Raptor v Typhoon question (yes another one)

While trying to find out more info on the g limits for the Raptor suit (as yet unsuccessfully) I noticed the report from a Raptor pilot stating the aircrafts capability of flying at over 40,00ft supersonicvally w/o burner. I know we already knew that but it sparked a question in me that the more au fait might be able to answer.

It is that if the Typhoon is operating at 60,000ft and is stealthy in the head on aspect would it gain an advantage by forcing the Raptor to light its burners (thus illuminating itself) in order to reach the Typhoons altitude?

Of course this assumes that the Typhoon is stooging about at 60,000ft on dry thrust while the Raptor has been approaching stealthily (and thus at 40,000). For the sake of argument does that make any sense? I confess I am an aeroplane buff not an aerial warfare tactics buff so please feel free to talk down to me

Why do you think Eurofighter is able to have higher operational altitude than Raptor?
And BTW I have read that Raptor typically operates at 50 000 feet. (or 16000 meters).

The ceiling for the Typhoon (and the figure quoted for its flying suit) is 60,000. I don't doubt that the Raptor could also fly at that height if it wanted to, I have just read that it can only operate stealthily up to 40,000 and above that it would have to use afterburners to climb, thus negating the advantages of stealth, and that is the root of my question.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by waynos]

Well, why are we assuming that a F22 would need to use AB's to go from 40,000 to 60,000 ft? If the Raptor is cruising at mach 1.4 already it wouldnt take but a few moments to make that altitude adjustment at its current supercruise speed.

AND, if the F22 got that close to a Typhoon without seeing it, AND the Typhoon had already aquired the F22, I assume the Typhoon pilot would have already fired by that point and the F22 wouldnt have any choice but to go full AB and try to evade.

I'm not assuming anything, I am going by what a Raptor pilot said. I don't Know why it is the case but he said it was, which led to me wondering the above, and I still haven't had an answer, look, I'm not saying 'this is how Typhoons will sweep Raptors from the sky' or anything, its just a hypothectical question based on a comment by a Raptor pilot.

If the Raptor is cruising at mach 1.4 already it wouldnt take but a few moments to make that altitude adjustment at its current supercruise speed.

Like I said, I don't know the technicals, I'm only going on what was said but I would guess that above 40,000ft the burner might be necessary to avoid bleeding off speed in the climb? Just a guess but that wasn't what I was asking.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
I'm not assuming anything, I am going by what a Raptor pilot said. I don't Know why it is the case but he said it was, which led to me wondering the above, and I still haven't had an answer, look, I'm not saying 'this is how Typhoons will sweep Raptors from the sky' or anything, its just a hypothectical question based on a comment by a Raptor pilot.

If the Raptor is cruising at mach 1.4 already it wouldnt take but a few moments to make that altitude adjustment at its current supercruise speed.

Like I said, I don't know the technicals, I'm only going on what was said but I would guess that above 40,000ft the burner might be necessary to avoid bleeding off speed in the climb? Just a guess but that wasn't what I was asking.

[edit on 7-3-2005 by waynos]

Um...Thats exactly what you asked:

"It is that if the Typhoon is operating at 60,000ft and is stealthy in the head on aspect would it gain an advantage by forcing the Raptor to light its burners (thus illuminating itself) in order to reach the Typhoons altitude?"

If some how I am reading this wrong, maybe you can rephrase your question so that we understand it?

Math time

20,000 feet = 3.78 statute miles. (5286 ft per mile)

Assuming the raptor is supercruising at mach 1.4 (mach 1 = 741mph at sea level) or just over 1000 mph. We need to make an assumption of thrust/momentum loss due to the climb. For mathematical simplicity lets assume the loss of thrust/momentum was instant (it wouldnt be). Lets use a few examples:

25% thrust/momentum loss: 750mph or 66,075ft per minute or 1,101.25ft per second. So, at an instant 25% loss of thrust at the point of climb, the F22 would close that 20,000ft gap in 18.16 seconds. Without afterbuners.

50% thrust/momentum loss: 500mph or 44,050ft per minute or 734.16ft per second. So, at an instant 50% loss of thrust at the point of climb, the F22 would close that 20,000 gap in 27.24 seconds. Without afterburners

So, without after burners an F22 could meet that Typhoon at 60,000ft in better than 18 seconds or 27 seconds depending on what asusmption you use. Now of course there are more factors such as momentum, angle of climb, etc. But I think we have a basic idea that the difference between 60,000 and 40,000ft isnt very much at these kinds of speeds, even without afterburners.

So..

I dont think a raptor would need to start its AB's to remain competative with a Typhoon under this scenario, unless it was already fired on and needed to evade a missile.

