French jets love American oil.
A French air force Mirage 2000 fighter jet receives fuel from a KC-10 Extender during Red Flag-Alaska 07-1 April 11. Photo Courtesy of the US Air Force
Misgivings about our French allies aside, the Mirage 2000 is actually a very capable jet, as far as multi-role fighters go. I remember sitting in on a speech where Air Force Chief of Staff, General Mosley, specifically mentioned this guy as one of the reasons that we need the Raptor. Not because we’ll be fighting Paris anytime soon, it’s just that when those dudes come out with new military hardware, you never what backwards 3rd world dictatorship it’s going to end up in.
That, and our F-15/16 fighter force is 30+ years old. Just sayin’.
look the rapter is still a waste of money. too expensive when the guys on the ground need equipment more than the non-combat air force. we are upgrading our a10 force and we can do the same with our f15s and f16s instead of blowing 200million dollars on one plane and cutting a full 1/8 of our personnel
I fully concur with my fellow disgruntled grunt. The F-22 was a waste of money.
I don’t care what the enemy flies. It’s training that counts… not the plane. Richtofen said it best “it’s not the crate, it’s the man flying it.”
We went up against the North Vietnames Air Force with some of the most high-tech planes around and had our lunches handed to us in the air because the “experts” said we’d never engage in dogfighting in the jet age. Trouble is, the experts failed to tell the North Vietnamese this. It wasn’t until the advent of schools like Top Gun that we regained supremacy in the skies.
Our Air Force is great because of its pilots, not its planes.
ouch…. How is the Raptor non-combat? I appreciate that jets are super expensive, and I might not agree with how much money is going toward the F-22 myself. But the “First look first kill” technology is second to none, and while Sukhoi is making jets with thrust vectoring, we can shoot down any jet in the world before there’s even a blip on their radar screen. A Raptor pilot could be an ace before the enemy even knows they are a target.
Air Force pilots are still being trained in the art of dog fighting. I teach students those basics on a daily basis, and most of them don’t even go on to fighters. But dog fighting isn’t where its at these days in practical terms is it? Its all about close air support boys, and everyone’s doing it, from F-16s to B-52s. While our brothers on the ground are getting most of the focus these days (as it should be), how much different would the fight have been, and will be, without the “shock and awe” beginning? And I will be happy to provide some close air support when I get out there to the fight, no matter what jet I’m in…
DG, the AF is cutting a lot of personnel as well, its not just you guys. Maybe you should focus less on your teammates and more on the people who want to take away money from us all and tie our hands while there’s still fighting to be done.
And Josh, “Top Gun” is far from real, I hate to burst your bubble…
Ok, you ment the school, not the movie… sorry Josh. I was on a roll. And not a big fan of the movie.
TOPGUN, or “US NAVY FIGHTER WEAPONS SCHOOL” was the Navy fix. I think the AF had a similar school, but I can’t think of the name.
As far as the Raptor and dogfighting, remember that just because we are not fighting an air war now does not mean that we won’t in the future. Just like with our Navy weapons platforms (i.e., submarines, ships, etc.) and their warfighting capabilites, the aviators need to maintain proficiency with things we are not employing in Iraq/Afghanistan/HOA.
‘Cause our future enemies are paying close attention to what we are doing, across the boards…
Am I mistaken in my understanding that the later models of the M-2000 had the parachute braking units replaced with high-speed deployable white flags? And the cannons/guns have orange plastic inserts in the end of the barrels so as not to be confused with real guns? Maybe I’m mistaken, coulda been a mirage!
Our enemies are always watching what we are doing, yes. And they are finding ways to nullify our technological advantages.
Our current fleet of aircraft is easily on par with anything anyone else is producing. Again, it is the quality of our pilots that puts us over the top.
If you put me in one of those F-22′s and put me up against one of the Navy’s or Air Force’s best in an F-15 or an F-18, I guarantee you I’d lose (and I wouldn’t do it intentionally just to prove my point). Why? Because I’m a grunt… and, although I may have a few hours in a Cessna 172, a fighter pilot I am not.
That’s the quality of pilot you’re looking at any potential adversary producing… a guy who probably knew someone politically who was given a few hours of flight training and sent up to die.
