28 degrees/s STR at 20,000ft

[uclass]

In thus video at 8:09.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA1mZF3FQhc

I think this has come up before. It's not possible is it?

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

28 ITR, maybe. 28 degrees bank sustained, sure thing. The F-22 has never to my knowledge demonstrated any sustained rate over 20 even at low altitude. That said, if I had to put a wager down on what plane would have the best odds of doing it I would go with a lightly loaded F-22, but I still doubt it.

edit: unless the sustained turn rate is in a post stall situation and the aircraft is falling while maintaining a 28 d/s nose rate.

[sergei]

For the first time watching this video(an earlier publication) I was unpleasantly surprised
since I had the information about the other results of competitions.
After reading the comments I have reviewed the video again more carefully.
And it became clear that the man is trying by all means to belittle the victory of Indians.
I wondered why he was doing it in front of those who were there and so they all should already know themselves(they won or not)? I expected that this resultant briefing with pilots after the exercise some sort summarizing.I was wrong .... it was a press conference to reporters.
Starting disassemble his speech I got the following results:a significant part of his statements are speculation on the subject of what was not and will not be in reality ,It is technically incorrect,and impossible at this technological level.
In summary about the content of his speech and the audience you can safely ignore this story .

[smsgtmac]

For the first time watching this video(an earlier publication) I was unpleasantly surprised
since I had the information about the other results of competitions.
After reading the comments I have reviewed the video again more carefully.
And it became clear that the man is trying by all means to belittle the victory of Indians.
I wondered why he was doing it in front of those who were there and so they all should already know themselves(they won or not)? I expected that this resultant briefing with pilots after the exercise some sort summarizing.I was wrong .... it was a press conference to reporters.
Starting disassemble his speech I got the following results:a significant part of his statements are speculation on the subject of what was not and will not be in reality ,It is technically incorrect,and impossible at this technological level.
In summary about the content of his speech and the audience you can safely ignore this story .

Even with the loss in translation, I can tell you are sputtering at the screen, unable to process information that exploded your world-view . I'd take the man at his word, and would tell you why, except I'm in a conference room right now typing on a phone. Someone want to fill Sergei in on the backstory on this? I'm sure it is in a thread here somewhere.

[Raptor_claw]

28 ITR, maybe. 28 degrees bank sustained, sure thing. The F-22 has never to my knowledge demonstrated any sustained rate over 20 even at low altitude. That said, if I had to put a wager down on what plane would have the best odds of doing it I would go with a lightly loaded F-22, but I still doubt it.

edit: unless the sustained turn rate is in a post stall situation and the aircraft is falling while maintaining a 28 d/s nose rate.

By definition, "sustained turn rate" requires constant speed and constant altitude. It's possible that the speaker was employing your potential interpretation (from the "edit" comment), but if so he is, technically, misusing the term...

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

I'm aware of what it means, I am just in disbelief that it is possible so I was listing anything else I could think of that may have been improperly used.

[smsgtmac]

In thus video at 8:09.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JA1mZF3FQhc
I think this has come up before. It's not possible is it?

Surprised no one closed the loop on the back story.The guy’s name is Colonel Terrence 'Skins' Fornof. He ‘was’ the U. S. Air Force Warfare Center Director of Requirements and Testing at the time of the video. And he was speaking in front of the local Dead Aliens chapter. They were NOT journalists nor even what I would call the ‘general public’. Fornof was an elite combat ANG pilot giving an extemporaneous speech in front of other military pilots, and someone (probably oblivious to the perils of social media) put the speech up on the web someplace.
The problems began when a bunch of weak-sister beta-boys on the sub-continent (I presume none of whom were fighter pilots) got their panties in a twist about what was said. Boo -Freakin’-Hoo. They even picked on his misidentifying the Sukhoi’s engine manufacturer as if that would invalidate anything else he said. I personally chalk the brouhaha up to whiny Grievance Queens being a downside of any culture obsessed with ‘face’. For all we know they also could have been manipulated by the fabulous eternal Russ’ dezinformatsia machine.

