Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

Actually, I'm starting to think that trolling was the point of your question for some reason, especially since there's absolutely no reason for a fighter pilot to train without the most basic subsystems his aircraft was designed to use. What the hell else do you want? A copy of everyone's weight and balance charts?

How the hell am I trolling? I want to know the ROE before making any kind of judgments about the F-22's and the Typhoon's aerodynamic performance. And there's a big difference between having HMCS and actually using it.

I can't remember if it was Adolf Galland or Chuck Yeager (or both) who said something to the effect of "whoever sees the other guy first will probably win"; and that was at a time when all fights were guns-only. Canned exercises designed to start at the merge are great practice for pilots, but they don't really tell us much about the aircraft in real combat. Even Mig-17s would have "puncher's chance" if they managed to tangle some F-22s in a WVR furball.

The F-22 does have an "optimal airspeed" in a dogfight, for the tightest turn. Too high over-stresses the jet, and too low and the adversary would be carrying more energy in the dogfight.

Thats called corner speed, the best air speed to keep the nose turning at the highest rate possible. You're right in some regards, but keep in mind the F-22 FLCS won't let you overstress the airframe and also the turn radius is bigger. The Raptor can turn its nose at slower speeds even post stall which gives it an advantage over non TVC jets. Energy is life and a smart Raptor driver would know not to enter the high alpha regime if they knew their opponent had more energy (although they would need ALOT more for it matter.)

I avoided using the term "corner airspeed" because it is technically inaccurate when applied to TVC aircraft like the F-22. Corner airspeed is defined as the speed at which a jet turns tightest. I know the FLCS will limit the F-22. Since we're talking "turn rate" rate, the F-22 will have a minimum speed to maintain 90 degree bank angle, and then the question becomes.. the more "vectored" thrust.. the tighter the turn.. but too much and the jet will accelerate away from this tight turn.

I suspect the F-22 has a higher "corner airspeed" than most 4th gen fighters, but it is really determined by the 9G limit.

Do you think a F-22 could WVR dogfight against an attack helo like a AH-1Z Cobra?

Corner speed is corner speed regardless of TVC.

TVC improves the instant turn rate, otherwise it doesn't improve sustained turn rate. Sure your instant turn rate is phenomenal and sustained, but you exchange your kinetic energy for potential energy or drop like a rock.

Corner speed is corner speed regardless of TVC.
TVC improves the instant turn rate, otherwise it doesn't improve sustained turn rate. Sure your instant turn rate is phenomenal and sustained, but you exchange your kinetic energy for potential energy or drop like a rock.

Corner airspeed is a characteristic of the sum of an aircraft design. TVC helps to direct thrust into the turn, not just point the nose.

Aircraft such as the MiG-35 (which is NOT operational) have 2D thrust vectoring. This could enable it to "hover" at high bank angle/low kinetic energy "knife edge" style.

True, corner speed is corner speed - TV has essentially no effect. However, TV also has very little effect on instant turn rate. TV allows you to get to (and maintain positive control at) AOAs at and above Clmax. However, even well below Clmax the lift curve slope begins to flatten out significantly (along with drag increasing rapidly). This is why the AOA for corner speed is far below Clmax, and also far below where you need TV for pitch control. What TV can do, is create good "instant" nose pointing, but this does not translate into a corresponding increase in turn rate.

This is not true for the same reason that the F-22 cannot hover (wings-level) with only thrust vectoring, and why the F-35B could not hover without the lift fan. In order to "hover" the vertical component of the total thrust force must act through the c.g. - not feasible with engine exhaust vectoring only, regardless of the number of degrees of freedom.

High AoA doesn't appear to be a magic panacea. It just is using post stall nose pointing and a lot of thrust to use. If you don't have a great TWR then it is not possible to use advantageously.