Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

The F-22's sword might be a little rusty and dull, but it has a very nice large caliber rifle in the other hand (AIM-120 C/D)

F-16.net Sponsor

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

Angels225 wrote:

Furthering Mr Cooks argument I remember reading on this forum a senior member pointing out that the F-22 has a much better chance of getting into a favorable position(i.e an enemy's rear quarter) compared to the F-35. Hence currently F-22's only fly with the Mike variants of the Sidewinder. Better for the handicapped fellow to get the HMS system than the one who can already kick your behind with legacy techniques.

Yes, one of the reasons why the F-22 didn't get the helmet and 9X is because it least needs it, thus legacy fighters got the priority. The USAF, knowing that the limited numbers of F-22s with it's many advantages, should never have to get close with anyone in a real fight.

They also knew that should the F-22 ever have to fight WVR, for whatever reason, it can win using it's "legacy weapons" (9M and M61A2) along with it's incredible maneuverability/agility/nose pointing advantage as proven many times over in tests and exercises.

My personal view is the F-22 should have got the helmet and 9X at the very beginning because weapons are just as important as the aircraft. To have such an incredible and capable fighter without the best weaponary is like King Leonidas of Sparta, instead of having a 32-inch sword, wields a 12-ich bowie.

Except everybody else compared to the F-22 is like an average kid wielding a sword. The Raptor, like King Leonidas, has the attributes of a very athetic warrior to win in hand-to-hand combat even with a bowie.

Just wait until he gets a very nice sword (9X)…

Regarding why F-22 didn't get a Helmet Mounted Sight/Cueing System, my understanding is the reasons are mainly two-fold:

In the early days, AF was proclaiming that it wasn't needed since they "knew" no one would get close enough to where it mattered. This was a mistake. Second, in my understanding, there turned out to be a problem mapping the F-22's cockpit, so although JHMCS could be mounted on just about anything, it wouldn't work on the F-22. Since AF was still enamored of the first reason, they just sorta said, "well, we didn't want it anyway".

The HMD from the F-35 is directly integrated with the F-35's system and is custom to it. Putting it in the Raptor is not an option. With the too few number of F-22s to be deployed, it's doubtful that money will be found to develop something for it.

AIM-9X is apparently more software intensive that earlier Sidewinders, more work has to be done on the launching aircraft to use it than previous models. That's why when the -9X does become operational on the F-22, initially it will not be able to operate in HOBS mode. This capability is to be added, but without a HMS Raptor won't be able to use it to its full potential.

What I think would be informative, but neither side wants to try it, would be an unrestricted close-in exercise of Raptor with whatever AIM-9 it's using at the time vs Typhoon with either ASRAAM or IRIS-T.

Quote:

F-22 was delivered without EOTS

I didn't even think the F-22 had the capability to carry an EOTS. What would this look like? A stealthy pod or something more along the lines of what the F-35 has?

A while back (1 job and 2 computers ago) I found a PDF that unfortunately did not make it into my current library of F-22 info. It had a lot of info on the AIRST (the F-22 IRST) including pictures of the prototypes that were long and rectangular.

I found this on a quick Google Images search.

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/ca/irst3.html

Quote:

The USAF has not yet been convinced of the usefulness of IRST, although I have tested the AAS-42 on an F-15 in the late 80's. GE and Martin Marietta Aerospace, which are now part of Lockheed Martin (LMEM) developed an IRST to the ATF program, which became the F-22A Raptor.

The IRST was canceled during the demonstration / evaluation (dem / val). The USAF believes the AN/APG-77 radar capable LPI will be able to meet all your requirements. The space, weight, power and cooling system for the IRST is still in the aircraft.

Still, LMEM won a contract to develop technology for an IRST (AirStar) with potential application in the F-22.

The LMEM tested a Advanced IRST (AirStar) for the F-22. The sensor unit (left) is protected by a window with stealth characteristics (right).

Now that I've had some sleep, perhaps the F-22 didn't get an IRST/EOTS, EODAS and what not because it would challenge F-35 production. I imagine any of the newer sensor going into the F-35 could be adapted to the F-22 if there was a REAL need.

The decision of what sensors would go into the F-22 were made on purely financial grounds. If they did not want to challenge the F-35 then they would have never came up with the whole F/A-22 naming scheme in order to get the program started.

SpudmanWP wrote:

The decision of what sensors would go into the F-22 were made on purely financial grounds. If they did not want to challenge the F-35 then they would have never came up with the whole F/A-22 naming scheme in order to get the program started.

This is true. The decision to pull the IRST was decided early in EMD, before the F-35 was even a factor.

Regarding the F-35 sensors, that plane is a very integrated system. Putting them in the F-22 would be hideously expensive, if practical at all, but I guess if you're willing to spend unlimited amounts of money on something I guess you could do anything (insert your own example of vast sums of money at someone politician's pet project).

Maybe they can consider Scorpion for the F-22 if they really want a HMD capability. Looks to be a lot cheaper and probably simpler to integrate. Its monocle-based so should just clip on to the pilot's helmet.

Raytheon unveils Scorpion helmet technology

By JANE WARDELL, AP Business Writer

Friday, July 23, 2010 at 8:46 a.m.

