wrightwing+1 with ww here (exercise scores vs legacy & Rafales), though one has to keep in mind that those “enemies” where restricted to use tactics of an anticipated enemy. Those kill ratios won’t necessarily work out in a true shooting war as not everything would work as advertised in the paper brochures. Missiles missing the target due evasive manoeuvres plus counter measures and equipment which can’t be simulated if you haven’t the exact technology to do so.
Actually the legacy fighters weren’t the Red Forces vs. Raptors, so they weren’t necessarily simulating anything. In numerous articles, pilots mentioned trying all manner of tactics against the Raptor, in order to try and negate its advantages.
wrightwingThat depends on force multipliers, not on F-22 itself.
If you think of the F-22 as being operated within USAF against IRIAF, then you are right, they are practically unbeatable. But in that case you don’t need any F-22, at all, even a group of souped-up F-15s accompanied by hordes of AWACS, Joint Stars and Growlers will do exactly the same killing work.
Not really. Even in a 1v1 scenario, the F-22 is far more likely to have a first look advantage.
wrightwingWhich opponents?
Do they have a name?
Flanker, Fulcrum, F-15, F-16, F-18, Gripen, Rafale, Typhoon, Mirage 2000, etc….
Actually, it didn’t.
1vs1 guns only, was another exercise carefully designed to push F22 into an advantageous situation, where Rafale’s lack of TVC gave F22 the edge, particularly on defense.
That “one” for F22…well who knows what it really looked like…
Anyway, many vs. many missiles allowed, would immediately change the picture, but I doubt USAF would like it.
It wasn’t the TVC that gave the F-22s an edge though, and I seriously doubt the French agreed to make the F-22 look good.:rolleyes:
wrightwingThe Pentagon has nothing to do with results from exercises. Exercises are designed to be challenging and realistic, (not to artificially provide lopsided results), so that equipment and tactics can validated, and pilots can feel confident in how their aircraft/weapons perform.
As for the scores against Rafales vs. scores against legacy fighters, you have to remember that there were vastly different scenarios and restrictions. It was a guns only fight with the Rafales, so it was pure raw performance and flying skills involved there. Against the legacy fighters, you had BVR weapons and tactics producing the lopsided wins.
wrightwingYou still do the same thing. Place the F-22 into favorable conditions so that it can win somehow. Looks like you’re not very much persuaded that it can win without help of boundary conditions.
BTW, if we already talk about it, if the combat took over Russia, then the F-22 would generally enter the combat zone at much lower speeds and at lower altitudes than MiG-31s. From latest news I assume that the F-22 cannot supercruise for much longer than MiG-31 can go on 1st level reheat therefore I somehow fail to see the kinematic advantage there, as well.
I put the F-22 in the conditions that it will likely be in. It will under most circumstances be flying higher than opponents other than Mig 31s. Assuming it’s flying subsonic, it will get up to supersonic speeds faster than a foe in the same condition, and stay there longer increasing its own kinematics while reducing the WEZ/NEZ of a foe. It will likely have first look, first shoot advantages. It will have SA advantages, etc….
wrightwingI still don’t get the big fuzz here. Most of aerial fights end up by an opponent killed without having realized the attacker was there. You don’t need a superior aircraft if your opponent doesn’t even fight back. Even a MiG-19 would do well.
The F-22 will have a higher likelihood of being in that position though against anything other than another VLO aircraft.
wrightwingWw, the topic here is an F22, not the USAF.
If you want to go down that road, then we can then add commandos polluting water, effectively grounding the entire wing in the airbase, even before a single plane took off, f.e.“:P” is supposed to be a smart emphasis, to you otherwise extremely intelligent comments? 😀
In a platform vs. platform fight, with no AWACS/GCI or other support, the F-22’s opponent is at an even greater disadvantage.
wrightwingWrightwing , you are trying to “drown the fish” as we say in France , you ‘re in search for bad excuses .
If I was you , I would leave the dogfight job to another aircraft , like the F-16 Blk52 😉 The F-22 is not designed for to start with and it does a very average job at it to say the least .
It is rather easy to say that the F-22 will always enter into the fight in the optimum conditions because of this and that , don ‘t you think ?
Then , LOAL will not change a thing as we ‘re talking LOBL : the capability for the IR missile to lock by itself before leaving the rail .The F-22 is a BVR Interceptor , not a dogfighter even if it has one of the best agility around if not the best .
Cheers .
LOAL is a far more significant capability, that will be available, once the AIM-9X Block II+ is integrated on the F-22 ~2016. This means the missile doesn’t even need to be locked on, till after launch. As for WVR, it bested the Rafale(and the F-16 many times). The AMRAAM is perfectly capable of all but the very closest range shots if need be. As for it being easy to say how the F-22 will enter the fight, more often than not(especially against non-VLO targets), it will enter the fight at an advantageous aspect with regard to its prey(whether by altitude, azimuth, or kinematics). To assume that the pilot would choose not to fight using its strengths, is counter-intuitive.
wrightwingWrightwing :
Yes I did and we ‘re on the same wavelengh 🙂
Read what I replied : Spud , the -9M still has a very short PoV . It can ‘t see anything over the aircraft ‘s nose to start with , and the vertical plane is of the utmost importance in dogfight .
