The F-22 debate: a crisis in microcosm
One slight problem: the F-22 requires 30 hours of maintenance for every hour in flight.
Congress this week is engaged in one of those debates that makes you want to throw up your hands in despair over the political process. At issue is whether the country needs to order seven more F-22 Raptor fighter jets.
“If we can’t get this right, what on Earth can we get right?” asks Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates.
Excellent question.
The F-22 debate does not break along traditional Democrat-Republican lines, nor even liberal-moderate-conservative. Mr. Gates, a Republican holdover from President George W. Bush’s cabinet, proposed to his new Democratic boss, President Barack Obama, that funding for the F-22 be deleted from the 2010 defense budget.
Reason: While it is an excellent airplane, it is a hideously expensive airplane (total program cost works out to $331 million each) that really isn’t needed. The Air Force’s wings of F-15 fighters already give the United States superiority over any plane likely to be in the air in the next 20 years. Far better, Mr. Gates argues, to spend the money on more critical defense needs.
Nevertheless, defense appropriators in both the Senate and the House voted to add money for more Raptors — seven more in the Senate version of the bill and advance funding for up to 12 more in the House.
Lockheed Martin Corp., the prime contractor for the F-22, scattered work on the plane across 44 states. For too many members of Congress, political concerns far outweigh defense and budget concerns. Fifty-three more of the planes (for a total of 187) already have been funded, so while jobs are at stake, they’re not at stake right away. Adding seven more planes might keep production going about an six extra months.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the GOP’s 2008 presidential nominee, agrees with the Obama administration. Along with Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., Mr. McCain sponsored an amendment that would strip funding for the F-22 from the budget.
High-profile Senate Democrats, including Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry of Massachusetts and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, also want to continue F-22 funding; Massachusetts-based Raytheon is a major F-22 subcontractor, and Connecticut-based Pratt & Whitney builds its engines.
The Senate charge is led by Republican Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, where Lockheed does final assembly on the plane. He is ably assisted by Washington’s two Democratic senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell; Boeing builds the F-22’s wings and aft fuselage in Seattle.
Mr. Obama has said he would consider vetoing the entire defense budget if funding for the F-22 were included. On Monday, Senate leaders pushed back by taking up hate crimes legislation that the president favors — legislation that is included in the defense appropriations bill.
That put off a showdown vote on the McCain-Levin amendment until at least late last night or early today. It also puts pressure on Mr. Obama: If he vetoes the bill that contains F-22 funding, he’ll also be vetoing the hate crimes legislation.
Meanwhile, House defense appropriators are scheduled to meet Wednesday to consider restoring not just F-22 funding, but also other programs that Mr. Gates wants to cut, including Boeing’s C-17 cargo plane.
Thus, despair over the political process. The nation’s real defense needs, as well as its real budget concerns and even laws against hate crimes, may be sacrificed on the altar of political contributions and make-work jobs.
Come on Obama, let’s see if you really want “change” to come to Washington. My guess is The Great Jobs Creator/Saver will sign the bill allowing the F-22 to get funded. All funding for this plane needs to be stopped.
While you’re at it, kill off the F-35, Joint Strike Fighter. That plane is years behind schedule, gazillions over budget and still hasn’t flown on a regular test basis. I doubt it ever will. What a POS. It is poster child for a make work defense program.
It doesn’t cost $331 million each, each additional F-22 would only cost $150M each.
The F-15 doesn’t win fights now, much less for the next 20 years. Reference exercises with the Indian Su-27 fighters where F-15 lost.
Congress can spend however much they want, fund any program they want. We’re already in dept trillions, what’s a couple more million?
187 jets will not be enough to fight wars and protect the homeland. DoD won’t show you the math because they know it’s not enough.
10 years from now when all fighter production lines are shut down, we will NOT have the ability to protect this country. Gates will be long retired and our kids will have to live with his decisions.
Uh, Dean. You should post a link to your information about F15 losing to a Su-27. I can’t find any. However, I can find an image of an F-18 “killing” the Air Force’s baby, the F-22, during Red Flag exercises.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread202946/pg1
Hey Barry, didn’t machinist vote for you, the same ones who build the F-22, now you want to screw them out of a job? Nice going pal, you really are a player.
Are you aware that the clowns that work in the techie departments at Boeing are telling all their friends that “The end is near” as if without all the military hardware our illustrious self-serving defense contrators build, we’re doomed? Ike warned us about the military/Industrial complex collusion when he left office. Nobody listened. I love those F-22’s but the US needs them about like a fish needs a bicycle. Our troops need support to fight mad bombers, not obsolete Russian built Migs with obsolute avionics being flown by ill-trained foreign pilots. Even our old obsolete F-14 Tomcats can put those things in the trick bag.
The Post sees defense spending as a cause for “real budget concerns”, but doesn’t have a problem with squandering multiple trillions of dollars on a government takeover of American health care, or hundreds of billions blown on “make-work” stimulus jobs.
The F-22 is an air-superiority fighter, and if you can’t dominate the skies over a battlefield, you can’t win the battle. The Russians and Chinese are not sitting still as far as aircraft production goes, and the F-15 Eagle is no longer the undisputed master of the air.
Still, the editors shouldn’t “despair over the political process”. I’m sure the Obama Administration will find many other avenues by which to weaken our national security.
Veto the bill, and kill the plane. Let’s not kid ourselves: hate crimes legislation will come back. And for those of you arguing about air superiority, read the damn article. We’re still making FIFTY-SEVEN of these planes, regardless of the last 6.
This is a way to get some moderate republican votes for health care reform.
The problem with the F-22 is too many foriegn contractors working on it. Especially the British. Remember it was the British that sold techology to the Soviets empowering them to fight U.N. forces to a standstill in Korea. The United States Armed Forces were harmed by British techology in Korea and Vietnam. It is vital to world peace that the United States does not make the same mistake with the F-22. Air power is what enables the United States to claim Superpowerness nuclear weapons can be countered at this time by various forces. In order to maintain air supremacy the United States needs to control its own technology.
Michael M,
I think you are confusing F22 with F35. F22 cannot be exported due to stealth technology and is one of the reasons cost is so high. Not enough volume. F35 is the jet with all the foreign vendors and proposed sales (that will never happen)
Jom had better do some reading. The F-14’s have been retired and shredded. They don’t exist anymore.
Both sides have some points. The F-15 fleet is aging. A good portion of it needs to be replaced simply because you cannot fly the same fighters forever. The same can be said about a good many of our F-16’s, too.
If we were going to build 100-300 more F-22’s then that would be worth talking about. A handful more aren’t going to make that much of a difference. Given that a handful seems to be the reality even friends of the program are working under, why not axe it and commit to more new F-15 and F-16 planes as a cheaper alternative until the new F-35 really comes online?