Noyhauser

Thats a wicked idea... I had something similar in my head (because I hate the Ostrich in its normal design) but you actually went out and did it... kudos!! :thumbsup:

heh, I wish

The question is "numbers" The USAF will have more fighters, with far better pilots, and better support. Name me a country you think that would be able to outstrip US fighter production... and actually could deploy more fighters than several US carrier task groups, and 4 or 5 Air expeditionary wings + allied contributions where available. The US will always have over 1500 combat aircraft ready, with more than 200~400 heavy fighters available at any given time. Even china would be extremely hardpressed against that.

Also the question of "always must be better" is a very shallow argument to defence planners. ITs a question of "value for money." The US can spend billions even trillions on "possible threats." The british did so in 1909 with the Dreadnought scandal where Germany was supposedly building 20 dreadnoughts and the UK would only have 12 or there abouts. Britain almost bankrupted itself building 20, and at the end of the war, it was found out that the germans barely had 8. The US doesn't need more F-22s, I'm a strategic analyst by trade, and almost everybody I knows agree. I can't stress this enough. Only the Japanese or the EU has the the economic power to put up a challenge, and if that is the case we should maybe stop giving the Japanese their fighters, and buy the rest of the European inustries (thats a lot of Sarchasm right there). Really I think people should be worried about Europeans doing to little, then them doing too much... in truth though with the creation of a European security and defence program, its likely they will be valuable partners in any threat to the west. They have a vested intersted in the maintence of the International system as it is, they make too much money off of it.

The USAF will have more F-22s than any other small airforce we may potentially fight has fighters. This will not change anywhere in the near future.

#1 the EF-2000 won't be sold to anybody the US deems a threat in the near future... Germany and the UK will see to that. Rafales, maybe, but I doubt it.

Lets make a little scenario. Lets say a emirate buys 20 or even 40 rafales (3.2 Billion dollars is quite alot) and somehow keeps ALL its planes running at one time. Even if a third of them are deployed the US would have 50 F-22s(1/3rd of their capability) and a shedload of F-15s 16, 35s 18s ect All with far higher quality of pilots, an E-3 behind then guiding them and all the missiles to spare in the world. the US would literally remove them from the skies in a matter of days, if not hours, and if they didn't want to come out and fight they would be destroyed in their shelters.

That's with current plans though.  Plans that were written up before we went on a collosally expensive snipe hunt in the middle east.   The air Force chose to go with re-developing the avionics because they felt it was a viable option.   That no longer apears to be the case, however that doesn't mean that there are no other options.   As I said re-opening or opening a new fabrication facility for the i960MX chips would be far cheaper than re-designing the avionics system.   It would allow that F-22 to get into the air (with quite a bit of strike capability), and a new avionics system could be designed after the F-35 program is more mature.

I don't beilieve that the F-35 is capable of taking on the mission of the F-15, it wasn't designed for that and it simply does not have the capability for it.   It has neither the range nor payload to take on the air superiority mission of the Eagle.   It's a hell of a replacement for the F-16 and Baby Hornet, but it's not an air superiority fighter by a long shot.

I don't think the equipment exists anymore to build those chips. The Tools have probably been trashed, and recycled... it was intel who told the Airforce it was closing it down, not the other way around.. if there was any possibility of it opening up, why would the airforce buy 800 chips at the very end? No I'm quite sure there is no ability to go back. Opening up a chip manufacturing facility would be a horrendous waste of money, It would be far in excess of 300 million because the facilities are probably long gone, they would likely have to be rebuilt from scratch.. and the USAF would be the only customer, for a technology that is 10 years obsolete. Its not a cost effective solution... and it would prevent the F-22 from being upgraded to later capabilities. The F-22's flight architecture would be over 20 years old by 2010, and 40 by 2030. If a new batch comes along, its better to bite the bullet pay for the upgrade, adn then retroactively upgrade the previous fighters. But I doubt that would happen.

I think the F-22 is dead after the next 155, product of bad timing, poor management and most importantly the lack of a global threat to US air superiority. There is no threat. No matter the circumstances the USAF can overwhelm any potential adversary in the air for the next 5 to 10 years, if not the next 15.

As for the JSF being a replacement for the F-15, one of the key traits for the JSF is modularity, I'm sure if it really got that bad, the USAF would have a spiral dedicated to putting in a new radar, uptuned engine and all sorts of goodies needed for it to be a smallish air superiority fighter.

