F-22

[+Dave 2,319]

What are your thoughts on it?

[jodandawg 18]

the F22 would be a great addition!!! bring it on!!

[+Fates 63]

Yeah USAFBLT

[+Dave 2,319]

I mean the real F-22. What do you all think of it?

[JediMaster 451]

I think it's the best fighter ever. I also think that in the future we're going to be glad we have it.

And I think right now it may get screwed because it can't do much for the fight we're involved in today. However, people are notoriously bad at predicting the fight of tomorrow.

[Caesar 305]

Although the Tomcat will always be my favorite fighter, the F-22 draws a close second. In my opinion, it'll be the fighter of the 21st century, at least until mid. Watching it preform is amazing, and the fact that it can't be seen on radar until it's damn close is a major advantage in air combat. I see stuff posted on other boards about "what'd happen if an F-22 encountered an Su-37" or some similar combat-modeled demonstration a/c, and I always think to myself, where's the argument? Can't shoot what you can't see! Doesn't matter how maneuverable your plane is if it gets killed 60 miles from its target. Expensive, yes, but I think it'll prove its worth to doubters over the next few years, especially as it has been doing so in simulated combat against 4th gen fighters like the F-15 and -16.

[jodandawg 18]

sorry about that. i thought you were talking about the model. in light of the world situation now, the f 22 seems to be a bit useless. although, north korea does seem to pose a moderate threat. right now using the f 22 would be like using a jack hammer to crack open a pecan.

[+Dave 2,319]

sorry about that. i thought you were talking about the model. in light of the world situation now, the f 22 seems to be a bit useless. although, north korea does seem to pose a moderate threat. right now using the f 22 would be like using a jack hammer to crack open a pecan.

 

But its that same line of thought when the "experts" thought the gun was obsolete on jet aircraft and we all know how wrong they were in that regard. You have to always have to plan ahead in a countries war fighting capability, because if you are caught short, the results can be disastrous. The F-22 has the A2A and A2G capability to be very useful in the current conflicts as well as tonorrows.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

But its that same line of thought when the "experts" thought the gun was obsolete on jet aircraft and we all know how wrong they were in that regard. You have to always have to plan ahead in a countries war fighting capability, because if you are caught short, the results can be disastrous. The F-22 has the A2A and A2G capability to be very useful in the current conflicts as well as tonorrows.

 

Don't forget the disastrous British White Paper from 1954 ('56?) stating that manned aircraft were on the way out and missiles were the way of the future. This led to a whole host of project cancellations, most notably TSR2 and fleet carrier CVA1 (carriers were also thought to be far too vulnerable, and not particularly useful. ) Wow... how wrong do you have to be?(Canadians went through similar motions with a similar white paper. This formed most of the initiative to scrap the CF-105 Arrow)

 

I do have to say though, it bugs me when people constantly compare the F-22 and the Su-37. Yeah, granted, they're two of the meanest kids on the block, but they both stem from different generations from which different design philosophies were employed. Also, their intended roles are far different. The F-22 is more of a strategic asset with its integrated technologies (sensors, AESA, datalinks -all next gen stuff) to create a wealth of situational knowledge not only for the pilots, but for all other assets employed in a particular area of operations. Changing operational strategy was reflected heavily in the approach to designing it where as this wasn't the case for the Super Flanker (or Terminator, I'm sticking with Super Flanker because Terminator sounds too wanky for me )

