LmRaptorInteresting to see the outcome. It’ll be a an embarrassment of tremendous proportions for either side that loses. If it happens that a MKI beats a Raptor, big sales for the Russians and opposite for any prospects of selling the Raptor overseas. If the MKI doesn’t get to go up against a Raptor, then we know the US is afraid of the PR nightmare if it loses.
No It wont really be an embarrassment if MKI looses. It would be considered the underdog in DACT with an F-22. It would be a much bigger embarrassment for the F-22 if it lost to the Su; but I am very confident along with a lot of other people who are much more intelligent than I, that it wont happen. That is of course if the F-22 and Su are on opposing sides during Red Flag 2008.
________
ZOLOFT ATTORNEY
LmRaptorOpinions: I am a Typhoon fan
I agree that the Typhoon is an outstanding aircraft. So is the Rafale. I believe that both of these aircraft when fully muture will be ahead of any of the fully matured teen series aircraft and their Russian (Su-27/30/35 family) counter parts by a significant margin. I believe for a high end air dominance fighter that is multirole, and has no intention of fighting the US and their F-22s, the EF Typhoon is ahead of anything out there technically speaking(other the F-22) and in terms of value for money.
I do believe the F-22 is a better fighter then the Typhoon by a ‘fair margin’. Despite being an F-22 fan, I do accept that the F-22 is not as good in certain respects when compared to the Typhoon, but in other respects it is better. Both have exceptionally impressive engines, with great TWR. I believe F-22 is much Stealthier in all aspects and has equal or better aerodynamic performance in certain flight regimes (perhaps more so in the subsonic regime). I believe Typhoon is cheaper to maintain, and to a lesser degree even easier to maintain than F-22. I believe F-22 is faster and accelerates as quickly or faster in many respects, and I believe it can supercruise significantly faster in the AD role. I believe Typhoon is significantly cheaper and is perhaps a better all round performer. I believe AN/APG-77 is perhaps the best fighter Radar in the world and it will maintain its edge through upgrades. I believe Captor has impressed its pilots a lot and is one of the best M-Scan Radars for its size in the world.
According to Jacko the Typhoons HMI/MMI is even better the F-22s, and I tend to agree as I believe he is privy to a lot more information than I. What I would Like to know is to what extent is it better the Raptors MMI? Also you refered to the Raptor blokes going to Tyhpoon for aid with DVI; could you please elaborate on this?
How does Captor compare to APG-77 in your opinion Jack?
I believe the Raptor is an expensive solution to the Flanker threat, but it is still the best by a margin if you ignore the price; but its design philosophy was not to only include the Flanker threat but also PAK-FA and S-300/400, in this area I think it will be justified in its expense.
________
Penelopa
LmRaptorDVI isn’t a matter of processing power alone, and that’s why your point about Moore’s Law (that the number of transistors on an integrated circuit for minimum component cost doubles every 24 months) is flawed. It’s not easy, and that’s why F-22 turned to the Eurofighter system of DVI to form the basis of its own planned DVI implementation.
@ Jackonicko
Sorry If I am going off topic here. But are you refering to the initial plans to implement DVI onto the ATF? Or are you refering to a possible future implementation of DVI into the F-22A? If the later is correct, could you fill us in on whats planned?
==========================================================
In regards to this thread, I agree with many of Jackos’ points. I trust him on the basis that he has a similar point of view to Jon Lake, a journalist who many know contributes to the Eurofighter forum.
==========================================================
I have also noticed that the supporters of the Rafale, don’t want to concede to Jackos’ views; perhaps due to the fact that Jacko cannot quote internet sources or magazine articles. His information comes from his work ‘in the field’.
==========================================================
But I hardly think Jacko is a Rafale basher, he is from Britain so he might have a dig at Rafale fans in jest; but I do believe he respects the work done by the Rafale program. This is where I dont understand why the Rafale supporters are so stubborn in accepting that the Rafale might have some weaknesses in relation to other programs such as F-22/Typhoon, after all Rafale was a single nation venture. Would Germany or England have been able to develop a fighter as advanced as Rafale on their own?
Rafale, a fast jet, excels in the a-g role; and second to only:
1)F-22
2)Typhoon
in the a-a role. Remember this was a single nation fighter program.
LmRaptor@ Jackonicko
A stupid question; but by chance, have you sat in the cockpits of both the Typhoon and the Rafale?
LmRaptorHowever the big SU threat is inflated. Decide for yourself.
I agree with your conclusion. Kopp makes out that the only aircraft with the capability to combat the latest Su Variants and NG Russian aircraft comprehensively and with relative ease will be the F-22A Raptor; which is true in one sense, as it can and will, but that does not mean the Eurocanards are outclassed by their Russian counterparts as Kopp makes out. In fact the Eurocanards(more so Typhoon and Rafale) when upgraded to their full potential will be more then a match for any Flanker derivative.
Bringing the DERA study into it, the notional Flanker threat was much greater then what the Flanker family has evolved into today. Now despite Jousts limited credibility, it does reflect in my opinion a relatively good comparison for BVR performance.
