Jump to content

F-22 Rulez!!!


Recommended Posts

I swear I was over on metacafe and witnessed the same argument. I don't have near the knowledge of these planes that you guys do but I have given this some thought as well. (Sorry, I am not aware of the deadhorse thread mentioned earlier. So I apologize for jumping on this wagon late)

I bet you guys will have the answers to these questions.

 

While the cobra is really nice to watch, wouldn't that just get the amraam to slam into your skin all that much quicker?

 

The Cobra is suicide when performed against a locked-on missile. Period.

It may aid in rapid deceleration and turning away to stay in the notch, but flying this slow, as has been narrated to me by pilots = you die.

 

Didn't we have a modified F-15C eagle at one time with vectored thrust and canards (along with louvers for reversing) There would have to be some reason that our military chose not to explore this option. Possibly they believe speed/stealth is the greater advantage over maneuverability. This aircraft was from the mid to late 80's? Thats some time ago.

 

Yep, it was a technology evaluator/demonstrator. USAF went for BVR ownage instead of trying to get close. However lessons learned from this and other projects led to the F-22's thrust vectoring. The USAF had a whole new plane built instead of doing airframe upgrades to F-15's.

 

Don’t' we blow a hell of a lot more of our taxpayers money on training our guys than anyone else?

 

Yep, and everyone else loses right there. There are a few countries that sort of keep up, but not too many.

 

Isn't our technology in terms of the electronic battlefield superior? Data linking etc etc. I know Russian aircraft have the IRST (don’t we have some equivalent?)

 

Russian aircraft have datalinks as well. Now wether one's quality is better over the other is debateable, though for a long while the USAF has enjoyed superior radar technology for its interceptors. I think the gap is closing though - thus the F-22.

 

I remember hearing Russians had superior engines that gave an enormous thrust advantage (the show boasted at the time a mig29 could perform "almost" the same as an F-15 with one engine shut down) I swear! It was on a show!

 

In someone's wet dreams, maybe :)

 

Hey! Didn't India just whoop our ass in some match 9/10 times with their migs vs our F-15's?

 

Scripted exercise, F-15's were not allowed to use AMRAAMs and were severely out-numbered. ;)

 

Who wants to field this one? Any takers?

 

Jeff

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest IguanaKing

Didn't we have a modified F-15C eagle at one time with vectored thrust and canards (along with louvers for reversing) There would have to be some reason that our military chose not to explore this option. Possibly they believe speed/stealth is the greater advantage over maneuverability. This aircraft was from the mid to late 80's? Thats some time ago.

 

Yup. It was a modified F-15B, known as the F-15 ACTIVE (Advanced Controls Technology for Intergrated Vehicles). The canards were actually stabilators from the F/A-18. There was also the F-16 AFTI (Advanced Fighter Technology Integrator) with forward canards, and IRST. It was all the rage in Air Force Magazine in 1985. Then there was the F-16 VISTA/MATV (Variable-stability in-flight simulator test aircraft/Multi-axis thrust vectoring). In 1994 it was demonstrating 80 degree sustained AoA, and even transient AoA maneuvers in excess of 180 degrees (yes...it could fly backward for a short time and then transition to normal flight). These aircraft were test beds for proving concepts in airframe, powerplant, and avionics...much of what they taught us is being incorporated into the F-22 and aircraft to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest IguanaKing
She may not be curvey like her Russian counterparts, but the Raptor is still a gorgeous aircraft in a futuristic sort of way. IMO anyway.

 

Curvy? Nah...those Flankers and Fulcrums have chunky butts. I think Sir Mixalot should do a tribute to Flankers. Oh wait, I think he already did. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, it's a bland looking aircraft....thats said as an aircraft lover though, and of course it's just my opinion. As a warfighter (which I'm not, but if I was!), I would have to guesstimate that the F22 will no doubt take it.

 

Slight coincidence, but I've just finished watching an episode of Top Gear where they compared the Ferrari Enzo to the F50 - Jeremy Clarkson ultimately came down on the side of the F50, saying something like "The Enzo is without doubt faster, but there are too many computers. The F50 is more fun!"

 

And perhaps thats what gets people fighting - The F22 may win the fight, but IMHO it doesn't do it with panache or style - of course thats not what fighting a war is all about, but we are aircraft enthusiasts at heart, and for some the F22 just doesn't do it at all. So when some people constantly remind others that 'The F22 pwns everything, always, in all situations!', it just seems like baiting - and someone will always rise to take a bite....

 

Which reminds me, I was wondering - are people going to wax as lyrical about the combat abilities of the first UCAV into the air-to-air fight? IMHO the answer would have to be: hardly - whilst a UCAV may be able to utterly slaughter a manned fighter in the near future, it will be even more soulless (er, especially without a pilot!) than the F22. A clinical dealer of air-to-air death. But will it be beautiful as a piece of aviation? If you find function over form to be beautiful, then maybe. But for me, for all their limitations and faults, I still find aircraft such as the Su27, the Constellation, the Mustang, the Concorde etc beautiful. Something a UCAV (and the F22) just......aren't.