The design approach of the Su-37 was to make sure that the title of "World's most kickass air superiority fighter" would be retained within the Flanker family, but less emphasis was placed on situational awareness and information sharing. This continued on the Soviet philosophy of a lack of force multiplication, or quantity over quality. In combat, the Su-35 and 37 aren't able to share the ammounts of information that other 4th and 5th gen fighters can, such as Rafaele, Eurofighter and F-22 and so on and as a result are lagging behind these aircraft as only now are serious programs developed towards developing said capabilities. Although this gap is closing, the end result will be an aircraft, a very very capable aircraft mind you, using a lot of technology in either a bolt-on format or requiring sunstantial refitting (Look at the latest F-15K/SG variants). I don't think you'll see this with the Russian 5th gen fighters as the leassons should have been learned by then.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Something I personally think should have been planned for with the F-22 was the ammount of foreign interest in buying them. Several nations are currently seeking permission to acquire FMS permits for the Raptor, most notably Taiwan and Japan, but are almost certain to get rejected for various reasons. (There's talk here in Australia about it, but it's a total crock... Don't get me started )

I believe an export model with slightly different export systems and construction methods would still have been a vast improvement over current inventories but also allowing the US to retain sensitive technologies. This was done with the F-15 early on with its service (see Japan and Saudi Arabia) and I think this would have allowed foreign military sales to friendly nations while simultaneously allowing something closer to the original 738(?) production units to be build. This would have created an economy of scale resulting in cheaper parts, training, units and construction methods. This makes much more sense than producing aircraft on an "as needed" basis. But like I said, this is said with hindsight.

 

I believe something vaguely similar to this is happening with JSF but it's not working out as either the rules seem to keep changing, or they're open to interpretation, hence developing partners getting screwed (Like Oz, Turkey, pick a European nation, also Israel was booted out completely at one stage). Either the terms drawn up during the Clinton administration were too broad or ambiguous, or the Bush administration is looking to change the rules again, I'm not too sure.

 

That's me done, just let me wipe the rabid foam from my chin...

[eraser_tr 29]

Fantastic aircraft. The latest figure I heard was that a flight on 8 raptors managed to take out 32 F-15s without loss. But then on C5, I read one got caught by an F-18 low and slow. I say the pilot makes the plane, but as far as just the machine goes, I don't think there was ever a finer plane made. Of course that comes at a price few can afford.

 

Fortunately, it and the rest of the top of the line equipment being developed and deployed now most likely won't ever see a true test of their abilities. Unless other nations sell their best planes(and other weapons) cheaply and liberally, most won't have much of a chance to fight each other. As economies intertwine, aside from some catastrophic change, going to war with any of the old threats like china and russia dwindles as time goes on. North Korea is probably the biggest threat, any other country war is forseeable with, we'll be stuck in guerilla warfare against militias, rebel groups etc. Which a Raptor or Abrams isn't quite as useful.

 

Of course, that's what simulations are for. We can make up and conflict we like to pit them against each other.

Edited March 3, 2007 by eraser_tr

[Darrin 3]

I've only seen Tv material,but what i've seen and heard is very positive stuff,like 1 against 5 ,but id like to hear more about its dog fighting capabilitys ,i mean i've heard alot about never being seen but what happens when it has to show it self.

And if someone did shoot one down whats that going to do to our confedence. It seems to have set the bar a little high.

[JediMaster 451]

That's always the problem. Remember the hoopla when the 117 was shot down? That was a result of poor planning, but it was still paraded about.

[Redddevil911 0]

Maybe this is not military thinking, but what happen to the old saying if it’s not broken don’t fix it. I’m all for the latest and greatest if it’s needed, but who are we trying to stay a head of? The Russians can’t pay its pilots let alone put new aircraft in the air, China can’t fart without the US intelligence services knowing about it. By and far the US is a head of the game not only with aircraft in service but pilots as well. Do we need this aircraft? Can we live without it? We did not have this aircraft in Desert Strom and the Iraqi AF was bomb back to the Stone Age, I know this only set them back about three weeks and loss’s hit the allied side as well but the loss’s where due to blindly fired AAA, that’s what cause the shooting down of the F117 years ago. Sounds to me like we are putting all our eggs in one basket.

[KJSimon 0]

Yes the F-22 is the ultimate in Air Dominance for the 21st century.

What is happening with the current state of development of the F-22 for SFP-1/WingsVetEuro.