1)F-22
2)Eurofighter
2)Rafale
3)F-15(latest Variants) Su-XX on par Meteor equiped Gripen.
________
Lovely Wendie99
LmRaptorNice articles. I note that in the second one ? ?Turn and Burn? ? the author made the Ricconi type error of an apples to oranges comparison between the F-15 and F-22 in terms of weight and T/W ratio. At 42,160lbs that F-15D weights had about ~ 90% internal gas with no external stores. This configuration, however, only yields a T/W ratio of 1.13:1 (the author probably rounded up to 25Klbs of thrust instead of the sub 24Klbs that they actually are). By contrast the he is obviously quoting the Raptor in the fully loaded configuration, fuel internal gas (20,649lbs), 6 slammers and two AIM-9s. If the F-119s are only making 35Klbs then the T/W ratio in this configuration is 1.05:1, but most sources claim the actual figure is around 39Klbs, which puts the T/W ratio right at 1:17:1.
At any rate where comparison falls short (if indeed the F-22 was in this flight was fully loaded) is that the F-22 has a significant range advantage as it caries about 80% more fuel internally- which is what it was designed to do. For example the F-15 has a rough SR of 0.0085nm/lb, which at 12,400lbs of fuel, translates to a range of roughly 1,060nm (very rough of course, to taxi/ T/O / decent burn calcs etc.). The F-22 ? subsonic ? according to Sperry (take that for what you will) has a SR of roughly 0.0081nm/lb. So that means roughly 13,100lbs internal, or 64% of total capacity. At this point, and again still loaded with 8 missiles where as the F-15 does not, the T/W ratio is 1.18:1 (35Klbs) or 1.32:1 (39Klbs) (static T/W of course, which makes true T/W comparisons problematic as the two engines have very difference design points). The wing loading for the F-22 is now the same at 70lbs/ft2. Either way the F-22 has better or maybe much better T/W ratio.
Wing loading comparisons are not a great way to compare potential maneuverability either. This is where Ricconi plays a slight of hand with his rants. If it was such an important criterion, one would wonder why his beloved F-16A would have 6,500lbs of internal fuel (no external bags) and only two heaters to have the same wing loaded as a fully loaded Raptor. Similar situation for the F-5E. If the F-22 has reached 60% internal fuel and has expended all its slammers the wing loading is 67lbs/ft2. For an F-16C, that would mean 20% internal fuel with two heaters to reach the same wing loading (83% internal fuel for an F-15C). I?ve yet to hear a viper driver have any qualms about going heaters and guns vs. Rodan drivers, even though on paper the Eagle has a lower wing loading.
Good articles but a caveat or two would have been nice and quite appropriate.
BDF
Agreed, also the Raptor will fly clean whereas the Eagle will fly with external stores which means comparing basic T:W Ratios are misleading; the Raptor should have a much greater Thrust:Weight*Drag Ratio. Lift to Drag ratio, would I believe, be more important for a/c maneuverability, than a simple wing loading ratio (Wing Area divided by Weight of aircraft). That being said I dont know how much more lift per unit area the Raptors wing would give over the the Eagles.
________
LovelyWendie99
LmRaptorCan the F-22s Infra Red MLDs be used as an IRST system?
________
STARCRAFT II STRATEGY
LmRaptorIn my opinion, the absolute best place you can go for Red Flag info is http://www.dreamlandresort.com . True, the site’s primary focus is the base at Groom Lake (no UFO stuff), but the discussion forum is populated by some of the most knowledgeable people around regarding the NTS, including Red Flag of course. Every Red Flag exercise is discussed, including all participating units. A post a couple of days ago even listed the tail numbers of participating aircraft.
Thanks a lot for the site.
________
Ford Aerospace
LmRaptorLmRaptorThe general impression in this thread is that the Rafale has a lower RCS than the Typhoon. According to SOC at least, can you explain why you have come to that conclusion?
________
herbalaire reviews
________
Gm L66 Engine Specifications
LmRaptorTheir main assignment field was to operate at supersonic where choosing the right wing shape is no brainer at all. They were focusing on delta wings used in initial ATF studies, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, Lavi and the soviet MFI while drawbacks of deltas at subsonic have been reduced with help of canards. The US designers quickly realized that by applying canard-delta design, they will have problems to fullfil the stealth requirements(RCS), what explains why they got stuck with a common aft-tail design. The F-22 inherited less design features from seventies and eighties, basically it is a tweaked 60th design. No blended wing-body design, no real LERXs exploiting the non-linear lift as on the F-16,F-18, Mig-29, Su-27, no delta wings with sweep angle around 60deg suited for supersonic flight and maneuvering as Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen.. etc. When lacking the TVC the aircraft would be almost considered as the F-15.
