Forum: F-22A Raptor

Modified the topic's title so to reflect a better relevancy to this forum.

I do agree with the jist of the message.

The PAK FA has a lot to prove and will be a long time before it proves a lot of things. Sure, it has borrowed a lot from the F-22, YF-23, F-35 and the Flanker series designs. Some may have not believed we would ever see a "PAF FA". But the reality now is it exists, albeit in a VERY EARLY form. When it will get to a final and operational weapon system is again, going to be a long time. But at least a starting point is made.

Regardless how stealthy the PAK FA turns out to be, I have little doubts it will be better than anything the Russians have fielded before because this prototype at least follows certain rules of stealth unlike anything before it (thanks to them taking a good hard look at our designs). If they start loading it with good avionics, sensors and weapons (especially if the Russians get financial and technical help from India and maybe China), it cannot be overlooked as a viable threat to 4th Gen fighters and a more difficult target to engage.

The F-22 was designed and built just for (potential) threats like this. Threats that Gates said should never mind us because he doesn't foresee a shooting war with Russia or anyone else other than in the Middle east anytime soon. Threats which we apparently will never face because these technologies would never be exported or transferred in any way, shape or form.

187 F-22s is enough to sustain operations. 187 F-22s is enough to handle anything, including two geographically seperated wars or conflicts.

Yeah right...

F-22s prematurely capped at 187?

Hell yes it is!

F-16.net Sponsor

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Modified the topic's title so to reflect a better relevancy to this forum.

I do agree with the jist of the message.

The PAK FA has a lot to prove and will be a long time before it proves a lot of things. Sure, it has borrowed a lot from the F-22, YF-23, F-35 and the Flanker series designs. Some may have not believed we would ever see a "PAF FA". But the reality now is it exists, albeit in a VERY EARLY form. When it will get to a final and operational weapon system is again, going to be a long time. But at least a starting point is made.

Regardless how stealthy the PAK FA turns out to be, I have little doubts it will be better than anything the Russians have fielded before because this prototype at least follows certain rules of stealth unlike anything before it (thanks to them taking a good hard look at our designs). If they start loading it with good avionics, sensors and weapons (especially if the Russians get financial and technical help from India and maybe China), it cannot be overlooked as a viable threat to 4th Gen fighters and a more difficult target to engage.

The F-22 was designed and built just for (potential) threats like this. Threats that Gates said should never mind us because he doesn't foresee a shooting war with Russia or anyone else other than in the Middle east anytime soon. Threats which we apparently will never face because these technologies would never be exported or transferred in any way, shape or form.

187 F-22s is enough to sustain operations. 187 F-22s is enough to handle anything, including two geographically seperated wars or conflicts.

Yeah right...

F-22s prematurely capped at 187?

Hell yes it is!

I totally agree with you. Gates may not envision Russia or China being our enemies. But I damn sure consider them potential enemies! And Russia will sell anything, to anybody, at any time, as long as they've got the money. With India as a partner in this effort, this aircraft will make it into development. That is why this Gates strategy is so dangerous for us. You don't plan for the best possible outcome and hope that is what happens. You plan for the worst possible outcome and hope it doesn't ever come to pass.

This current line of thinking by folks like Gates is extremely dangerous. One can't just assume that because we are only fighting insurgencies now means we'll only be fighting those kinds of threats in 10 or 15 years. We simply don't know what threats might exist. Thank goodness that after Vietnam we didn't exclusively arm and train to fight guerrilla insurgents in SE Asia jungles, otherwise we would have been in a real pickle when Iraq invaded Kuwait and we found ourselves needing massive amounts of armor and expertise in that type of warfare.

Nor do I believe the F-35 can serve as an adequate alternative to the F-22, as Gates is suggesting, especially with the emergence of the T-50. The F-35 will be a fine aircraft and will serve us well. But it needs to do so in the capacity it was designed - as the low portion of the hi-lo F-22/F-35 mix. It simply doesn't have the performance, radar range or A2A weapons load to compete with the F-22 in the air dominance role.

Finally, the F-35 when pitted against the fighter the T-50 eventually becomes, will also suffer from many of the same disadvantages it currently holds to the F-22. The T-50 will be faster, able to super cruise, will fly higher, carry more missiles and will be more agile due to an impressive wing area and 3D TVC.

