F/A-22 Secrets Revealed

kashifshahzad

Banned Member
RAPTOR UNWRAPPED

With long-term military budget cuts looming once again, the U.S. Air Force and Lockheed Martin are finally talking about some of the F/A-22 Raptor's closely held secrets that they hope will keep Congress paying for the $132-million stealth aircraft.

While these conversations, many of them informal, didn't touch on "even one-third of its classified capabilities," according to one pilot, they included the ability to hunt down and destroy cruise missiles well behind enemy lines, the introduction of a new missile that allows the head-on attack and destruction of stealthy enemy missiles, a tailless bomber derivative design, a planned electronic attack capability so powerful that it actually damages enemy electronics, and modifications that would allow the aircraft's electronic package to invade enemy computer networks.

The tone of the conversations was sharpened by a still-unreleased report about the series of air combat training engagements earlier this year between Indian air force Su-30MKs and F-15Cs from Elmendorf AFB, Alaska; the latter were equipped with the U.S.' newest long-range, high-definition radars.

Those who have read draft copies of the report say the Su-30MKs and F-15 pilots were seeing each other at the same time with their radars, but the Indian pilots were getting off the simulated first shot with their AA-10 Alamo missiles and often winning the long-range engagements. The Indian pilots also had more flight time in the previous year than the U.S. pilots, roughly 300 hr. compared with 250 hr., the pilot said.

Those factors are causing the U.S. to rethink the formula that they always will be facing less well-trained pilots and inferior weaponry. They also reinforce the argument that the U.S. needs a fighter with greater radar range (the F/A-22's is more than 100 naut. mi.), stealth (the F-15 has a huge radar cross section) and fused sensors so that pilots can easily grasp what's going on around them.

Key to the F/A-22's capabilities is a complex of passive sensors, basically for electronic surveillance, that line the outside edges of the fighter's wings and tail surfaces. They gather electronic emissions at frequencies up to 18 GHz., sort them by time and angle of arrival for location, and analyze the signature automatically for rapid identification. Electronic data are fused with detailed RCS signatures gathered by the radar for additional identification.

HOW MANY F/A-22S the Air Force eventually gets is still a crap shoot. Estimates range from a service requirement for more than 400 to pessimistic predictions of only 100-150 if the congressional budgeters, soured by the growing cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are unsympathetic.

A primary mission for the F/A-22 is slated to be cruise missile interception well behind enemy lines. "A cruise missile has stealth in only one direction--straight ahead," says Lt. Col. Mike Stapleton, operations officer for the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. The F-22s would operate in an extended picket line so they can look at cruise missiles to either side of their patrol area from a beam aspect where the missile is not low-observable. In addition, the new, 200-naut.-mi. AESA radar, in development for the E-10 surveillance aircraft, is to provide key cueing of cruise missile locations.

Tactics used by cruise missile operators are instructive. One option is to send waves of 10 missiles that would pull defenses to one side while a following wave slips through. Another is to disperse a large launch into many directions so that some actually approach the targets from behind. Those tactics have led the U.S. to plan a multi-layered defense that begins with F-22s deep in enemy territory.

While F-22s would normally operate at the 45,000-50,000-ft. level, for cruise missile defense they would drop into the middle altitudes around 25,000-30,000 ft. That would allow them the flexibility to combat both AS-4 "Kitchen" or CAS-1 "Kraken"-type, high-speed, air-launched missiles (predictable course, but little time to react) or to pick "Silkworm"-type missiles (low speed, but unpredictable course) out of ground clutter. Detailed information on missiles that leaked through the F/A-22 line would be sent by data link to second and third defensive layers comprising AESA-radar-equipped F-15s and F/A-18Es operating in less well-defended areas.

