Photos/Videos (NO DISCUSSION)

[Groove]

Amazing footage of AGM-158 JASSM:

 

 

Awesome!

 

Did anyone noticed the small blast "wave" above the target at 1:02 / 1:03 ?

[Wilde]

The article from EF GmbH named the "493rd Squadron". So pointing out it likely might have been some lame bombers seems a bit strange.

 

Meanwhile there is not much happening over the A400M discussions: threats, blamings, meetings but no results yet, also covered by Reuters

[Griffin]

Damn, I just can't believe what modern professional DSLR cameras can do these days! A few years ago I couldn't even imagine that we would see such ridiculous ISO speeds and such great quality at those speeds. They even make great quality HD videos!

I was just referring to some people who simply shop their photos with some funny filters and calling them HDR.

 

Wow Ross! Could you shed some technical info about that picture (shutter speeds etc)? What kind of camera system are you using? I can't even get the trees to look the same in the shots but your rotor blades look great! EDIT: Nevermind, I got it from EXIF. :)

Edited January 21, 2010 by Griffin

[topol-m]

Type-90 Japanese main battle tank:

 

 

Note the the hydropneumatic suspension:

 

 

HE and AP 120mm rounds:

[topol-m]

Not sure if these vids haven`t been posted before, at least the search option didn`t come up with similar results.

 

Contrary to what the titles say, this is small diameter bombs (SDB) testing and not missiles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pki4uSIlnY0&feature=related

[topol-m]

Awesome!

 

Did anyone noticed the small blast "wave" above the target at 1:02 / 1:03 ?

 

Also at 1:37

[EvilBivol-1]

An-70 stall controllability tests, down to 98 km/h:

 

gvj0BLHmwZk

[sobek]

Also at 1:37

 

It's present in almost all above surface detonations shown in this vid, although not as prominent :)

 

This effect can even be observed on airliner wingfoils, very close to the wing (or in front of it) there is an area of air with a different refraction index.

[hitman]

Believe it our pilots have offered to have a 'play' with them. Thing is, although the Raptor would almost certainly win overall, they would have a real fight on their hands (both a/c have essentially the same avionics capability, and very, very similar manoeuvrability and performance). And I'm not sure the USAF want an aircraft costing half as much to make the Raptor look fallible while they are pleading with their government to let them have more.

 

 

 

Don't knock the mud hen's. They might be a bit chubby compared to the C model, but they are certainly no slouch.

 

I mean it's a bit unfair when your adversary can see you on the radar from 'a lot' farther away without even having his own radar emitting and lock you up by just speaking a command into his mask, while you fumble around with a cursor control on the HOTAS. And some more gucci stuff besides. :smilewink:

got to see them before you can beat them. i can tell you why we dont compete in a/c foreplay like that: we dont give up secrets. but dont believe what i say, i only work at lockheed.

[IvanK]

"...(both a/c have essentially the same avionics capability, and very, very similar manoeuvrability and performance)."...

 

What EADS propaganda pamphlet did that come from ? .... :)

[Eddie]

got to see them before you can beat them. i can tell you why we dont compete in a/c foreplay like that: we dont give up secrets. but dont believe what i say, i only work at lockheed.

 

Indeed. Hence why we call you lot boring :smilewink:. I mean there we are at Nellis, both types on the pan, and they won't go and play, not even for fun. Boring.

 

"...(both a/c have essentially the same avionics capability, and very, very similar manoeuvrability and performance)."...

 

What EADS propaganda pamphlet did that come from ? .... :)

 

lol, no one ever listens to EADS, they don't have clue what the jet can do. They seem to have this strange idea that nobody has modified or upgraded it since they first designed it. Don't get me wrong, of course the Raptor is more capable in the air to air role (it should be for that price :huh:) and it would win the fight, but they would have to work for it. However the gap isn't as large as people think. But of course at the end of the day, they are not meant to fight against each other, but with each other. This is the real gripe really, not that they won't come and play, more that they don't come and take part in exercises.

