Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

avon1944 wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Yeah, when the cuffs are off, it's usually boring until you died so many times you depleted their missiles and forced them to use their gun. Then, if you get a chance to see them turn, you're either wide-eyed or cry.
Also, having the Raptor jocks write their name on the back of your jet isn't something to be proud of either.

Considering that handicap you are in, there should be no shame in being bested by the best plane in fighter history! Isn't it a bit of pride to just be in the same sky with the F-22 knowing the are no slouches up there? Everyone up there is among the best in their profession!
As a civilian I want to say, thank you gentlemen for your input I have found it very informative and interesting.

Hey Adrian.

Let me first say that I’m not the one flying, so sorry if it sounded that way. I work around people that do. The feedback that I hear is overwhelmingly consistent: Its dominating. Doesn’t matter what threat replication you throw at it like VprWzl said. Doesn’t matter what combination of aircraft/weapons/sensors you want to use. Doesn’t matter if the most experienced Weapons School jock rides them who has thousands of hours of flight time and an expert in air-to-air who knows every dirty little trick in the book. The F-22 wins the vast majority of the time…and very convincingly.

Also of note (and is very impressive in itself) is usually the F-22 guys have maybe 100-200 or so hours in the jet (regular CAF line squadron). Although they more than likely have experience in another jet, they’re definitely noobs to the F-22 and still kick a$$. It’s also because of this that you might hear the rare F-22 loss. Mistakes are made and if a new Raptor jock is use to doing something in his previous jet (i.e. muscle memory) or when he’s not use to the F-22’s expanded maneuver envelope and applies a certain maneuver incorrectly, it could leave him vulnerable and to that rare loss that unfortunately not everybody realizes or considers. Technically, you’ve beat the pilot that made the mistake, the guy controlling it, not the jet because the F-22 is fine and superior.

But that’s the noobs. Wait til they get more hours and more experience in employing the F-22, that’s the scary part and not that they’re not already dominant.

Yes, feeling proud of this jet shouldn’t be something just reserved for those involved in the program, but actually from every taxpayer in the U.S. that demands the best for our tax dollars. It has been a long and sometimes rocky road. I'll even say the F-22 hasn't reach it's full potential yet. But the jet that flies today can rightfully be called the best and most capable fighter ever produced for its intended role and will be for at least one more generation.

F-16.net Sponsor

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Yes, feeling proud of this jet shouldn’t be something just reserved for those involved in the program, but actually from every taxpayer in the U.S. that demands the best for our tax dollars. It has been a long and sometimes rocky road. I'll even say the F-22 hasn't reach it's full potential yet. But the jet that flies today can rightfully be called the best and most capable fighter ever produced for its intended role and will be for at least one more generation.

I do feel proud but not as proud as I could have been because of the deballing of my fellow americans in gov't. and in the more or less clueless public. I'm referring to the requirement for 750 Raptors. That 1990 requirement still stands as far as I'm concerned.

Also, it should have had the IRST feature and the side mounted radar emitters that budget cutters killed. One design f-up. The lack of a requirement for a long range AAM.

bruant328 wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Yes, feeling proud of this jet shouldn’t be something just reserved for those involved in the program, but actually from every taxpayer in the U.S. that demands the best for our tax dollars. It has been a long and sometimes rocky road. I'll even say the F-22 hasn't reach it's full potential yet. But the jet that flies today can rightfully be called the best and most capable fighter ever produced for its intended role and will be for at least one more generation.

I do feel proud but not as proud as I could have been because of the deballing of my fellow americans in gov't. and in the more or less clueless public. I'm referring to the requirement for 750 Raptors. That 1990 requirement still stands as far as I'm concerned.

Also, it should have had the IRST feature and the side mounted radar emitters that budget cutters killed. One design f-up. The lack of a requirement for a long range AAM.

popcorn wrote:

bruant328 wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Yes, feeling proud of this jet shouldn’t be something just reserved for those involved in the program, but actually from every taxpayer in the U.S. that demands the best for our tax dollars. It has been a long and sometimes rocky road. I'll even say the F-22 hasn't reach it's full potential yet. But the jet that flies today can rightfully be called the best and most capable fighter ever produced for its intended role and will be for at least one more generation.

I do feel proud but not as proud as I could have been because of the deballing of my fellow americans in gov't. and in the more or less clueless public. I'm referring to the requirement for 750 Raptors. That 1990 requirement still stands as far as I'm concerned.

Also, it should have had the IRST feature and the side mounted radar emitters that budget cutters killed. One design f-up. The lack of a requirement for a long range AAM.

More Raptors would have been nice. But 750 units are cold war numbers and that's been over for nearly 2 decades now. I's settle for the 381 jet fleet.

I'll take what I can get but I want as much edge as I can get. 750 still sounds great to me. Wars should be horrible. For the other guy.

60-100 additional block 35 Raptors, backed up by 750 block 60+ Vipers (w/ big IRST pod, ALQ-218 (or equiv) and L-band pods mixed in) in lieu of F-35A, could have indeed increased deterrence through 2030 while also saving $billions ($billions which will unfortunately be cut from AF procurement over the next 10 yrs anyway, further shredding unexpectedly expensive block III F-35A buys).

Respects to the next-gen Viper drivers of tomorrow giving Raptors an unsuspecting run for their money. Thumb

geogen wrote:

Respects to the next-gen Viper drivers of tomorrow giving Raptors an unsuspecting run for their money. Thumb

No offense to all Viper drivers, but unlikely. Cool

Keep up the hard training. Respects-

I don't really understand the logic behind the Raptor fans' insistance that the USAF needs 750 (or even 380) F-22s. After all, if the 22's success in exercises is an accurate reflection of its real world combat abilities, then simple math dictates that 187 of the pricey beasts is more than plenty to crush any credibly forseeable threat.

