Article aboat F22 in South African newspaper.

[rlogue]

They didn't consult the lockon forums did they ???? How can they print "facts" like that ! lol

[Pilotasso]

If the F-22 was cheaper it would replace the F-15 as they were delivered. The F-15 was also seen as expensive back in it's day, the USAF wanted to buy more than they could and served along with F-106s and F-4s for its first 20 years.

 

The JSF will help take over the 15, specialy when one of the versions has a longer fuel capability and given the enourmous new engines thrust and efficiency it wont need the power of 2, and have more than enough range for most intercept missions. The extreme missions demand are going to be the domain of the Raptor but those will be far less frequent and less likely to happen.

[Fanboy2006]

Do any body know how good the F22's maneuvrability is compared to other aircraft? South African Gripens don't have TVC engines while the F22 and Su 30 MKI has. Does this mean that the Gripen will be hoplessly outmaneuvred in a dogfight?

[Camoman]

Sorta off this thread but i guess its a gud thread to try find an answer.Well it is obvious that if you cant see ur enemy ur gonna get smoked.. But (and shoot me down if im way off the mark but I dont know alot bout this) despite the obvoius stealth abilities of the F22, the blue C&C must know where their assets are and so there must be some sorta link between the command and the raptors so they know where to dispatch them too (and where from) when needed. So, is it possible for the red side to try and find this link and use it to find the 'invisible' raptor.Or on the other hand, do you just send a flight up into a designated area and let them go 'silent' and cover the area all on there own without any awac support to direct them from thier known/unknown postion to a threat???

[peterj]

Do any body know how good the F22's maneuvrability is compared to other aircraft? South African Gripens don't have TVC engines while the F22 and Su 30 MKI has. Does this mean that the Gripen will be hoplessly outmaneuvred in a dogfight?

 

Yes most likely, the biggest problem being their advantage in thrust-to-weight ratio.

EF Typhoon (without TVC) would probably put up a good fight against those two.

[markriley]

So, is it possible for the red side to try and find this link and use it to find the 'invisible' raptor.

 

I would say (guess) that it is possible, but the red side hasnt been able to do that in the past with the current links with awacs or other fighters so i doubt they would be able to do it now with even better technology. At least we dont know that they have ever succeeded. Scary thought for either side to have that kind of advantage.

[ARM505]

Well, BVR is obviously a no-win against a Raptor - until they hobble them with a 'mandatory' VID pass to get positive ID that is! Or of course (as is statistically likely judging by the relative prevalence of fractricides in modern warfare), you're going to get some more 'victories' by F22's over F15/16/18's/Blackhawks etc, only actual shootdowns instead of simulated!

 

I think there's minimal flames nowdays with these 'F22's pwn all' threads because it's difficult to argue that the F22 doesn't, in fact, pwn everything. Exscuse the 'pwn'ing. I do like the comment by the SAAF oke at the end:

 

Tough day?

"I think a very short day".

 

LOL!

[Pilotasso]

Do any body know how good the F22's maneuvrability is compared to other aircraft? South African Gripens don't have TVC engines while the F22 and Su 30 MKI has. Does this mean that the Gripen will be hoplessly outmaneuvred in a dogfight?

 

Current versions of the gripen are underpowered IMHO. They barely reach T/W of 1 with fuel and a basic AA load. I have heard coments that its on parity with the F-16 in low speed fight, when it can react slighly faster due to the lower wing load, but when the falcon takes it to vertical fight the gripen is in trouble.

 

There are plans for enhanced engines for upgrades and probably AESA radars sometime in the future. Untill there it cant compete on the same level as the other 4th GEN aircraft. Much less the raptor.

 

A reason for this is evident when you compare the gripen directly with the F-16. The falcon empty weight is 7500Kg while the gripen weights 1000Kg less. But the falcons engine for export versions is about 12.5 tones force, while the gripen is slighly less than 8tones force. Thats a full 3.5 tonnes less than the F-16, and it gets worse if you compare to the full block 52 standard with a 13.5 tonnes force engine. Even the gripen weighting only 1 tonne less than the F-16 its engine is 3.5 tones force weaker. Its not compensated for the lighter wieght.

 

The only way the gripen can match the falcon is when the falcon takes its maximum load but then the gripen cannot match the warload of the falcon either anyway.