To clarify, its a complete avionics rebuild actually, This is from the GAO website

http://www.gao.gov/atext/d04391.txt

The primary processor in CIP is the Intel i960MX

microprocessor,[Footnote 12] which is used strictly for avionics

processing. This microprocessor is based on 1990's technology and has a

32-bit processor that operates at speeds of 25mhz. By today's

technology standards, the processor is considered obsolete and cannot

support spiral developments beyond the Global Strike Enhanced. In mid-

2003, the manufacturer of the microprocessor informed the Air Force

that it planned to permanently shut down the i960MX production line by

January 2004 because the microprocessor was no longer a viable product

for the company.

As a result, the Air Force decided in November 2003 to replace its

computer architecture and avionics processors to support the F/A-22's

expanded capabilities. In December 2003, the Air Force purchased its

last i960MX microprocessors when it bought 820 of the microprocessors.

According to program officials, this quantity and previously purchased

quantities are sufficient to support production of 155 F/A-22 aircraft.

These officials believe that with some minor upgrades to improve

processing capacity, these processors will be able to support the

baseline aircraft and the developmental spirals--Global Strike Basic

and Global Strike Enhanced. However, the Air Force plans for the

remaining production aircraft to include a new computer architecture

and avionics processor needed to support the final two planned spirals-

-Global Strike Full and Enhanced Intelligence, Surveillance, and

Reconnaissance.

At the time of our review, the Air Force believed its best long-term

solution to its avionics architecture and computer-processing

shortfalls was a new, modern, open system architecture. Rather than

start a new development program, the program office plans to leverage

two other ongoing Air Force development or modification programs for

this processing capability: the new architecture being developed for

the F-35 and the new commercial off-the-shelf general-purpose

processors designed for newer versions of the F-16. According to F/A-22

program officials, this new architecture will be state-of-the-art and

will have ample processing capacity to accommodate all future air-to-

ground capabilities as currently planned. These officials do not expect

the new architecture to be fully developed and ready for installation

in the F/A-22 for at least 5 to 6 years.

F/A-22 program officials acknowledge that this mass changeover of

the F/A-22 computer architecture and avionics processor will be a

time-consuming and costly effort and will likely create additional

program risks. Air Force cost estimates are not yet available.

Nevertheless, program officials estimate the nonrecurring engineering

costs alone could be at least $300 million. At the time of our review,

the Air Force had not made a decision about retrofitting aircraft

equipped with the i960MX microprocessor. Additional risks are likely

because the new processor and architecture are being developed by other

major aircraft programs and will require extensive integration and

operational testing to ensure that the F/A-22 program does not

encounter similar problems that have delayed integration and testing of

the F/A-22's current avionics suite.

So you've got the cost of the engineering to do the upgrade (300 million is probably a very conservative number), The cost to hold the production lines (because you can't build these fighters without the avionics suites), which have already been produced, and a whole host of other problems. Maybe 250 is a bit high, but I certainly can see 200million when all the costs are said and done. And the USAF is not going to buy these things when its paying for the JSF at the same time.

oops, I see you meant the F-15.... but again the 115 million fly away cost is for the Current batch of F-22s... not what should be called the F-22Bs

*Edit*... and I misread again....

I'm using GAO figures Nied, as well I can extrapolate figures for what the cost overrun will be for the next generation from other programs if you wish, it will take awhile but I can't see it being under 200 million especially with the previous funding allotment.

There is no way it will cost 85 million, when its flyaway is 115 million now. Honestly you're looking at a 200 to 250 million fly away cost in 5 years (the expected time for the avionics suite to be designed, I'd say its more realistically closer to 7 years) when you factor in cost overruns, and the redesigned suite.... right when the JSF project is running up into production, which is a larger budget priority, and a far more efficient and effective use of funds. Even if the JSF has 1/2 the capability of the F-22 (when it most certainly doesn't) its still more effective to buy JSFs instead of the 22.

I had a copy that my Uncle made for me in Japan in Beta (yes beta), when I was a kiddie... I don't think it helped me learn any japanese, but man I'd watch it just for the action... I wonder what happened to it?

Also a quick one from me... I've got to finish a essay about Airland Battle and the Soviet Operational Maneuver group...

The cost of 115 million for the current batch of F-22s, and it itself is a very politicized number... The next batch will involve far higher costs as it does not figure in the cost of having to redevelop the avionics hardware because they cannot build anymore fighters after the first 155 built. This will take at least 5 to 6 years if everything goes to plan, and the costs of just the engineering alone is 300 million. You may think that is not much but.. because the manufacturing is delayed you run into massive cost overrun. Essentially everything stops for production, bbecause nobody knows what the flight architecture will look like, And the DoD is still required to pay the manufacturors to keep their staff and production facilities idle, as well as their subcontractors as well. I wouldn't be suprised if the actual cost for the next batch won't top 200 to 250 million dollars per aircraft, when it is all said and done and the cost for the new avionics is factored in.