That seems fair enough, except that at the top of the climb would the Raptor then still need the burners to get back up to 'fighting speed' asap?

Of course this still assumes that the stealthy head on aspect prevents either plane getting a missile lock demanding a close in turning fight to evolve at which point they are more or less equal anyway, I was just thinking that, theoretically, in such a scenario even a momentary use of the burner would allow a shot to be got off (the burner giving away the position, however briefly then the PIRATE, now focussed, doing the rest.

I know such a thing is unlikely but it was the F-22 pilot talking about being able to do without burners up to 40,000ft that sparked off the question.

Why would the Raptor pilot see it necessary to get to the altitude as the Typhoon is on anyhow?

Theoretically, the Raptor will/would detect, gain a firing solution, and then 'fire and forget' before the Typhoon detected it, regardless of altitude.

No afterburners required.




seekerof

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Seekerof]

Exactly seekerof, Missiles can reach that altitude a heck of a lot faster than the raptor, even if raptor was sitting on the runway and typhoon is nose down at the raptor, raptor still wins, just too dominate. I was beng funny, but seriously, does anyone on this board think one on one raptor could lose to typhoon, highly unlikely. Get serious people.

Train

I think it can...Infact I think the raptor can lose to a more than just a typhoon..
Btw the crux of the arguement above is
" does supercruise/supersonic) flight as mentioned in all aircraft specs revolve around 'steady flight' or does it incorporate rate of climb as well?"

IMO all mach specs are only valid at steady flight at sea level or or at high altitude...
Otherwise the manufacturers would mention something as phenomenal as supersonic rate of climb...

Although in hindsight I have heard sonic booms coming off aircraft that are still on the ascent after taking off..actually im not quite sure those WERE sonic booms..

Arguably you would overall lose 2 typhoons to 1 raptor.

If statistics are accurate anyhow

I'm glad bigtrain explained his 'sitting on the runway' scenario as I was already getting twitchy fingers as I was reading it

As to your view that it is seemingly impossible for a Raptor to lose to a Typhoon, a type v type ratio of 2.2 to 1, (extrapolated form the oft quoted 10:1 and 4.5:1 figures for each type against a Flanker) imples 1 Raptor getting shot down, otherwise it would be millions to nil wouldn't it?

Seekerof raises a rather obvious point though, which I missed, if the Typhoon is 20,000 ft higher it wont be exactly nose on to the Raptor would it. I suppose you could imagine the Typhoon as being at the pointy end of a cone,extending forwards, within which the 'head on stealth' aspect is effective, the question would then be, I suppose, how broad or narrow is this cone, at what point does the Typhoon's head on stealth become compromised? I have no idea what the answer to that is and I rather suspect the answer would be classified in any case.

I have seen a site that states the Raptors sustained climb rate is 203m/s, unfortunately I still think in old money so that figure means nothing to me, maybe one of you young chaps could tell me how that equates to climbing 20,000ft?

As to why he would want to climb anyway, its a fighter pilot maxim, and as true today as it ever was, that he who has the height controls the engagement and you really don't want to be taking on an opponent with a 20,000ft advantage.


[edit on 8-3-2005 by waynos]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Why would the Raptor pilot see it necessary to get to the altitude as the Typhoon is on anyhow?

Theoretically, the Raptor will/would detect, gain a firing solution, and then 'fire and forget' before the Typhoon detected it, regardless of altitude.

No afterburners required.




seekerof

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Seekerof]

now this depends on a lot of other factors, type of sensory used, missile, range between boths crafts etc.
your scenario could work if the raptor does not need to use it's radar (e.g fires a ir-guided, passive sensory missile). but once the raptor activates radar, his position is known to the typhoon (yes even other airplanes have rwr systems..) and the typhoon will quickly start turning to the last known direction/position of the raptor, activate radar or use ir sensory to get him and attack, in a medium or bvr range scenario. if they're close the typhoon would have the advantage of much higher potential energy for a close range combat and you all know that stealth features do not equal radar-invisibility.

20000ft at 203m/s < 340m/s(mach 1)
more than 30 seconds for sure

(see I TOLD you that IMO the supersonic speed itself is not inclusive of rate of climb and more so a steady flight stat)

A few quick questions:

If the Raptor fires its missile, would it then be possible to pick it up on anotehr air crafts radar system?

If so and the plane is 20,000feet above. Would that not give him time to fire a missile at the raptor as well?

If not, why would it remain stealthy after the missile was fired?

Originally posted by Odium
A few quick questions:

If the Raptor fires its missile, would it then be possible to pick it up on anotehr air crafts radar system?

