F-22 and F-35 RCS revealed by USAF

Anything goes, as long as it is about the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

LordOfBunnies

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 588
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 05:28
  • Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 07:26

Toan, do you know anything about the test aircraft Bird of Prey? I think it was a Boeing plane or some such. It was black for quite a while but was revealed recently. I saw somewhere (non reliable source) that it has a disturbingly small RCS.

Image
Peace through superior firepower.
Back as a Student, it's a long story.
Offline

toan

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 535
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2004, 16:14

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 08:05

This test plane was also introduced by the special report of Popular Science in 2003. It is said that a new and extendible covered skin had been used to this plane that made no gap on the surface of the whole plane, and with the help of the design of air-intake on back and removement of vertical tail, its frontal RCS is extremely small: 0.000026 m2, or about the 1/6 to 1/8 frontal RCS of F/A-22..........
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 10:45

Toan, didn't "replica" achieve the same RCS properties as the F-22; we did produce it to proove to Lockheed Martin that we were capable of producing stealth aircraft (ie. F-35 development)... but also publically showed our own stealth capabilities? Then again it was only declassified last year.

This is the only image that was released, this was taken in 1994!!! They claim it never flew but we don't believe them with good reason ;)
Image

Europe in a variety of different projects has been researching stealth for aslong as America; they just haven't funded operational aircraft... a good example is the "Lampyridae" a German/Dutch aircraft in the 1980's which looks very similar to the F-117.

Although there is one aircraft I can't understand us Euro's devloping.... Mako; who the hell wants a stealth Jet Trainer?? That would make a knightmare for positive air control especially with students at the controls!

Andy
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
Offline

Safetystick

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: 13 May 2005, 11:46
  • Location: Sussex, UK

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 13:18

Mako was... yeah, a little crazy.

Stealth was a tricky subject in EU. To get US level of funding we would need to work together and I don't think any of us trust each other enough to do that! There also seemed to be very little urgency in developing true stealth capabilities (kinda like trying to get the EU to develop stategic airlift capabilities). The closest we get is the RAF wanting F-117 (and would have likelly happened if the production line hadn't been closed).

Certainly us and the Germans had stuff that would have worked until funding got pulled, at least ours got incorporated into JSF. the Germans haven't had any return on their investment!

Given JSF (and bar it falling out of favour) I think European stealth effort will be directed into UCAV platforms, there are already a few projects gathering steam.
Offline

djcross

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2005, 01:28

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 15:50

BoP was McDonnell Douglas' company-funded attempt to gain credibility in the VLO airplane world. They had participated in many contract competitions, but kept getting beat by Northrop, Lockheed and Rockwell. The VLO techniques and materials used in BoP were very ordinary. The interesting thing about BoP was the complex, highly integrated composite fueslage and wing carry through structure - one of the first in the industry. I saw it fly in December 1999 at Edwards, chased by 2 F-16s. Pretty cool. It was easy to tell what it was, but I did not know who built it at the time.

The "airplane" in boff180's picture is an RCS pole model used to gather empirical data to verify analytical RCS predictions. Pole models are typically built using a steel frame and fiberglass body in the desired shape and covered with RAM and RAS. A cylindrical rotation/tilt mechamism is built into the dorsal/ventral fuselage at the CG. This allows the model to spin and tilt on the inclined pole while RF measurements are being taken. The radar transmitter/receiver would be located off the left edge of the picture several hundred meters. The building over the model is likely on rails and would move aside to allow the R/T a clear shot at the pole model.
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 15:57

the photo was taken in BAE Systems Warton's state of the art radar hanger... (hence the pole model) but they claim the project named Replica never flew a "prototype" however strange aircraft pertaining to its shape were seen over the UK mid-late 1990's... the conspiracy theorists nicknamed the project then... HALO.
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
Offline

TenguNoHi

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 920
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2004, 04:24

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 16:49

Replica is a very sharp looking a/c. Something like the proposed F-117 Navy and an F-35 or F-22. Pretty neat. Any other info available on it?

-Aaron
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1684
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 17:08

Funny you should say that Aaron, was thinking the same thing.. The Replica has a Raptor looking front end and Nighthawk wings! It was never designed to be a completely stealthy aircraft but a look at what an affordable stealth plane could look like. That project has disappeared again into the blackness! Apparently it`s stealth and radar reflexivity targets were all met.Some of the ideas might find their way into JSF or may already have.

Anyone heard of the Su T-60 S stealth bomber? Would love to see a picture.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

TenguNoHi

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 920
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2004, 04:24

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 17:46

Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 963
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 18:12

TenguNoHi wrote:Replica is a very sharp looking a/c. Something like the proposed F-117 Navy and an F-35 or F-22. Pretty neat. Any other info available on it?

-Aaron


All we know is the model was the product of a study into an indigenous Stealth aircraft which was revealed to exist in 2003.

All that was released was that it was the most extensive RCS study performed by the UK and that all its targets were met (unofficially attributed as: rcs of the f-22) and the project "completed" in 1999. Thats all that was said in a press release which accompanied the image. Thats all thats ever been heard of it.

