F-22 Raptor "sucks"

[cool_t]

Nice

 

Im not spaming Im just providing cover so we can vulch.

 

Stealth, its still in its baby stage. "?"

 

But on a PREAVIOUS THREAD I said "think of the Un-thinkable and "KaZam" you got a good 10 to 1 kill ratio; fear is a preylude to victory.

 

:joystick:

[bflagg]

Engaging the Flanker in a knife fight? I don't know, that Raptor vid with the "well...I don't know what the hell to call it" turn looked pretty damned impressive. You know...the one where the guy near the camera was heard saying "Whoah!!! What the...!!!"

 

you still have the link for that?

[Gripes]

Im not spaming Im just providing cover so we can vulch.

 

Stealth, its still in its baby stage. "?"

 

But on a PREAVIOUS THREAD I said "think of the Un-thinkable and "KaZam" you got a good 10 to 1 kill ratio; fear is a preylude to victory.

 

:joystick:

 

Cool... your freaking me out... at times you sound like a kid, other times...

like my former commander:huh: .

Let`s HL tomorrow. I promise not to mistake your F15 for a SU25 in hot!!

when you cross my vert scan... good evasive flying:thumbup:

[TucksonSonny]

And how much more obvious can *I* make it? The detection range of the F-22 either to radar, IRST or visually is gonna be so low that it's not gonna matter to the F-22. It's still gonna dictate the fight how and where it wants to.

 

Comprende? Owned?

 

Your f22 stealth-system is already defeated by the ef-2k’s

Pirate infrared search and track (IRST) and forward-looking infrared (FLIR).

(They can lock and track you as a target outside your aim120 range)

Why do you think that Russian’s or some other country can’t counter your system in the next 10 year?

It was even beaten 10 years ago by the Tamara anti-stealth radar system.

BTW, each AWACS of today knows exactly where you are and can counter your radar:

BTW, the PLAAF is very close to counter your AESA radar already:

KJ-2000 and Y-8 "Balance Beam"

A Chinese radar plane was most likely testing a new microwave weapon when it went down last year, the electronics installed on the KJ-2000 and Y-8 "Balance Beam" aircraft can be used for far more than simple tracking.

"Both platforms are testing different types of active phased array radar, which can serve as a highly flexible and difficult-to-jam radar, or if refined via software and more capable transmit-receive modules, can also become a microwave weapon that can directly attack enemy electronics," stated Fisher.

"For example, if they can 'see' an approaching AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile, the most important U.S.-made air-to-air missile, then it can also likely 'fry' the missile's microchips, rendering it inoperable," stated Fisher.

The AESA radar has already proven to be so adept and powerful that it can overwhelm, jam and even intercept enemy communications. The computer-controlled radar can use the latest information warfare spy algorithms to insert false data or plant a computer virus intended to bug and monitor the enemy communications.

There is evidence that China is trying to develop similar radar-based weapons. According to the 2006 Pentagon report on Chinese military power, PRC officials have publicly indicated their intent to acquire advanced microwave weapons such as the AESA as a means of defeating technologically advanced military forces.

"Chinese writings have suggested that RF (Radio Frequency) weapons could be used against C4ISR, guided missiles, computer networks, electronically-fused mines, aircraft carrier battle groups, and satellites in orbit," states the report.

"Analysis of Chinese technical literature indicates a major effort is underway to develop the technologies required for RF weapons, including high-power radio frequency sources, prime-power generators, and antennas to radiate RF pulses. Chinese scientists are also investigating the effects of RF pulses on electronics and the propagation of these pulses through building walls and through the atmosphere. Furthermore, China appears to be assessing its own vulnerability to RF weapons and exploring ways to 'harden' electronics," notes the Pentagon report.

***

:helpsmilie:

[tflash]

First, I think, like many in this board, that the air-to-air capabilities of the F-22 are suddenly being *wildy* exaggerated. It can supercruise, but its performance envelope is not of a totally different scale than that of the competition. In fact, in aerodynamic performance, it is just a very good aircraft, not a super aircraft. It will not be able to engage and disengage totally at will. In acceleration and manoevrability it is matched by many. ==> I prefer to change this to "there are some others that comeclose enough to make it interesting, but then I guess not at the same speeds."