Four of the initial seven cadre pilots in the 43nd Fighter Sqdn., the Air Force's first F/A-22 squadron, came from the AESA-equipped F-15 squadrons in Alaska, where they developed concepts for airborne cruise missile defense, Stapleton says. While F/A-22 crews will train to attack cruise missiles with AIM-9s and 20-mm. cannon, the primary weapon will be the AIM-120C Amraam. A variant, the AIM-120C-6 (available by 2006), has been specialized with an improved seeker to optimize the explosive cone of destruction for small, slow targets in a head-on engagement with the F/A-22. The upgraded Amraam incorporates improved fuzing through a new quadrant target-detection device. One tactic for the F-22s will be to approach a wave of cruise missiles head-on, get in a first shot and then turn at Mach 1.7 supercruise speed for a second and third shot from behind.

F/A-22S ASSIGNED the cruise missile defense mission would carry at least six Amraams and possibly more when a compressed-carriage AIM-120 design is fielded, says J.R. McDonald, director of Lockheed Martin's F/A-22 program. The range of the F/A-22 can be extended with two 600-gal., low-observable fuel tanks carried on two inboard hard points that are plumbed to transfer fuel. However, there are a number of concepts for a larger, longer range FB-22 that could also carry a larger weapons payload. McDonald says the weapons bay on either the F/A-22 or FB-22 concepts could be enlarged to carry more missiles. Moreover, because of the improvements in stealth coatings, shaping and RCS predictability, the changes could be made while actually improving the signature of the aircraft, he says.

Some of the FB-22 derivative concepts being proposed by Lockheed Martin include both one- and two-seat options, with and without a vertical tail, McDonald said. The tailless version would be possible because the wing would be expanded and made large enough to carry sufficient flight control surfaces to provide adequate aerodynamic authority.

"We have a smorgasbord of options," McDonald said. The objective is to preserve all the attributes of the F/A-22--stealth, speed, integrated avionics--while giving up a bit of agility in order to field a stable bombing platform. The aircraft would also be designed to control a wide range of unmanned reconnaissance and strike aircraft.

Most intriguing about the F/A-22's future were hints from various sources that the fighter would have drastically improved electronic attack capability and would introduce computer network attack to its arsenal. Critics say some of the planning borders on the fanciful. Officials have acknowledged that the F/A-22's AESA radar has a projected capability to concentrate its transmission power onto a narrow spot--most likely the electronic radars and communication links associated with air defenses--with enough focus to jam them. The Thor jamming system is to be active in 2008. Those working on improvements say that with the addition of radar cheek arrays to the aircraft in 2010, it would be able to focus enough energy in a beam to actually damage electronic components in enemy sensors.

An associated capability is airborne computer network attack that, under project Suter, currently resides with the EC-130 Compass Call. However, the aircraft is large, slow and can't penetrate defended airspace. Futurists say a further modified F/A-22 will be able to operate over key targets and carry out computer attack or surveillance with much less power. "If you're 5 mi. from the threat, you don't need the power of Compass Call" to penetrate an enemy computer network, says one official.
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/05244wna.xml

At last i am able to find some of the capebilities of the raptor i cannot understand all of them i will try to digest all of them the stealthness and the ability to intercept missiles looks good to me
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
matey I'd probably edit your post title as its a little deceptive. something morelike "US unveils some F-22 capabilities"

"secrets" is a descriptor thats too often abused and best left to sensationalist sites.

This is about a week or so old, but there is some very useful indicators in there about latent capability.
 

kashifshahzad

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
gf0012-aust said:
matey I'd probably edit your post title as its a little deceptive. something morelike "US unveils some F-22 capabilities"

"secrets" is a descriptor thats too often abused and best left to sensationalist sites.

This is about a week or so old, but there is some very useful indicators in there about latent capability.
GF CAP, cruise missile defence, SEAD, electronic attack, early warning, reconnaisance, strike, bombing, etc. And thats only one third.No one knows from the general public that which other capebilities it has i guess it might have the capeblility to fire a missile in the back direction to counter the missiles and the AC's
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
kashifshahzad said:
GF CAP, cruise missile defence, SEAD, electronic attack, early warning, reconnaisance, strike, bombing, etc. And thats only one third.No one knows from the general public that which other capebilities it has i guess it might have the capeblility to fire a missile in the back direction to counter the missiles and the AC's
I don't think they included such a capability Kash, why bother? Nothings going to get on an F-22's tail by the sound of things...
 

