Advertisement Advertisement New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices 1. Hornet Leader 2. Harpoon 4: Modern Tactical Naval Warfare 3. Empires In Arms 4. Gallic Wars 5. Fast Action Battle: The Bulge 6. Campaigns of King David 7. Queen of the Celts 8. Danube Front '85 9. Axis and Allies: Guadalcanal 10. Guns of August 100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.       Online Giving Utah SEO Firm Xango Smiley Gifts for Babies

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3 4   NEXT Herald12345    You will find.....   2/10/2008 6:52:54 PM That some very knowledgeable people have already beaten this dead horse to death this last year You are also in grave technical error when you suggest that the F-22 is not a vicious dogfighter. It is,.if no other reason that it has altitude and thrust vectoring advantage over everything else called a fighter aircraft out out there. Electro-opticals also discussed. especially technological limitations discussed in the last threads on the Rafale All within the last month. Just skim any Rafael thread for details and answers to your questions. Herald.   Quote    Reply leroy       2/10/2008 8:59:48 PM "I just wanted to start the same old topic about the same old F-22A. Granted it was discussed many times, but most discussions started and ended before the plane became operational and were based on speculations and outdated information. I would like to renew the debate and try to find an answer to some age-old questions and post interesting links about Raptor (here?s one that I found informative: hXXp://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Raptor.html). " You are right that this has already been discussed quite a bit on here. If you read through any of the long threads you are likely to find a fair bit of discussion of the F-22. A word of caution on Ausairpower and anything else associated with Carlo Kopp... the guy is pretty much a hobbyist with a hobbyist's level of expertise. You should treat his webpage like you would a message board post. Is the plane cost-effective? So far the major argument against it was that F-22 is just too damn expensive. It?s true, but it is also true that at about $130mil Typhoon is only half the price of F-22 (and EF will be sold in greater numbers than F-22). Oh, and US needs to replace all the grounded Eagles with something and after investing plenty of money into F-22 research we are left with very few choices (and F-35 is still several years away) The most recent numbers I remember hearing for production costs of the F-22 is $150million per plane. Note that that doesn't include R&D costs which have already been spent regardless of how many planes are purchased. At that price it is cost effective for its intended mission. There is nothing similar that can provide its level of performance at any price. The only question is really how many dedicated air superiority fighters we need. Is the plane limited by its airframe? Some say that F-22 is not as maneuverable as the latest incarnation of Su series, especially Su-3X with TVC and canards. While it does appear that Su-30 maneuvers with less effort, it is also obvious that F-22 is not that far behind and can match practically all moves and can probably come out of low speed maneuvers faster due to better thrust to weight ratio (here?s video comparison of F-22 and Su-30: hXXp://youtube.com/watch?v=_za3KfMFKLk&feature=related) And how important is super-maneuverability in the modern A2A combat? Will it help break the lock of modern AESA radars, while providing an excellent target opportunity for a second missile? The F-22 is a spectacularly maneuverable aircraft. Back during the YF-23/YF-22 fly-off that was the YF-22's major advantage. The YF-23 actually had some advantages in speed and stealth but lacked the F-22's maneuverability. The airforce was absolutely determined not to build another fighter that couldn't dogfight and picked the YF-22. The sorts of low speed low altitude maneuvering demonstrated in various airshows is not useful for much besides airshows. At the speeds and altitudes where performance is critical the F-22 is without a doubt the most maneuverable aircraft in the world. No amount of maneuverability will help break a radar lock, AESA or otherwise. Where possible the F-22 will avoid getting into turning fights at all and instead engage in hit and run attacks that deny its opponents an opportunity to ever return fire. (Tail chase shots against a supersonic target are basically hopeless unless it is a very short range shot. The F-22 will be able to close to an effective range, fire, and then depart at high speed without ever giving its opposition a chance to take their shot.) Was it a mistake to scrap Electro-Optical Sensor upgrade for F-22? Will EOS of 4+ generation planes give them advantage over stealth plane without EOS and at what distance? I hear conflicting detection ranges for EOS, some going beyond 100km. I wonder if claimed ?reduced IR signature? of F-22 is the truth or mostly PR to justify cost? The EO sensor on the F-22 is not gone forever. The airframe will still support an IRST should the decision be made to purchase it. There has been some talk that R&D continues on an F-22 IRST. See: h**p://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/sb03_16.xml Although Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control's advanced infrared search and track (AIRST) was publically canceled for the F-22, and no targeting FLIR is currently funded, there is almost certainly development ongoing for both of these internal systems, probably as classified programs. An advanced long-range IRST is in development for the E-2C Hawkeye, and the F-22 will likely get a derivative of this, Lockheed Martin's AIRST, or some other IRST, sometime after the middle of the decade. It is difficult to describe the performance of an IRST in a concise way. It is true that they can detect targets at 100km or greater ranges, but you have to understand that those