 

But what is even more stretched beyond credibility, is the performance of the global strike concept against ground targets.

 

In fact, many nations have already similar capabilities than a Raptor dropping a supersonic JDAM.

 

A couple of Tornado's can launch stealth Storm Shadow missiles from standoff range with the same effect. They engaged high-value heavily fortified targets in the Bagdad Supermez the SAME day USAF engaged them with stealth fighers. Typhoon and Rafale can do similar things, and the Flanker fleets (or floods?) will launch several performant air-to-ground standoff missiles even before they are engaged by the F-22. (The F-22's main job will be to intercept those missiles in a defensive scenario).

 

On top of this, the last ten years we learned that precision strike does not mean much in a full-scale engagement. It helps, but it's just a starter. Look at the map of Russia. Do you realize how BIG it is compared to Iraq? There are tens of thousands of roads and small airfields where soviet fighters could land and take off (they are build for it). You will have to make tens of thousands of sorties to take it all out. For your F-22's sidekicks, there will be plenty of Thors, Igla's, Strela's etc. to choose from.

 

I would compare the F-22 air dominance concept with the outdated "blue water" concept of the Cold War Navy. OK, the Navy ruled the deep seas, just like the F-22 will rule the blue skies.

 

The Navy adapted and now is specializing in the more murky "littoral, brown water warfare". If we wait a little, the USAF will follow when some cold war veterans retire. ==> Maybe add: there is little doubt the F-22 can achieve superiority in the high skies, but achieving air dominance to the point that your low-flying assets can roam freely is another story.

 

(edited after criticism by nscode ;)

[nscode]

the only bigger mega lols than from raptor exadurators (and these are 10x worse than kobra exploiters) come from raptor nullifiers

[tflash]

Hey, I'm not an F-22 nullifier at all, I think it is the very best aircraft. I just think all this "global strike supremacy" talk is BS. :)

[nscode]

see above your post :)

[FanBoy2006.01]

I just want to point out that just because it is not likely that two Super Powers will be at war in the foreseeable future, it does not mean that the USAF can deal with even third world countries with their teen series aircraft. (PS I view any country with ICBMs and SSBNs as a superpower! An that leaves out other WMDs [Like cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.] that can destroy cities.

 

 

A lot of countries are looking to buy 5th generation aircraft like Su-30 MKI, JAS39, etc. These aircraft are extremely capable. In the future one might get into the situation that the USA might have to go up against a Third World Nation armed with this type of technology. It will be very detrimental (Politically) for the USA to loose a couple of Super-Hornets or AESA F15s to take out the opposing air force.

 

 

The big thing, I think, is advanced avionics and BVR missiles that more and more nations are getting.

 

 

Thus in air-to-air combat stealth is important.

 

 

To my mind that means all countries in the world need stealth technology! If you don't think that stealth is a big deal, ask yourself why in the past armies had bright uniforms but now (For a very long time now.) they are wearing camouflage uniforms. Why do we employ radio silence? If the enemy knows where you are and you are not already dead, it probably means that they are still busy killing other people that are more important than you.

 

 

Non stealth 5th generation aircraft are great but they will have to stay a lot farther away from heavily defended areas than stealth aircraft will have to.

 

 

 

 

By all this loose babble, I am not trying to say that Stealth Aircraft is so great that they are unbeatable but rather that the airspace over the modern battlefield is becoming so dangerous a place to be that standoff and stealth capability are necessities.

 

 

Just another thing. I have seen a lot of posts in the past where certain people argue that the F22 can be overwhelmed shear numbers of other aircraft. That to me sounds like the tactics of the First World War where people were sent to their deaths against their enemy's prepared positions! If you want to fight against the F22 do not take it on, on it's own terms!

