It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Best of the Best....Air superiority Fighters

page: 24
2
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Great link, thanks for the info, hope the General gets his way and more Raptors can be procured, especially if they only cost 116 Mil per airframe.




posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Great link, thanks for the info, hope the General gets his way and more Raptors can be procured, especially if they only cost 116 Mil per airframe.


It would be nice to see some more F-22s around here. I live in Marietta were they produce the Raptor and they've been coming out of the plant at a pretty steady pace. I saw one yesterday and it looks the part. It's loud, big, and expensive.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Excellent links as usual Laxpla ,really appreciate it!I wonder how many more Raptor's will be produced?? Hopefully it's 381 or more and not the crappy 180. I hope the General get's it's way and our idiotic congress approves the request for more raptors.I'm tired ofall these budget cuts and cap!!!
I'm having trouble copying and pasting from this pdf so here's the pdf itself. It's on page 3,zoom in for more detail,it compares fighter radars.

www.ausairpower.net...

By the way does anyone know how to C&p images of a PDf cuz im havin a lot of trouble.
[edit on 29-6-2006 by urmomma158]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by urmomma158]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by srsairbags
well dude . . . in a typical scenario . . . the f14s will have awacs cover . . and thus my BVR post is justified . . . and about inteligurlrs excellent post . . event that dont mention anything about generation 4.75 fighters . . . .
ill repeat again . . . i never wanted to compare the f22 with the sukhoi . . .i just wanted to know where it stands . . ( i which generation) . . . thats all
yea but no protection from double digit sams like the S400(Which is why you need the Raptor). It's always nice to have the element of surprise. The AIM120D will have a range of 150km you know,so it's nowhere near as bad. The Tomcat has some serious maintenance issues,i'd rather have my plane flying rather than having it sit on the carrier deck for maintenance.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Just a few things to keep in mind, the radar range chart is a bit misleading, the RCS of a typical fighter is 5m2 so don’t focused on the range given for the 10m2 figure, look at the range given between the 1 and 10 on the chart. For comparisson the F-22 has an RCS between .01 and .001, great link urmomma158.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Just a few things to keep in mind, the radar range chart is a bit misleading, the RCS of a typical fighter is 5m2 so don’t focused on the range given for the 10m2 figure, look at the range given between the 1 and 10 on the chart.

probabaly with external weapons bays.
For comparisson the F-22 has an RCS between .01 and .001, great link urmomma158.
actually it's .0001-.0002


The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was a first step in the stealth reformation. Planners are considering abandoning the radar blocker in the exhaust with the idea that the 5-deg. cone of vulnerability out the aircraft's tail was an acceptable risk given the altitude at which it would fly (a margin of safety provided by the use of precision weapons). Its overall radar signature, for example, is about -30 dBsm. (the radar reflection of a golf ball) in most directions compared with -40 dBsm. (a marble) for the F/A-22. (AW&ST Aug. 27, 2001, p. 34).
www.aviationnow.com... .jsp%3Fview%3Dstory%26id%3Dnews%2F04045p02.xml



Because of its small radar return (about that of an aluminum marble), high operating altitude (40,000 ft.) and fast cruising speed (Mach 1.5), the F-22 has about "12 times more airspace" than conventional aircraft in which to operate safely. In that space, antiaircraft radar cannot detect it with enough precision to shoot it down, said retired USAF Gen. Richard Hawley.
this was cut n paste from an aviationnow article www.freerepublic.com...


November 25, 2005: The U.S. Air Force, in it’s effort to get money to build more F-22s, has revealed just how “stealthy” the F-22
is.
It’s RCS (Radar Cross Section) is the equivalent, for a radar, to a metal marble. The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117. Much older aircraft, like the B-52, have a huge RCS, which makes them very easy to spot on radar. But with a smaller RCS, it's more likely that the aircraft won't be detected at all.
www.air-attack.com...


November 25, 2005: The U.S. Air Force, in it’s effort to get money to build more F-22s, has revealed just how “stealthy” the F-22 is. It’s RCS (Radar Cross Section) is the equivalent, for a radar, to a metal marble. The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117. Much older aircraft, like the B-52, have a huge RCS, which makes them very easy to spot on radar. But with a smaller RCS, it's more likely that the aircraft won't be detected at all. The air force revealed this information, which is usually kept secret, because it wants to make the case that it makes more sense to cut production of the F-35 (which cost $30-50 million each), so that more F-22s (that cost over $100 million each) can be bought. Most of the air force generals are former fighter pilots, and the F-22 is a much hotter fighter than the F-35 (which is basically a fighter-bomber, with emphasis on the latter function.) This is causing an international uproar, because of the many foreign countries that are buying the F-35. Some of these countries have contributed money for the development of the F-35. The F-22 will not be exported, because it uses so much top secret technology.
www.strategypage.com...