AMTP10E

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Aussie Digger said:
I don't think they included such a capability Kash, why bother? Nothings going to get on an F-22's tail by the sound of things...
With off bore axis targeting and a couple of other handy tricks the F-22's will be able to engage targets at any position.
 

GADefence

New Member
"A primary mission for the F/A-22 is slated to be cruise missile interception well behind enemy lines. "A cruise missile has stealth in only one direction--straight ahead," says Lt. Col. Mike Stapleton, operations officer for the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. The F-22s would operate in an extended picket line so they can look at cruise missiles to either side of their patrol area from a beam aspect where the missile is not low-observable. In addition, the new, 200-naut.-mi. AESA radar, in development for the E-10 surveillance aircraft, is to provide key cueing of cruise missile locations. "
So, you're telling me you'll know ahead of time were these missiles will be launched from, and that the only fighter that can reach it is the relatively slow F-22? Secondly, armed with just a few medium range missiles, you best hope that each missile hits dead on.

Tactics used by cruise missile operators are instructive. One option is to send waves of 10 missiles that would pull defenses to one side while a following wave slips through. Another is to disperse a large launch into many directions so that some actually approach the targets from behind. Those tactics have led the U.S. to plan a multi-layered defense that begins with F-22s deep in enemy territory.
How, exactly, is the F-22 going to protect against all of this? If you get a launch on one side of your country, then send your F-22's there to protect, how will they make it to the OTHER side? As well, how will they defend if it's a circular launch? Great plan there. . . An aircraft with not-great-speed will be fast enough to save us!

Detailed information on missiles that leaked through the F/A-22 line would be sent by data link to second and third defensive layers comprising AESA-radar-equipped F-15s and F/A-18Es operating in less well-defended areas.
I just had to poke fun at this one. . . Using the same radar as the F-18. . . Tsk Tsk. . .

Four of the initial seven cadre pilots in the 43nd Fighter Sqdn., the Air Force's first F/A-22 squadron, came from the AESA-equipped F-15 squadrons in Alaska, where they developed concepts for airborne cruise missile defense, Stapleton says. While F/A-22 crews will train to attack cruise missiles with AIM-9s and 20-mm. cannon, the primary weapon will be the AIM-120C Amraam. A variant, the AIM-120C-6 (available by 2006), has been specialized with an improved seeker to optimize the explosive cone of destruction for small, slow targets in a head-on engagement with the F/A-22. The upgraded Amraam incorporates improved fuzing through a new quadrant target-detection device. One tactic for the F-22s will be to approach a wave of cruise missiles head-on, get in a first shot and then turn at Mach 1.7 supercruise speed for a second and third shot from behind.
So, you're going to have the aircraft go to Mach 1.7, then pull an amasing amount of G's (an amount that would kill the pilot, by any human standards) and turn the aircraft INTO the wake of the air barrier it created going supersonic? Is it just me, or is this suicide?

"We have a smorgasbord of options," McDonald said. The objective is to preserve all the attributes of the F/A-22--stealth, speed, integrated avionics--while giving up a bit of agility in order to field a stable bombing platform. The aircraft would also be designed to control a wide range of unmanned reconnaissance and strike aircraft."
Urgh, American UAVs. . . Another moot subject. But at least this shows the F-22's only true potential, command.

Most intriguing about the F/A-22's future were hints from various sources that the fighter would have drastically improved electronic attack capability and would introduce computer network attack to its arsenal. Critics say some of the planning borders on the fanciful. Officials have acknowledged that the F/A-22's AESA radar has a projected capability to concentrate its transmission power onto a narrow spot--most likely the electronic radars and communication links associated with air defenses--with enough focus to jam them. The Thor jamming system is to be active in 2008. Those working on improvements say that with the addition of radar cheek arrays to the aircraft in 2010, it would be able to focus enough energy in a beam to actually damage electronic components in enemy sensors.
Yes, so the F-22 will be armed with an advance laser that will cut down enemy radar dishes. . . You're not pulling this from your ass. No sire-bob. Definately not. This is as bad as that statement that the F-22 will carry a "virus" capable of wiping out an entire radar network in one fell swoop.

