Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Fake News? Trump approves F-22s for Israel

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Fake News? Trump approves F-22s for Israel

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 12:00
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 1,289
Received 133 Likes on 87 Posts
Fake News? Trump approves F-22s for Israel

Has anyone else seen the chatter about F-22s for Israel. As the story below says the Obey Amendment to 1998 Department of Defense Appropriations Act still prevents this. So I assume this is mainly to satisfy either internal Israeli concerns about the F-35s for the UAE and/or the US Israeli lobby in the run up to the US elections.

I can't see F-22 production ever being restarted unless the the USAF had approved funding for a substantial number of additional ones. Nor, as the Forbes article quoted below says, does the US have an excess of F-22s to offload.

Trump approves selling F-22 Raptor to Israel — Saudi report
Newspaper says US is okaying sale of the advanced stealth aircraft to maintain the Jewish state’s military superiority, after announcing plans to sell F-35s to UAE

US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper told Israeli officials during a visit to Israel this week that the Trump administration has approved selling F-22 stealth fighters to the Jewish state, according to a Friday report in a Saudi-owned newspaper.

US President Donald Trump okayed the sale of the F-22 Raptor and precision-guided bombs to Israel, the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported, citing senior sources in Tel Aviv.

Such a sale would first require the US Congress to overturn a current law barring Washington from exporting the advanced fighter jets. The House of Representatives passed the law in 1998 over concerns that the nigh-unparalleled stealth technology in the F-22 could fall into the hands of Russia or China if the aircraft were sold abroad, including to Israel.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-...israel-report/

Forbes' report a few days earlier added a note of realism:

After OKing UAE F-35s, Israel Asks For F-22 Raptors—Here’s Why That’s Not Likely To Fly Following earlier Israeli objections to the sale of Lockheed F-35 Lightning II stealth jets to the United Arab Emirates, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz reportedly relented and accepted the sale following a meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper last Friday.

According to Israeli newspaper Haaretz, senior Israeli defense officials subsequently sought compensation: “removing obstacles” to purchasing older F-22 Raptor stealth fighters designed for greater air-to-air combat capability than the F-35.

The report notes, however, such a sale is “currently not on the table.” And it will likely remain that way because the F-22 is no longer in production, and the U.S. Air Force—the type’s only operator—is unlikely to want to give up aircraft from its own fleet.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sebasti...likely-to-fly/

The Haaretz story also quotes IDF sources about opposing views over the agreement to acquire V-22s the Airforce not wanting them but the ground forces are in favour. THe airforce would prefere CH-53Ks.
SLXOwft is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 19:31
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: uk
Age: 50
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Japan would be doing backflips if true. Emphasis on the if true bit and Trump not trying to buy more votes...
Misformonkey is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 20:27
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,078
Received 55 Likes on 34 Posts
USAF leadership is on record of recent saying the next generation fighter (my presumption being an eventual replacement for the F22) has already flown. Think it would be off to restart the F22 line given this.
West Coast is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 21:20
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Executive Branch doesn't authorise foreign military sales, Congress does. Congress has already passed a Bill in 1998 that banned the export of the F-22 to foreign nations.

This is fake news.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 21:33
  #5 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,462
Received 1,623 Likes on 740 Posts
Maybe, maybe not.

But, to be frank, the F-22 force is a token gesture that has no real military value in the defence of the USA. Three squadrons outside Washington, two in Alaska and one in Hawaii. The last time they were asked they could generate 33 airframes CR between them.

The maintenance is mind-blowingly expensive, upgrades even more so and long delayed and repairs take years.

If they passed on 24-48 of the 187 airframes produced to the Israelis I’m sure it could be talked up as a major gesture, and doubtless the Israelis would modify the software and get them working in short order. But the major effect would be political, not military.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericteg...fight-tonight/

Last edited by ORAC; 3rd Nov 2020 at 03:50.
ORAC is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2020, 23:40
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 654
Received 9 Likes on 8 Posts
Whilst there will likely be no more F-22s because of the cost of starting a manufacturing line, there is talk of more than one country (Japan is one) approaching the US for an F-22/F-35 Hybrid.

