The Titanic designers claimed it was unsinkable too. How did that work out for them?

You can apply that for everything, that all claims by designers are PR stunts also for the F-22……:D and Thank God, they did not build two Titanics. 😀

Yeah, I’m sure they’d have said the same if someone had suggested parking a Patriot battery on top of the World Trade Center. Actually, that sounds more “out there” than missile defense- and yet who would have been the fool? More likely though they’d have picked easier targets, the Patriots would have never been used, and we’d be hearing the “experts” tell us what a waste they were. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. As for Iranians and ICBMs, let’s see how long until they’ve got a space launcher. Once they’ve got it that’s all they need really.

AFAIK WTC designers claimed the twins were built to withstand a Boeing 707 crash, is it correct?? No reason to have a Patrior battery on the roof then, unless it is a lie.

LMraptor, after reading your replies I was wondering what have you been taught on the aerospace university or whether is it a kind of PR stunt saying you are studying there?

It is interesting that the low/slow envelope hadn’t been fully exploited yet. Which vindicates the argument that most of those maneuvers have no combat utility most of the time!.

In regard to low/slow maneuvers with no combat utility, ever heard about John Boyd and his combat maneuver or stunt called “flat plating the bird”? Try to read USAF air combat history once.

Exactly – which is logical – the F-22 doesn’t need the same kind of PR – as say the Flanker series has done over the years. To me most of the airshow stunts are directly related to PR – boosting selling power of the jet.

Hmm, you hardly understood the main reason. Yes, at last those airshow stunts might boost selling power, bcs they are telling the buyer about carefree handling characteristics/qualities at high lift coefficients, no loss of control when stall and spin tendencies. PERIOD.
I think once the F-22 will need the same kind of PR, when it is offered to the market. Therefore showing high-alpha maneuverability is not pointless at all. Maneuverability is one part of the whole package.
A Mig-29 pilot excercising a simulated dog-fight against a Dutch F-16 debriefed, that once he tricked the F-16 with a kind of slow moving kinky maneuver in a vertical climb while the Dutch had been unable to follow the Mig tail bcs of its electronic AOA limiters preventing to enter post stall regimes. Huuuh… bull$hit, how can it be done? Maybe, a kind of crazy trick Mr. Boyd used in dogfights several decades ago. You are now surely asking why havent you seen that manuever on airshows(or youtube). You will never see it on airshows bcs of safety regulations, therefore you will be dogmated to rest of your life that AIRSHOW TAIL SLIDE AND AIRSHOW COBRA are the only two PR stunts of legacy fighters MIG ans SU.

Yeah but the big thing is – dogfights aren’t going to take place at airshow level

read twice that above…Not to mention that since ninities the SU and MIG are performing other breath taking maneuvers, for example as stated before a 360 degree turn within 12-13seconds. Huuh…can you calculate turn rate from that, Isn`t that impresive? I hardly doubt the F-22 will ever be able to make that 360 degree turn any tighter.

It is reported that the F-15 has similar if not better handling characteristics – up high and fast than the Su-27 series of fighter – it was one of the few flight regimes where it was at worst at parity with the 27 – and best with a slight advantage

A common mistake of all US fan boys to think that a boxy and unslated EAGLE has ever been capable to take its chances to match up against the SU in maneuverability. Well, pilots from Lipetsk training centre know better, when several years ago a few F-15s visited Russia. Be sure their were not just giving rides in backseats again as claimed in alibism by US pilots when Russians visited Langley.
Lipetsk pilots had always been in a good mood on post-flight debriefs saying the EAGLE maneuverability is somewhere between the Mig-21/Mig-23. 😀 Of course, Russians were just poking fun of F-15 manueverability, considered as an awkward aircraft.

He stated that the jet was currently not being used to its maximum performance – relating to low altitude. He said that by the time he became demo pilot – the F-22 hadn’t even had its full FCS code for low level – airshow maneuvers – programed in. In fact it is still not fully programed – while it is being increased incrementally

Common, for Christ sake!!! 😀 what have been done during those years of flight testing and billions of USD spent on R&D before F-22 became OC?? Rather, he meant that HE needs to fully exploit capabilities of the F-22, bcs of his miserable 250 hours behing the Raptor joystick.

regards
M

Hi

maybe this thread is strange

but it’s something new.the question is there some one see real air combat between fighters by his eye.I saw one of the last air combat in 1991 war between USAF F-15C and IrAF Su-22M3 in march 22 1991 in north of tikrit when eight IrAF Su-22M3 runs from AL Hurrya Air Base(Kirkuk) after the town down in hands of insurgents .seven aircraft land in Iraqi air force college air base in north tikrit.the last aircraft fail to land because unnown reason and go for new approach.in that moment single F-15C came from the east in high altitude and track the Iraqi fighter and then the F-15C fired one Sidewinder at the Su- 22 that far about 2 mile from the F-15 .the missil hit the Su-22 and the pilot eject safely and land with his orange parachute.the Su-22 down near Baghdad Mosul highway.

Hell, you’ve got good eyes, better than a radar.

Dear God, have just paid real attention to the canopy on this bird. What kind of visibility does that thing give the pilot? Is there any improvement there at all over earlier MiG models..?

Dear Jolanta, what kind of visibility gave this bird to a pilot?
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/071015-F-1234S-007.jpg

That’s what I though on seeing that photo as well. Nice big radar reflector there for the AWACS to spot at a much longer range. A bit like the intakes on a Mig 25 in fact.

:D:D:D another one…

Why bother with commercial GPS units when they can simply use GLONASS instead…

You did not understand it either. Once nuke loaded Tu-160 is not a stupid cessna with a stupid crew flying by the GPS, turn left, turn right….:D what is making DONKEYS from pilots. Maybe as you have seen on Tu-160 videos from Venezuela, they;ve made the “podgotovka” with old paper maps. 😀