An associated capability is airborne computer network attack that, under project Suter, currently resides with the EC-130 Compass Call. However, the aircraft is large, slow and can't penetrate defended airspace. Futurists say a further modified F/A-22 will be able to operate over key targets and carry out computer attack or surveillance with much less power. "If you're 5 mi. from the threat, you don't need the power of Compass Call" to penetrate an enemy computer network, says one official.
Wait, I was wrong. . . There's the virus statement.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I'm wondering whether you're being deliberately mischievous, or whether you actually don't understand about how some systems work - but I'll assume that your self confessed anti-F22/FA-18/F15 stance is colouring your responses

GADefence said:
So, you're telling me you'll know ahead of time were these missiles will be launched from, and that the only fighter that can reach it is the relatively slow F-22? Secondly, armed with just a few medium range missiles, you best hope that each missile hits dead on.
how many airbases are there in the US?
how many F22's (min) are projected for build?
Cruise missiles will be heading for specific targets - they also have limited range. considering the fact that you can identify a rocket by IR characteristics, then lets assume that you can also detect and identify what type a cruise missile is by various other means - after all, the technology to identify incoming missiles has been around since 1973 (if we use that as the start of the first missile on missile engagement age)
other systems are used for battle space management as well as organic - thats why its called sensor and data fusion, its also why you have combined arms. F-22's or Z-53's or w98's etc etc are part of a combined and sympathetic solution, what part of modern warfare don't you seek to accept and understand?

GADefence said:
How, exactly, is the F-22 going to protect against all of this? If you get a launch on one side of your country, then send your F-22's there to protect, how will they make it to the OTHER side? As well, how will they defend if it's a circular launch? Great plan there. . . An aircraft with not-great-speed will be fast enough to save us!
gee, never heard of off-boresight missiles? never heard of engagement corridors? from the way that you present your argument, you'd think that the entire west coast needs to be protected concurrently... where are the launch platforms? whats their arc of engagement? you see the cruise missile - then you know pretty well where the launch platform is likely to be. Esp considering that you have OHR systems that can see 2000km and yet the best launch vehicle with the longest range cruise missile will probably be at less than 150km - guess who has better prior?

GADefence said:
I just had to poke fun at this one. . . Using the same radar as the F-18. . . Tsk Tsk. . .
and here is one of the reasons why I think you're being deliberately mischievous - they don't use the same AESA system. Basic research would have provided that nugget

GADefence said:
So, you're going to have the aircraft go to Mach 1.7, then pull an amasing amount of G's (an amount that would kill the pilot, by any human standards) and turn the aircraft INTO the wake of the air barrier it created going supersonic? Is it just me, or is this suicide?
where did you not understand the concept of off-boresight? 30-35g by a missile - the pilot never has to turn his head if he doesn't want to. and if he does, its still at 9g max

GADefence said:
Urgh, American UAVs. . . Another moot subject. But at least this shows the F-22's only true potential, command.
hmmm, less moot subject comments and more on relevancy.... BTW, all modern combat aircraft with PESA and AESA can do command and control. F15's, F18's, Gripen, rafale and eventually typhoon

GADefence said:
Yes, so the F-22 will be armed with an advance laser that will cut down enemy radar dishes. . . You're not pulling this from your ass. No sire-bob. Definately not. This is as bad as that statement that the F-22 will carry a "virus" capable of wiping out an entire radar network in one fell swoop.
Considering the fact that portable kinetic energy and laser weapons have been tested for the last 5 years - and that laser weapons have gone from electric to chemical - I wonder why you think that lasers aren't possible. We use them now for LOS comms. There's not much difference on capability when you're up in the air and have clear LOS to anything you point at.
10 years ago lasers and designatorscould be disrupted by sand clouds etc, when that was last tried as a defence, the enemy armour was taken out by thermal imaging combinations. lets see, whats harder to see, a moving tank in a sandstorm or a fixed comms site where googlemap can give you an update on location to a degree of accuracy of 1m?

