New details about F-22 upgrade
- Active Member
- Posts: 102
- Joined: 03 Jun 2025, 07:11
New details as described by TWZ:
https://www.twz.com/air/new-f-22-upgrad ... e-laid-out
More about this, F-22 will be the first to control CCA:
https://www.twz.com/air/f-22-raptors-wi ... t-aircraft
https://www.twz.com/air/new-f-22-upgrad ... e-laid-out
More about this, F-22 will be the first to control CCA:
https://www.twz.com/air/f-22-raptors-wi ... t-aircraft
-
- Elite 2K
- Posts: 2451
- Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
- Location: San Antonio, TX
To add to this, the F-22 recently demonstrated the longest AMRAAM kill, specifically using the AIM-120D3 in fall 2024.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/amraa ... d-in-test/
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/amraa ... d-in-test/
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 6957
- Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
- Location: Finland
If we compare best infrared sensors from year 2000 to current ones, a new MLD (IRDS) should have about 3 to 4 times the detection range compared to original version. The imagery certainly also have lower noise levels which would lower false alarms. This would be really significant improvement even without additional features similar to EODAS in F-35. Of course some of those would be really useful to have in F-22 too.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 6957
- Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
- Location: Finland
darkmount wrote:I think the biggest upgrade for the F-22 is not about the F-22 itself, but the MQ-25.
When it comes into service we will have the most optimal solution for Raptor's biggest problem, which is range.
It might well be if the promises are fulfilled (and I don't really doubt that). Besides longer reach, they can also offer larger magazine depth, allow more complex EW tactics and methods and give additional sensor coverage. Basically further improve own SA and lethality while degrading enemy SA and lethality. Future of warfare will likely be in teams of crewed and uncrewed systems. Be it ground units, combat aircraft or naval units, all need and will employ both.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 7254
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
darkmount wrote:I think the biggest upgrade for the F-22 is not about the F-22 itself, but the MQ-25.
When it comes into service we will have the most optimal solution for Raptor's biggest problem, which is range.
Well, there's a very big (huge, actually) problem with that:
- The MQ-25 refueling system is probe-and-drogue while the F-22 can only be refueled thru a flying boom system which as far as I know, the MQ-25 completely lacks.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 832
- Joined: 24 Dec 2023, 15:16
ricnunes wrote:darkmount wrote:I think the biggest upgrade for the F-22 is not about the F-22 itself, but the MQ-25.
When it comes into service we will have the most optimal solution for Raptor's biggest problem, which is range.
Well, there's a very big (huge, actually) problem with that:
- The MQ-25 refueling system is probe-and-drogue while the F-22 can only be refueled thru a flying boom system which as far as I know, the MQ-25 completely lacks.
That's a big issue that I didn't consider.
The MQ-25 seems to be only compatible with F-18 and F-35C unfortunately.
There are workarounds like refueling F-22 with KC tankers on their way back from a mission.
Or maybe a crazy approach were KC tankers fly low to reful below radar horizontal.
- Elite 4K
- Posts: 4775
- Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22
darkmount wrote:I think the biggest upgrade for the F-22 is not about the F-22 itself, but the MQ-25.
When it comes into service we will have the most optimal solution for Raptor's biggest problem, which is range.
The MQ-25 isn't part of the F-22 upgrade. That's currently a Navy only program, and uses probe/drogue refueling hardware. The F-22 is getting stealthy drop tanks, to add range, along with new radar, IRDS, AIRST, new computers, EW, stealth coatings, helmet sight, datalink/cryptology, cockpit displays, engine upgrades, weapons, etc....
-
- Elite 2K
- Posts: 2451
- Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
- Location: San Antonio, TX
hornetfinn wrote:If we compare best infrared sensors from year 2000 to current ones, a new MLD (IRDS) should have about 3 to 4 times the detection range compared to original version. The imagery certainly also have lower noise levels which would lower false alarms. This would be really significant improvement even without additional features similar to EODAS in F-35. Of course some of those would be really useful to have in F-22 too.
https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2025-01 ... on-Sensors
The new MLD sensors for IRDS is called TacIRST by Lockheed Martin and on SPF, they found the trademark filing back in 2021 describing it, seems to be dual-band mid wave and long wave EO/IR sensor, and with IRST capabilities like the name implies. I don't think it can project IR image to the helmet like the F-35 DAS, but it will probably be do all-aspect targeting especially when paired with the new Scorpion HMD that the F-22 is soon getting as well.
https://uspto.report/TM/90780394
TACIRST® trademark registration is intended to cover the categories of small form factor modules comprising electro-optical infrared (EO/IR) midwave, longwave, and multi-band distributed sensors for providing passive situational awareness tracks for missile warning, fixed wing GPS location, and infrared search and track, in connection with aircraft.