For example, if even 100 jets are combat ready at any particular time, and each jet can achieve a kill ratio of 50-1 (Less than 1/3 of its success rate in exercises), that means that 100 F-22s can destroy FIVE THOUSAND enemy fighters! And who has 5000 fighters for the Raptor ace wannabes to splash (Not to mention the hundreds of Eagle and Viper drivers who've forcefully demonstrated that they ain't too shabby in real world aerial combat, either...)? Certainly not the Russians , or even the dreaded evil Chicom...

The plain, hard fact of the matter is that there is simply nothing out there that militarily requires the US to purchase hundreds more examples of a such a single-purpose and exorbitantly expensive weapon.

The limited Raptor fleet will have to pull duty over the next 20-30 years.. they are going to be used hard in training and actual combat no doubt and there will be attrition. I think there were at least 2 or 3 independent studies that the AF cited jn jutifying the 381 force level. AFAIK, DoD never made them public.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... uction.htm
A September 2002 Air Force study suggested a need for 381 F-22 fighter jets, rejecting a suggestion in early 2002 the Office of the Secretary of Defense that 180 Raptors would suffice. A total of 381 F-22s would provide one F-22 squadron per Air Expeditionary Force [AEF], along with the aircraft for training, testing, backup aircraft inventory and peacetime attrition reserve. Earlier in 2002, Air Force officials began citing 381 as a more usable force size. As of late 2002 there was speculation that Secretary Rumsfeld might order a cut to 239 planes, while leaving the F/A-22 production schedule through 2009 unchanged, with the decision on whether to exceed 239 planes would falling to a successor defense secretary.

Last edited by shep1978 on Dec 05, 2010 - 09:42 AM; edited 1 time in total

geogen wrote:

60-100 additional block 35 Raptors, backed up by 750 block 60+ Vipers (w/ big IRST pod, ALQ-218 (or equiv) and L-band pods mixed in) in lieu of F-35A, could have indeed increased deterrence through 2030 while also saving $billions ($billions which will unfortunately be cut from AF procurement over the next 10 yrs anyway, further shredding unexpectedly expensive block III F-35A buys).

Respects to the next-gen Viper drivers of tomorrow giving Raptors an unsuspecting run for their money. Thumb

So let me get this straight, the F-35 should be gassed because its no good as a fighter yet you want to wheel out some souped up 70's era jet complete with its lack of low observable shaping and materials? A jet that almost certainly has worse performance than the F-35 especially with all these lovely pods hanging off it - i'd imagine it'd fly much like a Lancaster bomber....oh and then you have to hang weapons on it too. I wonder how many weapons stations would be left, perhaps three? Hope you've got a wing or ten of refuelers hanging about and alot of CSAR assets at hand for the poor pilots.

popcorn wrote:

More Raptors would have been nice. But 750 units are cold war numbers and that's been over for nearly 2 decades now. I's settle for the 381 jet fleet.

I'm not convinced the Russians believe the cold war has ended as they certainly seem to want to get back into the swing of things. I agree 750 may have been to many byt 350 - 450 would have been a good quantity of Raptors to have.

And even if the Pak-Fa is not as stealthy as the Raptor, the Russians do have a history of making high agility aircraft with great aerodynamics, and they plan to build a couple hundred for themselves as well as EXPORTING them. There are more Su-30s in non Russian service than in Russian service so they obviously have no issue with selling top level equipment to foreign powers. There are reports that the global market could be as high as a thousand. Even if the Pak-Fa is only half as effective as the Raptor, the fact of the matter is that we will only have 100 combat ready top line Raptors and they will NOT be deployed all at once. One or two squadrons at a time so 24-50ish? If you are taking 50 raptors into a combat zone where there could be an equal or grater number of Pak-Fas is not something to take lightly. The raptor has utterly dominated exercises against aircraft with RCS in the neighborhood of 10-20 Db, it has never fought against a plane in the neighborhood of -20 Db. It may not do 150-0 against them, it may be 20-1, may be 5-1, who knows. I am not saying it wont have the edge, I am just saying it likely wont be "invincible." We need more.

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:

And even if the Pak-Fa is not as stealthy as the Raptor, the Russians do have a history of making high agility aircraft with great aerodynamics, and they plan to build a couple hundred for themselves as well as EXPORTING them. There are more Su-30s in non Russian service than in Russian service so they obviously have no issue with selling top level equipment to foreign powers. There are reports that the global market could be as high as a thousand. Even if the Pak-Fa is only half as effective as the Raptor, the fact of the matter is that we will only have 100 combat ready top line Raptors and they will NOT be deployed all at once. One or two squadrons at a time so 24-50ish? If you are taking 50 raptors into a combat zone where there could be an equal or grater number of Pak-Fas is not something to take lightly. The raptor has utterly dominated exercises against aircraft with RCS in the neighborhood of 10-20 Db, it has never fought against a plane in the neighborhood of -20 Db. It may not do 150-0 against them, it may be 20-1, may be 5-1, who knows. I am not saying it wont have the edge, I am just saying it likely wont be "invincible." We need more.

Greetings,

We have have some history making AAA slammers - regardless of of how many triple sow cows your jet can pull, doctrine, training, integration, and force multiplication are the crucial assets that seperate us from the them.

I don't think the US spent 2 decades making the perfect A/C killer and have it come back as something less then outstanding.

Famine

My impression of an F-22 pilot? Um...I don't do impressions. We need Rich Little, Kevin Pollak, or Frank Caliendo for a job like this!

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Pilot Impressions