 

Oh and TVC, isn't the be all and end all. We chose canards over TVC for a reason, and not just cost.

 

Anyway, enough OT. My fault I know :doh:

Edited January 21, 2010 by Eddie
Can't spell

[GGTharos]

Believe it our pilots have offered to have a 'play' with them. Thing is, although the Raptor would almost certainly win overall, they would have a real fight on their hands (both a/c have essentially the same avionics capability, and very, very similar manoeuvrability and performance). And I'm not sure the USAF want an aircraft costing half as much to make the Raptor look fallible while they are pleading with their government to let them have more.

 

Similar? I'm not so sure. One plane has TVC, one doesn't ;)

The Raptor hasn't been participating in certain fights in general, and I don't think it has to do with fallibility in this case. I know there are British exchange pilots who may have had their hands on an F-22 here and there, or at least seen some stuff up close.

 

Don't knock the mud hen's. They might be a bit chubby compared to the C model, but they are certainly no slouch.

 

If you look at the writing on the wall (ie. the -1) they are -really- chubby. They are like seals waiting to be clubbed by an actual A2A fighter. They can self-escort and beat up on lower capability targets, but that is the extent of what they can do, UNLESS you remove all the air to ground cruft, and -then- even a 22 might have its hands full in a dogfight. The TWR of a 'naked' 15E is insane.

 

I mean it's a bit unfair when your adversary can see you on the radar from 'a lot' farther away without even having his own radar emitting and lock you up by just speaking a command into his mask, while you fumble around with a cursor control on the HOTAS. And some more gucci stuff besides. :smilewink:

 

What do you qualify as a lot farther away? I believe they mentioned something about a dogfight here. ;)

I'm pretty certain the Typhoon would see a 15E at twice the distance that an F-15E would see it, at least pre-AESA ... so yes, that does give them a lot of set up time. The voice command stuff is really just icing on the cake. The RCS reduction is pretty big.

[topol-m]

Thing is, although the Raptor would almost certainly win overall, they would have a real fight on their hands (both a/c have essentially the same avionics capability, and very, very similar manoeuvrability and performance).

 

The raptor has more advanced avionics, has TVC (even though it`s not 3 dimensional like in some other aircraft on the market ;) ) thus achieving higher maneuverability in subsonic speeds and in supersonic speed than a fighter with no TVC (be it as maneuverable as the EF-2000 is). About the performance, well the above mentioned + stealth guarantee much better performance in almost all aspects.

[Wilde]

The raptor has more advanced avionics, has TVC (even though it`s not 3 dimensional like in some other aircraft on the market ;) ) thus achieving higher maneuverability in subsonic speeds and in supersonic speed than a fighter with no TVC (be it as maneuverable as the EF-2000 is). About the performance, well the above mentioned + stealth guarantee much better performance in almost all aspects.

 

About the more advanced avionics I'd be skeptical. It has an AESA but apart from that there is nothing which implies it's avionics were better.

 

The TVC doesn't make it lighter or immune to physics. In reality the aerodynamical profile of the Raptor is not even known. It could well be that the TVC only makes up for the stealth compromises.

 

And don't ask me about the stealth part. Sure it decreases enemy radar efficiency somewhat. But I still believe it doesn't work against top tier militaries. Not in the way it was implemented in the Raptor. Or any other publicly known American stealth fighter or bomber. An unproven stealth system, that costs insane amounts of maintenance during peace time surely is not something I'd consider a game changer. In an actual war, where sorties and efficiency matter the Raptor would look a lot different from what people think of it now.

[GGTharos]

About the more advanced avionics I'd be skeptical. It has an AESA but apart from that there is nothing which implies it's avionics were better.

 

ALR-94? ;)

 

The TVC doesn't make it lighter or immune to physics. In reality the aerodynamical profile of the Raptor is not even known. It could well be that the TVC only makes up for the stealth compromises.

What stealth compromises? We clocked this thing doing 50DPS ITR.