This will make the F-22 even more nasty at the merge, as if it's not lethal enough already in that area. This is also separate from the long range IRST.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5418
- Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
- Location: Parts Unknown
Imagine the Chinese trying to figure out what's going into this..
Consider just what USAF has spoken about - which is a LOT. Chrome coatings? Podded IR sensors?, Stealth drop tanks? E/O and DAS type system? APG-77 upgrades? More powerful motors? Better stealth coatings/RAM? AIM-120E integration? AIM-260 integration? Helmet mounted display/site? That's 10 off the top of my head, most of which are confirmed as being added.
Then you have to worry about what's NOT being talked about, which I'm sure is a lot too.
Yes, they have a lot of demonstrators and prototypes flying BUT I wouldn't want to be in their shoes (having to fight this thing).
Consider just what USAF has spoken about - which is a LOT. Chrome coatings? Podded IR sensors?, Stealth drop tanks? E/O and DAS type system? APG-77 upgrades? More powerful motors? Better stealth coatings/RAM? AIM-120E integration? AIM-260 integration? Helmet mounted display/site? That's 10 off the top of my head, most of which are confirmed as being added.
Then you have to worry about what's NOT being talked about, which I'm sure is a lot too.
Yes, they have a lot of demonstrators and prototypes flying BUT I wouldn't want to be in their shoes (having to fight this thing).
-
- Elite 2K
- Posts: 2451
- Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
- Location: San Antonio, TX
I wouldn’t get too confident yet. These F-22 upgrades are substantial, but tbh they’re very much necessary and needed because of how much the Chinese have closed the gap or even reached parity in certain ways if you look at how all these aircraft and weapon work as a system.
Recall a few years ago, when USAF considers the Block 20 F-22 to no longer be competitive with J-20 armed with PL-15s. And they’re not standing still either, the PL-16 is becoming close to operational, as well as improved J-20A version.
Also, the way that PLAAF is able to do cooperative engagement capability (CEC) with the KJ-500, J-20, and PL-15 makes it a credible threat against even our 5th generation fighters. Remember that the previous head of PACAF, ACC, and now CSAF nominee General Kenneth Wilsbach implied while the J-20 itself may not be world beating in every way, it’s the way that it fits into the PLAAF CEC system that makes it very dangerous, and he’s very much interested in how to disrupt the KJ-500, J-20, and PL-15 kill chain (it’s really a kill web at this point because of the multiple targeting methods).
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/f- ... 36.article
So yes these upgrades will keep the F-22 at or near the leading edge of air superiority technology until the F-47 is operational, but the gap against the Chinese threat is very concerning and rapidly closing if these upgrades aren’t pursued to the fullest extent. They’re not to be underestimated.
Recall a few years ago, when USAF considers the Block 20 F-22 to no longer be competitive with J-20 armed with PL-15s. And they’re not standing still either, the PL-16 is becoming close to operational, as well as improved J-20A version.
Also, the way that PLAAF is able to do cooperative engagement capability (CEC) with the KJ-500, J-20, and PL-15 makes it a credible threat against even our 5th generation fighters. Remember that the previous head of PACAF, ACC, and now CSAF nominee General Kenneth Wilsbach implied while the J-20 itself may not be world beating in every way, it’s the way that it fits into the PLAAF CEC system that makes it very dangerous, and he’s very much interested in how to disrupt the KJ-500, J-20, and PL-15 kill chain (it’s really a kill web at this point because of the multiple targeting methods).
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/f- ... 36.article
So yes these upgrades will keep the F-22 at or near the leading edge of air superiority technology until the F-47 is operational, but the gap against the Chinese threat is very concerning and rapidly closing if these upgrades aren’t pursued to the fullest extent. They’re not to be underestimated.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5418
- Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
- Location: Parts Unknown
No doubt the Chinese have closed the gap. The real question IMO is twofold.
