wrightwingAs for the F22’s data, I can’t help but wonder, how does the LM manage to “discover” different SC speed every now and then.
First, it was M1.5, then M1.7, then M1.72, then M1.78 and now we’re on M1.82. I guess at the same time next year, it’ll be what M2?? Finally LM may even surpass F22’s A/B speed with its SC speed. I mean what’s their problem. Got broken pitot tubes, or what? How hard is it to measure a speed in 5th gen fighter?!, ROFLMAO.
I don’t think it’s so much a matter of discovery, as what is cleared for release. You can bet that whatever has been cleared for release doesn’t necessarily reflect the maximum capability(especially on a relatively new to service aircraft).
Even the SR-71’s max figures have never been released, and that’s not even in service any longer.
wrightwingDid the british pilot actually mention the Eurofighter? I have seen the video quite some time ago, but was of the impression that he did not mention the Eurofighter at all.
I’m not sure if this quote was the same British pilot, but it was something to the effect- The F-22 has as much advantage over the Typhoon, as the Typhoon has over F-15/16/18s, or something along those lines.
wrightwingBut clean is an EF with AIM-120 and without drop tank on the same ideal dry day. But the always quoted 1.22 Mach achieved in Signapore was achieved with a Trainer T1 with center tank, and six rockets and intrims FADEC software, on a hot tropical day in tropical latitudinal and not in Alaska or desert climate like a F-22. Mach is not a fixed speed mark.;)
If clean =AIM-120s, what would an EF carrying nothing be considered?
wrightwingA typical guess from wishful interpretation. Maybe you do have a seroius source/link to bolster your personal claim.
When you have Aviation Week(and other pubs) articles, pilot anecdotes, etc…. that seem to corroborate a better capability than the vanilla fact sheets, then it’s not exactly wishfully interpreting. Most fact sheets still say M1.5+ supercruise too, when numerous sources have shown that the M1.7 to 1.8+ range, are more accurate. The supercruise capability has been highly touted, so…..it stands to reason that the Raptor has more than just slightly better supersonic performance than legacy aircraft. It seems that critics have just as big of an agenda as those who don’t share their views.
wrightwingThe F-22 unless bought in numbers of 1000 or more will not be affective.
What size force is it going up against, to require >1000 to be effective? Does an Air Force have to have >1000 Typhoons, Rafales, Gripens, Flankers, Fulcrums, F-15s, etc… to be effective? Define effective.
wrightwingA 5th Gen airplane is to be better in “aspects” from previous Gen warplanes thats why, ESPECIALLY if your asking for $100+Mill for each one, (and on top of that your only getting 187 of ’em!!) HAHAHA
The Mig 31 was a specialized aircraft though. The Raptor has a lot more roles than merely high altititude interceptor, and there’d be too many compromises in the other areas it excels at, were it to try to compete with the Foxhound. The Foxhound doesn’t have nearly the flexibility or survivability of the Raptor. I’m trying hard to understand the attitude you’re projecting, with your posts.
wrightwingIndeed not. But we are in the realm of tension between netiquette (horrible bloody portmanteau word) and tricksy factual correctness.
It MAY very well be that
US Guest was being polite AND UK guest genuinely overawed
or
US Guest was genuinely overawed AND UK guest being polite
or
US and UK guest both genuinely overawed
or
US and UK guest both being politeHowever as a sort of house rule of playing fair it IS a little cheeky to claim that X was just being polite and Y had their socks blown off because it suits one’s own preferences.
Being cheeky though is not the same as not being factually correct (whether through superior knowledge or a lucky guess :))
Al
I’d say Gen. Jumper was being more than polite though, as he spoke highly of the Typhoon.
wrightwingSpace Based IR System SBIRS has the range to scan earth also in non-optimal conditions,
and has a FOV large enough to cover Russia even with that magnification.
So i think max 60 km at square inch FOV is a tad conservative.
We’re discussing OLS type systems, not orbiting systems. I’m sure a KH-12 has better resolution than the DAS on the F-35 as well.:rolleyes:
wrightwingFunny but when a British pilot (Lt. Dan Robinson) has flown the F-22, then crowds of fanboys have quoted every single word of him as undefiable proof of Raptor’s supremacy. You guys just love your double standards, don’t you?:cool:
Why can’t they both be right? I don’t see it necessarily being a double standard.
wrightwingLM does not decide the export rules, the US authorities do.