 

And don't ask me about the stealth part. Sure it decreases enemy radar efficiency somewhat. But I still believe it doesn't work against top tier militaries. Not in the way it was implemented in the Raptor. Or any other publicly known American stealth fighter or bomber. An unproven stealth system, that costs insane amounts of maintenance during peace time surely is not something I'd consider a game changer. In an actual war, where sorties and efficiency matter the Raptor would look a lot different from what people think of it now.

You can do the math: The stealth part cuts the radar detection range to 1/10th at least.

Even if you can't generate as many sorties, the fact that by the time they detect you have had multiple shots inside NEZ at them counts for a lot. To compound this, other aircraft will be picking up the sortie slack.

To put it another way, after day one the other side might find themselves not quite keeping up with the sorties either ...

[sniffer]

Nice formation ;)

 

[topol-m]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Wilde]

Yes GG, I know all this from LM ads. Just saying I don't think it's gonna work out like that. You simply assume everything would work 100% the way you planned and anticipated it. I prefer to stick with Murphy. When suddenly - like in the past - missile pK is massively below expectation for example and the Raptor only manages 1 kill per sortie, then the picture changes, a lot. This is still assuming a very unrealistic 100:0 kill ratio btw...

[Pilotasso]

Well while that may be true about murphy the skeptics are relying on it wich is also worng. On the other had, An F-22 without stealth would still be the best fighter in the world. It was designed to still be more than competitive when sensors come along capable of detecting them.

[Eddie]

ALR-94? ;)

 

 

Wasn't sure what that designation referred to so had to look it up. Turns out it's exactly the same as DASS. ;)

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2010 by Eddie

[topol-m]

An F-22 without stealth would still be the best fighter in the world.

 

That can hardly be true. The F-22 is not the fastest modern fighter, nor it is the most maneuverable, it doesn`t have the best thrust/weight ratio, yes it has one of the best radars, but it uses the same missiles as many other western built fighters, etc. There isn`t a fighter that is best in everything. The raptor without its stealth still would remain a very advanced and dangerous foe, but a lot of the modern fighters can be a match for it in BVR as well as in a dogfight.

[hitman]

saying an f22 w/o stealth is an oxymoron. it doesn't have to be faster or have thw best thrust to weight ratio to win, it just has to enhance the pilots capabilities and minimise his limitations. the f22 is just so far advanced that beginner pilots can fight like pros. a professional pilot in an f22 could win conflicts. the point is, there isnt another more capable plane out there that is so easy to manage.

[Krippz]

This is still assuming a very unrealistic 100:0 kill ratio btw...

 

The F-15C enjoys a 100:0 kill ratio; so how is the F-22 maintaining the same unrealistic? Keep in mind guys that we are only talking about the unclassified Raptor facts! The fact of the matter is that stealth works. My government would not spend $2.2 billion on a B-2 if it didn't. And while current 4.5 Gen fighters may be closing the gap the Raptor will always get "First look, first shot, first kill".

Edited January 22, 2010 by Krippz

[topol-m]

And while current 4.5 Gen fighters may be closing the gap the Raptor will always get "First look, first shot, first kill".

 

Yes as long as we speak of 4.5 that "always" is true (with some reservations), things are about to change though with other 5th gen fighters on the way.

 

BTW how come that Groove hasn`t cut/pasted all this off topic F-22 cockfight to its specific thread? :D I`m starting to question his eternal vigilance.

Edited January 22, 2010 by topol-m

[Wilde]

The F-15C enjoys a 100:0 kill ratio

 

Well, if you read what I wrote you'll understand I was talking about a real, hot conflict against a top tier military. The F-15 has never been in such a conflict, so no, it doesn't have the 100:0 ratio. And whoever thinks the F-22 would get such a ratio in the mentioned scenario lives in a phantasy world.

 

As for what your government would do or wouldn't I'd suggest to be very cautious. They are politicians. And they are also people. They have made a lot of strange decisions. Including some that you probably don't agree with either. I could easily spin that remark of yours into some very interesting "fact" that I am sure you would not find funny.