Further to that, this year the MoD and BAe admitted they are developing a indigenous stealth UCAV under the project name: Nightjar. We have no idea what progress has been made on this but you can bet it has the lessons learned from Replica in it ;)

Andy
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1684
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post29 Nov 2005, 20:02

Andy, on Nightjar, BAE are taking the technology from the project to the joint UCAV program being run between the UK/US. I would have thought we would go with the French n.E.U.R.O.n UCAV program. I don`t know the UK stance on that one.
Thanks for the link Aaron!
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline

Obi_Offiah

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 00:09

Unread post30 Nov 2005, 03:26

toan wrote:A UK test pilot declared that the maximum Air-to-air "tracking range" of CAPTOR radar is "significantly longer" than the 100 miles / 161km. (Source: AFM magazine 05/2004)

The same test pilot declared that with the help of Meteor AAM, the EF-2000 could attack the multiple aero-targets (up to 8 targets) as far as 200km away at the same time theoretically. (Source: RAF magazine 06/2004)

During the test, the CAPTOR radar showed the capability of tracking up to 20 air targets (F-4 and Mig-29) simultaneously 160~185 km away and then automatically identifying and prioritising them. (Source: EADS)

The RCS of the Mig-29 is about 5m2 class, so these informations may hint that CAPTOR radar now can "track" (not just detect) RCS = 5m2 class target 160~185 km away. According to the basic formula for the relationship between Target's RCS and Radar's effective detective / tracking range:

The maximally effective detective / tracking range of CAPTOR to F/A-22 (Minimal frontal RCS = 0.0001~0.0002m2 class) in head-to-head engagement should be 16~24 km / 11~15 km now theoretically.

According to the PDF at:
http://www.iee.org/oncomms/pn/radar/Roulston.pdf

I think that the figure in page 15 showed that the CAPTOR with AESA-upgrade's detective / tracking range is about 75% longer than the CAPTOR radar now.

So after 2012~2015, the maximally effective detective / tracking range of CAPTOR-AESA to F/A-22 (Frontal RCS = 0.0001~0.0002 m2 class) should be 28~42 km / 19~26 km theoretically.


Nice post Toan.

Apparently the Captor is an order of magnitude in advance of one of the most 'recent' US manually steered array radars, the APG-73 if this article is anything to go by: http://www.dcmilitary.com/navy/tester/10_43/features/37863-1.html .
However it could be that the pilot/tester was refering to a specific scenario?. I find the comments quite surprising otherwise.

Obi
Offline

south

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 41
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2005, 06:52

Unread post30 Nov 2005, 07:00

Hey all.

Long time lurker, first time poster.

Anyway, the problem with this sort of information is:
1. It has been released publicly. Generally safe to assume performance is going to be better, especcially in programs as secretive as the F-22 and F-35.
2. RCS information is pretty useless without an aspect angle and a frequency that it applies to.

Im pretty sure that figures similar to this have been released in the past,
Offline

toan

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 535
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2004, 16:14

Unread post30 Nov 2005, 10:29

1. The definition of "Maximally effective detection range" for a certain target is the distance that the radar has 50% chance to detect the target.

2. The maximally effective detection range, the maximally effective tracking range, and the maximally effective engaging or locking range are not the same thing for a radar. Usually, the maximally effective tracking range for the radar to a certain target is 60~70% of its maximally effective detection range to the target. In addition, the effective range of STT is also longer than TWS.

(According to an article from Mr. Billsweetman a few year ago, the detection range of Captor to a standard fighter-sized target is about 185 km. However, in the report of AFM magazine 05/2004, the RAF pilot declared that maximally air-to-air "tracking range" of CAPTOR radar to MIG-29 had been "significantly longer" than the 100 miles / 161km, which should mean that its maximally air-to-air "detection range" to MIG-29 would be "significantly longer" than the 140~165 miles / 230~270 km theoretically..............I'm not sure which statement is closer to the real performance of Captor, but the previous estimation I made for Captor v.s F/A-22 was based on the statement of AFM magazine 05/2004.............)


3. The maximally effective detection / tracking / locking range of a radar to a certain target is also effected significantly by many other factors, such as relative height, RCS, ECM/ECCM, maneuver and so on........
Offline

toan

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 535
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2004, 16:14

Unread post30 Nov 2005, 10:49

south wrote:Hey all.

Long time lurker, first time poster.

Anyway, the problem with this sort of information is:
1. It has been released publicly. Generally safe to assume performance is going to be better, especcially in programs as secretive as the F-22 and F-35.
2. RCS information is pretty useless without an aspect angle and a frequency that it applies to.

Im pretty sure that figures similar to this have been released in the past,



The similar information was released by AW&ST in 1999~2000:

The frontal RCS of F-22 is about 0.001 m2, or roughly equal to the size of a ping-pung ball, while the frontal RCS of JSF will be similar to a golf ball.

However, it seems that the stealthy capability of F/A-22 has been improved since then, and the frontal RCS of F/A-22 today is described as a metal marble, or even a hourse fly............

According to the special report of Popular Science in 2003 that I mentioned above, the smallest RCS that USA had achieved in its stealthy fighter (F/A-22???) at that time was: 5.2 cm2 (0.00052 m2, just as the size of a bigger glassy marble...........)

I think the minimal frontal RCS of F/A-22 today should be within the range between 0.00015 m2 to 0.00052 m2................. :idea:
PreviousNext

Return to General F-22A Raptor forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests