F-16 Reference
5th Gen Fighters
|
| Author |
Message |
|
skrip00
|
Posted: Apr 03, 2007 - 10:56 PM
|
|
|
Forum Veteran

Joined: Jul 04, 2006
Posts: 536
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
When the Raptor finds itself in a dogfight, it is no longer beyond visual range, but the advantage of stealth isn't diminished. It maintains "high ground" even at close range.
"I can't see the [expletive deleted] thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."
Source: http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123041831
So does this mean the F-22A's IR-suppression is far greater than we thought?
Outside of the F-15C's AIM-9s, does it also have an IRST system? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
Posted: Nov 18, 2008 - 5:49 PM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
 |
|
checksixx
|
Posted: Apr 04, 2007 - 01:14 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K

Joined: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 1035
Status: Offline
|
| Well it depends on what he specifically had in his jet at the time, but F-15's have AESA RADAR's, AIM-9X and JHMCS available now. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
fox100
|
Posted: Apr 04, 2007 - 12:40 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 98
Status: Offline
|
|
skrip00 wrote:
Quote:
When the Raptor finds itself in a dogfight, it is no longer beyond visual range, but the advantage of stealth isn't diminished. It maintains "high ground" even at close range.
"I can't see the [expletive deleted] thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."
Source: http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123041831
So does this mean the F-22A's IR-suppression is far greater than we thought?
Outside of the F-15C's AIM-9s, does it also have an IRST system?
Possibly. The technology/materials/coatings certainly do truly exist for.... how to say this... "Phase Shifting" an IR emission. Essentially if the materials used on the 'cans' are certain materials/coatings, then they may not register on an IR seeker tuned to specific wavelengths, especially if you're a mile or more away... If certain technologies were used, then indeed its possible that the only way to get an IR "lock" would be if your IR seeker is pointed straight into the exhuast can and looking at the red hot glowing emissions.... Now, in afterburner, you can't do too much about that because you're got 20 foot or there abouts flame sticking out of your a$$. Thats where the F-22 beats the F-35 hands down... flying supersonicially undetecably (or at least with greatly reduced ranges as aint nothing in the world undetectable by any stretch of one's imagination). |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
fox100
|
Posted: Apr 04, 2007 - 12:49 PM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 98
Status: Offline
|
|
fox100 wrote:
skrip00 wrote:
Quote:
When the Raptor finds itself in a dogfight, it is no longer beyond visual range, but the advantage of stealth isn't diminished. It maintains "high ground" even at close range.
"I can't see the [expletive deleted] thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."
Source: http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123041831
So does this mean the F-22A's IR-suppression is far greater than we thought?
Outside of the F-15C's AIM-9s, does it also have an IRST system?
Possibly. The technology/materials/coatings certainly do truly exist for.... how to say this... "Phase Shifting" an IR emission. Essentially if the materials used on the 'cans' are certain materials/coatings, then they may not register on an IR seeker tuned to specific wavelengths, especially if you're a mile or more away... If certain technologies were used, then indeed its possible that the only way to get an IR "lock" would be if your IR seeker is pointed straight into the exhuast can and looking at the red hot glowing emissions.... Now, in afterburner, you can't do too much about that because you're got 20 foot or there abouts flame sticking out of your a$$. Thats where the F-22 beats the F-35 hands down... flying supersonicially undetecably (or at least with greatly reduced ranges as aint nothing in the world undetectable by any stretch of one's imagination).
Alright I made an error (due to drinking too much last night). Phase shifting is an enitrely different thing altogether. What I meant to say was frequency shifting... Changing/altering the frequency of radiated emissions. "Yeah, thats the ticket." |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
fox100
|
Posted: Apr 05, 2007 - 01:44 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 98
Status: Offline
|
Yeah you guys a lot you think I just pull stuf out of thin air... heres a quick google search on this subjecy.
http://lprl.org/technology/EM2C_technology.htm
The long and the short is that, yes its certainl engineerable to change your IR emissions towards a more desireable wavelength. But everthing has a energy threshold and you cant pour a gallon into a shot glass. And alas, nothing is undectable... Nothing in a clear blue or night time sky is invisble... Just have to know precisely what it is you want to see and you'll see it. Have to also have time and means with whch to do something about what you see. Have to choose what card in the deck is the card thats going to pay off. Thats another story. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Neotopia
|
Posted: Apr 09, 2007 - 02:25 AM
|
|
|
Enthusiast

Joined: Sep 27, 2006
Posts: 67
Status: Offline
|
IR stealth underrated?
I think its more like IR as a means of search and detection is massively overrated. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|