GADefence said:
Wait, I was wrong. . . There's the virus statement.
again, the pre-Iraq engagement saw viruses downloaded into the ATC system from satellites . if you think its impossible to download signals from smaller packages, then you need to do some research.
 
Last edited:

GADefence

New Member
gf0012-aust said:
how many airbases are there in the US?
how many F22's (min) are projected for build?
Cruise missiles will be heading for specific targets - they also have limited range. considering the fact that you can identify a rocket by IR characteristics, then lets assume that you can also detect and identify what type a cruise missile is by various other means - after all, the technology to identify incoming missiles has been around since 1973 (if we use that as the start of the first missile on missile engagement age)
other systems are used for battle space management as well as organic - thats why its called sensor and data fusion, its also why you have combined arms. F-22's or Z-53's or w98's etc etc are part of a combined and sympathetic solution, what part of modern warfare don't you seek to accept and understand?
That fact that the article did not state that the missile would be stopped - but that they would be stopped in enemy territory. This means they knew of the launch ahead of time, and got F-22's there far before anything happened. Now, generously giving the F-22 the range to actually do that, it won't have the speed. Unless, of course, other nations house your F-22s. In which case, I ask, why not use other aircrafts, one that can do the job far easier?

gee, never heard of off-boresight missiles? never heard of engagement corridors? from the way that you present your argument, you'd think that the entire west coast needs to be protected concurrently... where are the launch platforms? whats their arc of engagement? you see the cruise missile - then you know pretty well where the launch platform is likely to be. Esp considering that you have OHR systems that can see 2000km and yet the best launch vehicle with the longest range cruise missile will probably be at less than 150km - guess who has better prior?
Yes, and in a world where we're always fighting poorly armed third world countries, those statements apply. Further more if the missiles where launched at 150 kilometres, then that's a pretty big margin of error for anything. 150 kilometres isn't a very long space for most missiles. Secondly, if we refer to nuclear strikes, then yes - this many missiles WILL be launched. I though this was why that statement was in the review?

and here is one of the reasons why I think you're being deliberately mischievous - they don't use the same AESA system. Basic research would have provided that nugget
Ah, yes then. Sorry, I misread. I still don't like the F-18's radar.

hmmm, less moot subject comments and more on relevancy.... BTW, all modern combat aircraft with PESA and AESA can do command and control. F15's, F18's, Gripen, rafale and eventually typhoon
Then the F-22 is already outsourced.

Considering the fact that portable kinetic energy and laser weapons have been tested for the last 5 years - and that laser weapons have gone from electric to chemical - I wonder why you think that lasers aren't possible. We use them now for LOS comms. There's not much difference on capability when you're up in the air and have clear LOS to anything you point at.
10 years ago lasers and designatorscould be disrupted by sand clouds etc, when that was last tried as a defence, the enemy armour was taken out by thermal imaging combinations. lets see, whats harder to see, a moving tank in a sandstorm or a fixed comms site where googlemap can give you an update on location to a degree of accuracy of 1m?
Very well then, so it will have a laser simply because these have been tested. As you stated. The test lasers are very large clumbersome things, that require a lot of power and the interior space of a boeing to be used. Where will it be put? I take it in the weapons bays. So it will have to drop the stealth you say it has to use it, this weapon will be large and clumbersome (there's no way around it) and take a while to aim. As well, where is the power coming from? Laser don't run themselves, and I doubt the F-22 can create enough power in it's self to run a long range accurate air to ground laser that can cut through steel.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
GADefence said:
Then the F-22 is already outsourced.
I don't understand what you're implying here - network fusion with a command platform is a varied concept - each aircraft mentioned does it in a different way as per the host nations definitoon of tac requirement - the critical issue is knowledge management and harvesting - explain to me how the country that has the demonstrated historical capacity to harvest and process information on a scale never achieved before has an outsourced solution? It's not: "X does not/does = Y" there is no correlation.

they are in effect battlefield management systems in their own right. it would pay to do some research through internationally reputable publications such as JED before making assumptions about systems which you are IMV decidedly shallow in appreciation of what their design intent is.