What does that all mean? Well, with those sort of raw performance advantages, if the T-50's radar (Tikhomirov NIIP AESA) ends up being as good as suggested, and if the T-50 goes into operational service with a frontal RCS somewhere between that of the F-35 and F-18 Super Hornet, then it will have the potential to be a very dangerous threat to an aircraft like the F-35. This next generation Russian radar will be quite large, bigger even that that fitted to the F-22. With the ability to cram so many T/R modules into this plane due to its size, this radar may turn out to be in the same sort of class as the Raptor's APG-77 in terms of detection range. The IRBIS-E of the Su-35 is a very good radar by Russia's standards, or anyone's for that matter. The PAK-FA's radar will be even better.

So what happens if the T-50 develops all of this potential? Well, to put it bluntly, I wouldn't want to have to rely on the F-35 to ensure air superiority. While the F-35 will likely maintain a smaller frontal RCS than that of the PAK-FA, the difference may not be great enough to overcome the more powerful radar the PAK-FA will be sporting. This is the problem small fighters face when compared to larger ones. It is why the F-15 has always been a superior BVR fighter than the F-16. The bigger the nose, the bigger the radar dish you can stuff into it. And again, if the PAK-FA ends up with a frontal RCS that falls somewhere between the 0.1 m2 of the Super Hornet and the 0.001 m2 of the F-35 (which seems quite likely based upon the angles of the design), well, it may come close to achieving parity with the F-35 in BVR engagements. And with the F-35's smaller A2A missile load out and inferior kinematic performance, merely achieving detection parity for the F-35 would actually put it at a disadvantage. The superior performing PAK-FA would be able to dictate the terms of the engagement by being able to fly higher, faster and farther than the F-35, as well as outmaneuvering it and having more firepower.

The PAK-FA certainly isn't a wonder weapon or some uber-stealth design that is unstoppable. It will still be clearly inferior to the F-22 as an air dominance fighter. But for the F-35, which is a lower performance, "budget" stealth fighter, the PAK-FA may close the gap it currently holds over aircraft such as the Su-35 to a dangerous, razor thin margin. That is why we need more F-22s. The F-35 clearly, due to it's stealth, holds a serious advantage over all EXISTING fighters besides the F-22. But the PAK-FA may change that equation. It certainly closes the gap significantly to make me wish we had more F-22s in the arsenal. But with the hate that Obama and Gates seem to have for the F-22 (just look at how Obama reacted when he visited Elmendorf and wouldn't even allow them to use the F-22 as a back drop), I have little hope they'll change. About all we can hope for is the F-22 tooling to survive and a political change in 2012.

Fox1 wrote:

if the T-50's radar (Tikhomirov NIIP AESA) ends up being as good as suggested, and if the T-50 goes into operational service with a frontal RCS somewhere between that of the F-35 and F-18 Super Hornet, then it will have the potential to be a very dangerous threat to an aircraft like the F-35. This next generation Russian radar will be quite large, bigger even that that fitted to the F-22. With the ability to cram so many T/R modules into this plane due to its size

T-50's radar will have 1500 T/R modules (NIIP claim). APG-81 has ~1200 T/R modules. Secondly, the APG-81's T/R modules are even better than those on APG-77, and are certainly better than those on N050 radar. So, I would say that F-35 and PAK-FA will have a similar radar performance.

Great post, Fox 1!

I don`t buy this "F-22, YF-23 clone" chit chat, it looks far more Sukhoi than Lockheed or a Chinese hack job as is suggested.
Sure, a stealthy aircraft is going to have some similarities to other stealth aircraft, after all, the Russians run their modeling on the same IBM supercomputers we use in the West:)

I for one, will give the designers some credit. As I have just mentioned elsewhere, the most significant aspect is that they are going to be able to sell it. India at least is a cast Iron customer..... Although cast iron is rather brittle Smile

We said it wouldn`t fly, now we are saying it won`t sell. Sheesh.

Fox,

You again assume too much. Russia has yet to field any usable technology that would be on par with the F-35. First gen stealth. AESA still unproven let alone tested in a real environment. No comparable EOTS/DAS technology, which is way more important given it's passive tech. Bigger, faster does not equate to better. It does not matter how many missiles you can carry if I can see you first. Given it's size and unproven tech(no production engines, avionics, etc..) I'll take an F-35 any day of the week. Everybody who knows anything about Russian fighters knows that their MCR's are dismal and that logistics are a nightmare as well. When I was in Norway, the Flankers were not allowed to fly due to weather restrictions while the F-16 MLU's were having a normal day above the Arctic Circle. By the way, what is your aviation experience? I am curious given your posts.

