F-22 AIRST

Is there any info about cancelled Raptor IRST? Is there any chance F-22 even get IRST?
bring_it_on wrote:It needs to get MADL and then keep a few F-35s close by to share passive targeting.
For some info on the IRST read these threads -
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 0/all.html
and
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 5.390.html
Pretty much everything has been dropped from future plans for the Raptor. With only ~180 airframes, development/integration of upgrades isn't worth the trouble, especially as the F-35 comes on-line. I expect they'll all end up in the bone-yard whilst some F-15Cs are still flying, a crying shame.aaam wrote:MADL has been dropped from future plans for Raptor.
lookieloo wrote:Pretty much everything has been dropped from future plans for the Raptor. With only ~180 airframes, development/integration of upgrades isn't worth the trouble, especially as the F-35 comes on-line. I expect they'll all end up in the bone-yard whilst some F-15Cs are still flying, a crying shame.aaam wrote:MADL has been dropped from future plans for Raptor.
lookieloo wrote:Pretty much everything has been dropped from future plans for the Raptor. With only ~180 airframes, development/integration of upgrades isn't worth the trouble, especially as the F-35 comes on-line. I expect they'll all end up in the bone-yard whilst some F-15Cs are still flying, a crying shame.aaam wrote:MADL has been dropped from future plans for Raptor.
wrightwing wrote:lookieloo wrote:Pretty much everything has been dropped from future plans for the Raptor. With only ~180 airframes, development/integration of upgrades isn't worth the trouble, especially as the F-35 comes on-line. I expect they'll all end up in the bone-yard whilst some F-15Cs are still flying, a crying shame.aaam wrote:MADL has been dropped from future plans for Raptor.
I wouldn't say that. Increments 3.1, 3.2, 3.3...... All of these add new and improved capabilities.
steakanddoritos wrote:lookieloo wrote:Pretty much everything has been dropped from future plans for the Raptor. With only ~180 airframes, development/integration of upgrades isn't worth the trouble, especially as the F-35 comes on-line. I expect they'll all end up in the bone-yard whilst some F-15Cs are still flying, a crying shame.aaam wrote:MADL has been dropped from future plans for Raptor.
Considering how long the USAF has dragged more life out of its F-16's and F-15's, I'd say that's a miscalculation. The Raptor will have every last bit of life squeezed out of it. Even in the future it will still be a capable platform. Bear in mind that both the F-22 and the F-35 are designed with far more modular and robust airframes than previous 4th gen aircraft. Also, in the future, it is not a stretch to assume that maintenece procedures and equipment will be far superior than what we have today, allowing operators to lengthen the service lives of their equipment greatly.
milosh wrote:Is there any info about cancelled Raptor IRST? Is there any chance F-22 even get IRST?
geogen wrote:Which is only 'necessary' sadly (as a last-resort), due to a fundamentally flawed (anti-seamless and unsustainable) modernization and recap/acquisition process being implemented still today.
Given more strategic planning and prudent process though, there would most likely be more balanced and sensible upgrade, life-extension and new-build procurement in actual benefit to national defense and security policy. God speed.
geogen wrote:milosh wrote:Is there any info about cancelled Raptor IRST? Is there any chance F-22 even get IRST?
Buy a few new-build F-15SA+ (w/ AGP-82, etc) for USAF and simply equip with IRST (as well as modern ECM capabilities) as 'escort' for F-22 in future. Call it a day.
XanderCrews wrote:geogen wrote:milosh wrote:Is there any info about cancelled Raptor IRST? Is there any chance F-22 even get IRST?
Buy a few new-build F-15SA+ (w/ AGP-82, etc) for USAF and simply equip with IRST (as well as modern ECM capabilities) as 'escort' for F-22 in future. Call it a day.
or simply put an IRST on an F-22. call it a day.
sferrin wrote:geogen wrote:Which is only 'necessary' sadly (as a last-resort), due to a fundamentally flawed (anti-seamless and unsustainable) modernization and recap/acquisition process being implemented still today.
Given more strategic planning and prudent process though, there would most likely be more balanced and sensible upgrade, life-extension and new-build procurement in actual benefit to national defense and security policy. God speed.
Well you got all the right buzzwords in there.Unfortunately you forgot the biggest problem when it comes to planning: the politicians.
geogen wrote:sferrin wrote:geogen wrote:Which is only 'necessary' sadly (as a last-resort), due to a fundamentally flawed (anti-seamless and unsustainable) modernization and recap/acquisition process being implemented still today.
