Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

The F-22 cannot fire a 9xBlk2 in LOAL in HOBS mode due to it not having either a HMS or EODAS capability, although it may use off-board targeting.

Don't forget, we're talking late '80s here. Do you think they wanted to pay what it would cost to invent it? Remember also, the YF-23 didn't use thrust vectoring at all and it also exceeded USAF's maneuverability requirement.

There were a number of US aircraft that flew with 3D TVC, prior to the YF-22 ever being built, so it's nonsense to suggest that it was an engineering issue. Additionally, just like the F-117, B-2, YF-23, the F-22 was designed with IR signature reduction in mind. The only time you'll see flames coming out of the tail, is when afterburners are used, and then you're not really concerned about IR reduction. The F-23 had a plume when in afterburner as well. It was no afterthought to use cool air, to reduce exhaust temperatures, active cooling of the airframe/leading edges, IR signature reducing paints, and nozzles that reduce the size of the plume, from the frontal/side aspects.

As for NEZs, stealth reduces the effective range that the F-22 can be targeted, well below the missile's kinematic capabilities. Super cruise further reduces the window of opportunity. Having to shoot up at a higher flying F-22, further reduces the missile's effective reach. You have to remember, NEZs are dynamic, and situationally dependent. The aspect, speed, altitude all play a role in determining that range, along with the fighter and missile's abilities to detect/track/lock on to the F-22.

Yet. That's what the MLD upgrade will provide though.

The Raptor has proven very capable in WVR and BVR, so it's not giving up a lot. Obviously targets will be taken out at BVR first, but after all the AMRAAMs are expended, it will have to use the Sidewinder/Gun option, if there are more targets. Once the -9X Block II with LOAL is integrated, then the Raptor will be even deadlier in WVR, as it'll have all of its current advantages, plus similar capabilities to the F-35.

The two US aircraft I am most aware of that used 3D TVC were the F-15 ACTIVE and the X-31, both of which flew well after F-22 was designed, so their data wouldn't have been available for use in the F-22 design, which is why I said Lockheed would have to invent it themselves to get it on the YF-22.

Regarding YF-22/23, of course Lockheed didn't ignore IR stealth, it's just that the YF-23 was more concerned about it. The nature of TVC means the exhaust has to be at the vary tail of the a/c, and 'burner or not, it's much harder to suppress the IR there than if you do it the way the YF-23 did. The flame is just a useful way of seeing this, and again, the point I was making was that you can only see the flame, 'burner or not, on the YF-23 is from a narrow cone in plane with the a/c. They were more concerned with that that Lockheed was, which is one of the reasons they didn't include thrust vectoring (interestingly enough the F-23 NATF did propose thrust vectoring and was an admittedly less stealthy bird than its AF counterpart).

But that's still years away. I'm not familiar how you can use offboard targeting to cue an AIM-9X's IR seeker unless another F-22 is using radar and then communicates to the launching F-22 where to point the -9Xs's seeker which then "sees" the target before launch or through LOAL once the Raptor is capable of doing so, but said seeker still has to achieve the lock sometime.

There were quite a few design changes between the YF-22, and the production model. They could've included 3D TVC, if they felt that it was worth the effort. Signature management was considered more valuable, than whatever nominal benefits 3D TVC would provide.




Now you're changing your story. Both companies were given requirements, with regard to performance, signature management, etc...., and they both exceeded them. The fact that the YF-23 may have been better in certain areas, is irrelevant to whether LM paid any attention to that issue. There's more than one way to skin a cat, and LM chose a different way to do it.

The AIM-9X Block II has a datalink, just like an AMRAAM. This is how third party targeting could be used.

Not changing my story at all. All I ever said was that, "I'm not convinced that the AF of those days put that high a priority on IR stealth in a fighter". Those would be reflected in whatever (still classified) requirements AF solicited. Northrop/MDD put a significant premium on them. Clearly, the Secretary of the Air Force had other things that were valued more highly.

2D vs. 3D: Most of the changes from the YF-22 to the F-22 were refinements of an already solid design. To go from a 2D to a 3D TVC system, though is a massive change involving the flight control system, the design of aft end, etc. At the time the F-22 was designed, there simply wasn't that much data available to draw from. X-31 started in the early '90s and F-15 ACTIVE didn't fly until the mid '90s so for Lockheed to successfully incorporate 3D TVC into their existing design would have been a very significant, quite expensive and potentially risky strategy, given the state of the art at the time. Could they have done it? Probably. Would AF have been willing to pay for that? Not likely.