F-22 Raptor: News and Discussion

The problem with F-22 is beyond cost , for an aircraft that would spend 30 hours on ground for every hour it flies and has high maintenace stealth features , there are not many country that can afford those , infact i can only think of USAF being able to afford not just the initial high cost but the expensive maintenance cost of F-22.

Lockheed's F-22 Raptor – a maintenance nightmare
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2292127/posts

High-Maintenance F-22 Stealth Features Keeping It in the Shop
http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/alerts/national-security/ns-f22-20090220.html

This morning, Lieutenant General Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, deputy chief of staff for plans, operations and requirements, explained how a Boeing F-15 can shoot down an F-22. Carlisle spoke this morning about fifth generation fighters at a breakfast event sponsored by the Air Force Association in Rosslyn, Virginia.

Here is a transcript of Carlisle's remarks:

"They [the F-22s] always start defensive as you might imagine because anything else is kind of a waste of gas. So the F-22 always start defensive. On rare occasions the F-22 guy -- first of all, the [F-15] Eagle guy, you have to fly a perfect lag fight (flight?). You have to have AIM-9X and JHMCS [joint helmet mounted cueing system] to get an off-boresight IR [infrared] capability. And the F-22 guy has to put up his power a nanosecond too early and not use his countermeasures and you may get a fleeting, one nanosecond AIM-9X shot, and that's about it."

AIM 9X sidewinder is infrared homing guidance. This means RuAF focus on IRST is on right lines.

and not use his countermeasures

Do you really think that countermeasures will be ignored in actual air combat?

That article is BS and is intended to show that the F-22 can't be shot down normally, and can only be shot down if the F-22 pilot makes a mistake or doesn't know what they are doing.

The suggestion that the IIR sidewinder needs to see an AB in full power to get a lock is a load of rubbish and lends evidence to the fact that this story is probably just propaganda by a pro F-22 lobby group.

The whole point behind IIR is that you don't even need to see any hot parts of the engine... an imaging IR seeker is like a Thermal Imager that forms an image of its view and can identify and target shapes.

It is a bit like the TV guided model of Maverick where the seeker is directed at the target and then the autotracker locks on and when fired the optics follow that target if it moves and the controls and engine of the maverick missile move the missile towards the target it is looking at till impact.

The differences are that an IIR seeker can see in the dark and all sorts of weather conditions and has an onboard database of IR signatures, or 3D model shapes of targets so when it sees an F-22 from any angle it will identify it as an F-22 and get a lock and home in on it.

Does that mean stealth is useless?

No.

There are DIRCMs.

Btw, when talking stealth, are the planes stealth from all around, top down front back or mostly from the front. The top horizontal portion of the wings, is it as much stealth as front wings curvature.

http://www.drtomorrow.com/lessons/lessons6/26.html

Does Jindalee offer any promise, also Glanoss sats that are near completion?

Using a modified weather over-the-horizon radar, named Jindalee (an aboriginal term for "bare bones"), they knew that although the stealth bomber did indeed absorb standard aircraft tracking radar (which detect solid objects) with its micro-wave absorbing foam cover, such protection did not extend to the "wake" created as the bomber ploughed through the air. Even at high altitudes where the air is much thinner, there is sufficient turbulence to register on weather radar. After all that is why it was designed -- to check turbulent weather ahead so modern airliners could divert and avoid danger and inconvenience to passengers.

The developed system, with one unit already based at Alice Springs in Central Australia, will monitor some three million square kilometres of land and open ocean north of Australia, when it ties in with two similar units to be installed at other Australian locations by the mid-1990s. The technique uses the "bounce" capability of the ionosphere (that gave Marconi the basis for his "wireless radio" signal sent from Cornwall, England to Signal Hill, Newfoundland in 1901).

Makes you stop and think doesn't it? How could a government allow such monumental military developments to spend so much money, to allow the stealth bomber design to advance to its final stages, only to be reduced to aluminum foil by another group thinking differently? Admittedly, there was one angle the U.S. claimed still gave the Stealth limited use. Jindalee radar, at the moment, works best when it is pointing towards the equator. Intended use of the Stealth by the U.S. was to be over the North Pole against Russia. The Russians are experimenting with satellite-borne systems that look down, not up, to track Stealth, to cover anything that might get missed by Jindalee. [u]

That article is BS and is intended to show that the F-22 can't be shot down normally, and can only be shot down if the F-22 pilot makes a mistake or doesn't know what they are doing.