IMHO.

 

 

Great post! I agree completly.

:Core2Duo @ 435FSB x 7 3.05GHz : ATI x1900xtx: 2GB Patriot @ 435Mhz : WD 250Gb UATA: Seagate 320Gb SATA2: X-Fi Platinum:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im afraid with the mig, it would mean double disavantage for you, plane and pilot. ;) :D

 

 

 

 

Not realy. The F-22 is extremely agile. I has been reported to be better than even the F-16.

The only plane I can think of making something the Raptor cant at WVR would be the Su-30MKI with ruder thrust vectoring. but you wont get much chances of using that, because then you will have exausted your speed and become a stationary target. The F-22 superior T/W ratio would give the critical ability of better energy play. I would wait for the opportunity to shoot up untill you be forced to level nose and then shoot ya like a clay pigeom from above.

 

Hold on, but didnt the Luftwaffe Mig-29s out fly and kill everything the Americans through at it in WVR?

 

So if the F22 is "EVEN better" then the F16, maybe it puts in on the level of the mig in the agility dept.

:Core2Duo @ 435FSB x 7 3.05GHz : ATI x1900xtx: 2GB Patriot @ 435Mhz : WD 250Gb UATA: Seagate 320Gb SATA2: X-Fi Platinum:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hold on, but didnt the Luftwaffe Mig-29s out fly and kill everything the Americans through at it in WVR?

 

So if the F22 is "EVEN better" then the F16, maybe it puts in on the level of the mig in the agility dept.

 

 

Uhh ... nope. The F-15 just whacked it BVR or stayed high in WVR. The F-16 kept its speed up and did ok. The F-18 out-AoA'd it.

 

The MiG-29 is a great fighter, but it was certainly not 'outflying and killing everything' the americans could throw at it in WVR. The win went to whoever drew the other guy into his sandbox.

 

As far as the F-22 goes, the MiG's unlikely to be particularely good competition without thrust vectoring at -least-.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RaptorBankingWithVapor.jpg

 

This one is totally stretched. And effect like this takes place when an object obtains relativistic range of speeds. So my guess is that F-22 was flying with at least 0.8c! :D

 

Oh btw, when the things are moving really fast, they get squeezed really. So in this case it should be minus 0.8c :D :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh ... nope. The F-15 just whacked it BVR or stayed high in WVR. The F-16 kept its speed up and did ok. The F-18 out-AoA'd it.

 

The MiG-29 is a great fighter, but it was certainly not 'outflying and killing everything' the americans could throw at it in WVR. The win went to whoever drew the other guy into his sandbox.

 

As far as the F-22 goes, the MiG's unlikely to be particularely good competition without thrust vectoring at -least-.

 

Intersting, because what I read was that the 29 took out the F18, F16 and F15 in their simulated dog fights. Being superior with its look and lock and agility.

:Core2Duo @ 435FSB x 7 3.05GHz : ATI x1900xtx: 2GB Patriot @ 435Mhz : WD 250Gb UATA: Seagate 320Gb SATA2: X-Fi Platinum:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest IguanaKing

If that's what you read, I suggest you expand your reading sources. The DACT exercises against the Luftwaffe 75th were typical of these types of exercises. Some losses and some wins on both sides. Anybody who claims that one side or the other completely dominated the exercise is full of s**t. Also, what GG said about the F-18 out-AoA'ing the MiG-29 is absolutely true...but don't take that to mean that he was saying the Hornet always kicked the Fulcrum's butt. That's where his analogy about getting the other guy to play in your sandbox comes in. Each aircraft has specific strengths and weaknesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I heard the same; but it turned out that the IRCM techniques worked well enough with the archer. I can't see how the MiG could have anything but advantage with the HMS, but there were ways to work around it.

 

It also turned out that the USAF had its own MiGs to practice with/against ... so I really doubt things went 'just like that' ;)

 

Insofar as the 15 went, that thing would crush the 29BVR or try to draw it high and fast - if it went the other way (the 15 got dragged down into a turning fight instead of energy) it got killed.

 

With the 16, it was about speed: The MiG-29 has excellent AoA handling and can point the nose all over the place, this with HMS is a huge advantage ... so if they got the 16 slow ...

boom

 

Witht he 18, the 29 had the energy advantage but it was the -18- that could out-AoA the MiG.

 

 

So you can probably see it wasn't near as cut-and-dry as people would like to make it. It was pretty much a 'come into my domain' fight all around.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intersting, because what I read was that the 29 took out the F18, F16 and F15 in their simulated dog fights. Being superior with its look and lock and agility.

 

 

Luftwafe claimed F-16 kills in exercises in italy, but that should be interpreted information "as is", because a pilot will only tell his sweet stories of victories. There are no such thing as a modest pilot and without other sources as cross references, all you get is over spiced myths such as that you said.