 

 

Say I am Dr. Evil and I took over Austria and my hence men are well trained to fly their Typhoons (That Austria have received by then.). I would not wait till the USA have build up their invasion force in Germany and Italy. I would attack immediately as their first F22's touch down for operation European Shield at forward airbases. I would send in Mini-Me with special forces henchmen to sabotage aircraft, blow up fuel supplies, whatever. All the time I would plead with liberals the world over to stop this naked American aggression against poor little me.

 

 

Of course I am just kidding but if I am faced with with what Saddam Insane was facing after he invaded Kuwait, I wouldn't just sit on my A$$ just waiting for the UN force to build up to come and remove my control over Kuwait. Of course doing anything would have been a mad gamble.

 

 

South Africa didn't take on Cuban MiG23s with our Mirage F1s when it became clear that they had all aspect angle missiles. Our pilots went in at 50 feet at 600 knots (Vlamgat ISBN 0-620-24116-0 page185-186) during dawn and at dusk: “As one Mirage pilot explained, 'It was rather like playing with a lion's testicles!'”.

 

 

There was a point in here somewhere, but I can't remember what it was!

 

 

O yes; 5th generation aircraft is so good that you will need a Raptor to counter them.

[Guest IguanaKing]

you still have the link for that?

 

Yup, there are several of them, and they're toward the beginning of this thread IIRC.

[Cosmonaut]

Here’s a cool video of the 22 in testing; check out the raptor with external fuel tanks . :yes:

 

 

 

 

Never forget what real pilots have to go through; warning some mildly colorful language… may not be suitable for children ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYjTQ7CNJFA&mode=related&search=

[D-Scythe]

First, I think, like many in this board, that the air-to-air capabilities of the F-22 are suddenly being *wildy* exaggerated. It can supercruise, but its performance envelope is not of a totally different scale than that of the competition. In fact, in aerodynamic performance, it is just a very good aircraft, not a super aircraft. It will not be able to engage and disengage totally at will. In acceleration and manoevrability it is matched by many. ==> I prefer to change this to "there are some others that comeclose enough to make it interesting, but then I guess not at the same speeds."

 

You're kidding right? It supercruises at Mach 1.7, it can accelerate to Mach 1.8 in a heart-beat, plus it has TVC for close in agility. Manueverability-wise it's only matched by other TVC-equipped fighters - kinematically it's only exceeded by the MiG-25/31 on AB.

 

In fact, many nations have already similar capabilities than a Raptor dropping a supersonic JDAM.

 

A couple of Tornado's can launch stealth Storm Shadow missiles from standoff range with the same effect. They engaged high-value heavily fortified targets in the Bagdad Supermez the SAME day USAF engaged them with stealth fighers. Typhoon and Rafale can do similar things, and the Flanker fleets (or floods?) will launch several performant air-to-ground standoff missiles even before they are engaged by the F-22. (The F-22's main job will be to intercept those missiles in a defensive scenario).

 

Baghdad was defended by SA-2s and 6s. The F-22 was designed to walk around SA-10s/20s. You do the math.

 

Maybe add: there is little doubt the F-22 can achieve superiority in the high skies, but achieving air dominance to the point that your low-flying assets can roam freely is another story.

 

Nobody said the F-22 was gonna eliminate some MANPADS guy taking pot shots at your helos.

[D-Scythe]

Your f22 stealth-system is already defeated by the ef-2k’s

Pirate infrared search and track (IRST) and forward-looking infrared (FLIR).

 

Pirate IRST was never tested against the F-22, so I don't know where you get your wonder-facts from make-belief land.

 

You ALSO seem to dismiss the fact that Lockheed has stealthed the Raptor to IR sensors as well. Like, we keep telling you "hey man, the F-22 is IR-stealthed," but you keep ignoring this fact to promote your own arguments. Sure, the F-22 is not as stealthy to IR as it is to radar, but IR sensors don't have the range of radars either.

 

Either way you look at it, you're gonna be picking up the F-22 with radar, IRST or with the Mk. 1 eyeball at the SAME time.

 

[(They can lock and track you as a target outside your aim120 range)

Why do you think that Russian’s or some other country can’t counter your system in the next 10 year?

It was even beaten 10 years ago by the Tamara anti-stealth radar system.

