| Author |
Message |
|
popcorn
|
 Posted: Jan 22, 2013 - 03:31 PM
|
 
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Sep 24, 2008 - 09:55 AM
Posts: 2025
Status: Offline
|
|
stobiewan wrote:
linkomart wrote:
No, but as I said Concorde is the best supercruiser IMHO.
F-22 is the best supercruiser among fighters.
my opinion.
Not quite getting the idea here, Concorde could cruise at M1.7 off the burners, F22 seems to be credited with running at M1.78 or so, and can go supersonic without afterburner - surely F22 takes the title in all fields ?
I recall Dozer confirming that the F-22 can indeed go supersonic without afterburner but this would consume a lot of fuel... the preferred procedure is to use burners briefly to break thru the sound barrier then go into SC mode. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: May 19, 2013 - 8:33 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
|
|
|
|
|
wrightwing
|
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2013 - 02:56 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Oct 23, 2008 - 04:22 PM
Posts: 2021
Status: Offline
|
|
linkomart wrote:
Agree that F-22 is according to L-M going in M=1.7something IIRC.
But in my book M=2 transatlantic is better than M=1.7-1.8 for a 150 nm or so range.
But maybe thats just my opinion.......
The Concorde was a faster supercruiser, and with greater range, but the F-22 can supercruise for much further than 150nm. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
linkomart
|
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2013 - 07:27 AM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: May 31, 2010 - 08:30 AM
Posts: 188
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
|
|
wrightwing wrote:
The Concorde was a faster supercruiser, and with greater range, but the F-22 can supercruise for much further than 150nm.
Yes, sorry wasn't trying to bash the F-22 it's a great plane king of supercruise in the fighter world, no doubt about that. The range is AFAIK classified, and as all fighters, the range depends on the scenario.
"150 or so range" were a try to say that whereas big C is transatlantic in supercruise, the Raptor range is more local.
hopefully I made myself understood this time.
my 5 cent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wrightwing
|
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2013 - 11:06 AM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Oct 23, 2008 - 04:22 PM
Posts: 2021
Status: Offline
|
|
linkomart wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
The Concorde was a faster supercruiser, and with greater range, but the F-22 can supercruise for much further than 150nm.
Yes, sorry wasn't trying to bash the F-22 it's a great plane king of supercruise in the fighter world, no doubt about that. The range is AFAIK classified, and as all fighters, the range depends on the scenario.
"150 or so range" were a try to say that whereas big C is transatlantic in supercruise, the Raptor range is more local.
hopefully I made myself understood this time.
my 5 cent
The 150nm figure is a radius, in a given profile. For a better guesstimate of the distance that an F-22 can supercruise, one can use the ~41 minute time frame. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
linkomart
|
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2013 - 11:32 AM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: May 31, 2010 - 08:30 AM
Posts: 188
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
|
correct, usually fighter range is given as a radius and commerical airplanes have range as a distance from A to B (including reserves).
But, as I said, I was not trying to give you the range of the F-22, but saying that big C is a transatlantic supercruiser and the F-22 is more local, giving you a lesser range, may it be 150, 350 or x.
best regards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corsair1963
|
|
Posted: Mar 11, 2013 - 05:46 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Dec 19, 2005 - 04:14 AM
Posts: 1907
Status: Offline
|
The Concord uses the Burners (for takeoff and) to get trough the transonic regime. It shuts off the burners at M=1.7 and accelerates up to top speed on military power (is there a better name, anyone?).
Will the F-35 likely use the same method to reach supercuise? (i.e. supersonic speeds on military power) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
linkomart
|
|
Posted: Mar 11, 2013 - 01:15 PM
|
|
|
Active Member
Joined: May 31, 2010 - 08:30 AM
Posts: 188
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
Will the F-35 likely use the same method to reach supercuise? (i.e. supersonic speeds on military power)
Either that or a dive. When an airplane closes in on the top speed the acceleration is substantially lowered, and it will take "forever" to reach the designated speed. On the topic if F-35 can sustain speed and altitude on military power above M=1, welll according to LM it's so, I have my doubts. But that is another topic.
regards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corsair1963
|
|
Posted: Mar 12, 2013 - 01:46 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Dec 19, 2005 - 04:14 AM
Posts: 1907
Status: Offline
|
|
linkomart wrote:
Quote:
Will the F-35 likely use the same method to reach supercuise? (i.e. supersonic speeds on military power)
Either that or a dive. When an airplane closes in on the top speed the acceleration is substantially lowered, and it will take "forever" to reach the designated speed. On the topic if F-35 can sustain speed and altitude on military power above M=1, welll according to LM it's so, I have my doubts. But that is another topic.
regards
Likely we will have to wait a while before that is confirmed for sure one way or the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wrightwing
|
|
Posted: Mar 13, 2013 - 03:56 PM
|
|
|
Elite 2K
Joined: Oct 23, 2008 - 04:22 PM
Posts: 2021
Status: Offline
|
|
linkomart wrote:
Quote:
Will the F-35 likely use the same method to reach supercuise? (i.e. supersonic speeds on military power)
Either that or a dive. When an airplane closes in on the top speed the acceleration is substantially lowered, and it will take "forever" to reach the designated speed. On the topic if F-35 can sustain speed and altitude on military power above M=1, welll according to LM it's so, I have my doubts. But that is another topic.
regards
The F-35 has demonstrated at least M1.2 without the use of afterburner, so I'm not sure what doubts you still have. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corsair1963
|
|
Posted: Mar 14, 2013 - 03:59 AM
|
|
|
Elite 1K
Joined: Dec 19, 2005 - 04:14 AM
Posts: 1907
Status: Offline
|
|
wrightwing wrote:
linkomart wrote:
Quote:
Will the F-35 likely use the same method to reach supercuise? (i.e. supersonic speeds on military power)
Either that or a dive. When an airplane closes in on the top speed the acceleration is substantially lowered, and it will take "forever" to reach the designated speed. On the topic if F-35 can sustain speed and altitude on military power above M=1, welll according to LM it's so, I have my doubts. But that is another topic.
regards
The F-35 has demonstrated at least M1.2 without the use of afterburner, so I'm not sure what doubts you still have.
Plus, we have much more power coming...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Private Messages
Forum Guidelines