M
The Americans got stuck with a ‘clipped delta type’ wing on the 22 that is very efficient when it comes to high speed and supersonic maneuverability. Couple that with huge control surfaces and TVC. It may be an aft-tail delta design, but its Horizontal Stablilizers(Huge, size of an F-16 wing) are far from its c/g, c/l/p; by the law of moments the Hori Stabilizers will offer a lot of force in turning the jet; much more then the close coupled canards on Rafale and Gripen; Typhoon has its canards futher from c/g, and c/l/p then the other Eurocanards. The only source that comments on this all important supersonic maneuverability claims the Raptor has better sustained supersonic turn rates then any Typhoon, Su, Rafale, Gripen, Mig. Whereas the Typhoon has better instantaneous supersonic turn rates. This was conclusion came from DERA engineers who were privy to more sensitive information then most. USAF and LM pilots have also commented on its very impressive supersonic performance/maneuverability. This was a requirment of ATF, one that has been met and exceeded.
________
launch box
________
LovelyWendie
LmRaptorWhen Thales will produce AESA it will be the same generation as the F35 and a generation ahead of the F22.
regards
Later block APG-77s will incorporate all the new technologies used in APG-81, software, newer(smaller) T/R modules. Side-Array modules will also be added. In that sense it will be of the same or later generation of the 81 being developed for the F-35.
________
buy vaporgenie
________
Starcraft 2 Replayers
LmRaptorPaticuarly in the A2G role, and considering that space is reserved for a FLIR system it would probably not be that difficult to add EOTS/DASS in order to increase the aircrafts utility.
It might happen sooner rather then later if this source is to be believed. An advanced EO system FLIR/IRST.
http://www.aiaa.org/aerospace/images/articleimages/pdf/eyemay05.pdf
On to the 23/4 aircraft. They are not additional orders I take it? Its just payment for 23/4 of the current order?
________
Suzuki GS850
________
PAXIL ATTORNEYS
LmRaptoraurcov, thanks. That is what I intended to ask (Range). But to deploy an AMRAAM, you need two widely spaced antennae for triangulation, possibly needing pairs of aircraft. What you’ve mentioned is teamwork between the radar and RWR.
No one knows. Unless your an engineer working for Sanders/LM. The RWR/AL-94 is one of the much more ‘top-secret’ aspects of the Raptor. The impression I have after years of reading up on the topic is that this is one of the fundemental avionics advantages the 22 has over other aircraft, including the JSF; its where a lot of money and research has been put into and also one of the reasons the Raptor pilots claim the public only knows about 40% of the aircrafts capabilities. There was a video interview with a Raptor pilot on http://www.f-22raptor.com/ who made the 40% / 60 % claim and he was talking directly about the aircrafts passive detection techniques(Not the LPI 77) being the truely impressive and top secret aspect of the Raptor, over the stealth, supercruise and maneuverability aspects. Its ability to locate and track all kinds of emissions throughout EM spectrum, from lasers to radar signals to (infrared?); and then cue the AMRAAM.
________
Suzuki GSX1100S
________
Wellbutrin Help
LmRaptorman why you do not think a little bit more your arguments?
Let us clarify your answers.
The R-33 can be fired at targets flying at a max speed of 3700km/h at targets ranging from 50 meters to 28 km of altitude and maneouvring at max load factor of 4Gs that gives you the 65% killl rate very easy.
The 40 kills are US admitted losses, not what Iraq or Russian sources claimed.
If you want to know why the F-117 is not used as an recon aircraft answer is an SA-3 shot it down and the nation that shot it down is a small nation not Russia, the SA-3 is an old missile in fact a 1960s missiles. Russia can fire ICBMs and SLBMs if the Russians feel threated, try to cross the line and you won`t see a small Serbia but a Russia armed with thousends of nukes.
Any provocation can be see it as a threat, and Russia has mobile ICBMs and the TOPOL M is one of the most advanced ICBM in the world.
”The R-33 can be fired at targets flying at a max speed of 3700km/h at targets ranging from 50 meters to 28 km of altitude and maneouvring at max load factor of 4Gs that gives you the 65% killl rate very easy.” Dude do you understand Brochure stats? ? ? ? ? ? Especially for missiles, they display the maximum capability of the missile being launched during optimum conditions(High and Fast Launch). The 65% ??, under what conditions, vs what type of target? Head on engagement, tail chase? Eg You claim lol the R-33 can be fired at targets flying at 3700km/h from 50 m to 28 km; I seriously doubt it would have 65% kill rate vs targets at an altitude of 50 m. Are you aware first of all lol that mach 3.2 is 3920.140 8 km/h and 3.5 is 4287.654 km/h. If thats the case then your argument as usual is fundamentally flawed.
”The 40 kills are US admitted losses, not what Iraq or Russian sources claimed.” Can you read english? Was that sferrins’ question? Did he need to be told about sources, or are you once again digressing from the real question to satisfy your insecure ‘Mig/Su fanboy/pro-Russia’ views. In future why not stick to the topic, the question asked and consider the noteworthy opinions of people and sources that clearly have a much greater understanding of military affairs. Instead of ignoring facts and ruining threads with your exceedingly long posts.
An example of you not considering the facts is the opinion you still hold over the downing of the F-117 over Serbia. I wont bother trying to explain it again, if you still cannot comprehend the issue, your either a lost cause or your fanboy views wont allow you to be persuaded.
________
ZX900F
________
honey oil
________
WELLBUTRIN PREGNANCY
Sign In
