkill
No such thing as enuf dakka.
>only expend the necessary
Penny wise, pound foolish: cutting R&D is far more expensive in the long run, especially when it comes to PGMs.
>balanced budget
USA doesn't even spend 5% of its GPD on defense, it's around 3% now.
Real countries have enough money to invest into their future and aren't just barely scraping by like a thirdie shithole.
If a homosexual like you thinks they are valid sources that are enough to make you a genuine war tech knowledge having snob, you really know nothing and should just go back to plebbit. Black person.
>n-no u r gayit!
0/10 apply yourself
You must be describing the exact way you responded to this post
Black personhomosexual.
>whas the F22 necesary? Us already had the most powerfull airfoce in the world
And constant development keeps it that way. Always getting a bit further ahead of the competition.
>the thing became obsolete before even being put to use
If a weapon is so powerful that nobody challenges it, it's doing a great job of preserving peace.
The shiny new fighter was not why nobody was challenging USAF, it is the nuclear capabilites that back it. And the fact that they have been heavily focused on conducting one sided bombing campaigns on sandal wearing adversaries during the timeframe that the f-22 was in service doesn't really imply that there were any challenge to speak of against it
I mean, if you're a musclebound chad and have an arsenal of weapons on your back and the peasant with a stick decides not to test their luck with you, it's not really worth trying to assign cause to one specific weapon you're carrying.
They all played their part, or would do if anyone tested their luck with you.
Let's not fool ourselves, among the carrier strike groups and the infinite stream of F-15s no one would notice the lack of F-22s. The peasant is deterred by the fact that the chad has a bigger better spear, shield and combat capability vs. his skinny ass and his pointy stick, not because the chad has all those and a gucci microtech otf hidden beneath his chestplate
>among the carrier strike groups and the infinite stream of F-15s no one would notice the lack of F-22s
It's part of the arsenal and while any single missing piece wouldn't be missed much, you need the totality to make the right impression on the also-rans.
The F22 isn't in limited numbers like
says, there's a lot of them. Enough to be the bulk of the fighter force at present and certainly going to have local superiority at the point of any conflict.
The F-22 did exactly what US fighter doctrine has been about for the last 50 years: have an aircraft that absolutely stomps the shit out of anything else that could possibly go against it, then make something that beats that. Using this, everyone else will not be building fighters to try and beat your best one. They'll be trying to beat your last best fighter.
Imagine the USAF just stopped at the F-15. They'd be getting extremely nervous at this point with the J-20 probably being close to as good as an F-15. Luckily, they've been constantly improving on what's "good enough" to make sure they massively overshadow any potential threats. It's the reason everybody knows picking a fight with American fighters is suicide.
Ha, this reply just came as I was typing my last one. I get what you say, this makes sense to me, but I would still posit that the overall strategy would hinge on the F-15s or whatever else that forms the backbone of the air force, not some wunderwaffe in limited numbers, the latter would be valuable as a bit of an incalculable x-factor on adversaries part that complicates planning a campaign against you.
The F-22 wasn't supposed to be built in limited numbers, that only happened because the USSR imploding resulted in military procurement budgets getting slashed left and right for a decade, followed by morons in the government believing the neoliberal globalist shit of "all future conflicts will be regional COIN", so we get the F22 cut from 750 to 195, B2 cut, LCS boondoggle, and more.
Seriously, until Obama's second term it was a common belief that peer/near peer wars were the things of the past, that China's growing economy would result in liberalization and thus democracy, etc. Crimea should've been a wake up call to NATO and the West but you had countries like Germany tie swathes of their economy to Russian gas and refused to believe their neoliberal practices were destined to fail.
Yes, I remember the days of small wars journal and the fourth gen warfare hype.
The F-22 began with the ATF during the 80s. Blame the CIA and their schizoreports about the ubersoviets .
Well war in Ukraine clearly shows they were right with analysis for operational conditions in Europe fir ATF program.
Mass of long range SAMs leave no place for non stealth aircrafts.
You either hug ground or you die, hugging ground d sucks, and barely possible for interceptors.
most icbms have zero kills but no one says they're useless
>nukes don't real
no one sane
anyway, having the best, most advanced thing is great even if you don't use it directly for its purpose
Until, they start failng to launch, that is
Great post anon, really added something to the thread.
Show me a nuke, then.
