GHOST_SPECTRE

The F-35 is the best multi-role aircraft, but could very well be the best air-to-air fighter.

Tarek Morgen

Name written in capital letters?
Check
Not posted an introduction thread?
Check
Posting only in threads which titel have either "best" or "top" in it, or both?
Check
Never writing more than a single sentence?
Check
Lack of writing anything related to the other post or to back up the claims posted?
Check (guess than one would have to use more than one sentece)

Well welcome to the forum I am sure you contributions will be much anticipated.


But does not keeping the pods under any price not endanger the plane & pilot as it reduces speed and agility? Would not pods that can destroy themselve after jettisoned not a better alternative?

__________________
uh I might be wrong

scorefour

This is all true, which explains why not everybody is already doing this. This is also why the USAF isn't showing pictures of their pods.

I found an article that sort of talks about the external pods a little. I've read about them several times, but don't have time to find more right now.


Aviation Week : USAF Weighs Four Skunk Works Designs for Interim Strike

Anyone know if Meteor eventually will make it on British F-35's?

__________________
I want what I do not have.

Tin Man

I suppose it depends on the configuration of the pods. We don`t know what route the USAF will take, conformal systems or underwing ones will have an impact on aerodynamics/fuel efficiency/radar profile and hence survivability that is for sure. Maybe the penalties can be reduced to acceptable levels. I feel these podded type weapons will be aimed more at the F-35 than the F-22.

Self destruct pods would have to work 100% or you blow your stealth lead. Is it worth the risk? Remember also that you will have explosives wrapped around bigger explosives, might make a few people nervous although the drivers are well accustomed to risk.
We are all assuming that these pods WILL appear. We shall have to see....


I know that these podded systems have been studied for a LONG time, who knows what is on the drawing board.
Meteor is planned for the Typhoon, but not the UK F-35. UK F-35 will only be armed with ASRAAM at first, not even carrying a radar guided AIM such as AMRAAM. At best, the RAF could get "fitted for but not with" weapons, which is the way things have gone over here regards military procurement. Weapons being integrated one by one over time to stretch budgets.

The UK F-35 may be an excellent fighter....by the time it goes out of service. Ala F.3 and the SHAR.

__________________
"Liberty is a thing beyond all price.

Jimmy

I'd be very interested in seeing those.

Tin Man

Haven`t found my pictures yet but I tried to open some very old links to a couple of open source sites, they aren`t there any more. The photo`s I had were artists impressions as I recall of what stealthy conformal weapons "should" look like, including some very odd looking AAM`s. I seem to recall a "LORAL" idea in that vein from way back. As said, all unclass` stuff.

Thinking about it, some of the ideas might have been designed with the mythical FB-22 concepts in mind. Will keep looking!

Super Dude

Same here. I want to see the real deal fly. The mass production ones are the ones i want too see and plus the EF2000 tranche 3. With sick Meteor.

I voted for the EF2000 cause its already in mass production. Its like comparing like the thread with LCA. LCA being F-35 and JF-17 being the EF2000. Not in the way of tech, but just saying ones out and ones not. SO how really can you compare.

alex968

f-35

obrescia

Lockeed-Martin F-22A Fighter Plane tactical use issues (never mind F-35, as they are too numerous to warrant discussion) may be:

1) Primary main weapon range / Newton’s second law of motion.
2) ECM detection of mid-course update transmission(s) for main weapon.
3) Thermal signature(s) of platform & main weapon.
4) Daylight/Moonlight contrail(s) of platform & main weapon.
5) Super-cruise only at high altitude / Afterburning turbo-jet like engines.
6) Kinematics
7) Detect Radar Resolution Filtration

JA Boomer

Are you suggesting that these issues place the F-22A at some other position than #1 in the air-superiority position?

obrescia

The F-22 Raptor will probably enjoy a 3-5 year honeymoon unlike it's predecessors 20-30 years:

1) Primary main weapon range / Newton’s second law of motion.
2) ECM detection of mid-course update transmission(s) for main weapon.
3) Thermal signature(s) of platform & main weapon.
4) Daylight/Moonlight contrail(s) of platform & main weapon.
5) Super-cruise only at high altitude / ‘turbo-jet’ like engines.
6) Kinematics
7) Detect Radar Resolution Filtration

Item (1): requires (6) which effects (3), (4) and (5).