Given more strategic planning and prudent process though, there would most likely be more balanced and sensible upgrade, life-extension and new-build procurement in actual benefit to national defense and security policy. God speed.
Well you got all the right buzzwords in there.Unfortunately you forgot the biggest problem when it comes to planning: the politicians.
Very true... invariably, 'politicians' will likely throw a wrench into such an epic and historic multi-decade-conceived MICC Program cluster such as the F-35.
Which of course 'should have' been part of the 'original' calculations (calculus) by top brass deciders too, when pulling the trigger on an effective and prudent TACAIR recap/modernization plan back in the late 90s and even into the late 2000s? Just my view at least. God speed.
Internal? External pod -- a la F-35-type multi-use LO pod?
IOC by ??
I'm going to stick my neck out in saying our fundamental approach to solving such recap/modernization problems is probably in disagreement.
You apparently tend to say 'stay the course', push ahead (rigid mindset) with Plan A no matter the cost or delay, come hell or high water
(or catastrophic TACAIR implosion)...
while others more critical in their assessments are simply arguing... Ok, do that, just also ensure absolutely that there is a credible stopgap solution (hedge) to 'augment' an unexpectedly insufficient (and potentially uncertain/risky) plan A.
geogen wrote:You apparently tend to say 'stay the course', push ahead (rigid mindset) with Plan A no matter the cost or delay, come hell or high water (or catastrophic TACAIR implosion)... while others more critical in their assessments are simply arguing... Ok, do that, just also ensure absolutely that there is a credible stopgap solution (hedge) to 'augment' an unexpectedly insufficient (and potentially uncertain/risky) plan A.
geogen wrote:
Order new build F-16C/D with new computer, new display (in development), equip with latest MAWS (providing ground fire location capability), AESA w/SAR and Litening SE pod (1k FLIR). Add CFT and a couple EFT enabling up to an extra 1 hr on station vs F-35. Arm with next-gen precision guided CAS munitions under development.
Buy 3 said new F-16s (fully equipped and armed) for every 2 F-35 in FY15. Sustain nearly twice more flyable hours per operational budget allocated. Call it a day.
geogen wrote:Count-to-10 -- Let's say we compromise: Order 400 of those NAFT F-23 to equip joint USAF-USN Tactical command, augment with new build F-16, Super Hornets as gap-fillers, round off with UAV/UCAV + next gen stand-off and call it a day until 2035 =)...
...Hence, in my mind at least, the more relevant question should rather be a matter of the customer first and foremost satisfying it's respective recap requirements via 'good enough', affordable (sustainable), reliable, operational platforms on a timely schedule.
.
geogen wrote:This updated revision would sound fairly prudent and strategic in hedging risk.
Who knows...maybe even USMC will be advised by policymakers to hedge risks starting in FY15, FY16?
An F-18F ASH-lite with CFT and a centerline Litening SE pod would be a considerably cheaper Hornet-replacement alternative than F-35B, let alone have greater endurance and loiter performance when operating in CAS role. Moreover, it's buddy-tanking ability wouldn't hurt either.
geogen wrote:If only USAF was procuring FBW F-15E+ today (essentially an F-15SA + APG-82 + PAWS II+ MLD(?) + Elta jammer(?)) as part of a stopgap recap strat... Remove the CFT, configure with centerline tank and arm with 4x latest/best semi-conformal BVR rounds + 4x AIM-9x if flying your described 1v1 DACT exercise. I would wager your USAF block 50 software would alert you to make a quick retreat upon assessing the disadvantage![]()
geogen wrote:Actually, an FY15/FY16 with CFT (plumbing), new displays and new computer could absolutely be a valid play. CFT could naturally be integrated if/when available, perhaps in time for IOC.
The radar mode enhancements will be incrementally updated according to plan and requirements, of course.
Other bolt-on upgrades, such as Litening SE pod and off-the-shelf IRST pod would be as simple as 1,2,3.
Bolt-on MAWS/MLD upgrades would need to be developed and integrated as part of a follow-on option, yes. But an FY15/16 advanced Super is absolutely doable as a stopgap option.
[/quote]geogen wrote:If only the Mitsubishi F-2 were still in production...
Add thrust vectoring GE-132, updated avionics, IRST pod, call it a day.
Perhaps a modified Gripen NG could fill the hole??
geogen wrote:
Buy a few new-build F-15SA+ (w/ AGP-82, etc) for USAF and simply equip with IRST (as well as modern ECM capabilities) as 'escort' for F-22 in future. Call it a day.
geogen wrote:Great post, host. Now we're debating.. and I appreciate your personal perspective.
