F-22 maker launches Twitter defense over recent negative reports
May 7th, 2012
10:45 AM ET

F-22 maker launches Twitter defense over recent negative reports

Lockheed Martin has launched an offensive to combat complaints from pilots who have refused to fly its F-22s over concerns about oxygen deprivation while in the cockpit, reports CNN's This Just In page.

The company took its campaign to the skies – er, Twitter – to try to combat growing negative publicity about its Raptors.

The Air Force has been looking into about a dozen unexplained incidents related to hypoxia, or oxygen deficiency, with pilots but has been unable to pinpoint the cause, Air Combat Command has said.

Read about the PR pushback on This Just In

Filed under: Defense Spending
soundoff (18 Responses)
  1. SayanIndia

    Only a positive combat campaign will brighten the image of F-22A Raptor, the aircraft is performing excellently in domestic combat exercises.

    Cost however will remain the negative point of F-22, the expensive fighter is proving even expensive to maintain, with less than remarkable availability, an aspect that may well haunt the F-35 Lightning II even more because of size constraints.

    Stealth may well prove less valuable once anticipated.


    May 8, 2012 at 8:38 am | Reply
  2. Simon

    Typical Made in U.S.A. babe.... You know it's better and you know it will break down in a short period of time

    May 7, 2012 at 4:02 pm | Reply
    • Cheese Wonton

      Depends. The F/A-18 flies, on average, three times as many hours between failures as any other fighter. It's not sexy, it's not terribly low observable, but it doesn't break and is, by the standards of tactical jets, it's inexpensive to buy and inexpensive to fly. It's cost per flight hour is lower than a couple of big helicopters we fly, which is saying something. The F/A-18's engines are particularly reliable and they can be swapped in 20 minutes in the field. It's shortcoming is that against the best defended adversaries with the most up to day electronics, it is not as survivable as a fully low observable design. Engaging the Chinese would be nothing likke our more recent wars. We'll lose aircraft to combat in larger numbers than we have seen in many years unless we have lots of low observiable aircraft.

      May 7, 2012 at 6:41 pm | Reply
      • Bleedingheart

        All those positive things you said are the reasons it wont fly (pun). If it's not expensive, and complicated the US doesn't want it. Got to keep those defense contractors rolling in the green.

        May 16, 2012 at 8:56 am |
    • CCCP

      Haha, if the American one has bugs imagine how horrible the Chinese knock off immitation one is. Yuck.

      Anyway, the oxygen pressure system is really a separate issue imo. Has nothing to do with the wings, the engine, etc of the lane.

      May 8, 2012 at 5:07 am | Reply
  3. frequentdropperoffbombs

    it's sad that they want to combat the pilots instead of listening to them and try to work together and resolve the issue. After all, the pilots risk their lives every time they fly.

    May 7, 2012 at 3:25 pm | Reply
  4. Jannani

    79 Billion dollar for 200 planes. That is 395 million dollar each plane. And pilots pass out mid air. it is hilarious. No wonder America is a failed state.

    May 7, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Reply
    • Cheese Wonton

      Jannani, that $395 million figure is total ownership cost, not "flyaway" cost. Total ownership cost includes maintenance costs, fuel, pilot and ground crew wages, aircraft specific facilities and everything else required to own that airplane over it's expected 20 or 30 year life span. Flyaway cost, the actual purchase price of a single airplane that is ready to fly is $150 million for the F-22. By comparison, both Singapore and South Korea paid in excess of $110 million flyaway cost for their most recent F-15 purchases, and this is a forty year old design with a more modern radar and fire control system.
      While not a dishonest figure, the media will often use total ownership cost as the "price" of an airplane rather than flyaway cost to inflate it's apparent cost and inflame opinion against a system. Few outside aerospace and defense professionals are aware of these sorts of differences in stated "costs" to buy an airplane.

      May 7, 2012 at 3:33 pm | Reply
      • John Debba

        Whether flyaway or ownership cost, the money is as good as spent.

        May 7, 2012 at 4:38 pm |
    • CCCP

      And yet, your sorry joke of a country copied the design. Who's the moron?

      May 8, 2012 at 5:12 am | Reply
    • SRSwain

      You might not be quite so quick to say this if one of those 99.99% of all F-22 flights put a hot one right up your tailpipe, totally unseen, and undreamed of. Yes, it's expensive. It's horribly expensive. But it's one part of the arsenal that this poor failed state still has at its disposal to make life a bit less easy for certain parties who would be only too happy to allow us all to be their slaves.

      Sound extreme, eh? Ask Mr. Chen. There are thousands of Mr. Chens in many countries around the world. Some of them are oppressed by atheists. Some of them are oppressed by gangsters and pirates. Some of them are oppressed by any number of different variations on a theme of true-believer. But all of them are just a whim away from being deprived of life and liberty. Would you like to trade places with them just to show how inadequate this failed state is?

      How you see all this is your choice, at least attitudinally.

      May 8, 2012 at 8:36 am | Reply
  5. PaulBel

    If I were a fighter pilot I would want to be assured my aircraft was in perfect working order before taking to the skies. That said, (and maybe this already exists?) wouldn't it be relatively easy to measure the O2 blood gas levels using a simple device (maybe built into the suit)? There are oximeters that hospitals use all the time to monitor oxygen saturation. These simply clip on to a fingertip. I'm sure someone could come up with an inexpensive unit to monitor a pilot's O2 level and start sounding an alarm if the % saturation drops below a certain point.

    May 7, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Reply
  6. Tosspot

    Oh, well, there's always the F-35.

    May 7, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Reply
    • billybob

      Hahaha that is a good one!!

      May 7, 2012 at 8:07 pm | Reply
    • Bleedingheart

      I was waiting for someone to mention the F-35. I really don't know much about it, but aren't we building over 2,000 of them, and it will be our main fighter for the next 50 years?? Also I read somewhere that for the cost of four of them we could fund the school lunch program for ten years.

      May 16, 2012 at 9:01 am | Reply
  7. Hahahahahahaha

    Next stop. Iran!!!!!!!!!! Hahahahahaha

    May 7, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Reply
  8. Everett Wallace

    Thanks Lockheed Martin the F-22 from the reviews I have seen is AWESOME. I want my ANGELS to be comfortable up there if you have upgrades we want them. Thanks, I look forward to our continued work with you.

    May 7, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Reply

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.