BTW, each AWACS of today knows exactly where you are and can counter your radar:

BTW, the PLAAF is very close to counter your AESA radar already:

KJ-2000 and Y-8 "Balance Beam"

A Chinese radar plane was most likely testing a new microwave weapon when it went down last year, the electronics installed on the KJ-2000 and Y-8 "Balance Beam" aircraft can be used for far more than simple tracking.

"Both platforms are testing different types of active phased array radar, which can serve as a highly flexible and difficult-to-jam radar, or if refined via software and more capable transmit-receive modules, can also become a microwave weapon that can directly attack enemy electronics," stated Fisher.

"For example, if they can 'see' an approaching AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missile, the most important U.S.-made air-to-air missile, then it can also likely 'fry' the missile's microchips, rendering it inoperable," stated Fisher.

The AESA radar has already proven to be so adept and powerful that it can overwhelm, jam and even intercept enemy communications. The computer-controlled radar can use the latest information warfare spy algorithms to insert false data or plant a computer virus intended to bug and monitor the enemy communications.

There is evidence that China is trying to develop similar radar-based weapons. According to the 2006 Pentagon report on Chinese military power, PRC officials have publicly indicated their intent to acquire advanced microwave weapons such as the AESA as a means of defeating technologically advanced military forces.

"Chinese writings have suggested that RF (Radio Frequency) weapons could be used against C4ISR, guided missiles, computer networks, electronically-fused mines, aircraft carrier battle groups, and satellites in orbit," states the report.

"Analysis of Chinese technical literature indicates a major effort is underway to develop the technologies required for RF weapons, including high-power radio frequency sources, prime-power generators, and antennas to radiate RF pulses. Chinese scientists are also investigating the effects of RF pulses on electronics and the propagation of these pulses through building walls and through the atmosphere. Furthermore, China appears to be assessing its own vulnerability to RF weapons and exploring ways to 'harden' electronics," notes the Pentagon report.

***

:helpsmilie:

 

APPLY YOUR LOGIC (or lack thereof) TO BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE. You seem to forget that one, the F-22 ALSO has an AESA radar, and two, the U.S. had been looking at RF-softkill weapons for a while now too.

 

Furthermore, if the Chinese don't know where the F-22 is (again, cause of STEALTH), how is it gonna direct any RF-weapons against it or the AMRAAMs it spams? Oh yeah, it can't.

[Guest IguanaKing]

A couple of Tornado's can launch stealth Storm Shadow missiles from standoff range with the same effect. They engaged high-value heavily fortified targets in the Bagdad Supermez the SAME day USAF engaged them with stealth fighers.

 

Yes, and during the air war, 19 of them were lost to hostile fire. How many F-117s were lost during that air war?

 

On top of this, the last ten years we learned that precision strike does not mean much in a full-scale engagement. It helps, but it's just a starter. Look at the map of Russia. Do you realize how BIG it is compared to Iraq? There are tens of thousands of roads and small airfields where soviet fighters could land and take off (they are build for it). You will have to make tens of thousands of sorties to take it all out. For your F-22's sidekicks, there will be plenty of Thors, Igla's, Strela's etc. to choose from.

 

All true. So, are you suggesting that sticking with current technology would be a better choice in defeating this juggernaut? It is no longer the Soviet Union (since you said "Soviet fighters". ;) ), so, the surrounding republics may or may not simply let them use those airfields. Also, you shouldn't make the mistake of comparing a limited, low-intensity conflict like Iraq to a war between the superpowers. Afghanistan is much smaller than the US too, yet I don't doubt for a second that Russia would put up a hell of a fight against the US if it were a battle for all the marbles...remember, they were there for 10 years and didn't win.

[tflash]

Yes, and during the air war, 19 of them were lost to hostile fire. How many F-117s were lost during that air war?

 

I'm not talking about the first gulf war, in which the Tornado's didn't have standoff weapons. BTW they lost 6 Tornado's, not 19 in the first Gulf war, and made a hell of a lot more sorties than the F-117's.

 

I'm talking about the 2003 Iraq war. Tornado's had 26 Storm Shadows "on target", with *devastating* results on Saddams' C&C.

