F-22 - Worth It?

[PraetorH]

Granted that the NKAF is not exactly a world class threat, but you clearly have no clue what they do have, do you?

 

Even if I knew nothing of the KPAF as you in a show of your class suggest, it is still you who brought up the threat of the MiG 29 - downgraded, overaged planes with little fuel and inexperienced pilots available in small numbers. The S-300 may be a different affair, but one that you did not bring up and one I did not respond to. If I were to, I’d probably point to the fact that all we know is the NKoreans showed something that looked like it. Then again, you wanted to talk about the MiG-29, so go ahead.

Edited April 2, 2013 by PraetorH

[thodouras95]

How about reading all the pages

 

is it that bad to reply to the OP's original question in one short line rather than enter a lenthy discussion?

[macelena]

Ok, there are many reasons so as to why to send the Raptors. But in the end is like the space race, a dick measuring contest. They send the raptors because they can.

 

Or did the apollo missions bring something from the moon (besides technology) anything beside letting the russians know how they could do amazing stuff? Murika, F yeah!

[PraetorH]

Ok, there are many reasons so as to why to send the Raptors. But in the end is like the space race, a dick measuring contest. They send the raptors because they can.

 

Or did the apollo missions bring something from the moon (besides technology) anything beside letting the russians know how they could do amazing stuff? Murika, F yeah!

 

Good points really, I'd sign up to all of these. MiG 29s, nah, totally insignificant. The KPAF could have Su 35s as well as Yak 1s, the US military is on a show of force. For that you need the F-22s.

[macelena]

Besides the real need of Raptors, and the issue of bragging about cool stuff, well, the US paid for them already, why not?

[+Typhoid]

The NKAF has Mig-29's.

 

It is anyone's guess as to how ready they are and how good their pilots are, but to denigrate them as nothing more than a handful of '70's vintage aircraft is just nonsense.

[+Dave]

Dave. Red Flag is a nice thing. It proved, that the F-22 is not as superior as it is shown at Discovery Channel and Fox News.

2007 the french Mirage got it on the radar and shot it down in simulated Dogfight. 2011 the same thing with Eurofighter.

As long as the american pilots are aware of the weaknesses of the F-22 and make the best of their strength, then they will surely win.

But if they come in circumstances of WVR combat the technical superiority is not more given. Then .... it could end unhealthy.

So the solution is to fight only from distance. If you can.

 

Gepard

 

You didnt read very well what I said. The bottom line is that those above victories you mentioned are few and far between. The numbers are extremely lopsided in DACT, with the F-22 coming out on top. Of course someone will get an F-22 in DACT. The F-22 is not invincible. The F-22's are there in case NK decides to use its AF. You send your best aircraft for that job. I think you are right, they wouldnt use their AF, but if they do the F-22's will do thier job. Thats the point, being better than the bad guys.

[Slartibartfast]

Also one thing that the 22 can do is it can go in fast and drop JDAM's on any birds on the pads getting ready to fire at Japan South Korea Taiwan China Russia the US etc... without the need to advertise that they are coming and they can be on target in minutes instead of hours as the B-2 or Tomahawks... and without the need for a package to go in as well with ECM SEAD and Air Cover...

[+Gepard]

Stealth meant not invicible. It only reduces the Radar reflecting area. But it can eliminate it. Some radar energy will always come back to the radar transmitter. The major problem is to detect this small amount of radar energy. With improved radar power and good computer power it is impossible to detect also Stealth planes. Of course from much smaller range than normal planes.

Some guys believe the F-22 is an invincible siver bullit. Nobody and harm it, but it can kill all targets easily. And this wrong believe bears the danger of wrong use of this doubtless good plane.

The idea of using JDAMs is such a stupid idea. It bears the risk of a sudden hit and run ambush of NK fighters. Out the ground clutter of the mountain rich terrain, climb in the back of the Raptors and firing some Archers. If the NKs shot down only one Raptor they have the propaganda coup they want to have. Its the same like the F-117 kill over Serbia in 1999. Shot down by outdated but smart used weapons, while the Americans used a smart weapon on stupid way. Its the danger to repeat this mistake.

Thatswhy.

Hold the Raptors in the back to defend Japan and the rest can do the Vipers, Eagles, Warthogs, Hornets and Tomahawks.

No glamour, but efficency.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Gepard

[+ST0RM]

Yes, the massive threat of 35 downgraded 70ies MiGs with inexperienced pilots and virtually no fuel can only be dealt with by sending F-22s.

To state it clearly, I think the F-22 is worth it big time, but pointing to the KPAF is not helping to convince anyone who is not convinced already. ...which is probably the main issue here, people on both sides seem to try convincing themselves rather than others.

 

Contrary to your focus on the MiGs, its more about the NK IADS. A LO aircraft needs to survive in a high threat environment and that is why the F-22 is well suited for this theater.