 

For example, I have heard in WVR exercises Gripen pilots telling they won almost all engagements because the Gripen bleeds less energy in a turn, but their suposedly F-16 and F-18 prey claim their own streak of victories thanks to their higher T/W ratio. Whos telling the truth?

 

Helmet mouted sight in russian fighter is not what it used to be as more modern systems are increasingly avaiable throughout europe.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also turned out that the USAF had its own MiGs to practice with/against ... so I really doubt things went 'just like that' ;)

 

US has had migs from the 15 to the 23. 29's only non airworthy examples from Moldova. And the 23 crashed in a fatal accident early in flight tests. The only ones to see extensive simulated dogfights in the US were the 15's and 21's much before any of us was even born. The first time US pilots had a taste of the 29 was with the german airforce.

 

Source: Airforces monthly. "American Migs" Report.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest IguanaKing

So you can probably see it wasn't near as cut-and-dry as people would like to make it. It was pretty much a 'come into my domain' fight all around.

 

Nope, it was definitely not cut-n-dry. The "come into my domain" fight is exactly how it would be IRL...good, ol' fashion combat tactics. :D

 

Have you seen Wings: Red October? That shows a pretty good overall picture of what DACT is all about, and it shows the fight from both perspectives. No pilot was heard saying "Yeah...we completely pwnd them!" :) The Archer came up more than a few times, with the USN aviators basically saying "If I let him get into that position...its Archer inbound, then I'm dead."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my humble opinion, the Raptor is somewhat misplaced aircraft. It's a true 21century technology with average weaponry, an exploitation of an old stealth system, and a 20-year old airframe design.

 

It's surely gonna kick some ass in the sky, but is it really worth the hype? Any aircraft with that cost will surely make enemies suffer. The Flanker and Fulcrum family showed that the airframe is the primary thing on the combat aircraft, as you can always upgrade the technology under the hood. Hell, even the newly upgraded MiG-21s can do extensive BVR with Alamo's and have all the nifty Russian EOS stuff and can carry top-of-the-class closecombat weapons like Archer.

 

Having mentioned weaponry, US doesn't have a true modern long-range weapon. I find this rather weird, considering that current USAF's tactics can be described as stealth-no-contact BVR combat. AIM-120C5's range is approx 110 km. AIM-7s range is 75 km. On the other side, there are R-77M1(175 km), R-33(160 km), R-37(280 km) and production prototype of R-172(400 km).

 

The stealth system is an advancement of an old type that F-117 and B-2 carries. And both of those types were shot down by guided weaponry in operation "allied force". IMHO, it's just an matter of Raptors combat hours until it's stealth gets decloaked.

 

The thing that i like very much is AESA radar, and it's fast-shifting. However, i again think that F22 is a mixture of an old and new, and right in the time when that is not needed. I mean, there isn't Soviet Union anymore, Russia has an rather defensive doctrine and US won't wage wars with any superforce (Russia, EU, China) in the near future. It's not even likely it will fight Iran, not an superforce, but an force. In last two conflicts, the Serbia and Iraq, third generation fighters won the skies. Why not instead concentrate on making an true futuristic aircraft, something like the PAK-FA project? Berkuts, Terminators and 1.44s were technology testbeds for future aircraft design. With an thrust-vectoring Fulcrum, Su-35 Superflanker, the Platypus and Su-25T, Foxhound, all old but genius designs, upgraded with latest technology, Russia is secured, rather up-to-date and can focus on the real new design.

 

All this is IMHO, flamewar not intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brave little Fulcrum to take on F-22! It is about how big the heart is, not how stealthy the airplane is!

 

Brave, :megalol: he can have the biggest heart in the world but what are you going to tell his family or when his little girl says were is my daddy?

 

Come on people do you really think the Fulcrum would stand a chance against a Raptor? :harhar:

 

I tried to stay out of it don't I couldn't help myself. I felt like ForceFeedback around a ceertain plant :helpsmilie:

 

:v:

 

 

@zare meet me in hyperlobby in 20 minutes :punch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*****Abstract: In a nutshell 22 is likely to win in ideal world, subject to equal skill of the pilots*****

 

Full Message

Well, the tread turned out ok after all!

 

Things ppl sayed about german MiGs exersize are true. There is even a video of F-18 with MiG-29 in his sights.

 

I agree that the victor is the pilot who makes his opponent to fight by his rules. In ideal world at least.

 

But then again, war will never happen in ideal world, nor will it go by ideal rules. I know how MiG would preform in random situations (scrambles, field airports etc), but I have no information about F-22 with that respect. In all-equal positions in fight between 29 and 22, 22 will probably win, but equal position fights rarely happen. Partially because fights happen over someones terretory, and that generally gives one side an advantage.

 

Unfortunately, times of knights and duels are passed in most places, it's not how you win it, it's whether you win or lose. And by that theory, methods don't matter.

 

Might seem like a lot of pointless words for most of you, but hopefully, some will understend what I'm trying to say.

 

{REGARDS}

 

BIOLOG

The bird of Hermes is my name eating my wings to make me tame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...