F-22 Thread

[SkateZilla]

yes, thats what im talking about, there was a lot more development opportunities in the YF-17 (to to being a superbug or growler) which probably would have been true to the YF-23 especially with vectored thrust

and superbug is too expensive for non-US countries, just like F-22

 

 

F-16s are Still being Built and sold,

 

F-18Cs are done, F-18 EFGs are being built and sold to Australia only so far.

[Kaktus29]

@GG ... Raptor is more stealthy than STEALTH missile.. i'm not talking about a NON-Stealthy missile but a STEALTHY one.. so you are claiming F-22, a 20 meters long craft has less RCS than a Stealthy modern missile that measures 0.4 meters in diameters ))) lol.. good one.. i wouldn't be so sure..

 

a Frigate detecting this missile at 65 km, really makes the whole Raptor Pitch lame a little bit.. especially since the anti-ship stealthy missile is probably flying low while Raptor flies at what now..40.000-60.000 feet?)) ..

[Kaktus29]

@maturlin.. yeah i kinda agree with you, .. shield is easier to make than the sword.. alway has been always will be like this.. stealth is very expensive and much harder to maintain than lets say ever increasing developments in radar field.. today's radars are all digital, and much computer power goes to go through complex algo's to determine and calculate even the slighties blip that radar detects and see if this is a target or not.. meaning, as time goes by, and computer power increases considerably Radars will be able to see stealth as easy as a barn door in the sky.. while making new developments in stealth becomes unprofitable and hugely expensive..

 

there is only so much you can do with design of the airplane, but radar, much different proposition.. radars like computers will see huge boom in capabilities in the next 20 years, much less can be said for stealth developments which remains much more stagnant-F-22 shape isn't changing for the duration of F22 career )) while radars do..

[wasserfall]

Funny thing, your assumption is wrong. A stealth fighter is actually much stealthier than any missile out there :)

A stealthy missile may have an RCS of 0.1 or 0.01 ... Raptors are 0.0001.

 

You are also making the mistake of thinking of the L-Band (or any other band) as a magical anti-stealth thing. It is not. Even if a raptor is optimized for X-Band radars for example (I think it covers a lot more bands than that though, because the threats to it are just that varied :) ) it will still be stealth against other bands.

 

This whole stealth defeating radar business in reality is about money and tactics; there is no stealth-defeating radar ... that magical radar is the product of wishful thinking of forum populations and raptor and lightning haters.

 

Maybe the future is already there:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART-L

 

[GGTharos]

You wouldn't be so sure? Do you know what the RCS of a missile is? Do you know what 'STEALTHY' means? F-18E's and Typhoons are also 'stealthy', did you know that? The radar ranges on that radar correspond well to what we know of the E-3 and E-2 radars, and we have some pretty good info on those ... and we also know that when F-22's are involved on exercises, they sneak right in and kill those AWACS'. So no, the 'future' isn't here yet, and those 'stealthy missiles' (which those AWACS' are built to detect also, by the way) aren't anywhere near at stealthy as an F-22. Did you know that the B-2 is stealthier than the much smaller F-117?

@GG ... Raptor is more stealthy than STEALTH missile.. i'm not talking about a NON-Stealthy missile but a STEALTHY one.. so you are claiming F-22, a 20 meters long craft has less RCS than a Stealthy modern missile that measures 0.4 meters in diameters ))) lol.. good one.. i wouldn't be so sure..

 

a Frigate detecting this missile at 65 km, really makes the whole Raptor Pitch lame a little bit.. especially since the anti-ship stealthy missile is probably flying low while Raptor flies at what now..40.000-60.000 feet?)) ..

[Kaktus29]

@wasserfall.. i have been trying to reason the great one called GG but to no avail.. ))

[GGTharos]

You're not trying to reason. You're trying to tell me that your make-believe theories have some semblance to reality.

 

They do not. The radar range equations and computed RCS' for all of the objects involved are publicly available - some are easier to figure out, some less easy, but all that information is out there.

 

So, if you don't want to believe me - and this is perfectly fine - then do the math yourself.

 

But until you DO the math yourself, don't be coming here telling me that you are being reasonable. All you are offering right now is fantasy.

 

PS: Here's another piece of the puzzle for you. If a frigate detects a cruise missile at 65km, that missile isn't flying low. The horizon is only about 35km for a sea-skimmer, beyond this the radar can't see it.

Edited June 6, 2013 by GGTharos

[Kaktus29]

@GG ..you haven't read what i wrote.. Radar is developing much faster than now already stagnant shape of F22.. this is the problem with stealth.. when you do it, its done, it better works or you just spent billions of dollars for nothing.. Radars developing at accelerated speed, computational power, and all kind of new novelties that will be going online in the next few years and keep coming online.. while F22 remains the same.. unless you think F22 will be brought to the mechanic "pimp up my plane" shop to get a new nose or something..

 

this is a lost cause.. and this german and dutch product has shown it clearly..

 

About how high the missile flies.. i don't know where they measure it, it could be some over-the-horizen capability of the radar..don't know.. but usually anti-ship and cruise missiles don't cruise at 20.000 feet now do they..