So no matter what The next F-22s won't arrive for at least 2010... if that... and a far higher cost than just 115 million. If that is the case, would you seriously consider buying one F-22 over 3,4 or 5 JSFs?

I agree about the minmay. It really looks like her. I also like the VE-1 Elintseeker, the subtle weathering on it looks good.

Lakenheath is the closest major base to the Balkans. And the rest of the former USSR, which frankly, few of those nations are very "stable". Spangdahlem and Aviano are pretty much "F-16 staging grounds for when we can't use Turkey". Now that Bitburg's closed, it's the best bet. And most importantly, the UK likes us (at least, more than Germany and Italy at the moment). Diego Garcia--too remote for anything but a B-52.

I don't think you've noticed but the EU has pretty well taken over most of the Balkan missions, save for KFOR, which will likely go to them in the next couple of years. The Bosnian mission is now called EUFOR, and in KFOR there are very few US troops deployed. Moreover, I don't think the US will ever be fighting overwhelming numbers of serbian fighters, if such an improbable thing ever happened. We had enough F-15s to do the job in Operation Allied Force... how many serbian fighters did we take out?

Serbia wants to get into the EU, and most countries in Eastern Europe does as well. The former soviet union isn't going to do much. Look at Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova. These countries are trying to reform to western standards. Few of them have to money to rearm their forces at all, and we certainly don't need the most very advanced fighter to counter their meager forces, or deploy fighters into the area. If they were such a threat, why is the US closing most of its bases in germany?

I'm still waiting to hear of the monster threat to appear that a US air group will be completely outmatched in size and numbers of opposing forces.

Noyhauser, how can you speak of there not being a threat? There are any number of nations that don't like us flying something we call a FLANKER. While they may be technologically inferior to most US aircraft, in the right (trained) hands, they can give anything the US armed forces currently flies (with the possible exclusion of the F-22) a serious run for it's money. What the US fighters achieve through advanced technology, Flankers achieve through brute force. I would say that the F-22 is not only justified, but maybe even REQUIRED.

I think we've had this argument before... and its really a non starter. Number one, how many fighters would a prospective country be able to buy? Probably less than one squadron, two max.

That is a force that can be easily wiped out by a current US AEF, and isn't an airforce, unless their airforce consists of those fighters.Moroever the Eurofighter won't be sold to countries that are potential agressors due to German Constitutional laws which prohibit such a sale. Why do you think there are no Leopard IIS in the middle east? Saudi Arabia has said it wants them, but there is a constitutional law has barred its sale.

Number 2... Do you honestly think that the buyers will be able to keep up a training standards like the United States Navy and Airforce does? In the right "trained hands" well outside of the west there are very few "right trained hands" and most of them were actually trained by us in the first place. The Former Soviet Unions doesnt' have the training regimen that the west does at all, and most countries skimp on training anyways.

Number 3 ... Do you think the state would be able to buy the E-3 or E-2 behind it, which greatly enhances the capability of any fighter, or produce upgraded missiles like the US and the EU are able to? Probably no on all those cases. The United States will have overwhemling odds for the near future, it doesn't need a fighter designed to fight with the odds against it for the next decade or two.

I was just about to go to bed when....

Air superiority is everything. No superiority, then every A-xx, B-xx, EA-xx, C-xx, KC-xx, and H-xx is going to get shot down before it gets its job done. F-xx's exist to clear the air for the bombers/attackers/recon/tankers.

I've asked you this before and I'll ask ALL of you to say this again. THREAT? WHAT IS YOUR THREAT? There is NO NEED for the F-22 in the next decade, ESPECIALLY given the full range of capabilities that the US has.

Not one of you can come up with one possible threat will have the capabilities to wipe a US air expeditionary force out of the sky... because the only one is china, and honestly if you want to argue that one be my guest...

Many of the same arguements many of you put up were similar to the ones in the 1950s when it was thought that vast armadas of Soviet nuclear bombers being built that were going to come over the poles and nuke north america. 1960 rolls around U2 flights show that the USSR has barely a fraction of the bombers that people claimed. Billions of dollars that could have been used to adress the real threat (the impending missile gap, which later was overblown as well) was devoted to the Air defence of North America, which Provided us with all those great interceptors for Vietnam, and not enough funding for strategic rockets. Thats what happens when threat analysis isn't properly carried out and you get useless procurement programs that just waste money.