1.) How close are they, to parity?
2.) How much overmatch will the F-47 and F/A-XX/AIM-260 bring?
To me, Western intelligence seems to consistently over-estimate Russian capabilities and under-estimate the Chinese. Therefore, if I'm in USAF planning, I'm assuming China has at least achieved parity with us (if not a slight edge). This is likely a conservative estimate but should build a margin of safety into the air dominance plan.
The question of "how good" the F-47 is a big X factor? Ditto for the Navy's F/A-XX. Nobody's seen them, there have been few if any leaks (knock on wood) and so we just don't know yet. TBH, I'm not sure USAF/USN can be certain, given the assumed outsized role CCA's will play with those platforms.
It pains me to think how far ahead we WERE in everything, then sat still during the "peace dividend" years. I mean honestly, who was responsible for not foreseeing China's rise? It should have been a big, honking red flag when Gates visited China and they flew the J-20 right over his head.
Our intelligence thought they were YEARS away from such a milestone. I wonder if Gates, at that precise moment realized he f'd up killing the F-22. Yes, yes I know some blame lies elsewhere but SOMEONE should've taken responsibility. Great example BTW, re: my point about consistently underestimating Chinese capabilities.
1.) How close are they, to parity?
2.) How much overmatch will the F-47 and F/A-XX/AIM-260 bring?
To me, Western intelligence seems to consistently over-estimate Russian capabilities and under-estimate the Chinese. Therefore, if I'm in USAF planning, I'm assuming China has at least achieved parity with us (if not a slight edge). This is likely a conservative estimate but should build a margin of safety into the air dominance plan.
The question of "how good" the F-47 is a big X factor? Ditto for the Navy's F/A-XX. Nobody's seen them, there have been few if any leaks (knock on wood) and so we just don't know yet. TBH, I'm not sure USAF/USN can be certain, given the assumed outsized role CCA's will play with those platforms.
It pains me to think how far ahead we WERE in everything, then sat still during the "peace dividend" years. I mean honestly, who was responsible for not foreseeing China's rise? It should have been a big, honking red flag when Gates visited China and they flew the J-20 right over his head.
Our intelligence thought they were YEARS away from such a milestone. I wonder if Gates, at that precise moment realized he f'd up killing the F-22. Yes, yes I know some blame lies elsewhere but SOMEONE should've taken responsibility. Great example BTW, re: my point about consistently underestimating Chinese capabilities.
-
- Elite 2K
- Posts: 2451
- Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
- Location: San Antonio, TX
Question about “parity” isn’t a simple yes or no because it’s very mission and situation dependent. The Chinese don’t have to match U.S. weapon-for-weapon, aircraft-for-aircraft system-for-system, for their doctrine or strategy, especially in the geographic region they want to counter us in (i.e. INDOPACOM in the region around Taiwan).
The J-20 doesn’t need to match F-22 in every way in terms of stealth, or maneuverability. Instead they focused on a big AESA radar, very fast and advanced AESA seeker air to air missiles like PL-15, and Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) with KJ-500 AWACS that has UHF AESA radar that work together as a system or “kill web”, specifically in the INDOPACOM theater with the goal of countering us responding to their potential military action against Taiwan. Consider how sparse the basing options for us in the region is in the First and Second Island Chains, the density of PLARF assets in creating that A2AD environment, and their ability to operate close to home with sensors and radars patrolling from all directions towards Taiwan.
The mistake too many people make is “mirror imaging”, which is to assume that the opponent acts exactly like us in all aspects, and then think that we must compare only weapon for weapon, aircraft for aircraft, without considering how everything operates together. Instead one must consider what the strategy and aims of the their military. The J-20 won’t be able to do the kind of offensive counter air like an F-22, but it doesn’t have to if that’s not part of their strategy (i.e. deter us from protecting Taiwan). Our Raptors aren’t very effective if the Chinese can use their PLARF massed fires to deny our ability to use First Island Chain bases like Kadena, and if we flying out of Second Island Chain installations where we need tankers, use their advanced long range PL-15 and PL-17 missiles and J-20 reduced RCS, to get close enough to our tankers and AWACS and deny the Raptors their supporting assets, or use the KJ-500 UHF radar with CEC to reduce the effectiveness of the F-22’s stealth.