Perhaps there will soon be clean desk space within contractors for a new long range Air Dominance fighter airframe with F-35 generation electronics that can be 'safely' sold to friends as a 5.5 Gen Fighter, whilst the silver bullet 6th gen fighter is being worked on behind the curtain? You might even sell a Super Duper Hornet with the CFTs, low RCS podded weapons bays and the latest electronics in the interim.

I feel that aerospace mega corps will be looking to their defence businesses to prop up the civil side for the next 5 to 10 years.
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 04:25
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 238
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by West Coast
USAF leadership is on record of recent saying the next generation fighter (my presumption being an eventual replacement for the F22) has already flown. Think it would be off to restart the F22 line given this.
All of the speculation about this comes from a statement made to Defense News in September by USAF's top acquisition official. ALL he said was that a "Demonstrator" had flown and that they had broken records doing it. He did NOT say it was a production-ready craft or even a prototype. There was no information about what it was, what it did, how representative of an operational aircraft it might be, if at all. The "records" could be how they did it, how fast they did it (you can move really fast in the Black world) if Virtual Reality or Artificial Intelligence was used, if it was an advanced unmanned platform, the type of construction, how it flew, how it achieved any stealth it might have, etc.

For example, look up TACIT BLUE. That was a demonstrator, not an operational craft or a prototype of anything. We're probably seeing something similar here. Still impressive, but not something that's going to be filling the flight lines in a few years.

Last edited by Commando Cody; 3rd Nov 2020 at 06:42. Reason: punctuation
Commando Cody is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 04:51
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,966
Received 151 Likes on 91 Posts
If there is a difference between Israel and Japan, it will be in their respective abilities to stop leakage of highly classified information to those whose names shall not be spoken. (Assuming that it has not all been leaked already.)
jolihokistix is online now  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 06:07
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boeing: Airpower Teaming System

Don’t think the F22 will be competitive for much longer.
George Glass is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 06:20
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Exeter UK
Posts: 280
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Or did someone confuse the F-22 for the V-22 perhaps?
EGTE is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 06:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by George Glass
Boeing: Airpower Teaming System

Don’t think the F22 will be competitive for much longer.
I'd argue that "loyal wingman" combat air systems such as this one will only make the F-22, and the F-35, considerably more competitive in heavily contested environments. The unique command and control capabilities of the F-22 makes it a force multiplier, and putting more assets in the air with similar low observable capabilities will only make it more effective.

I just hope the RAF follows this path. I think Taranis might be similar?
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 06:43
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 238
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by jolihokistix
If there is a difference between Israel and Japan, it will be in their respective abilities to stop leakage of highly classified information to those whose names shall not be spoken. (Assuming that it has not all been leaked already.)
Another difference is that one of them can pay for it with their own money.
Commando Cody is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 07:02
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 238
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by BVRAAM
The Executive Branch doesn't authorise foreign military sales, Congress does. Congress has already passed a Bill in 1998 that banned the export of the F-22 to foreign nations.

This is fake news.
DoD and State decide who they think should get what. Congress is then informed of the decision and they have the power to overrule the decision. The legislation you're thinking of is the Obey Amendment to the 1998 Defense Appropriations Act. Each year after that it was renewed for that year's appropriations act. I don't know if they still add it each year since at this point the chances of F-22 production resuming are slim to none. The production line no longer exists. Were not even sure if all the tooling that was supposed to be preserved is intact. The skilled workforce has disbursed, as has the supply chain that provided subcomponents (some companies no longer even exist).

We're talking mega bucks to get it back into production and you'd end up with an aircraft that would have some dated technology for not that much less than a new design aircraft.

Last edited by Commando Cody; 3rd Nov 2020 at 07:12. Reason: spelling
Commando Cody is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 07:10
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 238
Received 21 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
Maybe, maybe not.