[GGTharos]

I read what you wrote, and I told you ... stop making up fantasies.

 

Radar isn't magical, and it isn't developing at a magical pace either. The reason you make up these fantasies is because you don't actually know what it is you are talking about. So I will tell you yet again: Find the radar equation, find out the RCS' and radar powers of the objects you are interested in, and do the math yourself. Until you do this, you do not know anything at all about what you are talking about. Do you understand this? Your knowledge isn't even on armchair general level.

What you are doing is the same as telling me that all angles of a triangle add up to 360 degrees because no one taught you that they add up to 180.

 

Radar is limited first by the radar equation - this is pure physics, you're not going to defeat it. By the radar equation, those radars cannot detect an F-22 at long ranges, period, end of story.

 

A lot of very modern surveillance radars use something called STAP to pick out targets from clutter or to defeat ECM in some way, at distances that they previously could not - note that this was not a physical limitation, ie. as per radar equation, but a limitation on the ability to select a valid target out of clutter. And this is what this 'stealthy missile' thing is all about.

 

As for anti-ship (or any cruise) missiles, it all depends on how far they have to go, how well you have programmed their attack profile, etc. They will absolutely fly high if they need to do so for range, then dive for the terminal attack some distance before they reach their target.

Edited June 6, 2013 by GGTharos

[UCAS]

PS: Here's another piece of the puzzle for you. If a frigate detects a cruise missile at 65km, that missile isn't flying low. The horizon is only about 35km for a sea-skimmer, beyond this the radar can't see it.

At a height of 10m it's only about a third of that. 35km is for 100m altitude.

 

http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

 

I think there is such thing as over the horizon radar but I'm not sure it's applicable here. There's a lot of unknown knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns. I'm sure many radar designers would love to stick an F-22 on a pole and run tests all day everyday and then some.

[Kaktus29]

so stealthy missiles for you is a by-product of getting better radars that can pick up normal missiles..because they are on radar they have become stealthy?..

 

as far as i understand there are normal missiles and they there are new generation of missiles with a reduced RCS.. this are stealthy missiles that supposedly Pantsir and S-300 will not see so all that SDB and other nonsense other people write can come true and actually bomb something called air defence system..otherwise every single piece of metal will be intercepted))

 

if missiles have bigger RCS than F22 than here you go, proof F22 is not stealthy.. how will F22 fire a missile at an enemy without alerting them where the fire has come from.. enemy can fire a pre-programmed shot in that direction at a time delay of 0.3 seconds-computer response after first warning, and there you go.. F22 more stealthy than Amraam, but sadly Amraam will light up the screen,give the altitude, bearing, speed..everything of the raptor.. enemy can have programmed response to fire 4 missiles in a direction of F22 in such a way to cover all exit routes and the central point from where it was fired..

 

it makes sense that missiles will become much stealthier than F22 and other stealth planes since its a requisite for stealthy planes to make sense.. unless you think F22 pressing the fire button immediately makes the enemy vaporize with a time delay of 0.000001 seconds right?))

 

you talk about radar as this old thing that all you can do is increase frequency and get better displays to show radar blips.. its much more than that as you know, radars are already being connected in a grid, with higher computational power this will mean in a small time frame of 5-10 years radars will be able to see the "anomaly" that the other radar couldn't.. and vice versa.. making stealth planes as visible as a B-52.. what then.. jamming? and proving stealth is a failure..

 

to me stealth looks like a big Reagan SDI )) a big FU to Russia and China to blow their money)) EU hasn't followed suit, i think wisely..

[GGTharos]

You have to take into account that the radar itself is sitting some 20-25m high though. Also, radar horizon is just a little longer than visual horizon.And you are correct, over-the-horizon radar is something very specialized with very specific purpose, and its application is strictly early warning so far.

[wasserfall]

To be honest i have a close family member who is involved in this project, he is a professor.

Unfortunately i can' t go into detail about it, it' s to " sensitive".

But the future is near:)

[GGTharos]

Are you going to do the math, or are you just going to keep posting things that you don't understand? Here, I will help you:

 

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD0701321

 

And I will tell you once more: You cannot magically get past the radar equation, this is the physical limitation of radar. There is no amount of processing that you can do to change this.

 

you talk about radar as this old thing that all you can do is increase frequency and get better displays to show radar blips.. its much more than that as you know, radars are already being connected in a grid, with higher computational power this will mean in a small time frame of 5-10 years radars will be able to see the "anomaly" that the other radar couldn't.. and vice versa.. making stealth planes as visible as a B-52.. what then.. jamming? and proving stealth is a failure..

[GGTharos]

I live next to THALES, the manufacturers of Smart-L. If you're facing stealth fighters, you're in trouble. And by the way, this part isn't sensitive :)

 

To be honest i have a close family member who is involved in this project, he is a professor.

Unfortunately i can' t go into detail about it, it' s to " sensitive".

