F-22 achilles heels

[oldiaf]

I know its 1 year old article but since that date any update for the F-22 regarding IRST ?.. Yes they are going to put Scorpion HMCS by 2020 ( one heel will be covered ), but that is not enough without the IRST against PAK-FA and J-20/31
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

[eloise]

F-22 doesn't operating alone, the only country that have F-22 also have a huge number of others assets such as F-35, E-2D
F-35 will use it's sensor and share information with F-22
I really doubt the stealth capabilities of PAK-FA though, it doesn't look vẻy stealthy with the configuration at the moment
dont know about J-21, J-31

[charlielima223]

I know its 1 year old article but since that date any update for the F-22A regarding IRST ?.. Yes they are going to put Scorpion HMCS by 2020 ( one heel will be covered ), but that is not enough without the IRST against PAK-FA and J-20/31
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

Sensationalist "journalism" mixed with doom and gloom is how I see it.

The USAF tested the Scorpion the HMCS for the F-22 and proved the concept for the F-22 hence the USAF put out an RFP for a HMD/CS for the F-22 (hopefully this will survive another defense budget cut... )
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... by-413962/

Having or not having an IRST does not make or break a competent fighter design. Does it give an advantage? I don't think anyone will deny that but, it doesn't give a fighter aircraft a overall superiority over another? No. There has already been much talk and debate around here (F-16.net in general) about the advantages and disadvantages of IRST.

There has been much talk and debate about the F-22's capabilities in the air. From every place I have read and seen the general consensus (even by pilots) is that the most vulnerable the F-22 can ever be is in a WVR engagement and even then its vulnerabilities are almost negligible.

[oldiaf]

I know its 1 year old article but since that date any update for the F-22A regarding IRST ?.. Yes they are going to put Scorpion HMCS by 2020 ( one heel will be covered ), but that is not enough without the IRST against PAK-FA and J-20/31
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

Sensationalist "journalism" mixed with doom and gloom is how I see it.

The USAF tested the Scorpion the HMCS for the F-22 and proved the concept for the F-22 hence the USAF put out an RFP for a HMD/CS for the F-22 (hopefully this will survive another defense budget cut... )
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... by-413962/

Having or not having an IRST does not make or break a competent fighter design. Does it give an advantage? I don't think anyone will deny that but, it doesn't give a fighter aircraft a overall superiority over another? No. There has already been much talk and debate around here (F-16.net in general) about the advantages and disadvantages of IRST.

There has been much talk and debate about the F-22's capabilities in the air. From every place I have read and seen the general consensus (even by pilots) is that the most vulnerable the F-22 can ever be is in a WVR engagement and even then its vulnerabilities are almost negligible.

German Eurofighter Typhoon used this vulnerability to achieve mock kills on F-22 during Red Flag few years ago ... True only WVR utilizing HMSS and IRST ... In fact the one of the German pilot said the F-22 was glowing in the IRST !!

[armedupdate]

German Typhoons don't have IRST at Red Flag I believe. The 50 Km detection is just a claim.

The F-22's Achilles Heel is the merge(WVR) where the enemy doesn't necessarily have to fear them and overwhelm it with superior numbers.

[wrightwing]

Those German Typhoons were flying completely clean, in order to compete against the Raptor, in WVR. Even then, it depends on whose account that you put more weight into, as to the outcome.

[smsgtmac]

I know its 1 year old article but since that date any update for the F-22 regarding IRST ?.. Yes they are going to put Scorpion HMCS by 2020 ( one heel will be covered ), but that is not enough without the IRST against PAK-FA and J-20/31
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

IRST- Schmi-RST. WVR turning engagement is now a losers game: the only way to win is to choose not to play.

