Is the F-22 Raptor worth its cost?

Question

It cost nearly a quarter of a billion dollars for each plane. Do you think its worth its cost? Why?

Answer 1

Remember the Dunnigan Rule:

"Buying weapons that frighten a potential aggressor is cheaper than fighting a war."

Answer 2

The question of is it worth the cost is a mute point as we have already spent more than 25 BILLION to develop the airframe, and that cost is irrecoverable. right now the cost per aircraft is somewhere around 115 million each and will only get cheaper as more airplanes are brought on line.
Do I think its worth the cost, yes, why? because we now have a front line fighter/bomber that will guarantee air dominance for the next 30 years, the F-15 and F-16 are fine aircraft, and are able to handle our only threat in the sky, the Su-27 Flanker, but the Su-27 is a evolving airframe and the F-15 and 16 are dated and nearing the end of their use fullness.
The F-22 has what takes to achieve air dominance, BUT would it be worth jeopardizing over enemy lines? that is the question.

Answer 3

During Red Flag Exercise at Nellis AFB, they would pit a top of the line F15 air superiority fighter against 4 smaller less capable F5E Tiger II fighters, (1975) which were used to simulate the USSR Air Force. While one on one the F15 would always win, due to the greater numbers of the F5Es the four F5Es would eventually get the F15.

The cost benefit ratio worked to the advantage of the "Russians" because it was cheaper for the enemy side to lose three of their much cheaper F5s than for the USAF to lose one F15. This economy of cost works against the USA, as it did against the Germans in WW Two in regards to tanks.

The German Tiger tank was the best tank in the field. One on one against the Shermans, the Tiger won every time. But because the Shermans were cheaper and faster to make, we could turn them out and send four against a Tiger. The Tiger would get 2-3 of the Shermans, but the fourth Sherman would have time to get the Tiger. Again, the cost benefit ratio worked in favor of the nation that could make a lot of cheaper vehicles and overload the enemy.

The F22 one on one can take on anything in the sky. But the plan is to buy less than 200. And by the time we get those 200 in operation, robot planes or remote control planes may make them obsolete.

The UAVs the USAF is using in Iraq has changed the whole fighter picture. Because the UAVs do not have to coddle a pilot, they do not need a pressurized cabin, oxygen system or even room for a pilot to sit. Making a UAV with the same capabilities as a F22 would definitely be cheaper as they could get rid of all the systems and weight now used to protect the pilot.

The UAVs are also not limited to the capabilities of the pilot. Where a pilot can take 9 Gs for short periods of time, a UAV is not limited to that. Pit a UAV that can pull a 12 G turn against a manned plane and the manned plane is history.

My projection: The F22 production will stop with under 200 planes built. Other nations will not want to buy it due to the cost. The JSF will be the last manned fighter made and if they can keep the costs down, it should sell well. The next generation of fighters will be robots or remotes. The days of the fighter jockey is rapidly coming to an end.

Answer 4

It's a Stealth air superiority fighter which is a type of fighter aircraft intended to gain air superiority in a war, by entering and seizing control of enemy airspace. Air superiority fighters are designed to effectively engage enemy fighters, more than other types of aircraft. They are usually more expensive and procured in fewer numbers than multirole fighters. Before the F-22 Raptor, The McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle has been the USAF's premier air superiority fighter aircraft for nearly 30 years. Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle a recent variant developed from the F-15E with a reduced radar signature as a proposed alternative to more expensive 5th generation fighters. The new generation of European fighters currently entering service are all capable of the air superiority mission, as only one of many roles. They are the Saab Gripen, Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon.

Answer 5

Absolutely. The F-22 is the most advanced fighter aircraft in use today. For an aircraft to be capable of supersonic speeds while handling nimbly and carrying a wide range of armaments and at the same time have stealth qualities; that is the most optimal situation one can be in. It is the perfect example of why the United States has complete domination of the air. Military weaponry is not like groceries and prescription medication, "thats too expensive, let's go with the generic brand" does not work when you are defending a country.

Answer 6

If you want air supremacy, then yes. If that isn't a priority, then no. Upgrading F-15s, 16s and 18s will only get you so far until you have to start looking at new platforms.

Besides, look at it this way: when you buy military hardware, you create jobs and you have something to show for your money (i.e. a tank, a ship, or an airplane) that is going to last you for a while (B-52s and KC-135s have been flying around since the mid-50s.) When you spend money on social programs, such as welfare, you are flushing money down the toilet. The "war on poverty" and the "war on drugs" has only gotten us more poverty and drugs.

Answer 7

The reports of out of the past week's Red Flag events say yes. The F-22 kicked butt against everything in the aggressor stable.

The F-22 is the air superiority weapon we must have, especially as the Chinese and Russians continue to amp up their airpower.

Now the F-35 may be the superfluous program.

Answer 8

No, the government is overpaying as usual.