Raptors debut at Red Flag, wield "unfair" advantage - Page 5

avon1944 · 11-12-2007, 16:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy

Iraq is the best example of it, yeah. But export models of pretty much all Russian/Soviet equipment was often neutered, for the same reason we do it. The Russian equipment wasnt so far from par for most countries using FSU gear. In fact prior to the Gulf War, Iraq's military was held in fairly high regard, despite getting trounced by Iran.

Libya, Egypt, SE Asia...none of these guys were getting Russia's top equipment.

Viet Nam did get the latest MiG-21's and a few other pieces of equipment. Remember, Viet Nam was a 'combat laboratory' for the FSU, this was a great place to test their equipment against the latest equipment America was producing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Why the debate? The Raptor is the world's sole 5th Gen Machine...technologically no fighter as of now is closeby.

The Typhoon is definitely a 5th generation aircraft.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Just wait and watch for some remote action between Raptors and other legacy fighters to unfold.

The Raptor chews up everything that flies. In exercises a single Raptor went against five F-15C's, in another exercise went up against four F-16's and defeated them all and none of the opposing pilots ever saw the F-22! Another exercise three F-16C's with simulated HOB missiles and HMDS went against one F-22A in a WVR engagement. The third F-16 and the F-22A fired their missiles simultaneously, thus all four aircraft died. A reason many advocates want the F-22A to have HMDS. If the F-22 had a HMDS it would have killed all three with no problem.

Adrian

gunnut · 11-13-2007, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avon1944

The Typhoon is definitely a 5th generation aircraft.

Adrian

Technically, the Typhoon, the Rafale, and the Gripen are all 4.5 generation fighter. I think they don't have the stealth aspect. Gripen can supercruise. Typhoon can do it clean, maybe with some external stores. Rafale hasn't demonstrated that yet.

Jimmy · 11-13-2007, 19:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avon1944

Viet Nam did get the latest MiG-21's and a few other pieces of equipment. Remember, Viet Nam was a 'combat laboratory' for the FSU, this was a great place to test their equipment against the latest equipment America was producing.

They had limited numbers of new technology. The USSR was hedging its bets but still getting a lot of good information. They could figure out how well their stuff performed, but if it got whooped they still saved a lot of face by not fielding an entire military of it. "Hey its just a test, plus those crazy asians didnt use it right!"

Shuttlecat · 11-13-2007, 20:46 PM

An unfair fight? Well sorry the US made it stealthy. Next time they make a new jet, let them know you don't like that part.

Deltacamelately · 11-23-2007, 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avon1944

The Typhoon is definitely a 5th generation aircraft.

I really have serious doubts in the Eurofighter being a 5th Gen Craft. Just to drive home...the statistics of the planes are :

Eurofighter Typhoon :* Crew: 1 or 2
* Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
* Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
* Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
* Wing area: 50 m² (540 ft²)
* Empty weight: 11 000 kg (24,250 lb)
* Loaded weight: 15 550 kg (34,280 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 23 500 kg (51,809 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofans, 60 kN dry; 90 kN with afterburner (13,500 lbf; 20,250 lbf) each
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0+, 2390 km/h at high altitude; Mach 1.2, 1470 km/h at sea level; (1,480 mph; 915 mph) supercruise Mach 1.3+ at altitude with typical air-to-air armament
* Range: 1390 km (864 mi)
* Service ceiling: 19 812 m (65,000 ft [34])
* Rate of climb: >315 m/s [35] (62,007 ft/min)
* Wing loading: 311 kg/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.18
* Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
* Air-to-Air missiles: AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-120 AMRAAM, IRIS-T and in the future MBDA Meteor
* Air-to-Ground missiles: AGM-84 Harpoon, AGM-88 HARM, ALARMs, Storm Shadow (AKA "Scalp EG"), Brimstone, Taurus, Penguin and in the future AGM Armiger
* Bombs: Paveway 2, Paveway 3, Enhanced Paveway, JDAM
* Laser designator, e.g. LITENING pod