The ADM article then argues that stealth is ”one of the features that discriminates it
[the JSF] from its competitors", neglecting to mention that the principal competitor to
the JSF, the F/A-22A, is actually built for significantly higher stealth capability than
the JSF will have. While the JSF will be much stealthier than evolved third
generation fighters and opposing Sukhois, its stealth shaping has been optimised for
the upper X-band and forward hemisphere, a viable design choice for a battlefield
strike fighter, but not for an air superiority and deep strike fighter. This is a large
departure from the F/A-22A which is built to provide high stealth in all sectors, and
over a wider range of opposing radar wavelengths. The ADM article fails to explain
that export JSFs will have further reductions in stealth performance, relative to the
US baseline, itself that much inferior to the F/A-22A.
www.ausairpower.net...




* Radar signature approximately the size of a bumblebee, thereby avoiding detection by the most sophisticated enemy air defense systems
* Signatures/emissions of sound, turbulence, and heat that can aid detection are reduced
* Requires no direct assistance from electronic support aircraft that may be more easily detected
* Includes planform alignment of the wing and tail edges, radar-absorbing sawtoothed surfaces, an engine face that is concealed by a serpentine inlet duct, "stealthy" coating cockpit design to minimize the usually substantial radar return of pilot’s helmet
* Through internal weapons placement, the F-22 eliminates multiple surface features that could be detected by enemy radar
www.f22-raptor.com...

The RCS of a bumblebee or small marble would be .0001m2-.0002m2


This is closest to it's RCS since in the F 15 vs F/A 22 excercise the Raptors we're never detected even in WVR(F15's had the most updated radars too). Im sure you know of this excercise Westpoint.


[edit on 29-6-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Maybe, but only the largest non-stealthy fighters will have a head-on RCS of 10. Most fighters like the F-15 have an RCS of 5m2, the F-16, Rafale, F/A-18E/F and Typhoon all have reduced signatures. With the latter hovering around 1m2.

And yes I know the exercise your referring to, the F-15’s never had a lock on the Raptor, even though it was a WVR fight they still got killed by a single F-22.



posted on Jun, 29 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Clean figures might be less the 10m2, but with external stores, 10m2 is probably a more accurate representation (well, for those of those that don't have RAM anyway...). More than 10m2 isn't unusual in some circumstances. And this of course is nose on RCS.

Also, with Carlo's article, while he has some good undertanding of technical systems, I think his threat weapon capabilities are far too optomistic, especially in terms of range. Kinimatically, AA-10 might just hack 45 nm, but it won't have the ability to manoeuvre to an intercept. Similarly, for the IR versions, the seeker won't be good enough to detect and track an IR source at those sort of ranges. Similar thoughts for the other systems.



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 04:52 AM
link   
the mig 35 (the new one) . . . it maynot be the best air superiority fighter . . but its out there . . . (Mig 29 OVT) what say . . ? ? ?



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by srsairbags
the mig 35 (the new one) . . . it maynot be the best air superiority fighter . . but its out there . . . (Mig 29 OVT) what say . . ? ? ?


I'd say it's serious bang for the buck. What does one go for, about 25 mil. The Indians will probably buy it, with the radar absorbent paint that was tested on their MiG-21-93s. It's a wicked little thing. I'd like to see the results when they test one in a dogfight against their Su 30MKI's, that would be interesting to watch



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pazo

Originally posted by srsairbags
the mig 35 (the new one) . . . it maynot be the best air superiority fighter . . but its out there . . . (Mig 29 OVT) what say . . ? ? ?


I'd say it's serious bang for the buck. What does one go for, about 25 mil. The Indians will probably buy it, with the radar absorbent paint that was tested on their MiG-21-93s. It's a wicked little thing. I'd like to see the results when they test one in a dogfight against their Su 30MKI's, that would be interesting to watch


The MiG-29OVT is probably the only plane I would think that the F-22 and Su-30MKI would have major trouble with in a WVR battle. I think the MKI would get smacked down at low speeds from what I've seen. The best thing for the F-22 and MKI would be to gain as much speed at possible and go vertical.



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   
you know what . . when you look back at migs . . all of em have achieved something . . . . and great planes in their own right . . . .
i mean check out the Mig21 fishbed . . . . . half fighter half rocket . . . is reffered as the most sucessful fighter in the world . . . and it is quick (hell quick for its time . . ) . . .than comes the mig25 foxbat . . . maan . . what can you say about the fighetr that the US thought was perpose built to take out the blackbird . . . . . damn . . . when it came out (cold war at max) . . they thouht it could do mach 3.2 (flew over israil at that speed but distroyed its engines completely) . . . . and then there is the hugely powerful radar on it . . they said it could kill rabbits on the runway . . . and then there is the mig29 fulcrum . . . another great fighter . . with performance on par with most of its western counterparts . . .



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JFrazier
The MiG-29OVT is probably the only plane I would think that the F-22 and Su-30MKI would have major trouble with in a WVR battle. I think the MKI would get smacked down at low speeds from what I've seen. The best thing for the F-22 and MKI would be to gain as much speed at possible and go vertical.