………………………
Regarding the video posted showing the -9M being deployed , you should now all understand why the F-22 is at disadvantage during dogfight : it takes ages for the 9M to fire because of the safety reasons involved in firing from bays . You can also add the 1.5 second before firing …Look how a Mica is leaving its rail and at what speed it does it (!) :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnuMXLMvkx8
after 1:38 .
ANY external IR short range missile shot (Mica , Archer , Python , ASRAAM , etc ) will get in the air quicker .
No doubt .Cheers .
Just a few points to ponder-
The F-22 will generally start combat at altitudes above a foe rather than the other way around(so having limited upward field of view isn’t a terrible issue).
The F-22 will generally see its foe first, and get the shot off first, even if the process itself takes longer.
If the F-22 pilot knows the other fighter, sees him, the missile can be put into the slipstream while maneuvering occurs. It doesn’t have to wait until the last second to deploy the missile.
Once the AIM-9X is integrated with LOAL, none of these issues will be an issue.
wrightwingI think he was not understanding that the missiles were lowered outside the airframe(i.e. external) prior to firing though.
wrightwingSpudman :
??? :confused: We know that !
What I call a “clean” F-22 is a combat ready F-22 : internal fuel and missiles in bays . If it does carry extra sidewinders externally , LOBL becomes possible which is a different story , as I said .
What did you not understand ?Cheers .
Did you not read the link. It achieves LOBL by sticking the seeker into the slipstream(i.e. outside of the aircraft, where it has a view), prior to firing. Once the -9X is integrated with LOAL this won’t even be necessary. That’s why they’re upgrading the MLDs to be used for defensive IRST, against fighter targets.
wrightwingSomething is puzzling me a wee bit .
As you know , the Rafale proved many times that it is an outstanding dogfighter (Dassault ‘s trademark) and before the meeting with the F-22 , no one ever won against it in dogfight , bare Harriers but that was long ago .
The F-22 is the only fighter who won against the Rafale during cannon “dances” but the French Rafale pilots say that Thrust vectoring is squarely overestimated and did not bring anything into the fight .
Well … :confused:
I don ‘t get it yet … While the F-22 won the exercise (not by much), why the Rafale pilots are saying that TVC is overrated ?
I mean , if it was coming from North-Korean or Chinese pilots , we could understand 😀 , but coming from people who train on a regular basis with the USAF and USN , it is something to think about … I mean , they wouldn ‘t lie or spread false rumors when the Raptor is not even for sale . They are pilots who flew against the F-22 .Not many people on Air-defense tilted on this , so I ask here .
Cheers .
That’s because Raptor pilots don’t rely on thrust vectoring in WVR, so naturally it could be said it didn’t bring much to the fight. The thrust vectoring is used to provide control in the post stall portion of the envelope, as well as to reduce drag at high speeds, and provide extra control at high altitudes. For energy maneuvering though, the standard control surfaces provide plenty of control, without sacrificing airspeed to try and point the nose off axis.
wrightwingalfakilo , then Wrightwing :
AK , the F-22 ‘s short range IR missiles are stored inside the bays and even with the doors open , the seekers are blind so any Lock On Before Launch (LOBL) is impossible . It means that the F-22 has to go “active” (APG-77) to fire its sidewinders .
So , jamming is possible , just “possible” .
Then , knowing the sidewinders range , it is easy to say that the F-22 could light up its radar late for stealthy and safety reasons .
At this time , the F-22 already has 2 IR Micas incoming or is already shot , because the IR Micas can lock onto the F-22 waaaay earlier , on their own and without any “active” input .
To back up what I say , I ‘ve got some Thalès videos , official papers and pilot reports . I don ‘t make things up 🙂Wrightwing , yes I realize that it could be the case . But as I said , the F-22 has to go “live” and from then on , it is up to SPECTRA to do a good job and up to the Rafale pilot to overcome the threat .
Cheers .
That’s not an accurate description of how the Raptor fires Sidewinders. The bay doors are opened and the missile’s seeker is lowered into the slipstream, so that it can passively acquire targets(this is for the AIM-9M. Once the -9X is integrated, with LOAL modes, that won’t be necessary)
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-22-weapons.htm
As the AIM-9 uses infrared guidance, the missile first has to acquire the target. To launch a Sidewinder from the F-22, the side weapons bay doors open; the Trapeze Launcher, with missile attached, extends to put the missile’s seeker into the slipstream; the seeker acquires the target; the missile ignites and flies off the rail. The Trapeze Launcher then retracts, and the weapons bay doors close. Once launched, the F-22 pilot can leave the fight, as Sidewinder is autonomous, following its seeker to the target, after it leaves the launch rail. The entire Sidewinder launch sequence, from door opening to door closing, takes just seconds.
Furthermore, if a Raptor is within Sidewinder range, good luck with a self protection jammer overcoming the burn through of the APG-77, not that it’s necessary, as I’ve just shown.
wrightwingalfakilo :
The dogfight starts sometimes after the first visual contact , when aircraft try to put themselves in position to fire a short range IR missile , way before the cannon comes into play .
Do you agree ?
Cheers .
You do realize that the Raptor pilot will very likely have the advantage of initiating any dog fight though, as he probably won’t merge from the opponent’s most advantageous angle. Many a teen series fighter has been killed in WVR by Raptors, that didn’t even realize it was there. I don’t foresee a scenario where a Rafale would go up against a Raptor though.
wrightwingThat’s pretty spiffy.
One little question…given all this cosmosity, what are those mirrors for?
Rear visibility.
Sign In
