The US Air Force plans to retire some of its F-22s in order to fund the NGAD program. Analysis of costs, industrial challenges, and criticism.
Summary
In the United States, the debate over the early retirement of the F-22 Raptor in 2025 pits defenders of the aircraft against military officials. The US Air Force is considering reducing its fleet of F-22s—one of the most advanced fighters ever built—to free up funds for the NGAD (Next-Generation Air Dominance) program, renamed F-47 in its engineering and development phase. This project aims to design a sixth-generation fighter aircraft, accompanied by drones and network systems, to meet the challenges of future air warfare. The cost of an F-22 is extremely high, both in terms of purchase price and stealth maintenance, and the NGAD promises disruptive capabilities but at an equally astronomical price. The controversy stems from the fact that some believe the F-22 is still very effective, particularly against threats such as the Chinese J-20, and too valuable to be withdrawn prematurely, especially without the possibility of export.
The genesis of the NGAD project and its strategic role
The Next-Generation Air Dominance program is the United States’ effort to surpass fifth-generation fighters such as the F-22 and F-35. Rather than a single aircraft, NGAD is designed as a system of systems integrating a sixth-generation piloted aircraft, “Loyal Wingman” drones, and connected sensors to dominate the airspace in contested environments. This approach responds to evolving global threats, where adversaries are developing long-range missiles, advanced radars, and modern stealth fighters.
NGAD is distinguished by its advanced architecture, increased stealth, and ability to coordinate a fleet of manned and unmanned aircraft, which could transform the way air operations are conducted. With this in mind, the US Air Force sees NGAD as the centerpiece of its future air dominance strategy—a term referring to the ability to control airspace against all opposition. …
The real costs of the F-22 and NGAD
The F-22 Raptor is extremely expensive: its unit cost is often quoted as around $440 million, including development and production, although past studies have estimated the cost at around $206 to $216 million per aircraft without infrastructure costs.
It is not just the purchase price that weighs heavily. Every hour of flight time for an F-22 is costly, due to the complex stealth materials that require intensive maintenance to maintain low radar signature and optimal performance. The use of advanced coatings and composite materials increases maintenance man-hours and logistics costs well beyond those of a previous-generation aircraft.
The NGAD program, for its part, is still largely classified. However, estimates indicate that each airframe could cost several hundred million dollars, not including the associated networked systems and drones. The budget requested for NGAD in fiscal year 2025 was several billion dollars, including $3.4 billion for the NGAD family.
This financial competition between maintaining aging F-22s and funding NGAD is at the heart of the strategic debate.
Why the US Air Force is considering reducing its F-22 fleet
The US Air Force has justified its desire for early retirement or divestment for several pragmatic reasons. On the one hand, a large part of the fleet consists of Block 20, the older initial models. These aircraft have not received the full upgrades of later versions and are mainly used for training. The USAF believes that it would be cost-prohibitive to upgrade them to the Block 30/35 standard, with estimates of several billion dollars for a complete upgrade.
Rather than spending these sums, the USAF is seeking to reserve the budget for NGAD and other priorities such as the F-35. This is part of an overall “divest to invest” strategy, in other words, selling or withdrawing costly assets to free up funds for future technologies. This budgetary logic aims to anticipate high-intensity conflicts against adversaries equipped with sophisticated anti-access systems.
The lack of F-22 exports and the budgetary impact
A distinctive feature of the F-22 is the export ban, established by US law in the 1990s. Unlike the F-35, which has been sold to many allies, no F-22s have been exported. This policy has several financial consequences:
- No critical mass of production to reduce unit costs.
- All R&D and production costs remain exclusively American.
- No economies of scale or financial sharing with foreign partners.
This has made the program even more expensive. If a different policy had been adopted, allied nations could have shared some of the development and maintenance costs, improving the budgetary viability of the F-22.
Rising threats: the geopolitical context
The controversy is not solely financial. Those who oppose the early retirement of the F-22 point to the evolution of Russian and, above all, Chinese aviation capabilities. The Chengdu J-20, a Chinese stealth fighter, is already in service and continues to evolve with more powerful engines and increased capabilities. In some assessments, the J-20 is expected to be deployed in large numbers, posing a direct strategic challenge to Western forces.
In this context, defenders of the F-22 point out that the Raptor remains one of the best air superiority aircraft in the world, with high-level stealth, supercruise capability (supersonic flight without afterburners), and a powerful sensor suite—assets that cannot be easily replaced by other platforms in the immediate future.
Critics of the withdrawal policy
Criticism of the US Air Force’s strategy comes from a variety of quarters: defense specialists, lawmakers, and aviation enthusiasts. They put forward several arguments:
- The F-22 is still technologically relevant for several decades to come, particularly in air-to-air missions.
- Retiring stealth fighters while modern adversaries are advancing is strategically risky.
- According to some reports, the USAF has underestimated the cost-benefit analysis of the retirement.
- Without exports, the industrial and political potential of the F-22 is underutilized.
As a result, the House of Representatives has sometimes blocked certain divestments in annual budgets to preserve F-22s, indicating a divergence between the military and policymakers.
The uncertainty of the NGAD timeline and its risks
The NGAD program is not without its own challenges. It has experienced delays, cost overruns, and even questions about its feasibility, leading some analysts to wonder whether NGAD will ever fly as planned or whether its deployment schedule can be achieved without significant budget adjustments.
This uncertainty—combined with the reduction in the F-22 fleet—is fueling fears of a capability gap, where the USAF could find itself with fewer aircraft, either in terms of numbers or performance, during a critical transition period.
A changing air strategy
The US Air Force is attempting to reinvent its doctrine: moving from a model based on the number of aircraft to one focused on connectivity, autonomy, and systems integration. This shift reflects a vision where air dominance depends less on the number of aircraft and more on their ability to operate as a coherent network.
For some planners, this is a necessary adaptation to the realities of modern combat in the face of advanced anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems. For others, it represents a risky gamble that could result in the loss of a proven tactical advantage.
Future prospects and upcoming decisions
The final decision on the retirement of the F-22 and the funding of NGAD will have repercussions for decades to come. If NGAD delivers on its promises, it could redefine American air supremacy. If budgetary or technical challenges persist, the USAF could find itself between two generations of aircraft without fully benefiting from either.
This debate illustrates a fundamental tension: how can a country balance technological innovation, budgetary requirements, and strategic realities in a context where its adversaries are not standing still? The verdict of political and military decision-makers will provide clear direction, but the path remains fraught with uncertainty and controversy.
Live a unique fighter jet experience