Tyndall is the home to training for F-22 crews. They are not there for the air sovereignty mission (like shooting down an aircraft attempting to invade U.S. airspace). That mission for that is assigned to the Air National Guard F-15 squadron in Jacksonville.
Why training in Florida? Lots of sunny days. The Navy’s Blue Angels flight demonstration team is based not far away in Pensacola.
According to Wikipedia, they cost $150 million per plane in 2009 dollars. The F-35B (the most expensive variant) is listed at $115.5 per plane in what I assume is current dollars.
But just to be clear, a new F-22 cannot be bought today. There is no production line anymore.
RAND did a study on how much it would cost to re-open the production line for another 194 airplanes. The cost was estimated to be about $50 billion, or a quarter billion dollars per plane, plus inflation.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4452474-F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.html
Wasn’t Japan pushing for getting manufacturing rights to build their own? I don’t know if that finally died (obviously, they are buying F-35) but I thought they were still trying to get this fairly recently.
At any rate, you are correct that the US isn’t going to re-open the lines to build new ones at this point. What we have, we have. F-35, if it’s built in the sorts of numbers they were talking about, will be the main front line fighter for the next few decades.
Now folks are talking about 6th generation fighters being studied, so we will probably get to go through all of this again in another decade or two…
So, I’m way late to the party about the overheating issues (a year ago upthread,) but when a fighter jet is at 30,000 feet, shouldn’t the extreme cold be enough to heat-sink away the hot-avionics issue?
And if not, then what do they expect to do when the jet is on the ground and the ambient air temp might be 110 F (i.e., in the Middle East sun?)
Considering that the U.S. defense budget was abruptly hiked under Trump from $580 billion (Obama’s last year in office) to $716 billion in FY2019, seems like $50 billion isn’t much at all if amortized over, say, two decades ($2.5 billion per year.)
Not saying it would be a good idea, but when the defense budget looks like it might hit a trillion per year by the 2030s, having two hundred more Raptors manufactured looks like but a drop in the bucket annually.
No, it’s a stupid investment. Spending ~$250m for additional F-22s, instead of buying literally three F-35s for the same price, is a silly proposition.
What’s more, the Air Force announced a couple years ago that it was starting development of a replacement for the F-22, usually called “Next Generation Air Dominance” or NGAD. Plowing a ton of money into that, rather than a fighter that was designed 30 years ago, is obviously more productive.
ETA: and if the defense budget goes up again next year, rather than staying flat with today’s level or more likely going down somewhat, I’ll be shocked. Who knows what the defense budget will be in 2030 or whatever – the pilots the Air Force will be recruiting then are basically playing with crayons and Legos right now.
Note quite sure if you’re serious here. China, UK, and Russia, yes, on the borders. The US gulf coast???
:dubious: Any threats from Cuba vanished half a century+ ago.
Maritime patrols for smuggling and search/rescue are valid. Advance fighters, strictly political. Simply not necessary for dealing with all the thugs, murderers, and rapists coming our way from the lands of slightly darker skinned peoples.:rolleyes:
When it’s in the air, at least at high altitudes, that IS enough. There was a big to-do over the F-35 because someone suggested they paint the fuel trucks white in AZ so that the fuel wouldn’t get too hot before the jet was airborne. My understanding of the issue was that once the jet was in the air, it was fine, but that it had an issue where if the fuel was too hot when it was fueled on the ground, it might not be able to take off.
This is the story that started the big to-do and this is some level-headed commentary on the topic.
Venezuela is down that way. Somebody’s got to clear the skies of Su-30s in the run-up to the ground invasion. Might as well be F-22s.
ETA: I agree that politics plays a huge role in basing decisions, unfortunately.
Russian bombers do fly to the Gulf Coast of the US.. In addition there is the threat of cruise missiles. A Kh-55 has a range of 2500 km and can fly a preprogrammed flight path, meaning it can be programmed to penetrate from the Gulf even if the launcher A/C never gets near that region. Plus Kalibr have a range of 1000 miles and are launched by submarines. The F22 has look down, shoot down capability, which is useful against such weapons. As far as I recall early model F15 did not, and I am not sure National Guard has the late model ones that do.
Once again: it’s a training base.
My understanding was that there is at least one operational F-22 squadron at Tyndall:
I’m trying to dumb it down to get the message through. The air defense mission is handled by the Air Guard in Jacksonville.
How is Air Defence organised and handled in the US? Probably not a priority mission for several decades I imagine, since the USSR collapse, although it’s obviously increasing in importance again. Is it integrated, say with ANG, USAF, USN fighters and Army SAM batteries under direct control of a unified HQ?
No. Lockheed was offering to partner with them to build a “domestic” F-35 variant, similar to the Mitsubishi F-2 program which was basically an upsized F-16.
No, I thought they were looking into building a local variant of the F-22…I knew the F-35 was off the table. I’m probably mis-remembering, so don’t worry about it. I haven’t had time to look it up and like I said, I’m probably not remembering correctly.
NORAD, I think. I don’t know if they integrate Navy assets, but there appears to be at least some coordination with the Army.
(emphasis mine)
The Navy can contribute data to the system, but in the context we are talking about, the job of having pilots ready to intercept aircraft or other threats to the United States falls on roughly 18 or so bases around the U.S. The Air National Guard ends up having primary responsibility for those operations.
So, for the Washington, D.C. region, there are a small number of F-16s that are ready to take off at very short notice at all times. Other sites rely on F-15s to do the missions. The oddballs are Hawaii and Alaska, which have associated units (I think that’s still the right term) of Air Guard and Air Force personnel in the same squadron, and it just so happens that both of those states have F-22 squadrons assigned to that mission. There was a study recently that questioned the value of using F-22s in those roles, because of the limited numbers of the aircraft, the cost involved, possible conflicts with training duties, etc.