As to 'Achilles Heels' the F-22 individually has none. Setting aside the futility of talking the usual x vs y weapon system like they EVER engage in a vacuum without other external system elements, I'm reminded of an A&SP Journal Summer 2003 'PIREP' by Colonel Kurt "Two Lips" Dittmer, Chief of Combat Forces Capability Requirements, Headquarters USAF, at the time:

Let’s try this new analysis on a new and somewhat controversial system- the F/A-22. I recently spent quite a bit of time helping put together a study on this aircraft directed by Defense Planning Guidance, so I can reasonably assess its capabilities. If I represented Country X and were contemplating going to war against F/A-22s, this would be my take: "What capability/system do I need to face the US armed forces and their F/A-22s?" I would turn to my air force commander and get the "Air Staff salute" because no aircraft produced in any country, now or for the foreseeable future, can match the aerodynamic performance of that airplane. Furthermore, the fact that it has integrated avionics, an Active Electronically Scanned Array radar, and eight air-to-air missiles means that your pilots will face the most lethal weapon system ever built. Therefore, an adversary who wants to counter the F/A-22 in the air will have to make significant investments requiring research and development and lots of time (unless another hot spot in the world is occupying our entire F/A-22 fleet because we didn’t buy enough of them).

I would ask my ground force, air defense commander to assess what capability he or she has that measures up to the capabilities the F/A-22 will bring to the fight, and again I’ll get the Air Staff salute. The commander can’t answer the question because no one knows what the first engagement will even look like.

Instead of equipment, I decide I have to invade my neighbor now or never and ask my commanders to look at tactics, training, and procedures to counter the F/A-22’s capabilities. I tell them to start a training program to prepare for imminent combat, which would look something like this: "Today you SAM operators will need to practice against a weapon system that has the radar cross section of a golf ball. It will be flying above 40,000 feet at Mach 1.5. Okay, got that picture? Good! Now, these F/A-22s will be throwing Joint Direct Attack Munitions or small-diameter bombs at you outside your shot range! Now, in order to practice this profile, I would provide you something that can fly this profile, but we don’t have anything even remotely close, so . . . any questions?"

Similarly, for the pilots: "Today, your adversary will be a two-ship formation of Raptors. To simulate what you will be seeing, I want you to take your four-ship out and place your radars on 10-mile scope, turn your radar-warning receivers off, and plan to start your defensive maneuvers outside your maximum weapons envelope. Plan on ‘kill removal’ eliminating a couple of members of your flight prior to the merge. For those who do merge, you will be facing AIM-9X and AIM-120 missiles from the most maneuverable fighter ever built. If you elect to run, a valid separation must exceed Mach 2.0. Any questions?"

"Sir, I think my sinuses. . . ."

Just from the info gathered doing basic research for the series I'm working on now, and ignoring everything else I already knew before I started, I'm somewhat amazed this WVR maneuverability/agility fetish is still such a widespread phenomenon. In trying to figure out why it isn't obvious to many if not most, I've tentatively concluded it must be because to really understand how bad a losing game WVR turning fights have become/are becoming more, you have to look across several different disciplines at one time to recognize the state of things. Many people don't, and I doubt most who are jack-jawing in the press and on the blogs 'can'.

[oldiaf]

I know its 1 year old article but since that date any update for the F-22 regarding IRST ?.. Yes they are going to put Scorpion HMCS by 2020 ( one heel will be covered ), but that is not enough without the IRST against PAK-FA and J-20/31
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/th ... hter-jets/

IRST- Schmi-RST. WVR turning engagement is now a losers game: the only way to win is to choose not to play.

As to 'Achilles Heels' the F-22 individually has none. Setting aside the futility of talking the usual x vs y weapon system like they EVER engage in a vacuum without other external system elements, I'm reminded of an A&SP Journal Summer 2003 'PIREP' by Colonel Kurt "Two Lips" Dittmer, Chief of Combat Forces Capability Requirements, Headquarters USAF, at the time:

Let’s try this new analysis on a new and somewhat controversial system- the F/A-22. I recently spent quite a bit of time helping put together a study on this aircraft directed by Defense Planning Guidance, so I can reasonably assess its capabilities. If I represented Country X and were contemplating going to war against F/A-22s, this would be my take: "What capability/system do I need to face the US armed forces and their F/A-22s?" I would turn to my air force commander and get the "Air Staff salute" because no aircraft produced in any country, now or for the foreseeable future, can match the aerodynamic performance of that airplane. Furthermore, the fact that it has integrated avionics, an Active Electronically Scanned Array radar, and eight air-to-air missiles means that your pilots will face the most lethal weapon system ever built. Therefore, an adversary who wants to counter the F/A-22 in the air will have to make significant investments requiring research and development and lots of time (unless another hot spot in the world is occupying our entire F/A-22 fleet because we didn’t buy enough of them).

