Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

It's official: the USAF is starting work on the replacement for the F-22, with a target date of 2030. I'm guessing it will be something similar to the YF-23 but with EOTS, and TV.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0529588420101105

What do you "experts" think?

F-16.net Sponsor

My question to LM, Boeing or maybe even NG is this:

Are you guys really excited and onboard with this? After seeing how the F-22 Raptor program was excoriated throughout it's developmental and test phases by the government and the hordes of critics and the numbers cut to an eventual "golden bullet" force, are you all willing to take on the flak and headache(s) that eventually will come with this be-all/do-all "tactical aircraft"? Is it worth it to you, especially since you don't know who the leadership will be nor the economic situation if this thing ramps up?

If the answer is "yes", then good luck to your company. Replacing the F-22 won't be easy.

At least there was mention of a "manned" fighter.

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

My question to LM, Boeing or maybe even NG is this:

Are you guys really excited and onboard with this? After seeing how the F-22 Raptor program was excoriated throughout it's developmental and test phases by the government and the hordes of critics and the numbers cut to an eventual "golden bullet" force, are you all willing to take on the flak and headache(s) that eventually will come with this be-all/do-all "tactical aircraft"? Is it worth it to you, especially since you don't know who the leadership will be nor the economic situation if this thing ramps up?

If the answer is "yes", then good luck to your company. Replacing the F-22 won't be easy.

+1 to everything. And for that reason, it is that I suspect what will be offered up is essentially nothing groundbreaking in anything at all. It will all be tried and true technology, without taking any technical risks. Hence, it will (if it ever is) will be something dusted off from the ATF competition, but the electronics suite of the F-35. NG's YF-23 outfitted with thrust vectoring, and the -35's passive sensors makes sense.

But considering the target date is 2030, and that it takes 10 years (hard to believe I might add) to go through prove-out, then I'd expect to see something in the air as a technology demonstrator around 2016-18.

sewerrat wrote:

It's official: the USAF is starting work on the replacement for the F-22, with a target date of 2030. I'm guessing it will be something similar to the YF-23 but with EOTS, and TV.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0529588420101105

What do you "experts" think?

To save money, it will be essentially a de-navalized version of NGAD.

Great article and initial post.

To answer the above questions, of course the aerospace industry is interested! It's money and a whole lot of it for years to come.

Possible generation 6 capabilities:

1.) Sustained super cruise for either significantly longer ranges than now or higher Mach numbers than now (possible Mach 2+ cruise)

2.) Embedded, full 360 passive sensors (probably multi-spectral)

3.) Directed energy weapons almost guaranteed, especially in the form of ~3rd generation electrically-driven solid state laser weapons. Possible microwave weapon capability

4.) 3D cockpit displays?

5.) Automation of a high degree of piloting tasks

6.) Pre-cooled jet engine(s)? Probably too exotic for main power plant

7.) Optional manned/unmanned removable module

8.) If unmanned capable, ~20 G airframe?

9.) Highly integrated electronics, tons of fibre optics

10.) Extreme range of sensors, high degree of clarity in electronically hostile environments with some EMP hardening side effects

and more...

Fascinating stuff gentleman.

jetblast16 wrote:

Great article and initial post.

To answer the above questions, of course the aerospace industry is interested! It's money and a whole lot of it for years to come.

Possible generation 6 capabilities:

1.) Sustained super cruise for either significantly longer ranges than now or higher Mach numbers than now (possible Mach 2+ cruise)

2.) Embedded, full 360 passive sensors (probably multi-spectral)

3.) Directed energy weapons almost guaranteed, especially in the form of ~3rd generation electrically-driven solid state laser weapons. Possible microwave weapon capability

4.) 3D cockpit displays?

5.) Automation of a high degree of piloting tasks

6.) Pre-cooled jet engine(s)? Probably too exotic for main power plant

7.) Optional manned/unmanned removable module

8.) If unmanned capable, ~20 G airframe?

9.) Highly integrated electronics, tons of fibre optics

10.) Extreme range of sensors, high degree of clarity in electronically hostile environments with some EMP hardening side effects

and more...

Fascinating stuff gentleman.

I wouldnt look for anything more than sustained 1.8M cruise. Cost is going to be a factor, so they have to keep the airframe simple. One or two things that it will have are:

1) Hands off ACM cabability for in-close fighitng scenarios (the pilot will only "fire")
2) Built-in laser countermeasures for IR missile threats (front and rear aspect)

I predict nothing more than an ATF type of airframe and flight envelope, but with electronics/sensors to make the pilot only along for the ride until a weapons release is required for either a2a, or has been so for a long time, a2g.

It probably will be rolled in the Navy's program as mentioned above.

Liquid filled cockpit neutral-buoyant stasis, keeps the pilot insulated from the g forces.

sewerrat wrote:

I wouldnt look for anything more than sustained 1.8M cruise. Cost is going to be a factor, so they have to keep the airframe simple. One or two things that it will have are:

1) Hands off ACM cabability for in-close fighitng scenarios (the pilot will only "fire")
2) Built-in laser countermeasures for IR missile threats (front and rear aspect)

I predict nothing more than an ATF type of airframe and flight envelope, but with electronics/sensors to make the pilot only along for the ride until a weapons release is required for either a2a, or has been so for a long time, a2g.

It probably will be rolled in the Navy's program as mentioned above.

If that's all they're going to do, then they may as well keep the F-22 line open and have B, C, D, .... models. I suspect anything coming online in 2030 is going to have significantly greater capabilities(i.e. longer range, greater stealth, broader sensor package, etc..)

sewerrat wrote:

What do you "experts" think?

HaHa ... Buff with more bells and whistels Wink

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo

Well, you'd have to think given the disaster that building tomorrows fighter has turned out to be they'd work out a way to build a world beater with off the shelf bits.
Twin engines (just to fire off the old twins vs singles thing again) Very Happy

A nice separation between the engines to allow for large internal fuel/internal weapons bays
Bays designed to be LARGER than the current aam du jour.
A good high powered radar (preferably with LPI modes)
Some degree of "sensor fusion" to reduce the pilot workload
NCW capability
A nice "big" design with lots of room for growth
Probably something like this:

Bwah ha ha ha!

I take it that was a joke but you're advocating a less stealthy F-22 copy thats essentially a repackaged flanker ? Very smart thinking...

shep1978 wrote:

I take it that was a joke but you're advocating a less stealthy F-22 copy thats essentially a repackaged flanker ? Very smart thinking...

Well the PAK-FA bit's a joke but most of the other stuff isn't. Stealth shaping and coatings are a given now that the JSF project has matured the tech (especially the coatings). The rest is quite all right though, a bigger aircraft will increase RCS in the short term but makes upgrades in the long term much simpler. Paired F135s and large internal fuel and weapons combined with AGP77/81 is essentially something they could start putting together next week. It wouldn't be as stealthy or bleeding edge as the raptor or the JSF but it wouldn't need to be and it'd be a damn sight cheaper and exportable.

So, being 'cheap and exportable' are the keys to the US winning its wars in the future and should trump all other key design points?
I can just hear that USAF general barking "Forget high tech and capability, screw creating the best fighter on the planet that has no rival! What we want is cheapness and exportability"

shep1978 wrote:

So, being 'cheap and exportable' are the keys to the US winning its wars in the future and should trump all other key design points?
I can just hear that USAF general barking "Forget high tech and capability, screw creating the best fighter on the planet that has no rival! What we want is cheapness and exportability"

Cheap and exportable are (supposedly) the main features of the F-35. You disagree?

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

USAF Prods Industry for F-22 Successor Ideas