There may be an agreement regarding the partner nations that allow them to get the “full stealth” version of the F-35; but that will not apply to all buyers of F-35. Look at all the countries that currently operate F-16: Do you really believe the US politicians would like all those countries to get access to all the capabilities of the US version of the F-35? After reading a few things about the F-35 I have become convinced that it will be something very special compared to all existing fighters (with the notable exception of F-22). I simply cannot see that the US will export such an incredible aircraft to the whole world without some (or a lot of ) restrictions in capabilities to some countries.
We, the partners (who also happen to be very close allies to the US) may get the “real deal”. For the rest of the world; perhap a few of them will, but not all.
The only alternative I can see would be to refuse selling F-35 to a large list of countries. However that would have a negative effect on the unit cost…
So expect to see a “dumbed-down” version of the F-35 in many countries. I think that makes a lot of sense, and reduces the risk to the US and her allies.
That’s how I am viewing this until the US authorities say something different. 🙂
L
That may be the case, but seeing as how it hasn’t come up yet, it’s disengenous of Boeing to make an assertion about what LM will be able to sell.
wrightwingWell, I could just prove you wrong, but that’s beside the point. The trouble is you fail to recognize the principle and that’s not smart. 😉
What range is the target that’s flying at 8000m. It’s a little disengenuous if that isn’t included for purposes of comparison. If the target is 100nm away, then clutter will be far less of an issue than if it’s 5km away. That’s my point. The IRST under optimal conditions might range 40-60nm, but the radar can see 2x that range, and with a wider field of view.
wrightwingThe point about F22 not being able to fire high off boresight missiles is kind of wrong. F22 can carry and fire missiles like AIM9X (or IRIS-T, ASRAAM etc same interface and a vanilla Sidewinder mode for both missiles) it just doesn’t have a helmet mounted sight as mentioned in point 3 to cue the missile off boresight.
Doesn’t mean you can’t load the missile on the rail and fire it.
Or that it can’t be cued via the radar for HOBS shots.
wrightwingSounds good on paper, but it’ll have to proove it’s self.
As will the invincible Russian ECM.:cool:
wrightwingYes, it has been stated many times that the partners F-35 will have the same “stealth” as the US F-35. Which is good news for Norway 🙂
One question remains: What about those countries that are not partner countries? I think there will actually be an export version of F-35 that will be exported to the non-partner countries… And for many of those countries they will have less stealth than the US (and partner) F-35…
L
I think you’re trying to read into his statement. The F-15SE isn’t competing for business with the F-35 “partner” nations only, but in any market where the F-35 might be sold. He said that there won’t be a less stealthy export variant, and that’s how I’m reading it till I see LM mention such a thing.
wrightwingThat may be true, but then again, may not.
F22’s scheduled cruise height is some 12000+ meters, or just at the beginning of tropopause to avoid engine contrails. Raptor’s mission profile is clear about that.
Now, we can assume that F22 will be looking down most of the time, since there will be little, if any, enemies flying at or above its flight level.
>>Any radar that looks down, must do it in Doppler mode, or won’t be able to discern anything, due the ground clutter.<< That includes F22, too.
Now, in didn’t see data for APG77 in look-down mode, but operational experience by other radars, suggests that radar detection in Doppler (look down) mode, is suffering around 30% range penalty for fighter sized aircraft. This is because the radar works much more difficult, than in pure pulse mode (look level/up). As a consequence all modes and especially LPI (which is very demanding on both radar receivers/hardware and computer/software, on all three aspects of work, meaning power, frequency and PRF), work significantly more difficult and at reduced effectiveness, if at all.
On the contrary, a plane cruising at 8000 meters or just below the engine contrail belt and equipped with IRST system, will have much easier job spotting the F22, because F22 will present a high contrast target opposed to cold sky and there aren’t much clouds at these heights, for F22 to hide in.
This is especially true, if the IRST works in micrometer (IIR) band, like PIRATE/10.2 um, for example. This band has fairly long range and decent resolution and is passive.
So, as you can see the F22’s advantages may well play against it.
Clutter isn’t going to be an issue if the Raptor’s target is flying at an altitude of 8000m. If the target isn’t a VLO target then the Raptor’s radar will have a longer detection range than any fighter sized IRST I’m aware of. Additionally, to get max range out of the IRST, the field of view is going to be very small, making detection that much more difficult. If the Raptor is aware of the target, then breaking an IR track will be even easier, as it won’t be difficult to get out of a narrow field of view sensor, with some aggressive manuevering.
Sign In
