Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Just by looking over the past few pages and doing a little research, one can determine what the Fighter Mafia wanted. By inference, if they did not like heavier "gold plated & avionics laden" fighters, then by default you would need specialized fighters for each mission.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... ormers.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQB4W8C0rZI

Nothing turned out the way they wanted.

1. The F-15 dominated the skies with a zero A2A loss record against more numerous and cheaper adversaries.
2. To survive in the "real world" the F-16 had to become multi-role. To do that they had to go "big mouth" in order to haul the extra avionics around. They should have designed it with some growth room.
3. Even the A-10 is becoming multi-role and "gold plated" via the A-10C program.

Go back and watch that YouTube clip of his interview. He is mistaken on so many counts, especially in the area of BVR combat. He was talking about the need to get within 1/2 mile in order to positively ID your target. Apparently he has never heard of ESM, IFF, IRST, or FLIR.

Word of warning, don't drink anything while watching it as I had to clean my monitor twice.. it's that funny. Smile

F-16.net Sponsor

I haven't watched the video Spudman but I'd make the following points based on your previous post:
1. I'm not sure what the current official line is regarding positive ID but he isn't far off with the half mile positive ID thing. Was it Gulf War 1 where they had to wait for visual before firing? Sometimes they could be reasonably confident if they were cued by AWACs but the rest of the time? If memory serves, that black hawk that was shot down with an AMRAAM was operating in Northern Iraq with his IFF switched off! Missile fired from 7-9 miles away, close enough to identify as a helicopter but not close enough to identify as friendly.

2. I think his point with the F-16 and combat aircraft design in general is to build simple aircraft with plenty of performance and then add specialized equipment as required. Similarly, you can upgrade specialized equipment as required too. On the face of it that doesn't seem like such a bad approach. The basic aircraft are cheaper to build, the specialized equipment can be obtained cheaper through competitive development contracts, etc.

I think it was you who pointed out the other day that the F-35 is the equivalent of skipping strait along the development process of an aircraft like the F-16 and not stopping for the A through C models and going straight to the D. Of course how you can go strait to the D model without going through the learning process that are the A, B and C models is a bit of a mystery which probably explains why the F-35 is so late and so over budget.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Without a radar how do you calculate bomb impact points?

Answer: You don't.

Really?

SpudmanWP wrote:

1. The F-15 dominated the skies with a zero A2A loss record against more numerous and cheaper adversaries.

Spudman...planes don't score kills, pilots do.
Empty F15 sitting on tarmac won't score anything.
Get rid of that video-game perception of war, already.

Quote:

2. To survive in the "real world" the F-16 had to become multi-role. To do that they had to go "big mouth" in order to haul the extra avionics around. They should have designed it with some growth room.

F16 doesn't have a growth room, while being probably the most modded plane in the world?? Very Happy

Quote:

3. Even the A-10 is becoming multi-role and "gold plated" via the A-10C program.

How's A10 multirole??
Can bomb vehicles AND infantry? Very Happy

Quote:

He was talking about the need to get within 1/2 mile in order to positively ID your target. Apparently he has never heard of ESM, IFF, IRST, or FLIR.

Yea, Greek F16 can tell Turkish F16 on IRST, or NCTR. Very Happy

Not sure what's wrong with you, but this is way over your usual nonsense.

ON TOPIC:
Wasn't there a report some years ago, about mechanics finding RAM patches in F119s' fans/compressors?

A bit about the Lightweight Fighter competition from Lockheed's perspective, as written by Ben Rich, who was an engineer/supervisor at the time and would end up the head of Skunkworks starting shortly before F-117, talking to the guy who was in charge of Skunkworks at the time, Kelly Johnson (who was also a former engineer)...

Quote:

The bid contained specific design and performance requirements for a fighter that weighed 17,000 poounds, carried 5,000 pounds of fuel, had a 275-square-foot wing, and a specific excess power rate. I was ready to put my design team on it and give the Air Force exactly what they asked for, but Kelly had other ideas.