>0 kills
factually wrong
>In two separate incidents in February 2023, Raptors shot down a Chinese spy balloon off the coast of South Carolina as well as an “unidentified object” over Alaska
>shoots down a baroon that is basically up in space
>shoots down a legit alien mothership
OMG LOL guys this F22 is just totally pointless what huge waste of money.
thank you anon
B-2 was a far bigger waste of money than the F-22.
Was it?
It lead to the B-21 which is likely going to be our primary modern bomber platform for the next 50+ years.
single-purpose bombers are a luxury.
multi-role fighters can do all.
Multi-role fighters can't do massive saturation bombing runs, or hold larger long-range stand-off missiles.
what?
F-15EX has a weapons load of 29,500 lb.
B-21 has 20,000 lb.
>B-21 has 20,000 lb.
There's no official info
And it's not a stealth multi-role, that would be the F-35 which can't hold anywhere near that sort of bomb capacity internally.
The B-21 can probably carry like 50+ GBU-53 internally compared to an F-35 which can only hold a handful internally.
If you just want to move a massive number of missiles/bombs in the air you could load up a C-17 or B-52 just as easily.
The whole point of the B-2 and B-21 is to be stealthy while still carrying a massive bomb/missile load.
could you describe the mission where you see B-21s loaded up with GBU-53s?
I think it has much more value since it complicates the first-second-nth strike calculations of the enemy
What about all the other previous aircraft that were never used in combat but still served as a technological step forward?
The F22 was made with the understanding that communism was a functional system.
F22 is an Outside Context Problem. Its job was to be so advanced that nobody wanted to frick with it:
>An Outside Context Problem was the sort of thing most civilisations encountered just once, and which they tended to encounter rather in the same way a sentence encountered a full stop. The usual example given to illustrate an Outside Context Problem was imagining you were a tribe on a largish, fertile island; you’d tamed the land, invented the wheel or writing or whatever, the neighbours were cooperative or enslaved but at any rate peaceful and you were busy raising temples to yourself with all the excess productive capacity you had, you were in a position of near-absolute power and control which your hallowed ancestors could hardly have dreamed of and the whole situation was just running along nicely like a canoe on wet grass . . . when suddenly this bristling lump of iron appears sailless and trailing steam in the bay and these guys carrying long funny-looking sticks come ashore and announce you’ve just been discovered, you’re all subjects of the Emperor now, he’s keen on presents called tax and these bright-eyed holy men would like a word with your priests.
whatever you say pal f22 looks scifi and good and there nothing you can do about it
I like the f35 better
>0 kill
the f35 has some kills bombing browns in gaza
both the only true 2000 century planes but we are only talking about the 22, and that only carry aa missiles
ok i guess it can.... but only 2 250 lbs guided bombs? maybe 125 lbs
2x1000 lb
I want a super f-22 or screaming raptor. Bombing middle eastern countries and shooting balloons doesn't satisfy me. I want a J-20 or Su-50 downed by it like it should.
ESL turdies wouldn't understand
>necessary
Dumb question because nothing is necessary until it's needed. By then, you fricked up and are getting your ass reamed by an opponent that can run circles around you because you're a moron and don't see the value of being able to defend yourself.
>being able to defend yourself
FYI, USA has nukes and can always defend herself
Can you imagine the hilarity if the usa nuked in retaliation to 9/11?
that actually would have solved the middle east issue
it would have been based and redpilled but not necesarry...
how does a f22 helps invade iraq or afghanistan or whatever shithole us wants to invade in the early 2000s? they already had the capabilities to rape whatever capital they wanted uncontested if you dont put nuke on the table
>How can a deterrent work if you never used it?
Complacency and underestimating the enemy is how you get men killed. Every time some thirdie shithole gets underestimated, things tend to go bad.
A successful fighter is one that nobody wants to challenge in combat. One you don’t have to use. Yes, it was a success, and led to the development of even better technology.
>1945
>develop nuclear bomb
>only use it twice for moronic strategic bombing
>spend 80 years developing more powerful bombs/delivery methoda
>0 additional kills
Was the manhattan project necessary?
>0 additional kills
That's definitely not true.
Nukes have claimed several more kills over the years, just not via detonation.
Yeah that’s kind of the point of an air superiority fighter. The Russians and Chinese still haven’t caught up with 1970’s US technology.