Goodbye to the F-22 (and good riddance)

Early in his tenure, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld, together with his team, were already considering limitations on the size of the F-22 force. Indeed, Rumsfeld did so even before U.S. forces became enmeshed in long wars against Afghan and Iraqi insurgents.

That's because Rumsfeld had this view of a tiny conventional force being highly effective through the magic of good information systems.

That, and he was dealing with repeated congressional sabotage on the F-22.

The Defense leadership's reasoning was the same then as it is today: F-22s are wonderful fighters, but given their expense and the demands for less costly and more numerous air-to-ground capable aircraft, we simply have enough of them.

Is that why we're instead buying a so-called "cheaper" fighter that's still in Development Hell in mass quantities?

As for the F-22, it's expensive because Congress, being the idiots that they frequently are, took a look at the original 700+ order and said "Gee golly! We don't need that many planes!" So they cut the order quantity, which required re-tooling of the production line, and which pushed the development costs on the remaining planes, driving up the unit cost. At which point Congress thought, "Wow, these planes sure are expensive! Let's cut the order quantity again to save money!" It's a repeating cycle of idiocy.

And we don't have "enough of them." We have 187, which isn't even enough on its own to keep the production lines profitably open to make replacement parts, never mind replacing the fleet of thirty-year-old F-15s and F-16s (which are starting to get into serious trouble - the whole F-15 fleet got a mandatory upper speed limit after an F-15 broke up in mid-air a while back). They've essentially wasted 20 years and billions in development costs.

Secretary Gates was effectively confronted with the choice of continuing to expand the F-22 fleet at the expense of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

Good. The F-35 was never designed to be a top-of-the-line air superiority fighter, and I'd rather have a mixed force of them.

The latter not only will afford the United States the ultra-modern air-to-ground capability it needs in current and future combat environments, but also represents a joint effort with many of our closest allies.

That's no doubt why Gates couldn't cancel it.

As is, don't hold your breath. The F-35 is still in Development Hell, and you can guarantee that unit costs are going to spiral upward due to that and due to the massive requirements it needs to meet. At which point, we'll be risking another Congressional Cycle of Idiocy.

Reducing the JSF program in favor of the F-22 would certainly have alienated those very allies upon whom we rely for support in Afghanistan, and to whom we are likely to look for assistance in future combat environments.

Are you talking about the same allies who want to buy the F-22? That includes Australia, Japan, among others.

Secretary Gates made the right choice, and he should be applauded for it.

No, we should be appalled at this decision. Considering that Gates hasn't exactly been the height of competence in Afghanistan (the sole reason why he was kept on by Obama), it wouldn't shock me if he was seen as one of the worst secretaries of defense in a couple of decades, on par with Robert McNamara.