 

They lost 1 Tornado GR.4 to ... a friendly Patriot battery. OK, granted an F-22 will not be shot by a Patriot ;)

[Guest IguanaKing]

Actually, they lost 19 Tornados in GW1. I'm not sure where you are getting your figures, but the Tornado was the aircraft with the highest loss rate in that conflict, followed by the A-10A at 16. Several British members have already acknowledged this, along with saying their mission profile was moronic. I tend to agree, and the A-10As tactics were also moronic, but honed to a higher level after that conflict...as were the tactics of the Tornado I'm sure ;). Up until then, nobody knew what to expect, after that, the losses of both decreased dramatically. I'd like to see your "number or sorties" figures as well, since the US was, by far, the LARGEST contingent in both of those conflicts.

[TucksonSonny]

Pirate IRST was never tested against the F-22, so I don't know where you get your wonder-facts from make-belief land.

 

You ALSO seem to dismiss the fact that Lockheed has stealthed the Raptor to IR sensors as well. Like, we keep telling you "hey man, the F-22 is IR-stealthed," but you keep ignoring this fact to promote your own arguments. Sure, the F-22 is not as stealthy to IR as it is to radar, but IR sensors don't have the range of radars either.

 

Either way you look at it, you're gonna be picking up the F-22 with radar, IRST or with the Mk. 1 eyeball at the SAME time.

 

 

 

APPLY YOUR LOGIC (or lack thereof) TO BOTH SIDES OF THE DEBATE. You seem to forget that one, the F-22 ALSO has an AESA radar, and two, the U.S. had been looking at RF-softkill weapons for a while now too.

 

Furthermore, if the Chinese don't know where the F-22 is (again, cause of STEALTH), how is it gonna direct any RF-weapons against it or the AMRAAMs it spams? Oh yeah, it can't.

 

Are you kidding me OF COURSE I KNOW THIS! The F22 his AESA radar is the only piece of hardware that is actually a new innovation!

 

Pirate IRST was tested against drones much smaller than the F-22 and a lot stealthier too.

(BTW the F117 is 50% stealthier than the 22)

 

Please spare me your next reply:

 

I will write it already for you:

 

The F22 will make circles around about everything that become airborne in the next century and kill it in less than a heart-beat.

In the F22 everybody is Red Baron.

The F22 is so stealth that even his first wingman doesn’t know were his leader is.

The AIM120D doubles the range of his ramjet adversary without even using that new technology

(BTW these missiles never miss a target).

It supercruises at Mach 1.7, it can accelerate to Mach 1.8 in a heart-beat (wait a minute … ok that must be a fake F22 on that air show with AB on max all the time and slow like a toad)

 

@IguanaKing,

 

The early Tornado strikes (read all the dirty work) were actually the key of the success of the further developments of Operation Desert Storm.

[GGTharos]

Are you kidding me OF COURSE I KNOW THIS! The F22 his AESA radar is the only piece of hardware that is actually a new innovation!

 

No, it actually isn't but that's beyond the point.

 

Pirate IRST was tested against drones much smaller than the F-22 and a lot stealthier too.

(BTW the F117 is 50% stealthier than the 22)

 

Nice, where'd you get that figure? ;)

As for target drones, they have a higher signature due to reduced surface for radiating the heat, and the closer proximity to the hull. Anyway, what was the range at which this IRST picked up the drones? ;)

I mean, you can pick up an F-22 on radar too, we have proof ;)

 

 

Please spare me your next reply:

 

I will write it already for you:

 

The F22 will make circles around about everything that become airborne in the next century.

 

It willfly circles around anything without TVC. What's so surprising about that? :P

 

In the F22 everybody is Red Baron.

 

Nope. RB got shot down :}

 

The F22 is so stealth that even his first wingman doesn’t know were his leader is.

 

That's why we have a datalink! ;)

 

The AIM120D doubles the range of his ramjet adversary without even using that new technology

(BTW these missiles never miss a target).

 

The 120D is not only an improvement on range over the previous 120 version, but it also has a two-way datalink which will make it that much harder to shake. The F-22's supercuise capability further increases the 120's range in STANDARD OPERATING conditions. Very few other aircraft can do this.