Primary weapon is a medium-range-class (motor burn time) missile. F-22 proponents recognize this but say Raptor fly’s so fast/high it (effectively extends range of) the AIM-120 into opponents. Issues are: combined closure rate (frontal aspect attacker and defender), pilot maneuverability limits because of speed/G-loads (if Raptor still moving +500 knots after “push”), thermal airframe heating due to air friction and hot exhaust exposure (during merge). Effectively F-22 presents itself as a target (also extended Flanker weapons envelop) by hurtling towards an opponent?

This whole this boils down to; if F-22 press their attack, closure rates are so high and weapons malfunctions such a regular occurrence (on both sides) that F-22 aircrews will be in a dogfight (merge) within moments after calling "fox-3". Against advanced Sukhoi Su-30, 33, 35 Flanker series fighter, this may be truly a nightmare scenario?

Item (2):
Flanker will most certainly be equipped with a Threat Warning System that listens for Raptors AIM-120 mid-course update (data burst/handshake transmission) after F-22 weapon release. From here two (2) things could happen:
First; Threat Warning System triggers automatic release of expendables (chaff/flares); see reference, pg 41 (a). Second, Flanker pilot initiates a defensive 'beaming' / 'beam-turn' / ‘Doppler turn’ maneuver to defeat AIM-120 shot; see reference, pg 36-37 (a) & pg 97 (b).

Item (3):
Development/advancement cycles for IRST systems could be orders of magnitude more frequent than possible F-22 airframe changes. Combined w/ IR R-77 missile and if Flanker radar (slaved to IRST), could IRST see something then point radar straight at F-22?

Item (4):
Plane/pilot/weapon telegraphs not only their presents, number and tactic(s), but behavior(s)?

Item (5):
Raptor proponents say it has the best thrust-weight ratio of any current/future fighter. Engine performance seems more akin to say a Mig-25 (afterburner behavior)? This seems plainly evident.

Item (6):
Kinematics is the study space-time relationship of a given motion without the action of forces; no friction (drag), no gravity. F-22 unusual 'speed-brake' scheme (taxing existing control surfaces with no additional aerodynamic ‘pop-out’ device) may reveal true nature as more akin to say Lockheed YF-12?

Item (7):
Cannot radar resolution be adjusted so every object from a raindrop/hailstone/dragonfly can be seen? Compute power may be available (now/soon) to filter any objects with non-organic-like-motion, like an aircraft?

Lastly:

All Flanker (Mig-31) really need to do is scare off our AWACS and tanker aircraft. Will the next war likely start and end during the flight time of say Ks-172 and/or Kh-31 class weapon(s)?

Reference(s):

a) Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units In Combat- Cooper, Tom; Bishop, Farzad; Osprey Publishing, 2004.

b) ...And Kill MiGs, Air to Air Combat From Vietnam to the Gulf War (3rd), Squadron/Signal Publications, Lou Drendel.

c) Air War South Atlantic - Ethell, Jeffrey L.; Price, Alfred - New York, NY, USA: MacMillan, 1983.

d) Iranian F-4 Fhantom II Units In Combat- Cooper, Tom; Bishop, Farzad; Osprey Publishing, 2003.

e) Arab Mig-19 and Mig-21 Units In Combat- Cooper, Tom; Nicolle, David; Osprey Publishing, 2004.

f) Wings of the Red Star; Box set, NTSC; Rating: Discovery Channel; VHS Release Date: March 17, 1998. Narration by Sir Peter Ustinov.

g) Fighter Wing: A Guided Tour of an Air Force Combat Wing - Clancy, Tom; Penguin Group, 1995.

obrescia

There seems to be an enormous amount of hyperbole being bantered about?

Let discuss some fundamental basics:

Pilot physiology: the human body can only handle ~ +12G / -6G (blood sent to feet / blood sent to head). Because of this limit the maximum rate a plane can change flight direction and still maintain momentum is the so-called "corner speed" around 300 to 400 knots. An opponents missile that is detected by the pilot (target) can be nearly always be defeated by using a combination of corner speeds and release of expendables (chaff/flares).