sorts of detections can only be done under very specific circumstances. In practice their performance is highly variable and is dependent on the orientation of the target and weather conditions. Additionally, the F-22 has received IR signature reduction work. Don't forget that back when the F-22 was on the drawing board the aircraft it was being designed to defeat were all already operational with IRST systems. IRSTs can be a useful capability, but they are not an "answer" to stealth the way some fanboys on the internet seem to believe. Is super-cruise option largely useless or does it provide a distinct advantage by increasing kinematic range for AMRAAM, kinematic advantage with outrunning modern SAM and A2A missiles, reducing enemy reaction time? Supercruise is a major feature that offers a number of advantages. It allows the F-22 to cover huge amounts of real estate very quickly if it is called upon to intercept a target. Combined with stealth it allows the F-22 to pick favorable intercept angles against slower moving targets. It allows F-22s to quickly open distance between themselves and their targets should they need to do so.(dart in, fire, dart out) It allows the F-22 to move at high speeds without the large IR signature generated by afterburner use. It also gives missiles or bombs employed by an F-22 an increase in range. Is stealth a myth, a minor advantage, or will it give F-22 the ability to pick ideal battlefields to its advantage and force other planes into unfair fights they will be destined to lose? After all air war is not an assembly of head-to-head A2A fights, but a chess game in the air, using fighters, drones, decoys, EW, tankers, AWACS planes, etc. Stealth is a huge advantage. At the current technological level the F-22 is all but invisible to its opposition. This will not only allow F-22s to win head to head engagements against opposing fighters, but it will also make them hugely useful in the "chess game" you described. F-22s will be able to target enemy force multipliers such as airborne radars, refueling aircraft, EW aircraft, or command and control nodes. The F-22 will be able to operate in airspace protected by advanced SAM systems that conventional aircraft would be denied access to unless the SAM network was destroyed. The F-22 is the definition of a "game changing" capability. Even a small number of F-22s presents an opponent with some very difficult decisions. Are EW and sensory abilities of F-22 that far ahead of the rest of 4+ planes? Some claim that F-22 will be able to pinpoint position of electronic emissions from the ground precisely enough to bomb the source, and so on. The airforce has been very very pleased with the F-22's EW capabilities but it is pretty impossible to say exactly where it stands when compared to state of the art competition because sufficient information simply isn't available. And finally why are so many Russians so adamant about superiority (or parity) of Su-3X planes? Is it just delusional neo-patriotism or is there a bit of reason? It is marketing. The Russians know they do not currently have a competitor to the F-22 and that is why they are working to develop such a plane. It will be interesting to see what kind of aircraft they eventually produce. At the present time the F-22 is in a league by itself. At some point in the future it may find some competition from Russia/India, China, or perhaps another 5th generation US plane.   Quote    Reply afrc       2/10/2008 9:48:26 PM Herald, I did read other posts, including one about Rafale (and it mainly compares it to F-35). I want to concentrate more on F-22 and find out if it is the best plane dollar for dollar and if it is going to be in the lead for many years to come rather than just a few years. For example I would like to know how effective is the new passive FM radar HA-100 from Thales and new Russian SAMs against stealth planes? Ultimately states like Iran cannot buy enough planes to compete with US, but they sure will buy SAM systems. hXXp://www.defense-update.com/events/2007/summary/parisairshow07ad.htm And I do not diminish F-22 as a dogfighter, I even introduced a video to compare it to Su-30. It is very comparable, but Su-30 performance looks a bit more effortless (if you look at other videos online) - keep in mind that Su-30 had 3-D TVC, as well as front canards (something that F-22 lacks). Some say that with new engines Su-30 will be capable of supercruise, and so on. That's why I want to discuss F-22 more and compare it to other aircraft, including near-future upgrades.   Quote    Reply displacedjim       2/10/2008 10:32:59 PM No, really, air show crazy moves have nothing to do with aerial combat.   Leroy is 100% on target.     Quote    Reply afrc       2/10/2008 10:38:26 PM Leroy, Most of your comments are common knowledge. I would like to hear some details and see some links to backup arguments, something besides my Aussie hobbyist links As far as price, the problem is that F-22 is not for sale and R&D cost has to be included in the total price, while Typhoon is for sale and they can compensate for R&D. Same with Su-30. But I certainly see your point. BTW does $130mil price for EF include R&D cost or not? As far as how many planes we need, it depends if we going to fight China and Russia or just Iran Maneuverability... some articles on Cope India suggest that Indian Su-30 with the help of low speed tricks could break radar lock of older F-15s and get close enough to launch IR missiles. I wonder if it can work against newer radars? Americans feel confident that they can defeat Russian missiles at a distance, but what if new EW systems on Russian planes also will force F-22 to get closer to use IR targeting? EO... I did not hear about plans to incorporate it into F-22. We'll see. Do you have a link that gives exact distances for optical target detection (for different systems out there). Some suggest in other topics that the main EO flaw is that it cannot determine the range and heading for proper t