 

The gripens advantage is its avionics and smart BVR capabilities, I do not know how the gripen's radar compares to that of the F-16 APG-66V2 (basic APG-66 is retired from almost all falcons by now ), but believing the figure of 25 miles I have seen for fighter sized targets it is once again significatly lower than the falcons 30-40 miles. APG-68V9 increases that by 40%.

[Arwid2]

An interesting discussion about the Gripen's capabilities vs F-16 can be found at www.f-16.net.

Radar/RCS performance in particular and Datalink related can be found in page 3 & 4 of the thread.

 

Page 3: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1029-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-30.html

Page 4: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1029-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-45.html

[Pilotasso]

I believed the article untill the point it says the F-16 radar surpass that of the german Mig by only 5 KM. Now we know that radar is of very early export standards and by then already surpassed, I would very much like to know where and how they reached the conclusion the latest APG-68 would only be good enough to match it, hmmm.

To give you a measure, the mig is virtualy blind looking down right to visiual range while the baseline radar found on the MLU upgrade alone is capable of 6 on 6 AMRAAM engagement. go figure...

 

"Fire Control Radar

The Westinghouse AN/APX-66(V2) Fire Control Radar (FCR) will be equipped with an completely new signal data processor. It allows a track-while-scan mode for up to ten targets as well as a six-on-six AIM-120 AMRAAM capability. Other features include a 25% improvement in detection and tracking range, an enhanced Doppler Beam Sharpening mode (DBS), enhanced air-ground and ground mapping modes, a medium resolutions DNS, an enhanced ECCM, and a color display compatibility. The MLU kit and the receiver will also have an 40% improved reliability over previous versions."

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article2.html

[GGTharos]

I think their comparisons are right in spirit, probably wrong in detail.

 

Either way the FDL is not unique to the Gripen, nor was it implemented there first, nor is any stealth aircraft other than the F-117 likely to be particularely vulnerable to a bistatic radar ... not to mention it's unlikely for aircraft o operate in this bistatic radar mode.

[Alfa]

I believed the article untill the point it says the F-16 radar surpass that of the german Mig by only 5 KM. Now we know that radar is of very early export standards and by then already surpassed, I would very much like to know where and how they reached the conclusion the latest APG-68 would only be good enough to match it, hmmm.l

 

Pilotasso,

 

Radar detection range is a rather simple question of radar power(antenna size/emitter output) versus target size - so in terms of pure range capability, it doesnt really matter that much whether the F-16 or MiG-29 radars are the latest or older versions.....the limitation is the room available in the radomes in which they are housed.

 

If you compare the radar power of the F-16 with that of an MiG-29 the MiG-29 has the more power(bigger radar), but the F-16 is a smaller target(smaller RCS) than a MiG-29 so I would not be surprised if the detection ranges between the two are similar.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Pilotasso]

Pilotasso,

 

Radar detection range is a rather simple question of radar power(antenna size/emitter output) versus target size - so in terms of pure range capability, it doesnt really matter that much whether the F-16 or MiG-29 radars are the latest or older versions.....the limitation is the room available in the radomes in which they are housed.

 

If you compare the radar power of the F-16 with that of an MiG-29 the MiG-29 has the more power(bigger radar), but the F-16 is a smaller target(smaller RCS) than a MiG-29 so I would not be surprised if the detection ranges between the two are similar.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

Alfa for the first time I think Im going to best you in this :D

Radar output and antenna size means little to judge radar range if yourl looking at fighters of similar size, and respective radomes.

If you look at the consecutive radar upgrades to the F-16 (because they are the most divulged) youll see 20%, 30 and 40% increases in each new model out there from the basic APG-66 down to the APG-68V9. Lates standards nearly double the baseline APG-66 range in virtualy every scenario.In turn APG-80 efectively doubles the range of the 68. Im not familiar with the power outputs but given the fact that you cant just extract all the energy you want from the F-16 generators due to electrical supply demands, their wattage output should not have increased in the same order of magnitude.

If you look close at the radar details in each upgrade youll see almost all times a new radar processor mentioned. Added the fact that the F-16 radar radome remained the same we can only assume that the dominant factor between radar of similar size cannot be atributed to power output or making comparisons to the milimmiter about their diameter sizes.

Its possible that the radar mounted on Mig-29A's and G's have higher outputs than the falcon even today but they always have demonstrated poor ecoe discrimination, i.e. their as good as not reflecting energy back, as the plane cannot tell they are contacts.