And for the F-22 Raptor : * Crew: 1
* Length: 62 ft 1 in (18.90 m)
* Wingspan: 44 ft 6 in (13.56 m)
* Height: 16 ft 8 in (5.08 m)
* Wing area: 840 ft² (78.04 m²)
* Airfoil: NACA 64A?05.92 root, NACA 64A?04.29 tip
* Empty weight: 31,700 lb (14,379 kg)
* Loaded weight: 55,352 lb (25,107 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 80,000 lb (36,288 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 Pitch vectoring turbofans, 35,000 lb (155.7 kN) each * Maximum speed: ≈Mach 2.42 (1,600 mph, 2,575 km/h) at high altitude
* Cruise speed: Mach 1.72[40] (1,140 mph, 1,825 km/h) at high altitude
* Ferry range: 2,000 mi (1,738 nm, 3,219 km)
* Service ceiling: 65,000 ft (19,812 m)
* Rate of climb: classified (not publicly available)
* Wing loading: 66 lb/ft² (322 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.26
* Maximum g-load: −3/+9 g
* Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61A2 Vulcan gatling gun in starboard wing root, 480 rounds
* Air to air loadout:
o 6× AIM-120 AMRAAM
o 2× AIM-9 Sidewinder
* Air to ground loadout:
o 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM and
o 2× AIM-9 Sidewinder and one of the following:
+ 2× 1,000 lb JDAM or
+ 2× Wind Corrected Munitions Dispensers (WCMDs) or
+ 8× 250 lb GBU-39 Small Diameter Bombs
Radar: 125-150 miles (200-240 km) against 1 m² targets (estimated range)

The fact is, the F-22 Raptor is a Stealth Air Superiority Fighter while the Eurofighter Typhoon is a 4.5 Gen Multi role Fighter.

However, the Eurofighter typhoon, it is the first plane in the world to be able to do acrobatic maneuvers at supersonic speed. It is also capable of reaching Mach 1.5 without afterburners. The only other plane who is capable of doing supercruise is F-22A Raptor.But that still doesn't make the Typhoon a 5th Gen Fighter.

Deltacamelately · 11-23-2007, 02:53 AM

The F22 Raptor
By Ed Offley
eoffley@pcnh.com

Quote:

It was the most impressive fighter aircraft seen to date.

Designed around a breakthrough technology, it was heavily armed with the latest air-to-air weapons and was capable of flying faster than its enemies and destroying previously invulnerable enemy aircraft.

One British pilot called it “the most formidable fighter” that the world had seen to date. Its pilots said it was a delight to fly.

Yet military historians today say the German Messerschmidt 262 fighter had little effect on the air war over Europe during World War II, and two military aviation experts last week warned that the U.S. Air Force has likely set itself up to repeat the harsh lesson of the Me-262 “Stormbird” in a future conflict against an adversary with a modern air force.

Simply put, said Pierre Sprey and James P. Stevenson, the F-22 Raptor is shaping up to be the Sturmvogel of the 21st century: a dazzling piece of technology that fatally ignores some of the unbending realities of aerial combat.

On surface, the Raptor debate ended six months ago. After years of controversy, the Air Force and Defense Department reached a final agreement on the Raptor program, with DoD and Congress approving full production of the stealth fighter while capping the program at 183 aircraft, a 50-percent reduction of the 381 planes that the service had long said it needed at a minimum.

(For Tyndall Air Force Base, where the Raptor pilot training program is located, this has meant a reduction in training squadrons from two to one, with 29 of the sleek fighters to be used in preparing pilots for combat units.)

But to Sprey, a founding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” group that during the 1960s and 1970s ramrodded the F-15, F-16 and A-10 programs into being despite fierce internal opposition, and military author Stevenson, who has written extensively on the Navy’s F/A-18 and A-12 fighters, the Air Force has created a major crisis in its future combat capability by sticking to the Raptor program.

The two analysts presented their stark findings to a symposium at the nonprofit Center for Defense Information on Friday in Washington, D.C. The two analysts provided their findings to The News Herald, and Sprey elaborated on the issues in a telephone interview.

Sprey said his briefing focused on the time-tested factors that define an effective fighter plane: (1) See the enemy first; (2) outnumber the enemy; (3) outmaneuver the enemy to fire, and (4) kill the enemy quickly.

“The Raptor is a horrible failure on almost every one of those criteria,” Sprey said.

The stellar attribute of the F-22 — its invisibility on enemy radar due to a computer-aided stealth design — is a “myth,” Sprey said. That is because in order to locate the enemy beyond visual range, the Raptor (like every other fighter) must turn on its own radar, immediately betraying its location.