The suggestion that the IIR sidewinder needs to see an AB in full power to get a lock is a load of rubbish and lends evidence to the fact that this story is probably just propaganda by a pro F-22 lobby group.

Perfectly on the mark GarryB, you have centered perfectly the (in reality very naive ) PR rational behind those types of claims.

This type of low level "information smoke screen" ,which result even comical to any person with knowledge on those specific subjects, is obviously fundamental to maintain integer the totally constructed ,artificial image of F-22 sold abroad ,at its own time critical in the psychological and ,partially, in the strategic planning component of the military approach, against USAF , of potential enemy pilots and AD operatives.


Naturally when some type information not previously....how say that ? agreed ? .... slip out ,unluckily even reaching some media, it is very urgently "silenced", dismissed and attentively rendered a taboo.

From : International Air Power Review ,year 2006, issue 20, page 45 :

"more recently, there have been repeated reports that two RAF Typhoons deployed to the USA for OEU trails work have been flying against the F-22 at NAS China Lake, and have peformed better than was expected. There was little suprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-boresight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight, but the aircraft did cause a suprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a suprisingly long rate. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BVR engagement was canceled, and the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more."

"When this incident was reported on a website frequented by front-line RAF aircrew a senior RAF officer urged an end to the conversation on security grounds"

Someone is still surprised by the strange unmovable stance of USAF that,since this unlucky "incident", prohibit F-22 to participate in any BVR exercises with foreign aircraft ; at the end of day it...supposedly... shouldn't risk anything in those type of situations ,above all with fighters equiped with not particularly powerful mechanically scanned radars (not a true monster like an SU-35S Irbis) ; an enagement like this one start at 180-250 km of distance and after some minutes ....supposedly....the opposing aircraft would have been declared "shoot down" by the invisible raptor . Have i already said SUPPOSEDLY ?
Very strangely this supposedly invisible and unbeatable aircraft - at least in the odd claims of operatives with clear vested interests and totally incompatible with any known Physics model- has been discontinued only few years after its operative introduction and ,strangely, not employed also in the operation in Libya with the other NATO corresponding aircraft

@victor7
Most stealth shaped aircraft are at most radar optimized on front , the way I see it. But it doesn't mean they wouldn't have taken measures. There is large physical cross section from top and bottom and it will translate into large Radar cross section as well compared to front end. Just look at these pics of F22 from top and see those zagged patterns. No doubt that F22 is the most stealthy fighter plane out there and the way US is guarding it as mindstorm's last post summed it up. Although some of those rivet tapes are missing specially on the panels(pic 1 & 3) which might not have any effect from front as these will not visible to radar from some frontal angles.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/F22_Combat_Hammer.jpg
http://www.wickediron.com/images/f22assemblyline.jpg
http://www.tyndall.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/051222-F-7709A-121.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-W28G8KZ46Co/ToSH_W-iIpI/AAAAAAAAGX4/wMWh5GURmtk/s1600/f22_raptor_salt_desert.jpg

But all this also translates into high operating costs as we can see even USAF cant operate more than 180 something, while their original requirement was 700 plus.

Technologies exist to render stealth useless. If these different systems are effectively employed together and you have a high energy Surface to air missiles in enough numbers...you can theoretically deny an airspace to F-22. But aggressors can also play games with a well fortified enemy and not play into their strengths.

The only shape that offers a minimal RCS from any angle is a perfect sphere...

RCS diagrams are fairly easy to find on the internet, though the accuracy of such diagrams can be called into question for most of them they tend to show in the horizontal plane that at specific angles there are reflection peaks where the RCS is much higher than average.

Remember how average works? If 0.001m^2 is your peak RCS and 0.1m^2 is your average that means that at some angles the RCS must actually be quite high... if your peak RCS is in the thousanths of a metre and the middle of your bell curve is one tenth of a metre then half your RCS returns will be in the 1 metre range...