Bankruptcy is a problem for another day and secondary to winning the war in the first place.

What war is the F-22 going to fight? Really the F-22 was built for a war that was won 15 years ago. The F-22 is perfect to fight the Field Manual 100-5 Operations Airland Battle from 1982. The F-22 was built to stop a massive soviet attack on NATO airfields and be able to penetrate Soviet airspace, to fight against huge odds of fighters. How many countries do you think the US is going to fight in the next 10 to 15 years will have those sort of SAM capabilities that the US will be unable to neutralize, or that we would be outnumbered so significantly that the US would need to fight with stealth because it could not operate near the front lines? I really await your answer.

The US military is going to be fighting small wars for quite some time, given each and every policy document that has been put out. I'm sure troops on the ground in Iraq will be happy to hear that their body armor/next generation APC ect, is being pushed back because the airforce needs another fighter to defend the air superiority over their heads right now...

squadrons at Langley, 1 at Kadena, 1 at Lakenheath. World-wide coverage.

Why the would you have it at lakenheath? really thats an off shore deployement that costs WAAAY more money, and is nowhere near any sort of potential battlefield that the F-22 would have no range to deploy to. Its 4 hours more and far cheaper to keep them on any base on the east coast. Kadena is marginally better, but I'd rather chose guam or Diego Garcia which are closer to potential target areas for the F-22 (even though I can't imagine who would be foolish enough to strike them or even have the capabilities to do so)

That's actually a superstition among tabletop gamers....they are ROCKET launchers, because they aren't MISSile launchers.

Rockets are dumbfire. Missiles are not. Bifors is not a company. Bofors is.

Oh, and one other thing. Count the number of missiles in those bays. Not 12, is it? On the models, I mean.

Oh, and Rockets are not generally referred to in rounds, they are in # of tubes in a launcher.

Oh, another thing. Since they are both the same thing, and look the same, and don't have a HUGE FRICKIN' sticker on them saying "Lockheed ATM-01 Rapier" how could we possibly differntiate them? So let me ask you this.

Who CARES?!

The creators of Macross, Studio Nue have specified these things. The Japanese text says rocket not missile. In Macross, the company is called Bifors, unlike the real life Bofors. Truth about designs and respect for the creators is something to care about.

I really hate to say this, but please we don't need you going around and correcting each and every error on the models forum, especially if you don't build them. For the purpose of the kit It doesn't really matter especially if it goes by the line art. I don't mean to be an ass, but its kinda annoying. We are happy enough to get these kits made in the first place, and just because you can pick out an error in its name (which has little to do with the cast) is not a modeling problem per say.If you want to make a thread about it nanashi, do it in the Movie and TV series thread please.

Indeed. He's not even a modeller.

I think that was my #1 gripe actually. For example I only build 1/72 scale models and for years I had to suffer building the REALLY poor Revell HE-162 kits because they were the only company who built them. I spent ages accurizing them. We ALL have stories like this... like the F-14D issues that dave has pointed out. Having a missile pod that is definately inaccurate, and a hardpoint that "may" be inaccurate to me is so trivial, when you look at the absolute beauty and the overall accuracy of the model. I'd be far more recieving if he actually HAD built one, like HWK and his battroid missile problem.

I think Nanashi's point in mentioning this first of all, was just to make people aware that although they are great kits, they should not be regarded as the 'be all & end all' in accuracy.

This is not a critiscm as afterall, they are just the sculptor(s) interpretation of the design, incorporating Hasegawa's desire to give the Valks a more 'real aircraft' feel.

I personally felt it was more of an attack, especially after the Club-M/Tanmen comment. You're right that its an interpretation, but wasn't it mentioned somewhere that Kawamori signed off on the Hasegawa designs? If it is true I doubt that ClubM had the same privledge, I certainly doubt that Tanmen has either. If the biggest gripe people have is the "optional" missile pod not having a reverse missile, thats pretty tame. I can see the hardpoint thing maybe, but I'm pretty sure there are conflicting line art versions out there... so to say that its a shame that hasegawa didn't follow X interpretation over y interpretation is splitting hairs, and is a bit much.

Sure Hasegawa's models have more details than the animation, but thats also because of cost of the animation itself. AS was said in the other thread, up close fighters have panels everywhere, rivets and the like. Animators, and even shoji Kawamori don't have time to draw every single panel line on a fighter. As budgets go up, more and more detail gets put on, but never like what a real vehicle has. I think Macross Zero made it perfectly clear that VFs are fairly normal fighters in their requirements and designs, so that the VF-1 likely has these sort of details on them, but we never seen them before.