FARNBOROUGH, England — As the desert landscape unfolds ahead, the jet fighter pilot glances to his right. Spotting an enemy target, a sensor attached to his helmet relays the information straight back to his flight controls, allowing him to fire immediately without turning his aircraft.

U.S. defense company Raytheon Inc. is giving the first glimpse of its Scorpion helmet technology for F-16 and A-10 combat jets on a simulator at the Farnborough International Airshow after this week announcing a $12.6 million contract with the U.S. Air Force.

Raytheon is marketing the technology, which transmits data on a single-eye monocle attached to an existing helmet, as a more advanced but also cost-effective alternative to current full visor offerings from its competitors - reflecting belt-tightening in the defense aerospace sector amid large cuts to national military budgets.

The monocle is both cheaper to produce than a full visor, and reduces operational costs because it is interchangeable between standard existing helmets. That means a unit can be equipped to full capacity by purchasing a smaller number of monocles that can be shared, instead of having to buy more expensive visor helmets to fit every pilot.

The monocle also improves on existing helmet vision technology by adding both color and night capability to a pilot's field of vision, allowing him to cue up weapons and access data from both on-board and remote sensors. The small size of the unit means that there's no noticeable extra weight on the pilot's head during long missions.

"On the modern battlefield, there is way more data out there than most people can use. If you are just trying to see it all through your eyes and read it in bits and bites, you're never going to understand it," said Todd A. Lovell, Avionics Department Manager at Raytheon, as he gives a demonstration of the Scorpion technology. "So the key to the modern technology is to take all that data and turn it into useful information that the pilot can recognize very quickly and act upon it."

That includes deploying weapons. Unlike pilots using a fixed display who must turn the nose of the plane to line up a shot, the helmet vision sends coordinates sighted by the wearer directly to the weapons system - leaving pilots simply to confirm a decision to fire by joystick.

"If I get a symbol, I don't have to turn my plane all the way over there to get a sensor locked on it," says Lovell. "It reduces the amount of time and energy the pilot has to spend in acquiring a target, making sure he has the right target, and then taking a shot."

Raytheon revealed at Farnborough that it has won a contract for an initial integration and qualification of the helmet-mounted system for F-16 and A-10 aircraft flown by the U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard.

The contract, won against competition from U.S., European and Israeli companies, is part of a program with five one-year production options worth up to $50 million. Beyond the 1,000 F-16 fighters flown by the U.S. Air Force, Raytheon hopes to capture the market for the estimated 4,000 F-16 aircraft operated by foreign air forces.

Raytheon had also put in a tender to the Air National Guard for its central pedestal display for F-16s, an interactive display that allows the pilot to switch through different screens of information, including a moving map. Tender results are due in September.

Cuts to defense budgets have been the talk of the weeklong air show outside London - almost overshadowing some $29 billion worth of commercial plane sales as the global economy recovers from recession.

British Defense Secretary Liam Fox used his appearance at the biennial event to warn the industry to lower costs or see programs slashed.

And while analysts note that British and U.S. plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan within the next five years could be good news for companies like France's Thales and its unmanned Watchkeeper drone, the implications for other defense companies is less certain.

Raytheon is confident its offering adds necessary benefits, add Col. Paul Mancini, chief of the Air National Guard's Operational Requirements Division, agrees.

Mancini, who has flown F-16s in Afghanistan, says the addition of color was crucial to "separate things out and interpret them."

"It turns the whole world into a display," he says. "In the F-16, I have my small 4x4 displays. You spend a lot of time looking at this display and trying to do the mental gymnastics to convert what am I looking at and what does that mean, how does that translate to the world around me. With the helmet-mounted display, the whole world is my display."

It does not matter what kind of HMD you try in the F-22, the problem still remains the same. At some point you will have to integrate sensors into the cockpit that will map out the area of the cockpit in order for the HMD to display what the pilot is looking at.

I've heard rumors that the F-35 HMD is suffering from some rather choppy graphics. I've no doubt that it will be fixed, but would such a system work with the F-22's 80s era computing power? Maybe a simpler A2A oriented system would work better for the Raptor.

It is a problem with the nighttime display of graphical imaginary. It is being addressed by the manufacturer and is considered a minor but time critical problem (it is needed for Blk2 testing this summer). The problem does not reside in the F-35 imagery collection systems but the display of that data in the HMD, i.e. the problem is with the HMD itself . They can display the same data on the cockpit display without any problems.

SpudmanWP wrote:

It does not matter what kind of HMD you try in the F-22, the problem still remains the same. At some point you will have to integrate sensors into the cockpit that will map out the area of the cockpit in order for the HMD to display what the pilot is looking at.

Exactly. Mapping the cockpit is also necessary to let the cueing system know when the pilot is looking outside the cockpit, exactly where and not just at instruments, and if looking in the cockpit is the field of view just "passing through" while tracking something outside or actually focusing attention inside. Plus, with these intensively (to my mind overly) software driven aircraft, you can't add systems as easily as you could before. One of the tradeoffs you have to make. For example, I believe it's going to be another five years before AIM-9X with HOBS capability (even sans helmet) will be operational on the Raptor.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 and helmet mounted sight.