If so and the plane is 20,000feet above. Would that not give him time to fire a missile at the raptor as well?

If not, why would it remain stealthy after the missile was fired?

1. question :

if i understand you correct , you're asking if it's possible for the target aircraft to know if a missile is incoming, otherwise ignore the following

it always depends of missiles guidance systems :

a) infrared / "heatseeking" guidance systems (AIM-9 sidewinder / r-73 / etc. ) :

IR systems are passive, they track the heat emitted by the jet exhaust and as far as i know, there is no way to detect this if you're sitting in the target-aircraft. for example russian aircrafts have neat ir-tracking and targeting systems, the little "ball" in front of the canopy (mig-29 / su-27 / su-3x etc.). together with helmet mounted designater systems a nice tool ( other aircrafts have this too, before someone starts screaming ).
if the attacking pilot uses infrared for target designation, the target will not notice that it's tracked or fired at ( if the missile is also IR-guided of course ) . usually infrared works ( at average weather conditions ) in medium - close range (depending of the missile type..there is a russian missile which has a quite high range but i can't remeber it's name right now.. R-XY ET ) .

b) active radar guidance ( AIM-120 AMRAAM / Phoenix / r-77 / etc. ) :

the missile has a build in radar which emits radar-waves (thus active sensors ), like any other radar system. sensors, which are distributed over several places on the aircraft, can recognice that they are "illuminated" by a radar beam, a computer can calculate a rough direction and distance to the emitting radar system. so if any radar system tracks a target it will reveal it's rough position, the pilot in the targeted craft would get a visual warning on his radar-warning screen and a audio waring ( worst case : beep...blink..boom ).

c) passive radar guidance (AIM-7 (?) Sparrow / etc.) :

the aircraft has to track the target with it's own radar, the reflected radar energy is used to guide the missile to it's target, no fire-and-forget capabilities. attacking aircraft reveals it's rough position as in "b" .

in our example this would mean:

1. f-22 uses IR to designate the target and fires a IR missile, the typhoon pilot will only have the chance to visually spot the missile, start evasive maneuvers and drop a lot of flares. if he doesn't see the missile, he can only be very lucky if the missile misses.

2. f-22 uses radar tracking and missile guidance, reveals it's rough position at the time he starts tracking ( or scanning for ) the typhoon.


2. question (only if radar is used, or IR-missile was spotted ) :

depends on the positions, who is following who etc. . if he has the time to evade the incoming missile, he knows from where it was fired and can turn in the rough direction, use his scanning / tracking systems and fire back. in a close combat scenario the typhoon would be in a better position, because of the 20k feet altitude difference he has a higher potential energy.

3. question :

todays stealth features have generally the effect, that they reduce the range at which the aircraft can be detected, in regard to radar-stealth this means lowering the "radar cross section - RCS", the amount of radar energy that is scattered back from the aircraft to the tracking radar.
a low RCS is a nice advantage but once the f-22 has revealed it's position or is within the "detectable range" ( range depends on the tracking radar-system and of course the stealth features, rcs ) the typhoon would get a chance to fire at the raptor.
but on the other side, the raptor could simply activate radar, designate the target, fire a AMRAAM missile, wait till the missile tracks by it's own radar and shut down the raptors radar. this way only the missile would be noticed on the typhoons radar warner. the raptor would just pop-up very short and can break away.
this example scenario is of course far away from reality, as both aircrafts would be embedded in a network of other radar systems ( ground based / awacs ).

please correct me if i'm wrong....

[edit on 8-3-2005 by Hannah]

Thank you, Hannah. That helps explain what I was thinking.

Also, if the F-22's weapons have to 'slide out' (from my understanding) wouldn't that give it a larger RCS? Even if only for a moment. Couldn't this quick blip on a radar be enough for a well trained pilot to know that something's there?

Originally posted by Odium
Thank you, Hannah. That helps explain what I was thinking.

Also, if the F-22's weapons have to 'slide out' (from my understanding) wouldn't that give it a larger RCS? Even if only for a moment. Couldn't this quick blip on a radar be enough for a well trained pilot to know that something's there?

I would say "yes", but it would be tough. Those doors are open only for a few seconds. The opposing pilot whould need to be looking in the right direction at the right time so to speak. Certainly an opportunity, but a fleeting one. Even with the doors open the F22 has a signature smaller than most planes do all together.

Im kind of curious to see what an F22's signature is like from above. It cant be perfect from all directions. Id say an enemy would have the greatest advantage against one there.

It does seem to present a large flat surface from directly above or below, this would appear to be unavoidable though (as with the B-2) so thats what I was hinting at when I said that once the engagement had become a turning fight they would be more or less equal.