F-16.net

Printed from: F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference [http://www.f-16.net]
Document title: F-16.net - F-22 at Farnborough! :: F-16.net :: The Ultimate F-16 Reference
Original URL: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-10705-start-75-sid-1e2603a54f4e51503eb3707191c5af1e.html
Printed on: 07 September 2008

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-22 at Farnborough!



Search Search  Register Register  Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
guidelines Forum Guidelines
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
sferrin
PostPosted: Jul 23, 2008 - 07:33 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite
Elite


Joined: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 964

Status: Offline
em745 wrote:
Methinks people need to gain a bit of perspective regarding the Raptor's perceived "corpulence":


I always got a kick out of those who thought the F-22 would be slow because it was "boxy" and that it wouldn't be able to manuever at all because it was "compromised for stealth". Clearly they weren't acquainted with the concept of "common sense". Twisted Evil
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Sponsor
New postPosted: Sep 07, 2008 - 3:25 AM Back to top
F-16.net Sponsor






This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.
   
 
Viperalltheway
PostPosted: Jul 23, 2008 - 07:34 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Posts: 433

Quote:

The problem with UCAVs is that the decision making has to be either autonomous or remote. This doesn't fit well with air combat or with target of opportunity missions. UCAVs for the foreseeable future will be platforms which will take off, hit pre-determined targets or target areas wit some limited pre-strike or post strike feed back, then return to base. Fighter sweeps, CAPs, more ambiguous mission types will require a manned platform.


I don't see why UCAVs would not in the long term be capable of doing search and destroy missions. The longbow system can already detect, identify and track 128 targets.

Also, I'm not for a total UCAV force. The AF could have other manned platforms with strike capabilities, like F-22s or other options like the F-16X that was discussed before. These a/c would have a/a capabilities too. It's just that there's no point in building 1760 F-35s until 2034.

A medium term alternative, say something that would be credible until 2020, could already have been developped and put into service. The entire USAF would not be risking obsolescence.

Quote:

Also, there are no UCAVs with the F-35 or the F-22's performance on the road map right now. The designs in service in 2020~30s will be sub-sonic, stealthy platforms with the ability to deliver one or two bombs on pre-defined ground targets with no A2A ability -- designs ala X-47C


The X-45 could have been optimized for subsonic speed, yet have been able to fly in supersonic. That would not have been much more difficult and expensive to build. A top speed of M1.5 on AB would have been sufficient. It's very stealthy so most air targets it would encounter would be taken by surprise and would be flying at subsonic speed. M1.5 would have been sufficient to have a speed advantage. The bays would have been designed to fit 6 AIM-120s.

The way I see it the air vehicle is not really the problem. It's more the software that would pose problem. And even at that, the F-22 and F-35 are already almost completly automated for BVR engagements. The pilot himself has to trust the system otherwise it would always have to get WVR.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
em745
PostPosted: Jul 23, 2008 - 08:53 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Regular User
Regular User


Joined: Oct 18, 2007
Posts: 28

Status: Offline
vapor069 wrote:
energo wrote:
checksixx wrote:
There is a reason for it...that isn't it. You all should be able to figure it out though...


Feel free to elaborate.


Regards,
Bjørnar



My guess is because of the stealth, the F-15 was there so the flight could be seen on radar... am I right Checksixx? They supposedly had to put foil tape / strips on the F-117 when it flew to different airshows so it could be seen on radar.


When it needs to be visible to radar, the Rap' usually flies with that little radar-enhancing nubbin on its belly.



2.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  48.52 KB
 Viewed:  1349 Time(s)

2.jpg


 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Guysmiley
PostPosted: Jul 23, 2008 - 10:32 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite
Elite


Joined: May 26, 2005
Posts: 1093

em745 wrote:
When it needs to be visible to radar, the Rap' usually flies with that little radar-enhancing nubbin on its belly.


Nubbin LMAO That is a perfect word to describe it!
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
strykerxo
PostPosted: Jul 24, 2008 - 06:43 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Regular User
Regular User


Joined: Mar 21, 2008
Posts: 46

Status: Offline
Let's not forget that with all this talk about slow AOA, agility, controllability, min-turn, instantaneous, etc. etc. The 22 can preform all this and more with a full combat load, these are not just air-show m/v with specially modified or clean AC. I think this is just one of the many aspects the 22 brings to bare, that the crowds are responding too.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
asiatrails
PostPosted: Jul 28, 2008 - 12:43 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite
Elite


Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Posts: 663

Status: Offline
Guysmiley wrote:
em745 wrote:
When it needs to be visible to radar, the Rap' usually flies with that little radar-enhancing nubbin on its belly.


Nubbin LMAO That is a perfect word to describe it!



I think this was the prototype version


.



Drag Index.jpg
 Description:
 Filesize:  34.91 KB
 Viewed:  1000 Time(s)

Drag Index.jpg


 View user's profile Send private message  
 
strykerxo
PostPosted: Jul 28, 2008 - 04:22 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Regular User
Regular User


Joined: Mar 21, 2008
Posts: 46

Status: Offline
Ohhh, that's just wrong
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
em745
PostPosted: Jul 28, 2008 - 10:54 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Regular User
Regular User


Joined: Oct 18, 2007
Posts: 28

Status: Offline
strykerxo wrote:
Ohhh, that's just wrong


Maybe... But it DOES demonstrate the Raptor's incredible payload carrying abilities. Twisted Evil
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
energo
PostPosted: Aug 05, 2008 - 04:20 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: Dec 09, 2007
Posts: 18

Status: Offline
em745 wrote:
vapor069 wrote:
energo wrote:
checksixx wrote:
There is a reason for it...that isn't it. You all should be able to figure it out though...


Feel free to elaborate.


Regards,
Bjørnar



My guess is because of the stealth, the F-15 was there so the flight could be seen on radar... am I right Checksixx? They supposedly had to put foil tape / strips on the F-117 when it flew to different airshows so it could be seen on radar.


When it needs to be visible to radar, the Rap' usually flies with that little radar-enhancing nubbin on its belly.


Don't quote me on this, but the two-ship formation is required under current British regulations in case the transponder (or nubbin) fails. I might be wrong, of course.


Regards,
Bjørnar
Oslo
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Copyright © 2008 Lieven Dewitte and Stefaan Vanhastel