Quote:

Russia has yet to field any usable technology that would be on par with the F-35. First gen stealth.

Cywolf -

That brings up a point that has been bugging me for a long time: how does the opposition "verify" any claims of low observability other than educated guessing? When Sukhoi finally launches a production-representative prototype with RAM coatings installed, I'm sure the Russians won't invite Western analysts to come over and point our APG-77/81's etc at the thing. Of course the Raptor's potential enemies have a similar problem, (except that the operational history of the F-117 lends us a lot of credibility.) I am sure the Russians have tried every occasion possible to point one of their advanced radars at the F-22 to try and get a profile. I realize we're smart enough to deny that where practical (i.e. Raptors wearing external tanks during intercepts of recent Russian Bear overflights). And I'm sure that any unauthorized radar positioned near F-22 bases would be quickly picked up and found. This could evolve quickly into a similar cat-and-mouse game from the Cold War between our subs and those of the Soviets - each trying to silently detect, track and profile the others' signature.

So, all that being said, is there anything we will be able to do to independently verify PAK-FA's LO capabilities as early as practical? [Maybe send an F-22 a la the cold war to silently "tail" the Pak-FA from a distance and build a radar profile] I realize this might be a sensitive question, and if it is, I don't want any real answers. But I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering what we're doing about it, and what we've done to protect our stealth secrets.

I just have 1 questions in all of this especially regarding the so-called premature shut down of the F-22. When ATF, i.e. F-22, was first proposed, the number asked for was 720. And after the end of the USSR and the such, the final number was 184. So why is 187 units called premature shutdown?

Seems to me if it didn't take 10+ years to design, test, and produce a fighter AND if it was done on time and on budget, we wouldn't be having these debates and discussion. I await the crucifixion that is sure to follow.

why 187 is not enough? because Air Force already stated they need atleast 280 F-22 to replace all aging F-15C and keep current operational power. with only 187 there just will not be enough of F-22 for all possible areas... or they will have to reduce the number of F-22 available.

exec wrote:

Secondly, the APG-81's T/R modules are even better than those on APG-77, and are certainly better than those on N050 radar.

If you're saying the F-35's 81's performance in the air-to-air mode is "better" than the F-22's 77, that is incorrect.

The 81 is not designed to outperform the 77 in the 77's primary mode (air-to-air). What will be impressive about the 81 is it's designed from the outset to be good at all modes (air-to-air/ground/sea) when in service. The 77 for the Raptor will incorporate improved functions as an upgrade through it's incremental upgrades, which will include some of the 81's functions (air-to-ground)

Again, requirements and role(s) and responsibility(s).

snypa777 wrote:

I don`t buy this "F-22, YF-23 clone" chit chat, it looks far more Sukhoi than Lockheed or a Chinese hack job as is suggested.
Sure, a stealthy aircraft is going to have some similarities to other stealth aircraft, after all, the Russians run their modeling on the same IBM supercomputers we use in the West:)

I for one, will give the designers some credit. As I have just mentioned elsewhere, the most significant aspect is that they are going to be able to sell it. India at least is a cast Iron customer..... Although cast iron is rather brittle Smile

We said it wouldn`t fly, now we are saying it won`t sell. Sheesh.

Long time, no see sniper 77. Where have you been?

Everybody can see something and interpret different things. I definitely see more than just a vague or passing resemblance.

Although I agree a stealthy design might look vaguely similar in their design (can also be a result driven by requirements), however, as have been shown in the past, 2 designers, in most cases, usually don't come up with similar shapes to come to the same conclusion.

The PAK FA's shaping is by no accident or them just happens to come to the same conclusion.

[quote="Scorpion1alpha"][quote="exec"]Secondly, the APG-81

plus, 81 is not linked with ALR-94 as 77 is...

Wrong. Every sensor on F-35 is interlinked, aka sensor fusion.

Does the F-35 have anything like the AN/ALR-94 built into it?

Every sensor, but it doesnt have ALR-94... which is quite a advantage for F-22 in BVR btw...

Wonder if the Pak Fa will have an electronic surveillance system as advanced and as capable as the ALR-94. I have no doubt its AESA radar will be on par with the APG-77, as least in terms of detection range. One thing I'm not so sure is if it will have the LPI capability to make detection stealthy, or it will be as versatile as the APG-77 in the area of EA.....

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Russian Stealth Fighter and premature shutdown of F-22