Goddam it, Ben, this airplane isn't carrying enough fuel. A fighter on afterburner uses a thousand pounds a minute, and every fighter that carried only five thousand pounds in Vietnam combat ran out in tough spots and the pilot would up as a guest at the Hanoi Hilton. This is unacceptable. I won't submit a proposal for something this wrong."

I pleaded with Kelly to go along. I said, "Give the Air Force what they ask for initially, and as the procurement process unfolds all kinds of changes and modifications will follow. That always happens; you know that. But if you cut us off before we even get up to the plate, there's no way we can score."

He got sore. {an old now-out-of-use American term which meant "angry, mad, annoyed", and possibly also "insulted, offended"} "Ben, if I teach you anything, it's this: don't build an airplane you don't believe in. Don't prostitue yourself for bucks."

In the end, he allowed us to submit his version of what he thought the Air Force should be requesting: a fighter weighing 19,000 pounds and carrying 9,000 pounds of fuel and a 310-square-foot wing. General Dynamics won the competition by sticking to exactly what the Air Force wanted. By the time their airplane, the F-16, became operational, it weighed 19,000 pounds, carried 7,400 pounds of fuel, and had a 310-square-foot wing. I told Kelly, "Admit it, the blue-suiters would have made your changes in due course, just as I predicted."

cola wrote:

SpudmanWP wrote:

Without a radar how do you calculate bomb impact points?

Answer: You don't.

Really?

Yes, really. Either a radar or something else is needed to provide:
1. Altitude above the ground
2. Ground speed indication

Quote:

SpudmanWP wrote:

1. The F-15 dominated the skies with a zero A2A loss record against more numerous and cheaper adversaries.

Spudman...planes don't score kills, pilots do.
Empty F15 sitting on tarmac won't score anything.
Get rid of that video-game perception of war, already.

So you think that a F-4, F-16, F-15, and F-22 all have the same chance of survival? They all can carry the AIM-120 yet their combat records (real or wargame) are completely different. It has been reported that on several occasions the USN refused to "come out and play" with it's SH's against the F-22. While a good pilot is key, what is under the pilot is often the deciding factor.

Quote:

2. To survive in the "real world" the F-16 had to become multi-role. To do that they had to go "big mouth" in order to haul the extra avionics around. They should have designed it with some growth room.

F16 doesn't have a growth room, while being probably the most modded plane in the world?? Very Happy

Yes it is modded... but where did the mods go? Mostly they were bolted on to the outside of the airframe.
1. Internal FLIR, nope
2. Internal IRST, nope
3. Major avionics upgrade, bolted on a spine

All this extra drag meant a larger thrust engine was needed... which required changes to the inlet.

If they had built in some growth room into the design (available avionics bays, inlet growth potential, etc) they could have upgraded it faster and cheaper.

Quote:

3. Even the A-10 is becoming multi-role and "gold plated" via the A-10C program.

How's A10 multirole??
Can bomb vehicles AND infantry? Very Happy

All glass cockpit, FLIR, SDB, ASW, etc

Quote:

He was talking about the need to get within 1/2 mile in order to positively ID your target. Apparently he has never heard of ESM, IFF, IRST, or FLIR.

Yea, Greek F16 can tell Turkish F16 on IRST, or NCTR. Very Happy

You should read up and watch some interviews about GW1 A2A combat. All that was needed was an ID, be it visual or electronic. Often pilots were told of a bogey and had to wait for an ID before firing. That ID often came from the AWACS and not from a visual ID.

Pilots now have much better Radar, ESM, FLIR, and IRST systems that can be used to make a positive ID in order to take a BVR shot.

On the Greek vs Turkish F-16 issue, that's why God invented IFF.

On the Greek vs Turkish F-16 issue, that's why God invented IFF.

If you knew anything about these two parties, you would realize that Greek IFF will naturally identify a Turkish aircraft as unfriendly and vice versa Confused

It was a joke, jeesh Smile

@SpudmanWP: indeed. Perhaps I was too busy breathing my homemade OBOGS to notice. I take everything very seriously Embarassed

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-16 co-designer blames stealth 'skin' for F-22 problems