Speed = Energy. Energy = Life. Anything that fights WVR has to keep its speed up, or it's going to get killed. Every manuver you make bleeds energy, until you get to the point where you're a slow wallowing target, and some guy with a rock shoots you down.



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   
The Raptor will have no problem with a Mig 29 or SU27/30 in WVR.
aimpoints.hq.af.mil...



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Maybe, but only the largest non-stealthy fighters will have a head-on RCS of 10. Most fighters like the F-15 have an RCS of 5m2, the F-16, Rafale, F/A-18E/F and Typhoon all have reduced signatures. With the latter hovering around 1m2.

And yes I know the exercise your referring to, the F-15’s never had a lock on the Raptor, even though it was a WVR fight they still got killed by a single F-22.
What about with external weapons stores?????



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 05:34 PM
link   
They're in the process of developing semi-stealthy/stealthy external stores for the F-22 to cafrry so that it doesn't have a huge RCS bloom if it's carrying extra A2A missiles.



posted on Jun, 30 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Willard856
Clean figures might be less the 10m2, but with external stores, 10m2 is probably a more accurate representation (well, for those of those that don't have RAM anyway...). More than 10m2 isn't unusual in some circumstances. And this of course is nose on RCS.

Also, with Carlo's article, while he has some good undertanding of technical systems, I think his threat weapon capabilities are far too optomistic, especially in terms of range. Kinimatically, AA-10 might just hack 45 nm, but it won't have the ability to manoeuvre to an intercept. Similarly, for the IR versions, the seeker won't be good enough to detect and track an IR source at those sort of ranges. Similar thoughts for the other systems.
Maybe he's referring to LOBL or a helmet mounted cueing system. Same thing for the Amraam ,the active seeker won't work at 100km but once it goes to 20nm it'sa no escape.

Dr Carlo Kopp is best known publicly in Australia as a trade journal writer. Writing for Australian Aviation since 1980, he specialised in military aviation, technology, and strategic issues. More recently, his work has been published by Asia Pacific Defence Reporter, the US based Journal of Electronic Defence, International Assessment and Strategy Center, UK based Jane's Missiles and Rockets, Air International, and Amberley based Defence Today journals. He wrote monthly computer technical features for Sydney based Systems, Commsworld and Atomic MPC, between 1994 and 2003, producing well over 100 publications [3].

His other professional and academic interests include air warfare strategy, doctrine, network centric and information warfare. His work in this area has been published by the Royal Australian Air Force and the United States Air Force. He produced extensive contributions to the 2000 Defence White Paper debate, testified to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit and the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (federal parliament) on fighter replacement issues, and has delivered invited papers to a number of conferences on defence related topics [4]. In September, 2003, he was appointed a Visiting Research Fellow at the Australian Defence Studies Centre (UNSW@ADFA) for twelve months, specialising in air power and military strategy, and in February, 2005, he was appointed a Research Fellow at the Monash Asia Institute, specialising in regional military strategy.
www.ausairpower.net...

Some info on CarloKopp incase you we're wondering. He's not a nobody fon some random site.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 05:13 AM
link   
As I said, kinematic ranges don't really count for much if the guidance isn't there. So there is no real benefit in showing a missiles max range, especially if you're comparing apples and oranges (IR/SARH/ARH). If you are comparing apples and apples (AA-12 vs AMRAAM), then you have to start comparing the initial detection and guidance mechanism (the host FCR that will provide the midcourse updates) to see who gets their shot away first, then who is going to outpole the other (f-pole for semi-active and IR missiles, a-pole for ARH). So, if your IR missile can detect and track an adversary at 20 nm, and your missile has a kinematic range of 30nm, you actually have an advantage over an adversary who has an IR missile with a kinematic capability of 50 nm, but the seeker can only detect and track you at 10 nm. Of course, missile speed also comes into play when calculating pole. But my beef is more the inference that the max kinematic range means that certain systems outperform others, without taking a holistic view of the engagement. I think it deliberately misrepresents the situation.

As for Carlo, I am quite familiar with his work. As I said, good technical knowledge in some areas, but his true understanding of threat capabilities is relatively uninformed.



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I dont know if this is already been posted but...

One thing that counts is the pilots skill. Wouldnt a novice pilot or one who hasnt been in any battles who flys a advance aircraft versus one pilot who has alot more experience who flys a less advance aircraft lose?



posted on Jul, 1 2006 @ 09:08 PM
link   
That's very true, the problem this forum has is that it is so difficult to characterise a generic pilot as the aircrew training regimes differ so much. Even amongst western nations, training levels differ. And post-graduate training (weapon courses) are also different. I don't think it is something that will be reconciled here, we'll probably just keep on going around the buoy with the same discussions. ROE, combat enablers such as AWACs, Link systems, intel support, threat training, and other aspects, all have inputs into the final overall capability of the system. With future systems, the pilot will become increasingly irrelevant (or already has if you listen to some people!).



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join