What Col. Fornof said exactly about the F-22 turn rate (FlightGlobal Brit spelling):

“We’ve been fighting the Raptor and getting our butts kicked, and you know the only chance you have against the Raptor is when he’s in the turn and he’s coming around the corner — and you have an inexperienced guy because the experienced guys know not to get there — but the inexperienced guy has got — and this is, no [shoot], 28-degrees-per-second turn rate at 20,000 feet. The F-15 has an instantaneous [turn rate] of 21 [degrees] and a sustained [turn rate] of about 15-20 degrees. The Raptor can sustain 28 degrees. Some of these young guys, that’s not enough for them. They want more than that! So they come around the corner, and, here you are in your Eagle, just hoping that he gets scared and … [the F-22 pilot] pulls to the point where he’s going post-stall manoeuvring. Once he goes post-stall, the airplane stops moving around the centre of lift on the wing and it goes around the centre of gravity up by the nose because it goes on just thrust, and the ass-end drops down, and the airplane will rotate like this. Well, in the Eagle, or in the [F-16] Viper, when you see that, you immediately go vertical because you know he’s not going to be able to go up with you, and you have one fleeting opportunity against the Raptor and that’s it.”

So it looks like Fornof is clearly talking about a sustained turn within the context of the speech, especially when he talks about inexperienced guys going “around the corner” for ‘more’, but I suspect the term as he used it was really in a ‘hand-flying’ context: as in only a ‘sustained’ average turn rate ‘good enough’ for just ‘long enough’ to get a nose around. If not, that indicates bags of excess thrust for a ‘journal-worthy’-low drag rise. If someone here goes to Reno this year and sees him (he retired in 2011 as head of the Nevada Air Guard and now apparently races jets on the side) they could ask him what he REALLY meant.
Both videos of that meeting should also be viewed before reaching any conclusions, BTW.
He has also been quoted on the USAF’s Cope India experience earlier:

“We came rolling in, like, ‘Beep-beep, superpower coming through,’” Colonel Fornof told me. “And we had our eyes opened. We learned a lot. By the third week, we were facing a threat that we weren’t prepared to face, because we had underestimated them. They had figured out how to take Russian-built equipment and improve upon it. –

So I’d say Fornof is not out-of-hand dismissive of any nation, pilot, or plane at all. Just ‘Matter of Fact’. Sucks that it may have cost him his star.

[popcorn]

Seemed to me at the time the Colonel was in a position to know what he was talking about.
IIRC there were calls in the Indian media demanding an apology from the USAF. No dice. They had to settle for a statement that the Colonel's talk was not intended for public release.LOL.

[uclass]

Reading it again, it's seems he may have been talking about ITR at 20,000ft and STR at sea level wrt 28deg/s. I can't see how a Raptor could sustain more than twice the turn rate of an F-15 or F-16 at 20,000ft even with TVC.

This is a 50% fuelled F-16 with 2 wing tip AIM-9s at 15,000ft - 14.4deg/s


F-15 Clean 50% fuel - 12deg/s at 20,000ft

[basher54321]

Reading it again, it's seems he may have been talking about ITR at 20,000ft and STR at sea level wrt 28deg/s. I can't see how a Raptor could sustain more than twice the turn rate of an F-15 or F-16 at 20,000ft even with TVC.

If you can get the EM charts for the Raptor as well then that would clear it up - that's also the time I will eat my hat

[uclass]

If I could get the EM charts for the Raptor, I wouldn't have started the thread.

[wil59]

Reading it again, it's seems he may have been talking about ITR at 20,000ft and STR at sea level wrt 28deg/s. I can't see how a Raptor could sustain more than twice the turn rate of an F-15 or F-16 at 20,000ft even with TVC.

If you can get the EM charts for the Raptor as well then that would clear it up - that's also the time I will eat my hat

Maximum angle of attack: 29.9 ° (Mention "Release stick") - Maximum speed: 515 kts - Mini Speed: 87 kts (Display "Too slow" within 100 kts) - maximum load factor: 8.4 g
Learn more about http://rafalefan.e-monsite.com/pages/do ... fMyo.99:if that was raised on the hud of rafale,during exercice with f-22;10000 to 20000ft