Why Did The U.S. Air Force Cancel The F-22 Raptor?
In 2009, the U.S. Department of Defense decided to end production of the fighter after only 186 planes were produced, significantly less than the original order of 750. What happened? Airpower is supposed to be one of the pillars of America's military strength, so why take its best piece off the board?
The answer comes down to the fact that the nature of America's threats change and evolve over time, meaning that an asset that seemed critical in one era seems less so in another. Plus, put simply, the F-22 is wildly expensive, so if it's not an absolute must-have, the cost-benefit analysis just doesn't shake out.
Read more: These Are The Worst American Cars Ever Made
The F-22 was a revelation when it first flew in 1997. With a top speed of an incredible Mach 2.25 (1,726 miles per hour), supercruise capability (meaning it could fly for extended periods above the speed of sound), and a coat of radar-absorbent material, it was more advanced than any other fighter in the world at the time. It was a spaceship in a world full of paper planes.
Ironically enough, that was part of its problem. Because Russia and China had nothing comparable in the first decade of the 21st century, the F-22 almost seemed like overkill. At a massive per-unit cost of $150 million, did America really need something that far beyond any of its competitors?
For that matter, America's main adversaries at the time had no airpower at all. With the U.S. embroiled in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq against low-tech insurgent forces, a high-cost air-dominance fighter just didn't fit the country's needs at the time. Since even the Pentagon doesn't have infinite money (though it sure seems like it sometimes), it had to make some tough choices over where to put resources. For the budget-draining War on Terror, the F-22 just didn't have an argument to make. Not helping matters was the fact that Congress restricted use of the F-22 to just the U.S. Air Force. Translation: There would be no sales to foreign allies, which cut off a major revenue stream that could have offset its costs.
Of course, since the end of production in 2009, a lot has changed. Russia and particularly China have upped their military capabilities, including in the air. With the benefit of hindsight, should the U.S. have kept the F-22 rolling off the assembly line?
Not necessarily. For one thing, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an even newer fighter jet (though it has problems of its own). While slower and less stealthy than the F-22, it has vastly more advanced sensor capabilities. Not only can it gather a huge amount of information about the battlespace, its true party trick is its ability to disseminate that information to other F-35s and to headquarters.
Meanwhile, the Air Force has also moved forward by looking backward. The decades-old F-15 airframe has gotten a major update in the form of the F-15EX. For one thing, it's much cheaper than the F-22 (its unit cost is only $94 million), which is appealing as the Pentagon looks to cut overspending. More importantly, the F-15EX can bring a whopping 12 air-to-air missiles to the fray, compared to the F-22's measly eight. The F-15EX was also designed to carry the newest and most advanced ordnance in the Air Force's arsenal, hypersonic missiles. Given all that, you could argue that the F-22 has lost its crown as the best air dominance fighter ... to a much older, and cheaper, plane.
Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox...
Read the original article on Jalopnik.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
8 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Slams Musk Plan for Rival Political Party as Feud Deepens
President Donald Trump blasted Elon Musk's bid to start a new political party, as the intensifying feud between the former allies deepens concerns among investors over the implications for Tesla Inc. and other companies helmed by the world's richest man. 'Third parties have never worked, so he can have fun with it, but I think it's ridiculous,' Trump told reporters on Sunday. The US has 'always been a two-party system,' he added.


Bloomberg
8 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Trump Threatens 10% Tariff for ‘Anti-American' BRICS Alignment
President Donald Trump said he would put an additional 10% tariff on any country aligning themselves with 'the Anti-American policies of BRICS,' injecting further uncertainty into global trade as the US continues to negotiate levies with many trading partners. 'Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff,' Trump said Sunday night in a Truth Social post. 'There will be no exceptions to this policy.'
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New phone safety features can help kids. But they only work if parents set them up
Keeping kids safe online can be a full-time job for parents. While good communication between parents and children is key, moms and dads should set kids up for success by placing parental controls on devices. Apple has a new software update; coming in September, iOS 26 expands tools that can help in the effort. For parents whose children have an iPhone, they can now play a role in deciding who their kids can text through Messages. If children want to communicate with a new phone number, they will need to get permission from their parents. It's a one-tap approval method for mom or dad, but gives parents a heads up that someone new may be entering their kids' digital life. Kids will also be able to send a parental approval request to chat, follow or friend users in any third-party apps (not developed by Apple) as well. Child Accounts have the user's age-range information. Now parents can share those details with app developers while keeping the child's birth date private. If developers receive the age information, they may better provide age-appropriate experiences for those users. Moms and dads can decide whether they want their kids' age range information shared with all apps or only those they select. Children cannot decide how their age range information is shared unless their parents allow them to do so. Whether or not a young person's account was set up as a Child Account, these age-appropriate protections will be enabled for all users 13 to 17. Web content filters, age ratings and Communication Safety will all be enacted on those accounts. Utah was the first state in the country to pass a bill requiring app stores to verify kids' ages. The state's App Store Accountability Act requires app stores — not individual apps — to seek parental consent before allowing minors to download apps. Each app on the App Store already shows its age rating based on information provided by developers. For parents, that's often a first check to help them decide whether the app would be appropriate for their child to download. Right now, those ratings are for ages 4+, 9+, 12+ and 17+. That leaves a big gap for teenagers. What may be appropriate for a 13 year old may not be for a 16 year old. Apple is helping by expanding age ratings by the end of the year, when you will see additional guidance for 4+ and 9+, but then 13+, 16+ and 18+. Since these age ratings are also used for parental control features like Screen Time and Ask to Buy, these differentiations will likely be helpful for many parents. Communication Safety is a feature that aims to stop kids from seeing nudity. If something explicit is detected in a photo or video a child receives or is trying to send, the image will be blurred. In the upcoming iOS 26 update, that capability will also apply to FaceTime. Apple says it will 'intervene' when nudity is detected in FaceTime video calls and will also blur out any nudity in Shared Albums in Photos. How do Android phones stack up against these parental controls? For those under 18, Google Messages triggers a sensitive content warning when it detects images that contain nudity. That prompts an Android device to blur those images and give helpful resources to users who receive that type of content. Parents can control the feature through Family Link for Supervised users. It's off by default for adults and unsupervised teen accounts, but users can turn it on in settings. This feature does not work for videos. Google Meet has an Acceptable Use Policy that prohibits nudity but only has the blurring capability in Messages. For now, apps in the Google Play Store follow the age ratings from the International Age Rating Coalition which are similar to those Apple has favored in the past. They break age categories into 3+, 7+, 12+, 16+ and 18+. When it comes to texting, parents of teens with Android phones can turn on 'Only allow calls and texts from phone contacts:' through Family Link. This blocks incoming texts from unknown numbers, but not outgoing ones. And worth noting: Android allows the incoming calls and text to go through if a child has reached out to that number within the past month. Giving parents more options to monitor how their kids spend time online is helpful. But while these companies grant the ability to have parental controls, they only work if moms and dads actually set them up. If parents haven't yet set up monitoring through Family Share for Apple or Family Link for Google, it's never too late to start.