[+MigBuster]

The idea of using JDAMs is such a stupid idea. It bears the risk of a sudden hit and run ambush of NK fighters. Out the ground clutter of the mountain rich terrain, climb in the back of the Raptors and firing some Archers.

 

Well they need to know its coming via radar, get to 60,000ft in view of every radar out there to intercept a target going near M1.8 in Mil! - good luck even detecting it - let alone getting a MiG-21/29 up there in time - im not sure why you think all tactical jets must fly along at 4kft at 300KIAS in a war zone - is this some kind of 1978 throwback?

 

I would be dubious whether ground clutter is going to hide them at all - the red flag exercises would suggest that there is nowhere to hide from AESA radars - so could happen - but less likely when you know how kinematically superior the F-22 is over pretty much everything else. (although on the same note Cruise Missiles might be as good for known coordinates)

Edited April 3, 2013 by MigBuster

[fallenphoenix1986]

Got to disagree with pretty much everything you just said there Gapard. You're advocating deliberatly holding back the asset with the highest proability of survival and sending in those with the least so that the F-22 can defend Japan from a potential attack that the JASDF are more than capable of dealing with themseves.

 

With improved radar power and good computer power

 

Both things that every single fighter in the NK airforce lacks.

 

You're right in theory a MiG could get into possition to lob an Archer at the 22. If, and its a BIG IF, the MiG can detect and get into a firing position, bear in mind the 22 could be crusing at M1.2+ and 60k', then yes it possible. Now would you rather go in flying an F-16 at <M0.9 at low altitude, bombed up with externals to weigh you down?

 

Noone thinks the 22 is invincible but its a hell of a lot more survivable than ANYTHING else. Send in a strike package of F-4's/15's/16's into NK and you WILL take losses, potentially heavy losses at that, A 22 on the other hand has the POTENTIAL to get in and out undetected and even if it is detected it presents a much harder target to intercept.

 

Craig

[+Brain32]

Send in a strike package of F-4's/15's/16's into NK and you WILL take losses, potentially heavy losses at that, A 22 on the other hand has the POTENTIAL to get in and out undetected and even if it is detected it presents a much harder target to intercept.

Iraq in early 1990 was far more powerfull than NK today, in numbers, aircraft types, air defense, everything. So unless F-15/16/18 somehow lost a lot of combat effectiveness from early 1990's up to today I would disagree with that statement.

[+Gepard]

The best way to go into NK is to fly low. Look at the map. Mountains, mountains, mountains. There is no way to form a radarnetwork that will cover the land so that low flying intruders are detectable. But you can build up a radarnetwork for high altitudes. And there are technics to detect high flying stealth planes. The serbs got it in 1999. The NK could do the same in 2013. Especially if China would give some help.

The technic is old. Already in WW2 it was used by the germans from 1943 to 44. They used the transmissions of the british radar network and put recievers at the french coast. Each single reciever was able to detect the bearing of incomming planes. With 3 recievers it was possible to triangulate the exact position of the planes. (If i remember correctly this system was called "Parasit" or something in this way. I will try to find it out.)

During Kosovo War 1999 the serbs used a methode which was similar in basics. And they shot down a F-117.

If the Chinese or Russians would flood the NK airspace with high energy radar tranmissions the NKs would only need recievers and a simple computer network to find and locate the weak stealth signals. The rest is simple mathematics.

[fallenphoenix1986]

F-16's and 18's WERE shot down in the Gulf... the'yre not SAM proof. Asuming the NK's know how to use their gear then I'd rather not take an F-16 accross the border if a 22 is an option.An F-22 is harder to kill than an F-15/16/18-whatever whether you are on the ground or fighting it in the air... lower probability of detection, faster & higher, harder to hit end of story.

 

The thing with the Serb shoot down noone ever seems to remember is that they knew it was coming... its a whole new game when you don't know when the attack is coming or what the target is going to be. The serbs were workin on that set up for some time before actually managing to pull it off, what makes you so sure the entire NK network is so easilly adaptable to kill stealths at will?

 

As for the Chinese, they think the NK's are just as nutty as we do.

 

In any case I'm out.

 

Craig

Edited April 3, 2013 by fallenphoenix1986

[+Gepard]

Okay, the name of the system is "passive radar". Here the link to wiki.

 

http://en.wikipedia....i/Passive_radar

 

 

Craig. if the NK shot down a F-16 or a F-18 it is not such a propaganda coup like downing a F-22.

Who is remembering about the other shot down planes during Kosovo war? No one. But all remembering the shot down F-117. And why?

Because it was said to be unvulnerable, because undetectable.

And this proved wrong.

And now it is repeated with the F-22. It is said to be unvulnerable, because undetectable.

 

Do you want to repeat history, or do you want to learn from mistakes?