Personally I love the Hase, models. I've got a few just waiting for construction, to go along with my already built ones.For Hasegawa, a company that has staked its claim on the modeling market based on realism and quality, to be doing Macross kits speaks volumes about the kits themselves. It was a dream come true when I first got a YF-21 in 1/72 scale. I don't think I've ever been as ecastic... except when I was building it. One of my friends is an excellent excellent 1/48th scale WW-2 plane modeler. He thinks science fiction modeling is "the dark side." But I told him that the most advanced kits hasegawa makes right now are the Macross line. I showed him the sprue and he was blown away. I had to buy him one for christmas because I knew he wanted it. I think the Accuracy far surpasses any plastic kit and they are only surpassed by ONE resin kit.

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?showtopic=12597

I think the biggest rant was a certain member who picked apart the model for its exact line art specifications. Actually the comments pissed me off to some degree. If the VF-1 was a REAL vehicle I think he may have had a legitimate gripe, but in truth it isn't and the Hase VF-1 is one of the closest interpretations you can get... by a company which makes some ofthe most accurate models in the world. To be honest I found some of the points he made were not very informed and did not reflect the truth behind how good hase models are.

I know I should have said something in that thread, but I'll say it here.

I think the same question could be asked even if they did carry lasers back when episode 4 came out.

Well there is some stuff from the Japanese magazines that may be of help

these ones are designed to transform... thefore I they must use the wings from fighter mode.

... I know... and I want one BAD.

I think its the companys fault actually... and partly due to as well to called the "core" market group of these companies. I think the comic book format is too slow and unwieldly to be an effective seller. I look at the Japanese manga market, and its prospering right now.. why? Three reasons: its accessable ( everybody can buy it at any corner store: 7/11 lawsons ect at very low prices), it has broad ranging appeal (not just superheroes but romances, political drama ect.. they translate harlequins into manga now) and finally its fast... you can get a new installment every week if it is in a weekly publication. Manga's pulpiness IS its appeal... and it works. And I think that comic books are really none of these things.

Storylines are long and ponderous, often requiring you to buy several books that take months if not years to develop... for the same price of one comic book you can buy one manga with several strips. Really comics rehash the superhero based story lines, that have limited appeal to all but the 13~45 age group of men. Even love stories and the like are based in a superpower world. And although there are real gems out there for storytelling, many are not that deep.

The style of comics reflect the art, at expense of story telling... taking a month for 15 pages of carefully inked cells with detailed backgrounds. I really think the last point is its worst detractor. In a time when we do have such a fast moving society, having something come out so slowly just puts new customers off. having an issue every week or even two weeks would make the product far more accessable. The real problem for these companies is to make the shift over to this new business model... which is very uncertain. I think though that it has to be done gently and slowly... rush into it and it will fail.

Oh if you think I'm out to lunch, A very good friend of mine is a pencilist for marvel, and he'll tell you the exact same things. Hell he's trying to do that right now.

ahhh the operation of the pentagon... love it

Jumper "Yes thats right Mr Rumsfeld... these F-35s, they are just so capable... that we need less of them!!! and with the money we save, we can buy more F-22s instead!"

Rumsfeld inner voice :"Uhhuh who does he take me for?"

Rumsfeld outervoice " GREAT. well that means they'll be cheaper and more effective to buy than the F-22! ... great going jumper! you've served your country well... get me the OMB on the phone"

Jumper: "But! but!"

Likely the wave 1/100

http://www.macrossworld.com/macross/models...ave_yf21128.jpg

(saving 3-D TV for a later spiral of course).

oooh someone who speaks the lingo... nice to see.

Not to wade too deep into the field of politics. One thing you don't see is that Rumsfeld and especially Wolfowitz has angered not so much the democrats, but a wing of the traditional foreign policy establishment of the Republican party... Realists, who dominated policy thinking up until very recently. These individuals guided policy through the Cold War, and see the neo cons as blatant idealists who have guided american foreign policy into areas it should have never gone. These are guys like Brent Scowcroft, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Richard Hass, in and outers like Mearshimer and others. Although they may not have influence in the White house, they have plenty of prestige and influence in Congress.Some are in the White House already (Rice and Cheney) but they have move towards the Neo-conservatism over realist tenets... I think you might not see Rumsfeld walk, but I think some of the neocons may lose their positions.