 

Simply put the radar have not bigger eyes but rather better contact lenses that matters. ;)

 

The Mig-29's have only recieved potent radar processors in the lates installements of their AESA upgrades sold only to 2 countries in asia so far.

[Olgerd]

BTW.

Just if anybody is interested in the subject. There are first public available F-22A related documents. Any performance or avionics, but anyway these are official instructions:

http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/search2.asp?keywordlong=F-22A

http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/search2.asp?keywordlong=A-22

[Guest teebus]

I don't like the way that reporter seems to make the association between "next generation radar detecting" the F-22A meaning that they can target, lock-on and destroy it with missiles from any appreciable range. Obviously they didn't say it in so many words, but that is what seemed to be implied.

 

Have you read this article? http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?view=story&id=news/05244wna.xml

 

It mentions that by 2010, when cheek radar arrays are added to the Raptor, it may be able to focus enough radar energy from its AN/APG-77 to actually damage radar equipment (a.k.a "microwave weapon"). I know it sounds pretty sci-fi, but it is an interesting notion.

[nscode]

Pilotasso,

 

Radar detection range is a rather simple question of radar power(antenna size/emitter output) versus target size -

 

Nope, not near that simple. It all comes down to reciver sensitivity and SNR.

[Alfa]

Pilotasso,

 

I was merely answering your question in regards to how an outdated radar design can match a more modern one in terms of sheer radar power - "pure range". The basics of radar functionality involves emitting a microwave pulse and picking up the return with an antenna. The weaker the emitted pulse, the longer the range and the smaller the RCS of the target, the weaker return signals you will recieve and the bigger the antenna required to pick them up. In other words the two main factors which provide the sheer radar power are emitter output and antenna size.

 

You are talking about something different - namely the radar's ability to make effective use of that power in varies operating regimes, which is a valid point and what makes the difference in an actual engagement - I agree. This is the sort of thing you can improve via sophisticated technology and increased processing capability, but an F-15 radar will, given the same technology standard, always out-perform an F-16 ditto simply because it has more power behind it.

 

The Mig-29's have only recieved potent radar processors in the lates installements of their AESA upgrades sold only to 2 countries in asia so far.

 

Not correct Pilotasso.

 

No MiG-29 exports involve AESA radars - in fact Russia does not even have an operational AESA(active phased array) radar yet.....the phased array radars having been installed in Russian fighter designs so far are all passive phased array sets.

 

But there are other radars available for installation in the MiG-29 which are of an altogether different level of sophistication than the basic N019 that the MiG-29 was "born with". The new line of MiG-29 versions; MiG-29M2, MiG-29K and MiG-29SMT-2 are being equipped with the Zhuk-M slotted array set, which is similar in design and functionality to e.g. the AN/APG-73 of the Hornet. But to return to the above point - although there is a world of difference in sophistication and effectiveness between the Zhuk-M and N019, the actual radar power remains similar and to the extend the Zhuk-M has more, it is due to an increase in emitter output(from 5 to 6 kw peak) while the other factor, antenna size, is restricted by the diameter of the MiG-29 radome.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

Alfa for the first time I think Im going to best you in this :D

Radar output and antenna size means little to judge radar range if yourl looking at fighters of similar size, and respective radomes.

If you look at the consecutive radar upgrades to the F-16 (because they are the most divulged) youll see 20%, 30 and 40% increases in each new model out there from the basic APG-66 down to the APG-68V9. Lates standards nearly double the baseline APG-66 range in virtualy every scenario.In turn APG-80 efectively doubles the range of the 68. Im not familiar with the power outputs but given the fact that you cant just extract all the energy you want from the F-16 generators due to electrical supply demands, their wattage output should not have increased in the same order of magnitude.

If you look close at the radar details in each upgrade youll see almost all times a new radar processor mentioned. Added the fact that the F-16 radar radome remained the same we can only assume that the dominant factor between radar of similar size cannot be atributed to power output or making comparisons to the milimmiter about their diameter sizes.

Its possible that the radar mounted on Mig-29A's and G's have higher outputs than the falcon even today but they always have demonstrated poor ecoe discrimination, i.e. their as good as not reflecting energy back, as the plane cannot tell they are contacts.