GADefence said:
Very well then, so it will have a laser simply because these have been tested.
Wheres the logic in that? Platforms field weapons when they go gold - not when they're "tested".


GADefence said:
As you stated. The test lasers are very large clumbersome things, that require a lot of power and the interior space of a boeing to be used. Where will it be put? I take it in the weapons bays. So it will have to drop the stealth you say it has to use it, this weapon will be large and clumbersome (there's no way around it) and take a while to aim. As well, where is the power coming from? Laser don't run themselves, and I doubt the F-22 can create enough power in it's self to run a long range accurate air to ground laser that can cut through steel.
lasers in combat aircraft are not used to cut metal - thats where the buck rogers assumptions are made. lasers are electronic disruptors - not darth vaders light sabre. - its not a high energy consumer.

large lasers were developed (eg) as anti-ballistic weapons and required out of necessity fast reloads - there is a vast difference between a weapon that has to reload to strike a mach 10+ warhead and one that is used to fuse processing components. hence the different evolutions of electrical/capacative and chemical triggered lasers.

btw, there are manportable lasers that have been tested by a number of militaries under their future soldier programmes - none of the white papers re those projects are in the public domain, and yet in one instance I know that the concept technology demonstrater has been around for the last 2 years. - Not all knowledge sits out on display on the internet.

The laser doesn't have to look like the ball turret on the 747 concept, or like THEL, or for that matter like the Chinese ARC-Light dazzler derivative.
 

kashifshahzad

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
Raptor enters final phase of testing
Flight International
Wed, 7 Sep 2005, 09:54


After 19 years of development, the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F/A-22 Raptor has reached the final hurdle before entering service with the US Air Force. Follow-on test and evaluation of the stealth fighter began on 29 August, with the USAF still planning to declare initial operational capability in December.

Related Story
F-22 Raptor Releases JDAM During First 'Follow-On' Evaluation Mission

Follow-on testing involves seven operationally representative Raptors incorporating software and hardware upgrades intended to address deficiencies identified during initial operational test and evaluation earlier this year.

Although rated operationally effective during the initial evaluation, the F/A-22 was judged not to be operationally suitable after it failed to meet the required 85% mission-capable rate because of immature diagnostics and maintenance procedures and parts unreliability. Maintenance of the Raptor’s low-observable characteristics on the flightline was also a concern.

Aircraft involved in follow-on testing are being upgraded to the baseline configuration to be introduced with the 47th Raptor – the next combat-coded F/A-22 to be delivered to the first operational unit at Langley AFB, Virginia. This includes the latest operational flight program software, which incorporates updated fault detection and isolation capabilities, as well as improved-reliability parts, says Lockheed.


URL of this article:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_003314.php

I think they will now try to improve the capebilities of F-22 raptor.This can lead to the major faliure of this project.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
kashifshahzad said:
I think they will now try to improve the capebilities of F-22 raptor.This can lead to the major faliure of this project.
Are you serious??? There are two full squadrons of test aircraft already in service. They've been flight testing for over a year - they've been running red air against multiple F-15's as part of swarming - so what in blazes are you talking about?

what part of this is indicative of major failure?
 

kashifshahzad

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
gf0012-aust said:
Are you serious??? There are two full squadrons of test aircraft already in service. They've been flight testing for over a year - they've been running red air against multiple F-15's as part of swarming - so what in blazes are you talking about?

what part of this is indicative of major failure?
Gf0012 dont take it serious US will not waste its huge money and time in the F-22 projest they will ask Lock heed martin team to make the changing in the AC for the improvement. After all this is the latest AC which is going to be operated by the US and this AC is going to be in the front line.
 

