Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fate of the F-22 in Obama’s Hands

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    the f-35s radar is developed from the 22s. this amongst other things persuades me that the f352 capabilities have been significantly played down to achieve funding for f-22.
    incoming fire has the right of way

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by treasure44 View Post
      the f-35s radar is developed from the 22s. this amongst other things persuades me that the f352 capabilities have been significantly played down to achieve funding for f-22.
      i doubt it, i think the technologies are better on the F-35, because it costs less to improve than to actually develop something brand new.

      However, as i recall, the F-35, like the F-16 to the F-15, has a smaller radar than that of the raptor, thus cannot detect as far away.

      Comment


      • #18
        I'm going to have to pull up my Nomex underpants for this one, but here goes.

        Here's Carlo's latest study on the F-35's stealth and survivability vs a modern IADS. It contains some comparisons to the F-22 in various areas, but not in detail.

        http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-01.html

        Apparently he has actually done some independent modeling of the F-35's shape to gain insight into its stealth parameters across a range of frequency bands and aspects.

        I don't have the tools or knowledge to know if or what he's missing, but it does appear to be an interesting analysis. He sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by B.Smitty View Post
          I'm going to have to pull up my Nomex underpants for this one, but here goes.

          Here's Carlo's latest study on the F-35's stealth and survivability vs a modern IADS. It contains some comparisons to the F-22 in various areas, but not in detail.

          http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-01.html

          Apparently he has actually done some independent modeling of the F-35's shape to gain insight into its stealth parameters across a range of frequency bands and aspects.

          I don't have the tools or knowledge to know if or what he's missing, but it does appear to be an interesting analysis. He sure sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
          That's why he's dangerous.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Belisarius View Post
            However, as i recall, the F-35, like the F-16 to the F-15, has a smaller radar than that of the raptor, thus cannot detect as far away.
            I believe you are correct, I remember reading the same thing somewhere; the F-35 has a slimmer nose profile than the F-22, so the aperture of the AESA is smaller. Of course, the primary mission of the F-35 isn't A-2-A, it's A-2-G, so it doesn't need a huge radar anyway.
            "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by B.Smitty View Post
              Apparently he has actually done some independent modeling of the F-35's shape to gain insight into its stealth parameters across a range of frequency bands and aspects.
              So Carlo has access to one of the 6 US sites that do Pole and emissions all aspect testing? :)

              No offence, but his "claim" to independant testing is as qualitative as being akin to buying a toy car and then extrapolating drag co-efficients from it...

              Again, why would someone who has no access to quality material, who does not even have basic clearances to view military related material and who has historically been shown to manipulate material to support an idealogical case be taken seriously?

              Heck, I see more relevant material on JSF at work and I'm not even remotely connected to the JSF team (although they do "live upstairs" and I do deal with them peripherally on other issues)
              Last edited by gf0012-aust; 08 Jan 09,, 02:35.
              Linkeden:
              http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
              http://cofda.wordpress.com/

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by B.Smitty View Post
                Here's Carlo's latest study on the F-35's stealth and survivability vs a modern IADS. It contains some comparisons to the F-22 in various areas, but not in detail.
                Carlo Kopp= Australia's answer to Mike Sparks:))

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                  ...So Carlo has access to one of the 6 US sites that do Pole and emissions all aspect testing? :)
                  Yep. There's a reason why every single F-22 or F-35 that comes off the production line goes directly to an anechoic chamber.

                  It's impossible to model even the RCS alone, without some very complex computing, and you need the exact dimensions and geometry to start with- i.e. the full Catia dataset. That still doesn't contain anything wrt emissions, so even if you had the dataset and computing ability, you would still only have half the picture.
                  "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                    Carlo Kopp= Australia's answer to Mike Sparks:))
                    Yikes. I know Dr Kopp has taken some unpopular and questionable positions over the years, but Sparky is, by far, in a class by himself.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                      Heck, I see more relevant material on JSF at work and I'm not even remotely connected to the JSF team (although they do "live upstairs" and I do deal with them peripherally on other issues)
                      Would you care to share? :)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        We'll probably see production conducted in low level batches of a few dozen per year, since the F-22A is a such a golden goose for the military industrial complex. Sometimes bureaucratic inertia is a good thing.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by B.Smitty View Post
                          Would you care to share? :)
                          Nope. Not worth losing my job and/or getting carpetted.

                          But my low opinion of his portrayal of the assets capabilities only serve to reinforce that he's far from balanced (or even remotely aware of what the plane can deliver) . In APA's case (and the other tail coat draggers) it is transparently so.....
                          Linkeden:
                          http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                          http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Skywatcher View Post
                            We'll probably see production conducted in low level batches of a few dozen per year, since the F-22A is a such a golden goose for the military industrial complex. Sometimes bureaucratic inertia is a good thing.
                            You cannot sustain approp economies of scale with batches of 4 x aircraft per annum. It is absolutely moronic for any Govt to even throw that carrot onto the table and expect it to act as a "holding pattern" while they work out how to catch the procurement tiger by the tail.

                            If Congress can work it out with the issue of build rates for the Virginias, then its not far removed as a parallel issue for the F-22. (It's not just an issue of looking at cost differences)
                            Linkeden:
                            http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                            http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                              You cannot sustain approp economies of scale with batches of 4 x aircraft per annum. It is absolutely moronic for any Govt to even throw that carrot onto the table and expect it to act as a "holding pattern" while they work out how to catch the procurement tiger by the tail.

                              If Congress can work it out with the issue of build rates for the Virginias, then its not far removed as a parallel issue for the F-22. (It's not just an issue of looking at cost differences)
                              I agree when it comes to economies of scale and pricing. Where it is useful is in keeping the production line open with build knowledge and tooling on hand so that if something should happen to decide to scare congress into keeping an airforce that projects power they can quickly ramp up production.

                              It also looks pretty decent to the voters to say Ihellped keep these jobs and the facilities of all the little commonet makers in my state.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Maxor View Post
                                I agree when it comes to economies of scale and pricing. Where it is useful is in keeping the production line open with build knowledge and tooling on hand so that if something should happen to decide to scare congress into keeping an airforce that projects power they can quickly ramp up production.

                                It also looks pretty decent to the voters to say Ihellped keep these jobs and the facilities of all the little commonet makers in my state.
                                In principle you're right, but I would seriously challenge whether that would translate into sustained skill maint and capability. Unless they can maintain and keep the entire personnel in that production line in play - then they will start to lose people - and they will start deskilling whats left of those skillsets anyway.

                                The significant problem with sub building, niche products such as VLO assets etc is that the capability rapidly degrades if sufficient volume and build momentum is not maintained. There is a glaring example of that wrt the UK and the Astutes. The UK discovered that they lacked some of the skills to rectify early build and design problems in the Astutes. The USN ended up providing an industry team to assist. That team leader then wrote a risk paper which went to State, Commerce and SecNav. It eventually filtered to RAN/AustGov because they considered that there were parallels with Collins and the 2020 replacement Project. F-22 is having the same problems, B2 had the same problems (to a lesser extent).

                                It might keep the general public happy, but in real terms, they are just prolonging the decay of skilled personnel, corporate history and team effectiveness.

                                "Lipstick on a pig" springs to mind...
                                Linkeden:
                                http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                                http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X