After 9 Years and $67 Billion, F-22 Raptor Sees Combat in Syria

[Purveyor]

The Pentagon’s newest fighter jet saw combat for the first time on Monday during the U.S.-led attacks against Islamic militants inside Syria. The F-22 Raptor made its fighting debut nearly nine years after the Air Force took delivery of the jet.

The $67 billion F-22 program is one of the most expensive in Pentagon history, and the military is blunt about its perceived advantage: “The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft,” according to the Air Force.

Be that as it may, the Obama administration notified the Syrian government that the strikes were coming on Monday, likely to reduce the risk of a U.S. fighter jet being shot down, and five Arab governments supported the offensive. There was reason to worry about risks from surface-to-air missiles, as the Air Force Times reported: “The Syrian defense system has been cast by Pentagon leadership as highly advanced, and was cited as a reason U.S. forces could not launch raids on the Assad regime in the early days of the Syrian civil war.”

The F-22?s cost was one reason former Defense Secretary Robert Gates pressed to end production in late 2011, at a time when the Air Force had already received 187 of the planes from Lockheed Martin (LMT). The first F-22s entered service in December 2005.

more...

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-09-23/f-22-raptor-makes-combat-debut-in-syria-in-strikes-on-islamic-state#r=rss

[Sherman A1]

1. Charming

This overpriced stealthy alleged air superiority fighter is used for ground attacks? What a "wonderful" use of tax dollars.

[GGJohn]

6. Several aircraft are dual role,

the F-15E Strike Eagle is a fighter/bomber, the F-111 Ardvaark is a fighter/bomber, the F/A-18 Hornet is also a fighter/ bomber.
The US military has invested heavily in dual role aircraft in supposedly cost saving program.

[Sherman A1]

23. I understand the concept of the fighter bomber aircraft

most fighters at one time or another have bombs hung on them, turning them into attack aircraft. That said the F22 was conceived as an stealthy air superiority or air dominance fighter. Only later did some bright folks decide to make it into the F/A22. In any event there would be likely no need to use this supposedly high tech/high cost aircraft in these strikes. The older aircraft are fully capable of dominating the airspace and carrying out the missions (many of which it appears were done with shipboard Tomahawks).

The F22 is like the F35 a boondoggle and waste of taxpayers money in my opinion. Yes, the F15's, F16's and F/A18's are older designs and airframes do wear out from use, but they can be replaced at much lower costs (as their R&D and tooling are already done). They are just fine particularly for this type of strike mission.

[GGJohn]

25. I agree,

I'm sorry if I sounded like I was lecturing, your post indicated, to me, that you didn't know about dual role aircraft.
My apologies.

[Sherman A1]

27. Appreciated

and welcome to DU.

[malaise]

2. Well they have to test it somewhere

Men have money to make

[Orsino]

5. They have to sell it somehow.

Along comes a war, right on time.

[malaise]

17. It never fails

I don't know why we're surprised.

[sabrina 1]

11. I wonder how many will be sold after this 'air show' in Syria? Have to keep justifying

those billions of dollars. What better place to do so than the ME? 'Kill' (forgive the macabre pun) two birds with one stone'.

[tammywammy]

13. Production of the F-22 has ended.

None will be sold.

[sabrina 1]

19. With enough customers, a case can be made that it should not have ended.

[tammywammy]

21. That won't happen.

The F-35 is in production with multiple governments committed to it. No one would invest in the money it would require to build and start production on the F-22, plus there's be reengineering involved. It would take years. Countries that are already purchasing the F-35 wouldn't also purchase the F-22.

[sabrina 1]

22. So after they get to see the old model on display, we can sell them the latest model.

$67 billion, imagine all the good that could have been done with that.

[malaise]

18. The West has perfected the art of killing

while calling everyone else barbarian

[SomethingFishy]

26. Saw a comic today where

Beheading was evil and Bombs were Justice. Thought he nailed it pretty good. Like you just did..

[n2doc]

3. Good to see. The ISIL air force, mighty as it might be, stands no chance!

Air supremacy is job 1 in todays modern war

[G_j]

4. yay!!!

they get to use their 67 billlion dollar toys!

[packman]

7. Makes you wonder

If the US would just tell every militant, "Come over to our side, we'll give you a million $ and set you up in a ranch in Texas" if it would have been cheaper and more effective.

[JaneyVee]

8. I would have built it for half that price.

Except it would be made of steel and cars could drive across it.

[flamingdem]

9. $67 billion?

I'm glad I didn't know that. Every hit on an Isis Toyota costs: ?

The missiles must be in the millions then add the cost of the Raptor.

I hope the Gulf states are ponying up their share of this war.

[former9thward]

10. Now we know the real reason for the War on ISIS.

The MIC folks wanted to play with their new toy.

[sabrina 1]

12. That and regime change in Syria.

[CaptainTruth]

14. I'm confused ...

“The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft,” according to the Air Force.

So that means the F-22 won't be matched by the F-35?

If that's the case, why are we spending so darn much on the F-35 when it apparently (according to the Air Force) will have lesser capabilities than the F-22?

Is the F-35 not considered a fighter aircraft?

Confused ... ?

[Erose999]

20. The F35 has "short takeoff and landing" cabability (except that it doesn't work). STOL is a feature

sought after by the Marines for their close air support aircraft.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. For that much dough they could have bought every member of ISIS a house in Beverly Hills

a new BMW, and let them find their own virgins.

[msanthrope]

24. You wanna live next to them? nt