And that is at the specific frequency the stealth is designed for.

BTW if the Typhoons detected F-22s at decent ranges because they weren't taped up properly would you stop training (which is important for both sides of course... no point having a new toy if you can't test it... it will certainly be tested in a real war but a failure there has rather more serious consequences so we test in training to try to anticipate any potential enemy move so that counters to it can be developed in peace time ready for war), or you you make sure the aircraft is properly taped up for the next days exercise and show some balls and keep training?

Or is the problem with the tape coming off in air that needs a more fundamental fix that will cost a lot of money?

The friction generated by zipping around at supercruise speeds will likely be bad for tape... if this is a serious problem then maybe Russia defences are already prepared for the F-22 and the F-22 is really a white elephant and that is the real reason they have stopped production at 189 and not allowed export despite the fact that I am sure the Japanese and Israelis and even the Australians would be interested in even a slightly downgraded export model.

The Aussies have already found flaws in the F-35 maybe they will find fundamental flaws in the F-22 and suddenly realise their best chance for a stealth fighter is the PAK FA!!!!

Regarding sawtooth edges on panels that doesn't eliminate RCS, it simply redirects the energy in a different direction.

If you view the sawtooth edges as being a series of triangles, from the front you have the tips of those triangles reflecting right back at the antenna but the edges of those triangles direct the energy out at 45 degree angles... at a 45 degree angle from the front that means all those triangles you were looking at are now the side edges of triangles reflecting radar energy directly back at the antenna with an enormous RCS... that is why they talk about peak RCS instead of average.

Garry, On topic of Australia interested in Pak-Fa...I doubt it will ever happen. They will get F-35 in the end which is not ideally suited to large Australian land mass and northern coastline.

Regarding F-22 production, US could easily have made a little bit downgraded model of F-22 even for themselves. Lets say a model that has maintainence costs similar to F-15. Lets say a version that keeps the basic stealth shape/zigzags, engines, internal weapons bays, TVC, which are already there and with RAM in only important areas and upgraded(latest) electronics....maybe then they could afford it in large number. This model's advantages over JSF will be in Range/endurance, payload, clear WVR advantage, superior agility/performance and comparable BVR performance. The same way as PAK-FA is heading. But I think you cant underestimate JSF lobby either.

Garry, On topic of Australia interested in Pak-Fa...I doubt it will ever happen. They will get F-35 in the end which is not ideally suited to large Australian land mass and northern coastline.

I wasn't seriously suggesting they would, just pointing out it is their only alternative beyond the F-22.

Regarding F-22 production, US could easily have made a little bit downgraded model of F-22 even for themselves. Lets say a model that has maintainence costs similar to F-15.

First of all they have missed their chance... with the Seawolf they admitted it was too expensive with the end of the cold war, and built Virginia class subs, but it is a bit late now to say the F-22 is rubbish and they need something to replace it.

They have the vast majority of their allies committed to the F-35 and if they admit that the F-22 isn't perfect, then what happens to the 3,000 plus F-35s they have planned to make?

The Brown stuff would be flying everywhere... and sticking... and stinking.

They have to wait till deliveries of the F-35 start and planes ordered start arriving.

Second the F-15 was made in the 1970s and is not the cheapest aircraft to operate and maintain. The light fighters (F-18 and F-16) were supposed to be cheap and easy to operate.

The promise of the F-22 was even less maintainence than any other fighter... and in terms of actual maintainence it is actually probably very good, but every access panel you need to open you need a grinder to remove the RAM and tape and paint... open the access panel... do the work... and then replace the panel and repaint/tape/and reapply the RAM and allow each application to cure before applying the next layer/coat etc.

The Russians... understandibly are looking for alternative solutions to the problem...

But I think you cant underestimate JSF lobby either.

Not just the JSF lobby... most members of NATO have committed to basically replacing most of their legasy airforce with the F-35... if the US puts an F-22 junior into production there will be enormous pressure to swap orders from F-35 to F-22... the cheap F-22 would basically replace the F-35, which would make the F-35 the most expensive aircraft in the universe bar none because production facilities are already set up to make about 3,000 of them.