Edited April 3, 2013 by Gepard

[PraetorH]

Iraq in early 1990 was far more powerfull than NK today, in numbers, aircraft types, air defense, everything. So unless F-15/16/18 somehow lost a lot of combat effectiveness from early 1990's up to today I would disagree with that statement.

 

Indeed from a purely technical point, the ROKAF is perfectly capable of dealing with NK. But the fact that the US has send its best assets however is crucial, it shows they mean it. There is a political message that stealth planes convey and conventional planes cannot.

 

 

Contrary to your focus on the MiGs, its more about the NK IADS. A LO aircraft needs to survive in a high threat environment and that is why the F-22 is well suited for this theater.

 

It is not my focus, it was brought up by Typhoid. And again, I'd agree to the point that the S-300 would be greater threat - if it really is the S-300 and not some cheap knock-off, or just something that looks like it. Russia has not confirmed any delivery of S-300 systems.

 

 

It is anyone's guess as to how ready they are and how good their pilots are, but to denigrate them as nothing more than a handful of '70's vintage aircraft is just nonsense.

 

It is not anyone's guess to say they lack fuel, which naturally hampers pilot training. I will grant that there is no clear data on it though. The MiG 29-pilots may receive special attention - but this is really anyone's guess.

As far as the numbers and capabilities of the MiG 29 are concerned, there are simply no more than 35 MiG 29 + 5 MiG 29 trainers, probably less due to attrition (the trouble with keeping the engine alive alone is staggering - one reason why we got rid of them even before we get rid of the Phantom). The single seaters are 9-12B, no other version has ever been confirmed, and they are the downgraded export version of the already downgraded WP-export version 9-12A. The 9-12Bs are equipped with radar (N-019EB) worse than that of the MiG 23ML without any ECCM, and while their own ecm is a joke, they have limited IFF, and they lack a datalink (so much for IAD). This is by far the very worst version of the MiG 29 ever produced. Technically they were produced in the early 80ies, but their technology is 70ies level.

 

I do not see any reason not to call them overaged and available in small numbers. They are.

 

What they are not is a reason to send the F-22. There are other, much better reasons, most of all a show of force, lower on the list is the ground based air defence, and rock bottom would be the KPAF aircraft.

[+Brain32]

But the fact that the US has send its best assets however is crucial, it shows they mean it. There is a political message that stealth planes convey and conventional planes cannot.

Exactly! And this is one of the high-points of the Raptor, Spirit and all the high tech stuff, it's a deterrent, it says - "We mean business".

Pretty similar to nukes, they are expensive, maintenance intensive and are newer used, even are not wanted to be used with huge fear surrounding not only potential targets but users too, but they make a point a really chilling wake-up call kind of point...

[+MigBuster]

The best way to go into NK is to fly low. Look at the map. Mountains, mountains, mountains. There is no way to form a radarnetwork that will cover the land so that low flying intruders are detectable. But you can build up a radarnetwork for high altitudes. And there are technics to detect high flying stealth planes. The serbs got it in 1999. The NK could do the same in 2013. Especially if China would give some help.

The technic is old. Already in WW2 it was used by the germans from 1943 to 44. They used the transmissions of the british radar network and put recievers at the french coast. Each single reciever was able to detect the bearing of incomming planes. With 3 recievers it was possible to triangulate the exact position of the planes. (If i remember correctly this system was called "Parasit" or something in this way. I will try to find it out.)

During Kosovo War 1999 the serbs used a methode which was similar in basics. And they shot down a F-117.

If the Chinese or Russians would flood the NK airspace with high energy radar tranmissions the NKs would only need recievers and a simple computer network to find and locate the weak stealth signals. The rest is simple mathematics.

 

 

 

Right so fly in low in the far more lethal AAA /MANPAD range...when quite frankly even a flight of F-16s or A-10Cs would be pretty safe up high with jamming support.

 

If this theoretical radar coverage can pinpoint a stealth jet - why is everyone building stealth jets today if thats such a threat? The reason is because it changes nothing in reality.

 

And these ancient low flying jets will have to actually climb quite above any mountains that will be detected long before they got in any kind of missile range -and what exactly makes you think their GCI will have any contact with the jets? or will the jets be transmitting their positions due to having ancient tech transponders?

Edited April 3, 2013 by MigBuster

[+Dave]

You all have to remember that Gepard is old East German AF. So he thinks in the cold war climate. He has been out of the ball game for years and has not been part of the new ways we do things. Tactics used in Desert Storm are not the same ones we use now. It's a different era Gepard, and I'm say this having been at the tip of that spear for years. Your thinking is out dated. It obvious by everyone's reaction to your comments.

[fallenphoenix1986]

 

Craig. if the NK shot down a F-16 or a F-18 it is not such a propaganda coup like downing a F-22.

Who is remembering about the other shot down planes during Kosovo war? No one. But all remembering the shot down F-117. And why?