Nor is the aircraft design effective simply because its advocates insist so, Sprey said. The 1980s-era F-117 stealth fighter was supposed to be invisible too, but post-Gulf War studies showed that the aircraft had been spotted by Iraq’s ground-based radars, he said.

And in the 77-day aerial campaign against Serbia in 1999, the adversary’s “1950s-era radar” managed to locate and shoot down two F-117s, Stevenson pointed out in his presentation. The situation is actually worse today, he said, because many nations have acquired advanced missiles that can home in on radar emissions.

“Who do you want in a dark alley?” Stevenson asked. “The cop with the flashlight, or the crook with a gun that fires light-homing bullets?”

Because the Raptor ultimately ballooned into a weapon that costs $361 million per copy, even Congress could not stomach the total program cost exceeding $65 billion, Sprey said. As a result, the Air Force is now committed to fielding a fighter program that lacks sufficient numbers to prevail in a major conflict, however effective the individual aircraft may be.

“Hitler had 70 Me-262s in combat,” Sprey said. “They were crushed by the force of 2,000 inferior P-51s that the United States had in the air.”

Early reports from mock deployments of the Raptor also show a major shortfall in the fighter’s sustainability in combat, Sprey said.

“The F-16 costs one-tenth of the F-22 and flies three times as often due to the issues of stealth, complexity and maintenance affecting the Raptor,” Sprey said. Sustainability and the number of aircraft available to fight on any given day, he added, are “vastly more important” than the quality of the F-22. “You have to have numerical superiority to win.”

On the last two points, maneuverability and capability for a “quick kill,” the two analysts assert that the Raptor is inferior to the F-16 and several allied fighter designs in the crucible of “energy-maneuverability.”

“Some (experts) assert that in the next air war,” all of the radars will be off and the air war will merge to air combat maneuvering,” Stevenson observed.

The Raptor’s performance in that mode will be “disastrous,” Sprey added.

“The only thing that will bail the U.S. Air Force out of this mess is the fact that they still have a lot of F-16s in service,” Sprey said, “The day they send the F-16s to the ‘boneyard’ is the day the service becomes a non-Air Force.”

Many of us may have known this from the very outset that the F-117 was detectable by low band search radars; as is the B-2, as is the F-22, as is the F-35. Looking at the data obtained during susceptibility and emissions testing of the Nighthawk confirms it. Stealth technology and design decreases detectability but doesn't make one invisible. Every measure that is taken is met with a countermeasure so the battle is an ongoing chess match. Effective tactics and the use of SEAD platforms can help keep the enemy guessing. The loss of the F-117 in the Balkans, showed what happens when people get complacent, lazy and arrogant when planning ops.

urmomma158 · 11-23-2007, 08:43 AM

LOL the Fighter Mafia srikes again!

That article has been beaten to death many times on this board. Yes low band radars can detect stealth aircraft but only roughly and you can't target based on that data.The F 117 shootdown was due to poor mission planning on our part including not having enough ground troops etc and innovative tactics on the serbian side.

sundeepmegas · 12-01-2007, 11:15 AM

Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22.

I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

Adux · 12-01-2007, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22.

I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

What?

Read UP,

GGTharos · 12-01-2007, 12:39 PM

It's not bound to have anything. The F-22 features active IR supression (cold fuel circulation in leading edges, IIRC - ie. the parts that actually get hot), passive suppression through design aside. It's a cold-blooded Su and MiG killer.

Pergaps it is news to yout hat the USAF already knew about IRSTs, not to mention the NAVY who had USED them ... the IRST has always been a secondary, lower-ranged sensor against just about everything. And the USAF knew well to specify that 'stealth' should work jsut as well against IRSTs. Why don't US aircraft use IRST's? Their radars don't suck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22.

I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

Jimmy · 12-01-2007, 14:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22.

They've never flown against the F-22, so no.

Quote:

I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

Not really. For one thing, IRST is typically shorter-range. So before the F-22 is even in "normal" IRST range, he's already taken shots at you. Add to that the IR suppression already mentioned, and the IRST's effective range is cut even further. On top of THAT, you're probably only going to get enough of a lock if you're behind him...and you need to be very close to hit anything with a tail-aspect IR missile shot, with very few exceptions. The missile will just run out of fuel and fall short.

avon1944 · 12-05-2007, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunnut

Technically, the Typhoon, the Rafale, and the Gripen are all 4.5 generation fighter.