Those same facilities could probably be modified to make F-22 jnr, but enormous amounts of money would have been wasted... not to mention time.

I've heard from a lot of fanboys that the F-22 isnt cancelled at all and the production just stopped and the problems concerning durability are russian propaganda and the F-22 is very durable and operates without problem in moist places such as Guam

I've heard from a lot of fanboys that the F-22 isnt cancelled at all and the production just stopped and the problems concerning durability are russian propaganda and the F-22 is very durable and operates without problem in moist places such as Guam

Which just shows how effective US propaganda is... anything that might be negative about Russian or Soviet stuff is true, anything positive is propaganda and the reverse for US and western gear.

Russian propaganda on the situation can be read from such biased pro commie sources as the US Congress, who cancelled the funding... driven by John McCain... clearly a left wing hippy if ever there was one.

Must be an absolutely brilliant aircraft if they only made 189 and are intending to produce over 2,500 F-35s for the USAF... in the late 1980s they were talking about 1,000s of F-22s and the F-35 was not even considered necessary.

Then they claimed 750 was a bare minimum number they needed, but as they built them and tested them and realised their purchase and operating costs were going to cripple the airforce... that also needs new tankers and could use a new single strategic bomber to preferably replace all the existing ones to reduce costs.

The number then became 250, and the F-35 was "invented" as a cheaper lighter numbers aircraft... the F-16 to the F-15C. Eventually they decided enough was enough and stopped production at 189.

It really doesn't sound like an aircraft with no problems, because one of its main problems is that it is expensive... and small production runs only make that worse. In fact you will find often that making 600 probably would not have cost as much as you might think because the increased numbers would have allowed the cost of the individual aircraft price to be dropped to more reasonable levels, so it might have cost 50% more to build 200% more aircraft than the 189 they produced.

Why wouldn't you want more of this plane for less if there was little actually wrong with it?

GarryB wrote:Why wouldn't you want more of this plane for less if there was little actually wrong with it?

Because that would represent a logical argument, and you're referring to decisions made by US politicians. See the problem?

F-22 crashes at Florida Air Force base


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/15/f-22-crashes-at-florida-air-force-base/?cmpid=prn_aol&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmaing5%7Cdl2%7Csec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D235226

Ouch...that had to hurt

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/04/01/us-deploys-more-stealth-planes-to-korean-peninsula

Does USA flexe its muscles ? This is the question after the B2's mini-show, we are witnessed now F-22 micro-show.
Does US's adminsitration forget the pitables performances of US air forces during Korea's war 1950-53 ?

In fact far to want a new war with North Korea, USA wished to avoid absolutly a new devastating war. This tension triggered by South Korea, and Japan -Nippon's quarels with China in islands - should be understood by this two asian countries to test the US determination. As the world's chessboard is evolving very quickly, and US is loosing step by step its influence, it is important for South Korea, and Japan to see if USA is still a super power. Du to the growing Brics power and influence, they are more and more reluctants to follow blindly the US policy, as the US's gloomy economic situation forbids any new US adventure.

But Japan and South Korea are playing a dangerous game, even though, all protaganists will avoid any conflicts. They know very well at this time what a war could cost. It is doubftull if Norh Korea will undergo anything without the chinese assessment.

I wonder what were the losses during the Korean war when the F-86 Sabre came to save the day from the evil MIG-15.

It seems that despite the US Hollywood' show presenting the exceptionnal and emotional F-22s' deployment, only two F-22 are in Korea, beside 2 B-2. This is what I felt since the begining of this North Korea pseudo-crisis. South Korea, and Japan are testing the US determination and asking this question what about the US hyperpower nowadays.

AlfaT8 wrote:I wonder what were the losses during the Korean war when the F-86 Sabre came to save the day from the evil MIG-15.

To Alfa :
If you follow US propaganda, about 100 F-86 were lost. You notice only 100, lol....
If they said that several hundreds of Mig 15 were downed by F-86, I think they are right, because China, had just a new communist governement, consequently they are not much experiment chinese pilots.
This is the reason why Stalin, decdided to send soviet pilots. Once soviets are there t things began very bad for US, especially for the F-86 -real war like Korean, is not Buck Danny's cartoon- this is why they conceded half of Korea, and Mc Arthur was ready to use nuclear bombs.
The figures' losses of F-86, we will never know exactly, however a fair estimates, at minima, the estimation is at least several hundreds, more near the thousand. At minima of course.

