Idées reçues sur le F-22 ?

Commentaire intéressant de Pierre SPREY qui compte parmi les concepteurs du F-16 et du A-10 :

"The Chief of Staff and General Lyons have been pushing the notion that the F-22 is doing all kinds of hard maneuvering above 50,000 feet that no other fighter is capable of. This is simply false. First of all, the F-22 at Mach 1.6 can't sustain level flight above 47,000 feet without using afterburner -- and if it uses afterburner, within minutes it runs so low on fuel it has to leave combat to run for home or for refueling.

Secondly, lots of fighters besides the F-22 can get to 60,000 feet or over, including the F-15, F-16A, Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen. And each of these fighters, having lighter wing loading than the F-22, can maneuver harder (that is, pull higher G) than the F-22, whether subsonic or supersonic and whether at high altitude or low altitude."

Rien de bien concret sur le Rafale, mais juste un petit rappel sur l'importance de la charge alaire d'un avion de combat ... et la "relative" supériorité du F-22.

Source

En 2008, Pierre SPREY établissait sa vision de l'Armée de l'Air idéale de la façon suivante :

• 4,000 smaller, more agile A-10s
• 2,500 turboprops as forward air controllers
• 100 new tankers
• 1,000 dirt-strip C-123-like airlifters
• 1,100 smaller, faster F-16s
• 183 F-22s already purchased 
• 200 F-35s redesignated as A-35s "to meet commitments to allies"