I would ask my ground force, air defense commander to assess what capability he or she has that measures up to the capabilities the F/A-22 will bring to the fight, and again I’ll get the Air Staff salute. The commander can’t answer the question because no one knows what the first engagement will even look like.

Instead of equipment, I decide I have to invade my neighbor now or never and ask my commanders to look at tactics, training, and procedures to counter the F/A-22’s capabilities. I tell them to start a training program to prepare for imminent combat, which would look something like this: "Today you SAM operators will need to practice against a weapon system that has the radar cross section of a golf ball. It will be flying above 40,000 feet at Mach 1.5. Okay, got that picture? Good! Now, these F/A-22s will be throwing Joint Direct Attack Munitions or small-diameter bombs at you outside your shot range! Now, in order to practice this profile, I would provide you something that can fly this profile, but we don’t have anything even remotely close, so . . . any questions?"

Similarly, for the pilots: "Today, your adversary will be a two-ship formation of Raptors. To simulate what you will be seeing, I want you to take your four-ship out and place your radars on 10-mile scope, turn your radar-warning receivers off, and plan to start your defensive maneuvers outside your maximum weapons envelope. Plan on ‘kill removal’ eliminating a couple of members of your flight prior to the merge. For those who do merge, you will be facing AIM-9X and AIM-120 missiles from the most maneuverable fighter ever built. If you elect to run, a valid separation must exceed Mach 2.0. Any questions?"

"Sir, I think my sinuses. . . ."

Just from the info gathered doing basic research for the series I'm working on now, and ignoring everything else I already knew before I started, I'm somewhat amazed this WVR maneuverability/agility fetish is still such a widespread phenomenon. In trying to figure out why it isn't obvious to many if not most, I've tentatively concluded it must be because to really understand how bad a losing game WVR turning fights have become/are becoming more, you have to look across several different disciplines at one time to recognize the state of things. Many people don't, and I doubt most who are jack-jawing in the press and on the blogs 'can'.

This is before the introduction of IRST for WVR combat ... Nonetheless the F-22 should and must have IRST in the future even if it comes on the cost of retiring the A-10 !! or delaying or canceling the F-35C since the Navy is happy with F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and can replace the legacy F/A-18A-D Hornets with it.

[smsgtmac]

This is before the introduction of IRST for WVR combat ... Nonetheless the F-22 should and must have IRST in the future even if it comes on the cost of retiring the A-10 !! or delaying or canceling the F-35C since the Navy is happy with F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and can replace the legacy F/A-18A-D Hornets with it.

If and when a fighter-borne IRST system ever (outside the fertile minds of marketing flacks and RF LO-Deniers) exits that is operationally useful against a VLO aircraft at ranges APPROACHING current BVR missile effective ranges (and that time ain't here yet) we will also have longer-ranged WVR weapon system combinations. By an "operationally useful" long-range IRST, I mean one that reliably 'works"--detection and tracking--to that alleged 'BVR-like' potential most of the time, under a majority of atmospheric conditions and against an LO aircraft from any aspect.
Personally, I doubt if such a thing will ever exist so long as most aircraft operate in the subsonic region most of the time, because just like RF-LO, IR-LO systems hide in a clutter of ambient noise that cannot be overcome in a way that is easy, repeatable, or practical (practical = prevents a long-ranged system shot up their wazoo).

IRSTs by themselves are great for sneaking up on people who don't have an AWACs, LPIRs, Stealth, or for certain relatively short-range cueing. That's about it.
As to that F-18E/F blather.... Heh. We'll see eh?

[jessmo111]

I think that the F-22s only weakness, is that it actually has to land, and is dependent on fuel.
The Chinese seem to have come to this conclusion, since we hear all these stories of plans for Mass SRBM attacks.
The latest missile is called the Guam killer.

[jessmo111]

http://defensetech.org/2015/09/03/china ... ary-march/

[charlielima223]

I think that the F-22s only weakness, is that it actually has to land, and is dependent on fuel.
The Chinese seem to have come to this conclusion, since we hear all these stories of plans for Mass SRBM attacks.
The latest missile is called the Guam killer.

The Chinese strategy would be to keep US forces at bay with long range cruise missiles. If they could destroy or severely damage US bases enough in the region, they would have complete home field advantage. The vast Pacific is pretty much the biggest obstacle for force projection.