I'd agree and have posted similar tunes in the short time here already on the current need to re-examine new factors and think outside the box. And the post-cold-war, mid-90s JSF dream machine, bringing happily ever after wealth and security until 2045, etc etc. was unfortunately very locked in a box origin, I'm afraid.
I'm not going to make statements on precise technical aspects of things, as it's not my field, but agree one could study such a 'hypothetical' realistically and I personally don't think it's too late to reconsider.
I'd vote for more F-22 at expense of USAF F-35A (as long as F-22 is truly cost-effective and reliable which is classified of course). But I'd admit if I were wrong on F-35 too, later on. (Just as RAAF was probably wrong on wanting RA-5C vigilante over the F-111)?
But I'd think a tailless, F-16XL type, vectoring, AESA with the best off-the-shelf avionics/radar/engine, etc, could indeed match %95 of the F-35 and deter any Su-30 to boot. Besides it would look pretty badass!But even an updated XL with the tail-on, or Block 60/IN variant, F-15SG type Eagle could be valid, modern 'complement' to fewer than preferred F-35 orders in future scenario. IMO.
Heck, could one imagine a tailless, delta-winged, F-111 w/ 2-D LON vectoring, LO inlet, (V)4, composite material/body and 2x GE-132 ? World class interceptor, or strike bomber at perhaps %25 of JSF development costs?
Lastly, DoD def can't be skimping on the 'deployed' A-A weapons part of equation, as is seemingly secondary to the sexy platforms.
milosh wrote:Is there any info about cancelled Raptor IRST? Is there any chance F-22 even get IRST?
An IR search and track (IRST) system was part of the original ATF requirement. It was deleted during dem/val, but the Avionics Directorate of the USAF Wright Laboratories has continued its development with Lockheed Martin as the contractor, and space, weight, power and cooling provisions for IRST are still on the aircraft. A low-observable IRST window for the F-22 was tested for stealth and durability last year. IRST is valuable for raid assessment, because of its high angular resolution. It is also useful against tactical ballistic missiles, and it can double as a thermal imaging system for ground attack.
disconnectedradical wrote:
Apparently there's the space, it might come in 2020s.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/254885620/F-22-Janes1997
One thing the jets could not share is the F-35’s electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), the diamond-shaped wedge under the F-35’s “chin” that provides many of the visual and infrared sensors other jets must carry in pods. Though the Air Force is considering an infrared search and track (IRST) system for the F-22 to help it better see stealthy adversaries, Merchant said, “we really don’t have the real estate” in the same location on the F-22. “We’re looking at other options.” He was unable to elaborate due to classification.
mixelflick wrote:The F-22 isn't going anywhere, and its doubtful that even when retired, you'll see it in the boneyard.
2019 is a BIG year for Raptor upgrades: More capable AIM-9x and integration of the AIM-120D are tangible, concrete examples that people can comprehend. Less concrete are the associated software upgrades the aircraft is going through, along with various sensors. You heard a USAF higher up saying they "didn't have the real estate" for something like DAS, but even more importantly he said they were looking at other options. So nobody is giving up on that idea, and there may well be an even better solution for the Raptor in the future.
Not going anywhere, far from it. New build legacy jets aren't the answer either, and those in the know are aware of that fact. It'll be upgraded F-22's and 35's in a future high end fight, and although we're short on F-22 numbers they'll still play a key role in any future (large scale) conflict..
charlielima223 wrote:disconnectedradical wrote:
Apparently there's the space, it might come in 2020s.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/254885620/F-22-Janes1997
That article is an old. In terms of IRST for the F-22, I do not believe it will get one yet will instead use other methods...
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArch ... ricks.aspxOne thing the jets could not share is the F-35’s electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), the diamond-shaped wedge under the F-35’s “chin” that provides many of the visual and infrared sensors other jets must carry in pods. Though the Air Force is considering an infrared search and track (IRST) system for the F-22 to help it better see stealthy adversaries, Merchant said, “we really don’t have the real estate” in the same location on the F-22. “We’re looking at other options.” He was unable to elaborate due to classification.
I'm guessing that will use the existing AN/AAR-56 and improve some of its hardware and software to make it more "DAS-ish" like the F-35. Rather than superimposing an image on a HMD, it will be used for cueing, tracking, and ID at certain ranges.
More things for the F-22 as well.
https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/10/1 ... rnization/
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The F-1422 Raptor-Cat. Gotta love mockups that never have to worry about production, structure, or cost problems.