Forum: F-22A Raptor

Thanks a lot gtg947h, great info`. Look forward to your input and a big welcome to the forum!

Your screen name looks like something they give a Black Hole or other stellar object Wink

I got that 1/6th of velocity figure from some bum numbers in a book. I thought they looked too high myself, thanks for the correct velocities.

If the missions have the possibility of being hand flown, I am not surprised many pilots clamour for the job!
Is being a shuttle pilot the "Holy Grail" for air force / navy pilots?
Does it help to know a few people in the loop or is selection fair and square?

Hope you have some more insight, again, thanks. Cool

F-16.net Sponsor

snypa777 wrote:

sferrin wrote:

Not all "reentries" are the same. Smile

Pershing II came in at Mach 8 + and had a radome and did just fine. HEDI did ~Mach 10 in the lower atmosphere (where the temps are going to be MUCH greater) and even had IR guidance with an actively cooled window. I'd suggest reentry temps as being almost a non-issue for the purpose of this arm-chair discussion :

This is a good discussion SFERRIN, thanks for all taking part!

Firstly, the Pershing had an ablative radome for heat protection and was absolutely necessary.

Where did you hear that it was ablative?

snypa777 wrote:

The HEDI was actually never built, but the technology was tested in the KITE vehicle, the IR sensor window was protected by a shroud to defend against high temperatures during the high speed section of flight.

The window was also cooled (check out some of the AIAA papers on it). AIT was also cooled.

sferrin wrote:

Not all "reentries" are the same. Smile

Pershing II came in at Mach 8 + and had a radome and did just fine. HEDI did ~Mach 10 in the lower atmosphere (where the temps are going to be MUCH greater) and even had IR guidance with an actively cooled window. I'd suggest reentry temps as being almost a non-issue for the purpose of this arm-chair discussion :

snypa wrote:

Firstly, the Pershing had an ablative radome for heat protection and was absolutely necessary.

sferrin wrote:

Where did you hear that it was ablative?

In this link, 3rd paragraph down...
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-31.html

In the link below, which is an HTML page from a PDF, look at page 24. It states..
Conical aluminum assembly wrapped with an ablative heatshield. In reference to the radome support structure. It seems that the actual radar set cover was a glass/epoxy radome which also acted as a heatshield, this entire assembly was in itself, protected by the additional conical ablative cover.

In essence, the radar had extensive heat shielding. Hope that covers it!

http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:J- ... &gl=uk

There is a Wiki reference but I am not going to bother with that one!

Further, the Pershing II had a kevlar rocket casing to protect from heating and save weight.

snypa777 wrote:

The HEDI was actually never built, but the technology was tested in the KITE vehicle, the IR sensor window was protected by a shroud to defend against high temperatures during the high speed section of flight.

sferrin wrote:

The window was also cooled (check out some of the AIAA papers on it). AIT was also cooled.

Yup, but I think all IR sensors are cooled in some way to allow them to actually work. A warm or hot IR sensor isn`t going to be of much use?

This is where I got the data on the HEDI IR shroud...

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/hedi.html

By the way, your last picture was quite amusing! Reminds me of a Raphael painting! Angels gently handling missile parts!

snypa777 wrote:

In this link, 3rd paragraph down...
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-31.html

That's talking about Pershing I

Found this:

"One day, I received a phone call from someone at Redstone
Arsenal who had worked on the Jupiter project, asking
for thick blocks of 5870. I just happened to have such a
thick block in my office from experiments to fusion bond
clamped stacks of sheet material. The dramatic first trial success
on a three-stage rocket-sled test at White Sands Proving
Ground excited the Army, and we ended up developing
the Pershing II missile radome ablator. The prime contractor
told us that this alone turned Pershing II into a strategic
weapon."

snypa777 wrote:

[Further, the Pershing II had a kevlar rocket casing to protect from heating and save weight.

The Kevlar was for weight reduction not heat protection. Kevlar is actually worse than carbon when it comes to heat.

snypa777 wrote:

Yup, but I think all IR sensors are cooled in some way to allow them to actually work. A warm or hot IR sensor isn`t going to be of much use?

You do know the difference between the window (the thing we're talking about) and the seeker itself don't you?

snypa777 wrote:

In this link, 3rd paragraph down...
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-31.html

sferrin wrote:

That's talking about Pershing I

My second link references Pershing II, so both models used ablative caps.

Found this:

"One day, I received a phone call from someone at Redstone
Arsenal who had worked on the Jupiter project, asking
for thick blocks of 5870. I just happened to have such a
thick block in my office from experiments to fusion bond
clamped stacks of sheet material. The dramatic first trial success
on a three-stage rocket-sled test at White Sands Proving
Ground excited the Army, and we ended up developing
the Pershing II missile radome ablator. The prime contractor
told us that this alone turned Pershing II into a strategic
weapon."

snypa777 wrote:

[Further, the Pershing II had a kevlar rocket casing to protect from heating and save weight.

sferrin wrote:

The Kevlar was for weight reduction not heat protection. Kevlar is actually worse than carbon when it comes to heat..