Superagility (nose pointing): as the term implies the plane who can get his nose pointed at the other guys first, can employ weapons first and so you get the rest. Raptor has no apparent engine/airfoil advantage over Flanker in this regard. Problem compounded for Raptor as Flanker can use helmet-sighting. Then weapons system/missile seeker heads look where pilot looks. Flanker pilot decides where Raptor is/will be/should be…so real question; can F-22 turn (seems to have ~Typhoon corner speed maneuverability) faster than Flanker can nose point?



WVR vs BVR: bad guys are within visual range; pilots call ‘tallyho’ (or tally-2 for two planes etc) vs beyond visual range, using sensors, radar, vector from AWACS, etc to shoot “first”. Was done effectively in 1991 gulf war (perfect engagement conditions) but needed to facilitate this, in this case with France (French were not allowed to fly their Mirage F1 jets which Iraq also had, can’t have any IFF mishaps).



IFF: identification friend or foe. If no reply is received from the IFF transponder, the target continues to be an unknown. The IFF system is not used to declare a target hostile if they do not reply. Very often the pilot can have the wrong code (encryption key) selected, or the code is expired, and they will have an audible and visual alarm every time they are interrogated by IFF. If they can't clear the alarm they follow the pre-briefed safe passage procedures. USS Vincennes.



Kinematics:



a) The biggest issue facing an air force that fights by flying over hostile airspace is SAM defenses. All missiles have a highest kill probability engagement envelope of roughly ¼ to ¾ it’s published ‘range’. Raptor at high altitudes attempts to put some distance between its pilot and the SAM launchers so it buys time to defeat a possible SAM missile shot. Same issues with plane vs plane, you don’t want to fly into your opponents’ weapons envelope before you can shoot (back). Flanker carries 11-14 missiles (short & medium can be IR seekers), Raptor 8 (2 short IR seekers). Flanker can carry missiles w/rocket burn-times in the short, medium, long and very long ranges. Raptor carries short and medium but could in future carry other types under its wings, but then no stealth. Raptor (future?) helmet sighting will have increased airfoil blockage via internal weapons bays (plus bay door must be opened). Nod to Flanker on better seeker-head fields of view via hardpoint placement(s).

b) The argument could also be referring to how weapon systems number crunch target data. They must predict where the target is GOING TO BE from time = 0 to time = X so the actual weapon is directed to intercept (time = X). so if you can't "see" the target, you cant predict, cant predict, can't shoot (??).

Surprise: The element of surprise is paramount. Stealth and speed attempts to exploit surprise, flying around bubbles and attacking from another direction does also. Flight of Flankers simply turn about periodically and check the airspace around them for sneak up attacks, the Israelis employ this tactic.

Fuel: the first thing all pilots do after they acknowledge targets from AWACS is check their fuel status before any decision(s) on an intercept. And what does Flanker carry in enormous quantities? There is no substitute for being able to loiter on station.

Engines: engine selection determines fighter jet performance. Period.

China: Possesses large numbers of Flanker. Historically the Chinese Air Force combat performance would best be described as worse than 'not good'.

obrescia

I don't claim to have all the answers. Our people in uniform often pay the ultimate price. I feel we have been lied to or told half truths for at least 8 years. The blogs are abuzz with the 'omnipotent' weapons like Raptor; these beliefs are dangerous in my view. The double standard(s) forward by F-22 proponents seem to ignore basic laws of physics and the fog of war as General Patton correctly stated. Our politicians have shown to be too quick to use (or threaten to use) military power as a poor substitute for doing their job; diplomacy. Osama bin Laden is still "at large"....incredible! Abu Ghraib...incredible! The PNAC (project for a new American century)...incredible! our relationship with Pakistan...incredible! literally pallets of hard US currency vanishing in Iraq...incredible! Seeing Raptors afterburner behavior was the last straw. (The real questions likely are 1. can Raptor turn faster than Flanker can nose point? 2. Why can't flanker use the same methods to defeat AIM-120 shot as Raptor uses to defeat S-300/S-400 shot?) I know this subject is highly sensitive, but no more lies please, no hyperbole please. The buzz surrounding the Raptor reminds me of a TV commercials for men's razors; "the first blade cut incredible close...and the second blade is omnipotent!!....so to the DoD marketers; cool it will ya, people might get killed.