But, to be frank, the F-22 force is a token gesture that has no real military value in the defence of the USA. Three squadrons outside Washington, two in Alaska and one in Hawaii. The last time they were asked they could generate 33 airframes CR between them.

The maintenance is mind-blowingly expensive, upgrades even more so and long delayed and repairs take years.

If they passed on 24-48 of the 187 airframes produced to the Israelis I’m sure it could be talked up as a major gesture, and doubtless the Israelis would modify the software and get them working in short order. But the major effect would be political, not military.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericteg...fight-tonight/

Given that not all of those are combat capable, can't see USAF being willing to give up any of the ones that are. To get an idea of how precious they are, one badly damaged Raptor instead of being written off was painstakingly repaired at a cost that exceeded what it cost to build the complete plane initially . This was because there was no chance of getting a remplacement so it was considered worth the cost.
Commando Cody is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 10:41
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,042
Received 13 Likes on 5 Posts
BVRAAM, forget Taranis as a teamed asset. That large and expensive UCAV seemed to vanish into a Franco-British agreement a few years back though it may yet resurface as a national project. What you mean is LANCA (Lightweight Affordable Novel Combat Aircraft) - and associated projects such as the Mosquito TDP, which will deliver a flying demonstrator in the next couple of years. It’s designed to give Tempest (and probably Typhoon/F35) a ‘loyal wingman’ and to beef up the RAF’s combat mass for less money than buying manned aircraft. Similar in concept to the USAF’s Skyborg and RAAF’s Airpower Teaming System.
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 12:15
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evalu8ter
BVRAAM, forget Taranis as a teamed asset. That large and expensive UCAV seemed to vanish into a Franco-British agreement a few years back though it may yet resurface as a national project. What you mean is LANCA (Lightweight Affordable Novel Combat Aircraft) - and associated projects such as the Mosquito TDP, which will deliver a flying demonstrator in the next couple of years. It’s designed to give Tempest (and probably Typhoon/F35) a ‘loyal wingman’ and to beef up the RAF’s combat mass for less money than buying manned aircraft. Similar in concept to the USAF’s Skyborg and RAAF’s Airpower Teaming System.
That's the badger.

I do find the 'Affordable' part of the acronym rather amusing, if I'm honest. I can't name a single O/S major defence procurement in the last 20 years that has been remotely 'affordable' off the top of my head. Late and over budget seems to be the popular thing - it keeps the shareholders happy, I guess...
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 13:18
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around
Posts: 1,206
Received 118 Likes on 54 Posts
Great to have you back.
downsizer is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 13:20
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,042
Received 13 Likes on 5 Posts
‘Affordable’ only in relative terms. IIRC the stated aim of LANCA is a cost of 10% of a manned fighter to buy and fly - hence you dramatically boost your combat mass for the same outlay. More sensors/weapons/jammers in the fight, an increased sort issue for the enemy and, ultimately, some decoys to ‘suck up’ the first volley of spears if needed......
Evalu8ter is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 13:26
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evalu8ter
‘Affordable’ only in relative terms. IIRC the stated aim of LANCA is a cost of 10% of a manned fighter to buy and fly - hence you dramatically boost your combat mass for the same outlay. More sensors/weapons/jammers in the fight, an increased sort issue for the enemy and, ultimately, some decoys to ‘suck up’ the first volley of spears if needed......

Will they be controllable via the pilot in the cockpit of the piloted asset? Or will they be controlled similarly to conventional RPAS systems, via a GCS?
Surely for jets such as F-22 and F-35, that would require a significant upgrade to achieve? It may be something that comes as standard with the 6th gen.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2020, 14:03
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Zummerset
Posts: 1,042
Received 13 Likes on 5 Posts
The clue is in the term ‘loyal wingman”. The plan is that they are capable of either autonomous action or respond to commands given by a formation leader. My sense is that they will not be ‘flown’ in a traditional sense (too much workload for the manned aircraft, lack of real estate and far too much bandwidth/electronic noise), more given tasks and then rely upon AI and programming to execute them.
Evalu8ter is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.