Again, there are other more pressing things to spend money on. The Army’s M-16 family of rifles needs replacing… Dragonskin body armor is far superior to our current issue (but is also far more expensive)… vehicles are being ground to bits in Iraq and Afghanistan… the list goes on and on. And, with the war dragging now into its sixth year, recruiting and retention bonuses are going through the roof.
Bush may have gotten carte blanche on the war, but just because we have checks in our checkbook doesn’t mean we have the money to spend.
The F22 is advanced, maneuverable, and beautiful. It was meant for another time and another war. Against an insurgent in the hills or the cities, it is utterly useless. A Predator with a Hellfire or an A-10 with PGM’s is just as useful and a helluva lot less expensive.
And my name is Joel, Chick, not Josh.
But you can call me Maverick. ;)
while I see your point Joel, your example wasn’t a very effective one.
Our enemies don’t just throw Cessna pilots into fighter jets. And while training is key -you’re telling this to Chickpilot btw, who IS a pilot instructor- you’re also talking about an airframe that has defeated the F-15 by a margin of 200-0.
Is an AWACs guided F15 more capable than anything our enemies fly? Sure, probably. Will it be in 10 years?
We rely too much on air supremacy to simply remain “on par” with our enemies. We have to stay ahead, or we’ll fall behind.
I think our reliance on high-technology solutions is one of the reasons why we seem rendered impotent in the face of simple explosive devices and suicide bombers.
I can take an unconventional force and defeat a conventional one.
A conventional force does not defeat an unconventional one.
I think the high reliance on high-tech is partially the effect of what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex.”
Dave Hackworth wrote in his memoirs that, when asked about the M-16, he replied to his superiors that it was a piece of shit and would get soldiers killed. A fellow officer of his said, “shut up, Hack, and just buy shares of Colt Arms.”
I’d be interested to see the Air Force acquisitions general officer who oversaw the purchasing of this plane and will no doubt hold a chair on the board of Boeing or General Dynamics or Northrop Grumman when he retires.
The Eagle will be around for a lot of years to come. I worked the Eagle as a weapons mech. for 13 years, The engineers that designed it in the early 70′s new there would be advancements in engines and avionics. the air frame is big and accesable so mods are pretty easy. The Converter programer which is the brains of the weapons and radar system only uses around 12 percent of its capacity now.
The F22 production has been cut back to around 185 airframes now.instead of the original 450+.
That Air Force school is called Red Flag it is at Nellis AFB NV
The M2K is, to the best of my knowledge, the only airframe with a confirmed F16 kill. Greeks vs Turks back in 1996, a high energy 2v2 that broke up into a pair of 1v1s and ended up with one of the Turkish F16s catching a Matra Magic AAM.
Big scandal – ’twas one of those two-seat F16s, and the fella in the back was an Israeli instructor, which was meant to be a secret. They had to ghost him out of the hospital and back to Tel Aviv..
The problem with the F-22 is that its expensive. And because JSF is in so much trouble the USAF cannot afford both. Now me, I would probably jettsion the F-35 and make the USAF use the F-18 E and F. (And get the Wild Weasels to use the F-18G). Proven technology and will stayed ahead of our adversaries for years to come.
The services cannot have both hi tech aircraft. Using the Hornet is alternative that makes sense.
« Not because we’ll be fighting Paris anytime soon, it’s just that when those dudes come out with new military hardware, you never what backwards 3rd world dictatorship it’s going to end up in.»
We all know that the United States would NEVER NEVER sell any hardware to backward 3rd wsorld dictatorships. No, Not the US. It only support and supplies great democracies like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar etc. God BLess America the good.
i think our county would be better off if we droped the f-35 and got the 400 f-22′s the airforce says it needs to defend our country i mean you can always use a-10′s for close air suport or even better a freeking helio. the f-22 was designed to clear the skys. now in every war since ww1 control of the air has been key to winning the war. ww2 for example once the german planes were gone we bombed the crap out of berlin we destroyed factorys and prity much destroyed the germans ablity to make war. in vietnam the same thing hapended we bombed the crap out of them they north vietnamese. we had practicaly won it was just the horable suport at home that made us louse
Oh Happy Day Picture Frame
You should frame that one- in a huge poster sized picture frame- and tell people that. Listed