But the future is near:)

[Kaktus29]

@GG .. firing massive "pollution" rays into the sky or just using other electro-magnetic pollution that is filling the sky makes a F22 flying through it visible.but for radar to see it it needs huge computational power, greater algos, better cooperation with other radars trying to see the small difference that are happening as f22 plows through this.. this is not radar technology per se as its computer technology..

 

if F-117 could be targeted with an old ass system under total air dominance and total suppression of SAMs .. i just can't see how you can be so confident about the imposibility of getting F22 on radar.. its quite a sight i must admit..

 

to me, its fairly easy to see that radar tech will develop at increasing speed-when i say radar i don't mean the active one or this or that one, the whole spectrum of rays thrown into the air in one way or the others.. maybe photon-ray will be the way.. who knows.. what i'm saying is, it will be cheaper to make that crap that to make the f22..

[GGTharos]

@GG .. firing massive "pollution" rays into the sky or just using other electro-magnetic pollution that is filling the sky makes a F22 flying through it visible.but for radar to see it it needs huge computational power, greater algos, better cooperation with other radars trying to see the small difference that are happening as f22 plows through this.. this is not radar technology per se as its computer technology..

 

Go to the link I provided and do the math. No algorithms, NOTHING will allow you to see past the radar equation range. This is the theoretical maximum range. It's called theoretical because it does not account for system and environment losses - the real range will always be less.

I will say this again, this is a physical limitation and you will not overcome it with processing. All processing can do is increase the ability to detect a target inside this range in the presence of clutter or ECM.

 

if F-117 could be targeted with an old ass system under total air dominance and total suppression of SAMs .. i just can't see how you can be so confident about the imposibility of getting F22 on radar.. its quite a sight i must admit..

 

And yet a B-2 flew right down through all those SAMs, bombed targets and no one ever saw it. Or the bombs.

The F-117 flew too close to that SAM - again, if you did the math using the radar equation, you would understand how stealth really works.

 

to me, its fairly easy to see that radar tech will develop at increasing speed-

 

Then stop typing and go to the math. The reason it's fairly easy for you to see it is because you don't know what you're talking about. The reason you keep posting here and replying to me is because you still don't understand what you're talking about. If you did the math, you would understand and you would have very different arguments, if any at all.

 

Why are you resistant to knowledge? Is it because you just want to make things up?

[wasserfall]

I live next to THALES, the manufacturers of Smart-L. If you're facing stealth fighters, you're in trouble. And by the way, this part isn't sensitive :)

 

No problem, i will talk with him, see what info i can get

[TimeKilla]

The United States has spent nearly $80 billion to develop the most advanced stealth fighter jet in history, the F-22 Raptor, but the Air Force recently found out firsthand that while the planes own the skies at modern long-range air combat, it is "evenly matched" with cheaper, foreign jets when it comes to old-school dogfighting.

 

The F-22 made its debut at the international Red Flag Alaska training exercise this June where the planes "cleared the skies of simulated enemy forces and provided security for Australian, German, Japanese, Polish and [NATO] aircraft," according to an after-action public report by the Air Force. The F-22 took part in the exercise while under strict flying restrictions imposed by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in light of mysterious, potentially deadly oxygen problems with the planes - problems that the Pentagon believes it has since solved.

 

The Air Force said the planes flew 80 missions during the event "with a very high mission success rate." However, a new report from Combat Aircraft Monthly revealed that in a handful of missions designed to test the F-22 in a very specific situation - close-range, one-on-one combat - the jet appeared to lose its pricey advantages over a friendly rival, the Eurofighter Typhoon, flown in this case by German airmen.

 

"We expected to perform less with the Eurofighter but we didn't," German air officer Marc Grune said, according to Combat Aircraft Monthly. "We were evenly matched. They didn't expect us to turn so aggressively."

from http://news.yahoo.com/f-22-fighter-l...opstories.html

 

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?215662-F-22-Fighter-Loses-79-Billion-Advantage-in-Dogfights&

[aaron886]

Old news now.

[NineLine]

In the 22's defense... isnt the point of a stealth fighter to get the kill done before getting in close?

 

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?215662-F-22-Fighter-Loses-79-Billion-Advantage-in-Dogfights&

[GGTharos]

More to the point, it came out about even with a lighter fighter.

[UCAS]

You have to take into account that the radar itself is sitting some 20-25m high though.

Of course.:doh:

[wasserfall]

Stealth

 

@GGTharos,

 

Just had a nice conversation with my brother in law about the Smart L radar vs. stealth in this

case the F22.

He acknowledged to me that the F22 is indeed detectable at distances > then 65km.

The key lies in the software! (in combination with the hardware).

i'm not going to tell how it's done, because i lack the knowledge:), but you have to believe me that he does!

This is first hand information!

 

So yes the future is already there!, i'm sorry.

[wilky510]

In the 22's defense... isnt the point of a stealth fighter to get the kill done before getting in close?

I remember reading a well thought article about how the USAF plans to use their F-15 Golden eagles (AESA upgrade) to bait aircraft and have the F-22's ambush the aircraft that are busy with the F-15's. That way the F-22 enters the WVR on their terms, or gets an instant pitbull with an AMRAAM shot with high energy, which would pretty much doom a fighter.