Never misses? Maybe not, but I'd like to see you fly a -real- fighter and go 'pah, it's just an AMRAAM' when one of those lights up your RWR.

 

 

It supercruises at Mach 1.7, it can accelerate to Mach 1.8 in a heart-beat (wait a minute … ok that must be a fake F22 on that air show with AB on max all the time and slow like a toad)

 

I'm sorry. What is it that you're babbling about here? It has been proven to out-accelerate F-15's and F-16s that were in full afterburner ... it leaves them behind to eat its exchaust fumes ... so. What are you on about?

[504 Wolverine]

Actually, they lost 19 Tornados in GW1.

 

 

May I ask where you got these numbers from r.e. Tornado losses.

 

There were a total of 8 RAF tornado losses during Operation Granby and only 1 loss during Operation Telic.

 

http://www.tornado-data.com/History/Granby/the_aircraft.htm

 

http://www.tornado-data.com/Production/RAF%20Crash%20Data.pdf

[Guest IguanaKing]

Are you kidding me OF COURSE I KNOW THIS! The F22 his AESA radar is the only piece of hardware that is actually a new innovation!

 

Pirate IRST was tested against drones much smaller than the F-22 and a lot stealthier too.

(BTW the F117 is 50% stealthier than the 22)

 

You know this classified information, how? A dragonfly is significantly smaller than a B-1B. Does that mean its RCS is smaller? Nope. IRST refers to IR signature, and those figures are even FURTHER classified than RCS.

 

 

@IguanaKing,

 

The early Tornado strikes (read all the dirty work) were actually the key of the success of the further developments of Operation Desert Storm.

 

I will concede that Tornado strikes were among the many that contributed to the overall tactical experience of ODS, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they were the key. I made no judgment of their performance or their importance, I just stated their losses. I could get into which aircraft accounted for the highest number of armored vehicle kills in that conflict, with NO losses while having the smallest number of combat aircraft in theatre, but I've said it too many times already...and it may bore/anger some of you. On top of that, the F-15C didn't get a real chance either, since the vaunted MiG-29 turned out to be only as good as the guy flying it...and Iraqi pilots were actually some of the best-trained in the world.

[mikoriad]

[/font]

 

I could get into which aircraft accounted for the highest number of armored vehicle kills in that conflict, with NO losses while having the smallest number of combat aircraft in theatre, but I've said it too many times already...and it may bore/anger some of you..

 

 

Just out of curiosity, please state it again. I'm not in anyway joining this argument by the way :) f-16? f-18?

[Guest IguanaKing]

Nope...F-111F. That aircraft accounted for over 70% of kills against armored vehicles, mainly tanks. Heh...I'm sure our Australian members won't be angered by my repeating that, since they still have the G Vark. :D

[tflash]

Actually, they lost 19 Tornados in GW1. I'm not sure where you are getting your figures, but the Tornado was the aircraft with the highest loss rate in that conflict, followed by the A-10A at 16. Several British members have already acknowledged this, along with saying their mission profile was moronic. I tend to agree, and the A-10As tactics were also moronic, but honed to a higher level after that conflict...as were the tactics of the Tornado I'm sure ;). Up until then, nobody knew what to expect, after that, the losses of both decreased dramatically. I'd like to see your "number or sorties" figures as well, since the US was, by far, the LARGEST contingent in both of those conflicts.

 

I prefer to go by the RAF figures:

 

http://www.dasa.mod.uk/natstats/ukds/2005/c4/table47.html

[Guest IguanaKing]

Actually, Wolverine and Tflash I can't remember where I saw those numbers. I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine them, but I can't find them at the moment, so they're probably false figures.

 

That's OK though...I have acquired a taste for crow, since I have been eating quite a bit of it lately. :D

[MGonzales]

I made the following thread of F-22 pics and movies I've been collecting for the benefit of the SimHQ F-22 TAW board, but thought some of you in this discussion might enjoy seeing them...

 

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=64;t=001115#000000

--

 

 

Mark