So this is where the F-22 upgrades come into play in face of this kind of threat environment, things like AIM-260 JATM, new long range IRST sensors and radar upgrades to see further, and the new Low Drag Tank and Pylon upgrades come in, to reduce reliance on tankers so that they’re safer and further back, and out-sticking the PL-15 and threatening those KJ-500s from greater ranges, CCA integration to enhance various capabilities and provide additional numbers, etc.
But it’s a constant cat and mouse game and the Chinese aren’t standing still either, as they’re now close to fielding the newer PL-16, and more capable AWACS like the KJ-3000. And we have things in development too, including the NGAD/F-47, HACM, advanced sensors and countermeasures, etc. But in summary, you can’t compare individual weapons or aircraft in a vacuum. You have to compare systems and how all the pieces work with each other in a particular scenario and geographic region.
The J-20 doesn’t need to match F-22 in every way in terms of stealth, or maneuverability. Instead they focused on a big AESA radar, very fast and advanced AESA seeker air to air missiles like PL-15, and Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) with KJ-500 AWACS that has UHF AESA radar that work together as a system or “kill web”, specifically in the INDOPACOM theater with the goal of countering us responding to their potential military action against Taiwan. Consider how sparse the basing options for us in the region is in the First and Second Island Chains, the density of PLARF assets in creating that A2AD environment, and their ability to operate close to home with sensors and radars patrolling from all directions towards Taiwan.
The mistake too many people make is “mirror imaging”, which is to assume that the opponent acts exactly like us in all aspects, and then think that we must compare only weapon for weapon, aircraft for aircraft, without considering how everything operates together. Instead one must consider what the strategy and aims of the their military. The J-20 won’t be able to do the kind of offensive counter air like an F-22, but it doesn’t have to if that’s not part of their strategy (i.e. deter us from protecting Taiwan). Our Raptors aren’t very effective if the Chinese can use their PLARF massed fires to deny our ability to use First Island Chain bases like Kadena, and if we flying out of Second Island Chain installations where we need tankers, use their advanced long range PL-15 and PL-17 missiles and J-20 reduced RCS, to get close enough to our tankers and AWACS and deny the Raptors their supporting assets, or use the KJ-500 UHF radar with CEC to reduce the effectiveness of the F-22’s stealth.
So this is where the F-22 upgrades come into play in face of this kind of threat environment, things like AIM-260 JATM, new long range IRST sensors and radar upgrades to see further, and the new Low Drag Tank and Pylon upgrades come in, to reduce reliance on tankers so that they’re safer and further back, and out-sticking the PL-15 and threatening those KJ-500s from greater ranges, CCA integration to enhance various capabilities and provide additional numbers, etc.
But it’s a constant cat and mouse game and the Chinese aren’t standing still either, as they’re now close to fielding the newer PL-16, and more capable AWACS like the KJ-3000. And we have things in development too, including the NGAD/F-47, HACM, advanced sensors and countermeasures, etc. But in summary, you can’t compare individual weapons or aircraft in a vacuum. You have to compare systems and how all the pieces work with each other in a particular scenario and geographic region.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 10574
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
All comes down to the tradeoffs and how the upgraded Raptors compare to the J-20. (million-dollar question)
-
- Elite 2K
- Posts: 2451
- Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
- Location: San Antonio, TX
Again, it’s not just how F-22 compares to J-20 by itself, but how well they fit into an entire systems approach. The Chinese invested heavily in network-centric warfare with datalinks like the Joint Information Distribution System (their copy of Link 16, basically) and fast, long range missiles like PL-15. The J-20 doesn’t need to be as stealthy, fast, or maneuverable as F-22 if it’s designed for a different set of requirements (a big AESA radar, very potent missiles, integrated into a well-developed CEC network).
Also, coinciding with the first flights of the YFQ-42 and YFQ-44 this year, F-22 is the initial platform for CCA integration.
https://aviationweek.com/defense/budget ... sideration
Also, coinciding with the first flights of the YFQ-42 and YFQ-44 this year, F-22 is the initial platform for CCA integration.
https://aviationweek.com/defense/budget ... sideration
15 posts
|Page 1 of 1