Because it was said to be unvulnerable, because undetectable.

And this proved wrong.

And now it is repeated with the F-22. It is said to be unvulnerable, because undetectable.

 

 

Right so no piece of military equipment should ever be deployed incase it gives the enemy propaganda points... or alternativly maybey it will live up to the hype and wipe the floor with them just like it has in every excersise to date.

 

The reason the other aircraft arn't so widely talked about is because there simply wern't that many other aircraft shot down, and none of those that were required special measures to bring down. In all probability with better mission planning ie not flying over the same spot at the same time every single night then the Serb 1117 shoot down wouldn't have happened. Stealth only works if you use it right, much the same as any other form of camouflage.

 

For the last time none whose opinions actually matter has ever claimed the F-22 is invulnerable, NOONE. Same goes for the 117 and B-2. How many types have had the capability to fly over Bahgdad night after night and return without a scratch? The terms used are "low observability" and, "high surviability"... these are accurate regardless of your opinion of stealth technology.

 

Stealth aircraft are harder to bring down than conventional types, the precious Serb example proves this very point. Your talking about re-organising an entire IADS network to deal with a single aircraft type (two if we count the B-2) and at the same time saying stealth isnt a game changer.

 

Craig

[MAKO69]

You all have to remember that Gepard is old East German AF. So he thinks in the cold war climate. He has been out of the ball game for years and has not been part of the new ways we do things. Tactics used in Desert Storm are not the same ones we use now. It's a different era Gepard, and I'm say this having been at the tip of that spear for years. Your thinking is out dated. It obvious by everyone's reaction to your comments.

 

Dave, they really messed him up, they got him good when the wall was still up. To bad cause he is missing "IT" if he still sees life through the distorted port hole in the iron curtain.

[dast24]

You all have to remember that Gepard is old East German AF. So he thinks in the cold war climate. He has been out of the ball game for years and has not been part of the new ways we do things. Tactics used in Desert Storm are not the same ones we use now. It's a different era Gepard, and I'm say this having been at the tip of that spear for years. Your thinking is out dated. It obvious by everyone's reaction to your comments.

 

but if i remember correctly this is a forum were we can discuss such things and Gepard has a point.the text i quoted sounds a bit offense or snootily.

only because he has done his duty in the cold war doesn´t mean that he and his thinking and knowledge isn´t anymore valid.

 

from the cost effective perspective you have to admit i would have been much cheaper to not develope/build the F-22

because the "legacy" aircrafts are still very capable and upgrading these would have been much cheaper.

or a new(stealth) mulitrole mass produced f-16 like jet would be a better choice for conflicts of the past (Irak 2003, Lybia...)

 

but if i have to go to War. i would want the best tech avaible for my troops, because i dont want to fight fair. i want to win.

and i would give a damn about if its overkill or not.

 

i also have to say that the USA is a bit over confident about her own abilities and the technology

much like that little Guy from austria and his "V" Weapons some time ago

and if the US loose a conflict or fight it doesn´t happen or the other´s cheated!

 

like the excersise against our mig-29´s against F-16´s

they flew DACT 1vs1 and the flight was over after the F-16 pilot "killed" the Mig virtually

but the fight process if the Mig kills the F-16.

the F-16 pilots celebrated there Victories until debriefing...

were thy learned that they were hit 10 or more times before they got the simulated kill on the Mig-29´s

but instead to look what went wrong or what they can do about it they run out of the room like big babies crying that the have the better jets and they should have won

 

EDIT: back to topic is it worth it.

if i remember correctly ther was a plane called F-14 Tomcat

it was also very overkill for it´s time and the Air to Air Victories in US Service are 4+?

but that little Turkey was worth it because it protected the Fleet, Allies in Desert Storm and the US only with it´s presence and its Radar.

Edited April 4, 2013 by dast24

[Slartibartfast]

In War no-one plays fair... so take the biggest bat you have and hit the other guys while he is looking the other way...

 

Also flying low is what cost the RAF etc in Gulf War 1 and the one thing that the DPK has is a bucketload and then some of guns and flying in that area is not really healthy as with most modern aircraft A-10 or Rook excluded small arms will bring them down... hit em high hard and fast...

 

And remember the game has changed as Dave quoted even the Russians/Soviets realised that in Afghanistan and in Chechnya you go in high and fast out of range of all the zipper guns and Manpads as the rule comes in here you fire enough you will hit something...

Edited April 4, 2013 by Slartibartfast

[fallenphoenix1986]

Also flying low is what cost the RAF etc in Gulf War 1

 

To be fair what cost the RAF in GW1 was flying low with nothing to hide behind, large flat open desert is a very different environment to hilly/mountainous Europe where the low level tactics were developed for. Though as you say, down low sooner or latter you get hit by fluke whereas the same cannot nessisarily be said for high alt.

 

Craig