 

Simply put the radar have not bigger eyes but rather better contact lenses that matters. ;)

 

The Mig-29's have only recieved potent radar processors in the lates installements of their AESA upgrades sold only to 2 countries in asia so far.

[Pilotasso]

Pilotasso,

You are talking about something different - namely the radar's ability to make effective use of that power in varies operating regimes, which is a valid point and what makes the difference in an actual engagement - I agree. This is the sort of thing you can improve via sophisticated technology and increased processing capability, but an F-15 radar will, given the same technology standard, always out-perform an F-16 ditto simply because it has more power behind it.

- JJ.

 

Granted that, but yet again, the F-15's radar has not lacked anything compared to that of the falcons. It had recieved equaly frequent upgrades, and since the technology was basicaly the same, the F-15 obvioulsy could marry processor capability with power among other things. The falcon had no room to compensate in any other area, so the contest here is indeed antenna size and shear power output.

No MiG-29 exports involve AESA radars - in fact Russia does not even have an operational AESA(active phased array) radar yet.....the phased array radars having been installed in Russian fighter designs so far are all passive phased array sets.

 

But there are other radars available for installation in the MiG-29 which are of an altogether different level of sophistication than the basic N019 that the MiG-29 was "born with". The new line of MiG-29 versions; MiG-29M2, MiG-29K and MiG-29SMT-2 are being equipped with the Zhuk-M slotted array set, which is similar in design and functionality to e.g. the AN/APG-73 of the Hornet. But to return to the above point - although there is a world of difference in sophistication and effectiveness between the Zhuk-M and N019, the actual radar power remains similar and to the extend the Zhuk-M has more, it is due to an increase in emitter output(from 5 to 6 kw peak) while the other factor, antenna size, is restricted by the diameter of the MiG-29 radome.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

I will not dare to enter a competition on the mig knowelege base :D however I happen to have several issues of the AFM magazine showcasing several russian proposals for indian Mig purchases among them the Mig-29M2 wich has been shown is festivals bearing the Bars-29 AESA radar, basicaly of the same technology as the ones mounted onboard of the Su-30MKI.

[TucksonSonny]

Faster yes, not from a top speed perspective, but from a cruising speed perspective. This thing right now outcruises every fighter out there barring perhaps the Typhoon, and anything equipped wiht the Russian AL-41 engines, IIRC.

 

I don’t think so! :bye:

The Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 (F/A-22) engine is rated at about 35000 lb (156 kN).

The Saturn AL-41 F (prototype) engine is rated at about 176 kN (39,575 lb).

[Alfa]

I will not dare to enter a competition on the mig knowelege base :D however I happen to have several issues of the AFM magazine showcasing several russian proposals for indian Mig purchases among them the Mig-29M2 wich has been shown is festivals bearing the Bars-29 AESA radar, basicaly of the same technology as the ones mounted onboard of the Su-30MKI.

 

I don't know anything about that AFM coverage, but the MiG-29M2 is basically the landbased version of the MiG-29KUB(9-47) which India has ordered along with the single seat MiG-29K(9-41). These 3 variants will be fitted with the "Zhuk-M" planar slotted array made by Phazatron-NIIR - if a phased array set is being considered, I am willing to bet it will be a Zhuk-MF(phased array version).

 

The Zhuk-M radar for the MiG-29 also exists in a large version for the Su-27(Zhuk-MS) and both come in phased array versions - Zhuk-MF and Zhuk-MFS respectively. The N011M "Bars" radar currently installed in India's Su-30MKIs was made by a different company(NIIP) and I am not aware of this being available in a small version for the MiG-29.

 

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[GGTharos]

I don’t think so! :bye:

 

The Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 (F/A-22) engine is rated at about 35000 lb (156 kN).

The Saturn AL-41 F (prototype) engine is rated at about 176 kN (39,575 lb).

 

Read what I wrote again.

[TucksonSonny]

Read what I wrote again.

 

GG,

Let me explain it in a more simply way for you…

“If you would put the AL-41 F’s in the F-22 it would cruise at Mach 1.9 without AB”

You see, me too I can answer a question without having any respect for the integrity for the person!

[GGTharos]

Uhm. Read what I wrote again ;)

[TucksonSonny]

Uhm. Read what I wrote again ;)

 

You too can read my answer again smart boy!:harhar:

[S77th-GOYA]

TucksonSonny, I really suggest you read what he wrote again. Slowly. With emphasis on comprehension.