F-22 using drop tanks

I just saw two F-22s from Elmendorf land with tanks on the wings. Not sure if these were from the 90th or 525th squadrons.

Questions: Is using drop tanks going to be common place on Raptors now? And are they old F-15 tanks or specially designed for the F-22?

And, Elmendorf is not the same without F-15s making some noise every day.

I've heard the 600 gallon tanks are the same as used on Israeli F-16s and also heard they're unique to the F-22. When they punch them off the pylon goes with it unlike on the F-15.


Speaking of F-22s and drop tanks though has anybody seen a picture of the F-22 with four of them on it?

They were from the 90th, as the 525 doesn't "own" any aircraft yet.

You won't find pictures of an F-22 with all 4 tanks on the wings.

No, tanks are not going to be common practice for the F-22. We are flying them to "certify" the tank since they are all brand new.

They can punch either the pylon or the entire tank depending on how it's carted. Usually it's the entire tank + pylon.

And, the flightline is quiet because of the F-15's being grounded.

der03301 wrote:You won't find pictures of an F-22 with all 4 tanks on the wings.

Maybe not photos, but diagrams

Here is one from Technical Order 00-105E-9 and STANAG 3896
"Aerospace Emergency Rescue and Mishap Response Information
(Emergency Services)" Chapter 8 - USAF Fighter Pt2 F-22A thru F-117A

Link: http://0x4d.net/files/AF1/to00-105e-9.htm

[quote="der03301"]They can punch either the pylon or the entire tank depending on how it's carted. Usually it's the entire tank + pylon.

It seems like you would want to punch off only the tank in a peacetime emergency and the pylon and tank in a combat situation (to preserve stealth).

That's the way it would seem, but "usually" the entire tank and pylon will get jettisoned. If those tanks have to come off, it's not going to matter if the pylon survives or not...as long as the jet can get back on the deck safely, all is good.

Well here is a question. With the tanks, doesnt that limit the stealth capability? Or is it just for training missions?

Ferry Range...

With the extra 2368 Gallons would greatly extend the Raptors range across large distances.

Why won't we see Raptors with four tanks?

If the jet is being ferried, your going to have tanker support. Same if your going across the "pond". Training missions don't reaquire that much fuel, because they don't last that long, or they use tanker support. The aircraft is an AA fighter. Tanks do nothing for AA combat, or your RCS for that matter. Can you put 4 tanks on it and fly it? Sure. Are you going to see it happen? Probably not.


Along with that. How often do you see F-16C's flying around with all 3 tanks loaded? Never. Even when going across the pond, they only carry 2 bags. I realize there is a big difference in the two, but just something to think about.

Think about this. When our planes arrived here at Elmendorf they used tanker support not external tanks. The tanks are just for back up when there is no tanker support. We are flying with the tanks to certify them (i.e. so if we do ever use them we know they are safe) and we only arm the pylon not the tank. So if the tank has to be dropped so does the pylon and it does make sense. If the tank is bad or damaged and it is affecting flight that much then you are going to want to get rid of as much crap as you can because the pylon is worthless without the tank. Secondly if we are in war and we want to drop the tanks might as well drop the pylons for the following reasons: they take away from stealth, RCS is screwed, they are heavy and induce drag, limit maneuvers, and are just plain ugly on a F-22 . Oh and for those who are wondering we do not have centerline tanks.

Is there any truth to the rumor that testing reveled that the four fuel tank configuration created high (higher than expected) stress levels on the wing? And therefore standard procedure has been set to never fly with such a configuration unless necessary.

Your getting into classified or "need to know" information when you start talking about wing structure, loading and stress levels.



afnsucks: Call me tomorrow when you get a chance. I need to talk to you about school.

der03301 wrote:If the jet is being ferried, your going to have tanker support. Same if your going across the "pond". Training missions don't reaquire that much fuel, because they don't last that long, or they use tanker support. The aircraft is an AA fighter. Tanks do nothing for AA combat, or your RCS for that matter. Can you put 4 tanks on it and fly it? Sure. Are you going to see it happen? Probably not.


Along with that. How often do you see F-16C's flying around with all 3 tanks loaded? Never. Even when going across the pond, they only carry 2 bags. I realize there is a big difference in the two, but just something to think about.

not quite the same thing as 3 tank positions allow you to carry one on the centerline or two on the wings or three if need be. Why would you spend the money to engineer and test the ability to carry four tanks if you really were only going to use the four positions to put two tanks either on the outer pylons or the inner? Makes no sense. On the other hand it's not uncommon to see F-15Es carrying a pair of 600 gallon tanks in addition to their CFTs and presumably they have as much access to tankers as the F-22.

Thanks to the Raptor guys, I have learned several new things from this thread.

Regarding use of tanks, obviously you don't get "all" the extra range from the extra fuel, since weight and drag are considerably higher. Perhaps flight testing investigated the relative range benefits of clean, two, and four tank configurations and two was determined to be the optimum compromise when range is a factor and tanker support is available but limited. Just guessing, of course.