Forum: F-22A Raptor

Some thoughts before disappearing for the holiday:

First, one of the same things that gives the F-22 its great abilities is also a bit of an Achilles heel: It's so integrated you can't just hang stuff on it and add systems as easily as you could on previous aircraft. and with the limited number of F-22's being built, there's always the question of whether it's worth doing custom hardware, as opposed to software, just for it (e.g. a folding fin AIM-9).

Putting some sensors in the side bay will not give it the same strike capability as the F-35. The F-35 is way beyond the Raptor in that arena. Besides, what if your target is on the other side of the aircraft. Field of View is quire restricted in the bays.

Using the bay for fuel also probably not a good idea. First off, remember that the reason the Raptor does not meet the original supercruise expectation t is that they reduced fuel from the original design to save weight. To my understand Lockheed during EMD came to AF and essentially said: "We can deliver on range, speed and maneuverability. Pick any two". So, they wouldn't want to add weight and structure back at this point Second, look at th location of the bays;. You get a round or shrapnel through a near miss that penetrates bot sides of the bay and you're now dumping raw fuel into an intake that leads to the front of an operating jet engine. "Dicey" to say the least.

As far as side arrays go, F-22 already has weight, power and space reservations for side facing AESA. They were "postponed" for cost reasons. Without them, F-22 has the field of view limitation shared with all other AESA aircraft except Typhoon and Gripen NG. Aside from the fact that there are better AWACS aircraft out there, the minute you use your Raptor as AWACS, it's no longer VLO. Why waste your best fighter on something that someone else does better anyway?

As for JAGM, it's not likely that AF would ever want to use its Raptors in a role that would require stealth (otherwise hang 'em under the wings) but would need JAGM. Of course, I don't believe USAF wants JAGM anyway.

AIM-9, especially X, is still our best close in weapon. As far as when was the last there was a Sidewinder kill, when was the last time USA was involved in significant air-to-air. That's the last time there was a Sidewinder kill. AIM-9X is more agile the AIM-120. It does need to "see" the target, although the potential for lock on after launch has been demonstrated. However, at present most F-22s can not even use AIM-9X in High Off Boresight mode yet, so LOAL is a ways off for the Raptor. Raptor is not getting JHMCS. There is a problem mapping the cockpit, so JHMCS can't be used. It not all that certain, given the limited numbers of Raptors built, that it will ever get an HMS. AIM-9 also allows F-22 to target an kill an opponent in a total stealth mode (too bad it never got its IRST, that's a big deficiency),except for the lunch plume.

Let's face it: Raptors will try to, but not always be able to able to avoid closer-in fights, and for that AIM-9 is the best. Don't forget that the very few F-22 "kills" that have been recorded have been with IR missiles. As far as successors to Sidewinder go, in 2010 Boeing got a contract to support the missile through 2055, and USAF has said it could very well be around until late in the 21st century (AM-9XX+?).

Putting them in the main bay means you give up some AIM-120s, why would you want to do that? Unlike the F-23, the F-22's bay isn't big enough to hold six AIM-120s plus AIM-9. Besides, you're getting back into that expensive modification situation again, and in this case for no gain.

I guess what I'm trying to say in my long winded way is that what's in those bays now is the best thing to be in those bays.

F-16.net Sponsor

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Side Bay Question