Actually, Kevlar is an excellent heat shielding material and is used industry wide for heat shielding purposes. It isn`t RCC but it will do just fine at 500*F.
It doesn`t have to do well for long, the booster is gone after about 1 minute and the midcourse begins..

For Pershing, it is widely written that Kevlar was used just as a weight saving issue to get greater range; I don`t buy that completely...I dont think the thermal qualities were ignored any more than its tensile strength was ignored.

Just about any material that can be woven could have been used to save weight. Kevlar was chosen for number of reasons in my view. Heat resistance being one of them, strength, etc.

snypa777 wrote:

Yup, but I think all IR sensors are cooled in some way to allow them to actually work. A warm or hot IR sensor isn`t going to be of much use?

sferrin wrote:

You do know the difference between the window (the thing we're talking about) and the seeker itself don't you?

Of course. The shroud is mentioned on several sites, which actually sounds like a physical shield, not a cooled window but I think the confusion was with that
The window itself is the shroud. Either way, window, seeker, et al, will require cooling or it won`t work. The whole HEDI nosecap looks cooled in your picture by that big a$$ bottle of Nitrogen.

All of this nitpicking aside, this re-inforces the points made by both of us about the importance of thermal shielding on any high speed weapon that gets very hot. Glad we at last agree on that Smile

Just to add to the topic at http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ ... 80715.aspx
it states...
Navy Missile With Air Force Eyes

July 15, 2008: The U.S. Navy has developed and tested a new version of its Standard surface-to-air missile, that incorporates the radar seeker of the U.S. Air Force AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. This missile recently had a successful test, and the navy plans on putting the new missile, called the SM-6, into service in three years.

The SM-6 has a range of 180 kilometers, and is designed to take out low flying targets that are over the horizon, and cannot be tracked by the Aegis radar. Other ships, aircraft or satellites that spot such targets enable the SM-6 to be launched and sent to the general area of the approaching missile or aircraft. Then, the SM-6 would use the AMRAMM radar to spot and identify the target, and guide the missile to it, and destroy it.

The SM-6 weighs about the same (1.4 tons) as the normal SM-2 long range surface-to-air missile. The fifteen foot missile fits in the same vertical launching cells as the SM-2, which is guided all the way to its target by the ships Aegis radar.

Seems like research in this direction might not be that far off! Wink

FlightDreamz wrote:

Just to add to the topic at http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ ... 80715.aspx
it states...
Navy Missile With Air Force Eyes

July 15, 2008: The U.S. Navy has developed and tested a new version of its Standard surface-to-air missile, that incorporates the radar seeker of the U.S. Air Force AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. This missile recently had a successful test, and the navy plans on putting the new missile, called the SM-6, into service in three years.

The SM-6 has a range of 180 kilometers, and is designed to take out low flying targets that are over the horizon, and cannot be tracked by the Aegis radar. Other ships, aircraft or satellites that spot such targets enable the SM-6 to be launched and sent to the general area of the approaching missile or aircraft. Then, the SM-6 would use the AMRAMM radar to spot and identify the target, and guide the missile to it, and destroy it.

The SM-6 weighs about the same (1.4 tons) as the normal SM-2 long range surface-to-air missile. The fifteen foot missile fits in the same vertical launching cells as the SM-2, which is guided all the way to its target by the ships Aegis radar.

Seems like research in this direction might not be that far off! Wink

Now if the USAF can only re-incorporate this joint USAF/USN missile into an air-launched long-range intercept missile for the F-15! Question

geogen wrote:

FlightDreamz wrote:

Just to add to the topic at http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ ... 80715.aspx
it states...
Navy Missile With Air Force Eyes

July 15, 2008: The U.S. Navy has developed and tested a new version of its Standard surface-to-air missile, that incorporates the radar seeker of the U.S. Air Force AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. This missile recently had a successful test, and the navy plans on putting the new missile, called the SM-6, into service in three years.

The SM-6 has a range of 180 kilometers, and is designed to take out low flying targets that are over the horizon, and cannot be tracked by the Aegis radar. Other ships, aircraft or satellites that spot such targets enable the SM-6 to be launched and sent to the general area of the approaching missile or aircraft. Then, the SM-6 would use the AMRAMM radar to spot and identify the target, and guide the missile to it, and destroy it.

The SM-6 weighs about the same (1.4 tons) as the normal SM-2 long range surface-to-air missile. The fifteen foot missile fits in the same vertical launching cells as the SM-2, which is guided all the way to its target by the ships Aegis radar.