The greatest thing the F-22 has over these other aircraft is stealth. If the Russians design a new fighter and it is low observable not stealthy (for argument sake), introduced after 2012, would it be considered part of generation 4.5?? The Typhoon has low observability, sensor fusion, supercruise, and super-maneuverability. Its performance envelope is not much smaller than the F-22A's. So once you get away from the hubris of American aircraft, it fits the requirement of fifth generation.
(There are websites on both sides of this argument.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22.

No, they have not met, there is a possibility they could when Indian AF sends it Su-30MKI's to the USA for a Red Flag Exercise in 2008.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

Read this article;
Raptors wield 'unfair' advantage at Red Flag
Feature - Raptors wield 'unfair' advantage at Red Flag

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundeepmegas

The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

The altitudes at which the F-22A travels at there is little friction. The F-22A is designed to emit heat from friction at wave lengths IR detectors have difficulty detecting.
For a MICA to kill an F-22A, the launch aircraft has to lock it up. The F-22A 'at altitude' has a small window of vulnerability.
The F-22A was designed so the hotspots are covered by the nose being pitched up while supercruising. The F-22 can travel at Mach 1.4, flying level with the nose pitched up at twenty-five degrees! Further the thrust vectoring system is also designed to reduce the IR signature to detection directly behind it.
Lockeed engineers also have done things to make the F-22 very difficult to see! Spotting the F-22A seems to be one of the common complaint when aircraft are engaging the F-22A.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

Many of us may have known this from the very outset that the F-117 was detectable by low band search radars

The USAF never said it was invisible to radar. It the very first issue of AW&ST, when the F-117 was introduced to the aviation world, there was an article on what it would take to detect the F-117.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deltacamelately

The loss of the F-117 in the Balkans, showed what happens when people get complacent, lazy and arrogant when planning ops.

It is so true, flying into the same target area at the same time and same course is inviting disaster. Arrogance and poor planning were the primary cause for the loss of the F-117.
When the mobile radar turned on, the AWACS' ESM detected it and warned the pilot but, he thought he could complete his mission. The F-117 flew almost directly over the mobile radar, it doesn't take an improvement in technology to detect a F-117 under these conditions.
The proof that there was no technology improvement is that the F-117 was shot down on day four. No other F-117's, B-1's or, B-2's were shot down. The B-1 was fired on once by a SAM-6 site but, the ECM worked as advertised. The air campaign lasted over seventy days.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GGTharos

Pergaps it is news to yout hat the USAF already knew about IRSTs, not to mention the NAVY who had USED them ... the IRST has always been a secondary

The USAF has tested the F-22A against many IRST systems, so they know the limitations. The USAF also owns MiG-29's, Su-27's, and the F-14D's. So IR detection is nothing new to them.

Adrian

11-23-2007, 08:43 AM	#67 (permalink)
urmomma158 the real plastic *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 03-05-06 Location: NJ Turnpike Posts: 937 Country:	LOL the Fighter Mafia srikes again! That article has been beaten to death many times on this board. Yes low band radars can detect stealth aircraft but only roughly and you can't target based on that data.The F 117 shootdown was due to poor mission planning on our part including not having enough ground troops etc and innovative tactics on the serbian side. __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
IAF & USAF to Engage in Red Flag Exercises	MarquezRazor	Military Aviation	39	11-12-2007 21:40 PM
One Raptor Loss at Red Flag	outofshdw	Military Aviation	22	03-11-2007 19:16 PM
Military Planners In Iraq May Soon Be Seeing 'Red'	Shek	The War in Iraq	1	01-19-2007 15:23 PM
Red Arrow 8L gains greater capabilities	Davis_Chan	Land Forces	30	09-03-2006 05:48 AM

11-13-2007, 20:46 PM	#64 (permalink)
Shuttlecat Regular Join Date: 07-16-07 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 80 Country:	An unfair fight? Well sorry the US made it stealthy. Next time they make a new jet, let them know you don't like that part.

12-01-2007, 11:15 AM	#68 (permalink)
sundeepmegas Banished Join Date: 07-07-07 Posts: 35 Country:	Did the Indian AF get a shot at the F-22. I am under the impression that any good air force with a good plane that has an IRST can bring down a F-22. The thing is supercruise...at that speed, it is bound to have one heck of a heat signature...i bet a MICA-IR could do the trick...

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)