Defcon 6

New Member
kashifshahzad said:
Gf0012 dont take it serious US will not waste its huge money and time in the F-22 projest they will ask Lock heed martin team to make the changing in the AC for the improvement. After all this is the latest AC which is going to be operated by the US and this AC is going to be in the front line.
Thats a joke! Your totally wrong about that. The Raptor is just a drop in the bucket compared to the B-2 which by the way costs $1.1 BILLION dollars per UNIT. I don't know what makes you so anti F-22, but I'm thinking someone is jealous. ;)

The F-22 is most likely more stealthy than the F/A-117 considering it's been designed with the blended body ideal that was used in the B-2 Spirit.

By the way, the F-15 has been in service since the 1970's, the U.S has been working on this F-22 for a LONG time so they would have a replacement for it when the time came.
 

turin

New Member
Defcon 6 said:
Thats a joke! Your totally wrong about that. The Raptor is just a drop in the bucket compared to the B-2 which by the way costs $1.1 BILLION dollars per UNIT. I don't know what makes you so anti F-22, but I'm thinking someone is jealous. ;)
Well the comparison to the B-2 isnt really a good one. The Spirit was intented to be a rather special AC, that, while being indeed very expensive, was to be produced in small numbers. The F/A-22 was intended as new main fighter being build in considerable numbers so cost overruns are much more of an issue.

The F-22 is most likely more stealthy than the F/A-117 considering it's been designed with the blended body ideal that was used in the B-2 Spirit.
Blended body isnt everything and I know estimations of serious experts that still put the F-117 quite ahead of the raptor. The stealth concept of the Nighthawk might be dated, however this is still an AC with the pure intention of using stealth as its main advantage. The F/A-22 has to make some concession due to its role of being a supersonic highly agile fighter jet as well. Therefore I think, your statement is quite doubtful. Maybe someone else with a little more (non-restricted) knowledge can comment that.
 

Defcon 6

New Member
USAF already outfitted two squadrons with the raptor. I was just citing that the units aren't realy the expensive in comparison to todays standards.
 

turin

New Member
Defcon 6 said:
USAF already outfitted two squadrons with the raptor. I was just citing that the units aren't realy the expensive in comparison to todays standards.
But they are and thats mostly the reason why the initial number of F/A-22 is now for only 180 units. Yeah, there may be follow-on orders (there better be), still its an issue that you just cant ignore.
 

EnigmaNZ

New Member
Yes, so the F-22 will be armed with an advance laser that will cut down enemy radar dishes. . . You're not pulling this from your ass. No sire-bob. Definately not. This is as bad as that statement that the F-22 will carry a "virus" capable of wiping out an entire radar network in one fell swoop.

I read the article, but it didn't say anything about lasers at all. What it said was that the radar, which like all radar, pumps out high powered microwaves, can be focused to put all that energy into a tight spot on a target to damage it's electronics. In this scenerio it is almost akin to a maser. The US navy is working on a number of directed energy weapons for CIWS for example, laser and microwave based, the laser attacks the missiles shell, the microwaves attack it's electronics. The F-22's radar consists of over a 1000 elements outputting over 4 watts each, that over 4 Kw that can be focused to a tight beam, in future the side elements will also be able to contribute, increasing the beam's power substantially.

http://www.f22fighter.com/radar.htm

The Coil laser in the 747 is in the megawatt class, there is a smaller 100 Kw Coil laser going into the next Spectre, the Hercules based gunship, the AC-130. The laser proposed for the JSF is also in the 100 Kw class but solid state, basically it will be mounted where the fan in mounted in the VTOL version, the power takeoff from the turbine connected to an advanced compact generator which will power the laser, the excess heat being dumped into the fuel tanks as heatsinks. There is already a 10 Kw solid state pilot model using LED's to provide the energy to pump the laser.

Use google to search out the info, after reading your post I think your just being provocative, so can't be bothered assisting you.
 
Last edited:

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
kashifshahzad said:
Gf0012 dont take it serious
actually, my job in here is to take it seriously so that we don't end up with threads filled with idiotic statements.

It's supposed to be a serious technical forum - there's lots of other forums for people to visit if they want to sprout rubbish. ;)
 
Top