Seems like research in this direction might not be that far off! Wink

Now if the USAF can only re-incorporate this joint USAF/USN missile into an air-launched long-range intercept missile for the F-15! Question

Why in the world would you want a 3000lb AAM? (And no way in hell would it fit in an F-22's internal bay even if it didn't have it's booster.)

[quote="sferrin"]

geogen wrote:

FlightDreamz wrote:

Just to add to the topic at http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/ ... 80715.aspx
it states...
Navy Missile With Air Force Eyes

July 15, 2008: The U.S. Navy has developed and tested a new version of its Standard surface-to-air missile, that incorporates the radar seeker of the U.S. Air Force AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. This missile recently had a successful test, and the navy plans on putting the new missile, called the SM-6, into service in three years.

The SM-6 has a range of 180 kilometers, and is designed to take out low flying targets that are over the horizon, and cannot be tracked by the Aegis radar. Other ships, aircraft or satellites that spot such targets enable the SM-6 to be launched and sent to the general area of the approaching missile or aircraft. Then, the SM-6 would use the AMRAMM radar to spot and identify the target, and guide the missile to it, and destroy it.

The SM-6 weighs about the same (1.4 tons) as the normal SM-2 long range surface-to-air missile. The fifteen foot missile fits in the same vertical launching cells as the SM-2, which is guided all the way to its target by the ships Aegis radar.

Seems like research in this direction might not be that far off! Wink

Now if the USAF can only re-incorporate this joint USAF/USN missile into an air-launched long-range intercept missile for the F-15! Question

Why in the world would you want a 3000lb AAM? (And no way in hell would it fit in an F-22Why in the world would you want a 3000lb AAM? (And no way in hell would it fit in an F-22's internal bay even if it didn't have it's booster.)

Very true, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point was closer to what Geogen said, if only the USAF would incorporate THE RESEARCH into making a long range air-to-air missile. Marrying the AMRAAM seeker with the ESSM'S or SM-6 motor aiming for a missile in the 10 foot long 550-600lb weight class (sorry I didn't add a comment to the original post). I just stumbled across the page and added it to this topic before logging off. Embarassed

FlightDreamz wrote:

Marrying the AMRAAM seeker with the ESSM'S or SM-6 motor aiming for a missile in the 10 foot long 550-600lb weight class (sorry I didn't add a comment to the original post). I just stumbled across the page and added it to this topic before logging off. Embarassed

Apparently the motor isn't designed for airborne use. That and it seems the 7" dia. AIM-120 airframe is a snug fit and a 10" is too big I guess.

sferrin wrote:

Apparently the motor isn't designed for airborne use. That and it seems the 7" dia. AIM-120 airframe is a snug fit and a 10" is too big I guess.

Good point, but... The point was to 'Re-incorporate' said USAF-USN joint system to an air-launced variant, with an airborne worthy motor and case, etc!

And as for who would want a potential 300-400 mile air launched intercept capability for F-15 (against bombers, cruise missiles, AWACS, naval operating helicopters providing vital support, and yes, even against naval targerts themselves, etc)... the question is who wouldn't?!?

Perhaps SK, Japan and SG would be interested as well?

Geogen, if such a capability were desired, don't you think it would have been pursued long ago?

geogen wrote:

And as for who would want a potential 300-400 mile air launched intercept capability for F-15 (against bombers, cruise missiles, AWACS, naval operating helicopters providing vital support, and yes, even against naval targerts themselves, etc)... the question is who wouldn't?!?

Obviously everybody, else they'd already have them. Look back over the years and tell me how many 300+ mile range AAMs have been on the drawing boards in the US. Exactly one that I can think of and it would have been a dual-mode weapon whos primary function would be nuclear attack - the ASALM. Hell, the air force didn't even want Phoenix and it was only a thousand pounds, never mind THREE thousand. Seriously, you really think anybody wants to pack around 6 TONS of weapons for four measly shots?

sferrin, you present very classic and valid points. Some would just favor to think beyond the box such as your example about USAF's retricted philosophy of past rejecting the Phoenix.

So isn't it at least partly an issue about USAF philosophy and not so much technical or tactical worthiness?

As far as the weight-argument goes, c'mon, so, there are 3k and 4k pound conventionl LG bombs? Of course every mission wouldn't be tasked with 4 SLR AAMs in the same respect. Specificity of mission would dictate the load-out always. Perhaps 1 CL loaded AAM per F-15E/K plus AIM-120D would be sufficient capability? And then perhaps other platforms altogether such as upgraded B-1 variants could be factored.

There would be numerous added defensive capabilities to any platform that employed such a system, especially over Gulfs, seas, oceans, as a counter to cruise missiles among others. Anyway, just shootin off you know.

Thoughts out to victims of true monster, Ike storm.

Forum: F-22A Raptor

ESSM boostered AMRAAM on F-22A