I keep checking on it EVERY week? Does anyone know??? The F-23 is VERY nice as is the Talon and F-19

[+Dave 2,319]

Yes the F-22 is the ultimate in Air Dominance for the 21st century.

What is happening with the current state of development of the F-22 for SFP-1/WingsVetEuro.

I keep checking on it EVERY week? Does anyone know??? The F-23 is VERY nice as is the Talon and F-19

 

KJ

 

We are keeping this forum to real aviation. Questions about mods etc should be asked in their perspective forums. But yes it is the ultimate in air dominance. Thank you for understanding.

[Redddevil911 0]

You think the Air Force will write "HEHE you can't see me", on the side of the plane. LOL

[+suhsjake 11]

I think its a great fighter, and that the US needs another advantage, but the current fighters can still do a lot. My main complant is the cost of the aircraft. Lets hope they don't go nuts building them.

 

Its not the quality of the equipment, its the quality of the pilots that fly them.

[JediMaster 451]

The reason I think is they keep wanting planes to do more and more. It's not enough that it does what the previous one does, it has do to it all better. Then, it has to be able to do more as well. Then it has to be safer, then it has to be more survivable, then it has to be more lethal, then it has to more effective, and so on.

Well, that stuff isn't free. You have to pay for it.

Then Congress balks at building more. You can get 100 planes for $50 billion, or 50 planes for $35 billion...well, that saves us $15 billion! Uh, yeah, but now your unit cost has gone up.

Penny wise, pound foolish, every time.

 

The USAF bought the F-16 because they couldn't afford enough F-15s to do everything. We're buying the F-35 because of the F-22's price, but there are issues with the F-35. So the debate for more F-22s takes a different course...

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

You think the Air Force will write "HEHE you can't see me", on the side of the plane. LOL

 

Saw a great photoshopped snap of a B-2 once that said on the underside "If you can read this, you're f***ed"

I used to have a large version, I can't seem to find it. Here's the smaller one:

 

Although, it'll be a lot harder to read on a Raptor. Maybe just something like "Boo!"

[serverandenforcer 33]

Saw a great photoshopped snap of a B-2 once that said on the underside "If you can read this, you're f***ed"

I used to have a large version, I can't seem to find it. Here's the smaller one:

 

Although, it'll be a lot harder to read on a Raptor. Maybe just something like "Boo!"

 

 

Or how about... "Got religion?"

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Or how about... "Got religion?"

 

Or for the Taliban, maybe "Ban this :fuk: " I think that'd fit underneath a Raptor

[allentime 0]

F-22 crosses the date line and computer nav. locks up. And cannot be rebooted.

I guess USAF pilots are not trained in dead reckoning anymore?

[+Dave 2,319]

F-22 crosses the date line and computer nav. locks up. And cannot be rebooted.

I guess USAF pilots are not trained in dead reckoning anymore?

 

I take it you have never flown over the Pacific Ocean before. I for one sure the hell wouldn't dead reckon over that ocean. That is how people disappear.

[FastCargo 412]

F-22 crosses the date line and computer nav. locks up. And cannot be rebooted.

I guess USAF pilots are not trained in dead reckoning anymore?

 

Hmmm...let me think. Let's risk several multi million dollar aircraft on the assumptions that my airspeed is correct (every 10 KIAS off at altitude equals .05 mach - 1/2 a mile per minute - 30 NM per hour), the winds are correct (10 knots cross - 10 NM per hour), the air density is correct (a 2000 ft PA change - 10 KIAS change) and you take in the mag variance change and the compass card doesn't drift. Oh, and you have no ground references for at least 4 hours travel because you're over an ocean that covers 1/3 of the planet. For a training exercise.

 

And forget cel nav...know any fighter pilots who carry cel nav tables and a sextant?

 

Tell ya what, go bungee jumping...doesn't sound quite as stupid as the above scenario.

 

FastCargo

Edited April 7, 2007 by FastCargo