I just am amused by the irony... the US government has rabbited on for years about dangerous dictators that are crazy with access or potential access to nuclear weapons... and now they have one...

Compared with this North Korean kid, Armadinijad, and Chavez are teddy bears.

Funny how a real hot head on one side brings out the the cautious sensible approach from the other side...

The figures' losses of F-86, we will never know exactly, however a fair estimates, at minima, the estimation is at least several hundreds, more near the thousand. At minima of course.

Absolutely correct.
MIG-15 LOSSES 300-330
Reasons for losses for MIG-15
1)no independent decisions till full flight profile
2) Under constant command from home base in N.K (for russkiy)
3) Some landing problems of MIG Gear
4)Unable to shoot during planned(unplanned ?) missions.(I dont remember)


SABRE(and its versions): (destroyed)1100 plus.
Damaged(beyond repair + repairable) around another: 1000 U.S aircraft
MIG-15 dealt a crushing blow to Sabre and rattled the Americans beyond frenzy.
2 thousand U.S aircraft gone for a picnic in this war..!
It was documented by some website I am forgetting now which link was that.

gaurav wrote:

Absolutely correct.
MIG-15 LOSSES 300-330
Reasons for losses for MIG-15
1)no independent decisions till full flight profile
2) Under constant command from home base in N.K (for russkiy)
3) Some landing problems of MIG Gear
4)Unable to shoot during planned(unplanned ?) missions.(I dont remember)

I think the main explanation of Mig 15's losses, was du to the lack of chinese experience pilots. As China's regime was less than one year old, only few month when the war started.
Not enough time to form a good pilots, notice that this was not the case during Vietnam's war, where chinese, and vietnamese pilots had good scores against their US rivals.

gaurav wrote:
SABRE(and its versions): (destroyed)1100 plus.
Damaged(beyond repair + repairable) around another: 1000 U.S aircraft
MIG-15 dealt a crushing blow to Sabre and rattled the Americans beyond frenzy.
2 thousand U.S aircraft gone for a picnic in this war..!
It was documented by some website I am forgetting now which link was that.

I read somewhere in the net -when I find the link, I will post it here- that a pathetic propaganda claimed that only around 100 F-86 lost, but.....more than 1000 pilots rescued . Isn't a joke ?
I think it would be very funny, if their human' rights, and Women' rights man Mr McArthur wanted to nuke China not more, not less.

If someone among you, could tell us what are the US main assets ?
After the USSR's collapse, it was obvious between 1995-2006, US were without serious rivals.
At first do not forget that US in that time accumulated nearly 16 trillons $ in their war machine, their economy seemed to be shinning -I said seemed, and not were, notice the difference between the two words-, hence attracted nearly all shinning scientists in the world.
The best japanese, russian, german, chinese, brazilian, frencheese, english, indian, arab, african, scientists dreamed to have the green card.
Nearly a decade of state of grace, as we can say in french.
But now, seeing the pitable performances of US hardwares everywhere in the world, in all area, what are the US main assets ?
What did they do with the last decade advance ?

They have largely squandered their position of power and dominance, but that is no real surprise.

All the promises of the cold war about what a force for good the US was and how it would do great things for the people of the world if it didn't have the evil Soviets countering all their attempts to spread peace and democracy.

Well it is pretty clear now it had nothing to do with spreading peace and democracy and was actually more about imposing US will on countries of strategic importance to the US to ensure the US remains wealthy and powerful... take away the Soviet Union and they are revealed.

If they practised what they preached then a  massive reduction in arms production and their arsenal could have been matched with an investment in poor foreign countries to help them develop and grow and for the US to get a return on their investments with new allies of like minded UN members that are grateful to the US for their genuine assistance. The problem is that never happened they just continued the old colonial search for resources with bribes at the highest level, with a few low paying dangerous jobs at the lowest level for the locals and nothing else... when the oil is gone the company is gone and the locals can deal with the mess of ruined ground water and half complete infrastructure etc etc.