Cobra Maneuver: The Truth.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by JFrazier
The F-22 demonstrated a 120 degree Cobra a few months ago in an airshow.

It also demonstrated the "Kulbit", and if I may add both of these were done with a full internal weapons and fuel load.

Why was an F-22 carrying a full weapons load at an airshow

Originally posted by BlackWidow23
Why was an F-22 carrying a full weapons load at an airshow

According to the pilot who flew the Raptor during those maneuvers it's SOP, almost every time the Raptor flies in public, other than for testing purposes, it always has a full internal load. It may sound strange but this is so the Raptor's true maneuvering capabilities aren't demonstrated and because there is less risk since they are carried internally.

USAF leaders don't want pilots showing the public just how maneuverable the Raptor is. These demonstrations were not scripted, the pilot was part of a larger air show and was 'burning fuel' in the back while he awaited his turn, not surprisingly his maneuvers became the highlights of the show. Once it was noted by the brass the word was put out and you will likely never see such maneuvers done in public again by the F-22, not even the official 2008 demo team will not repeat them

[edit on 4-1-2007 by WestPoint23]

Here's the footage-

www.youtube.com...

That's video footage from a different show, just to point out I was referring to the Atlantic City air show.

Link 1
Link 2


[edit on 4-1-2007 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by GT100FV
So are you saying that the test pilots and engineers misinterpreted their findings during the test flights studying the high AOA envelope capabilities for the F-22?

Nope, someone has misinterpreted what the pilots and engineers actually wrote.


For instance - go to the Wikipedia page, and it says:

The F-22 is also capable of maintaining a constant angle of attack of over 60°.[5]

Now, read the reference it gives:

The program has demonstrated outstanding flight characteristics at AOAs ranging from below –40 degrees to above 60 degrees.

and

High AOA envelope expansion testing began on 22 July 99 and cleared 1-g maneuvering beyond 60 degrees AOA by 8 September 1999

Neither of these quotes can be interpreted as sustained AoA - yet someone has.


Now, about the sustained AoA:

From the Air Force Association

David C. Schilling Award
The most outstanding contributions in the field of Flight
Lt. Col. David M. Nelson, Edwards AFB, CA
Lt. Col. Nelson is recognized for his tireless efforts, as the first F-22 operational test pilot, to improve the F-22 Raptor. He led the F-22 Combined Test Force in high-risk test sorties, expanding the aircraft's flight envelope. Colonel Nelson completed several first ever F-22 events to include sustained flight at negative 60 degrees angle-of-attack and the launch of an Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile.

[edit on 4/1/07 by kilcoo316]

the first video link wasn't to bad but i must say westpoint that its hard to see whats going on in the 2nd one. I think i got a good idea what happened but its hard to visualize the area that the 22 did the high alpha loop in since the camera is so shaky.

as for the whole sustained high AOA flight im sure they can do it at +60 but to sustain the angle that the 22 goes to in the cobra would be rediculous it like... +120? I'm not sure someone who has the facts can correct me. keep in mind sustained +60 is darn good

very well.......

The supermaneuverability does not mean you can avoid attack or shoot away from enemy fighter several ten nm, but means you will have the omnidirectional attack capability when you were fallen into besiegers.

The first Cobra manuvers was as it's probably stated elswere in this tread, by the sweedes, in a Saab Draken.

Why the russian Mig29 and Sukhoi can do this is mainly due to the wing design, the wing is the wing that has been tested for the longest time in the world, this is what even the allies call, "the perfect wing".

And the latest Sukhoi, only need about 50 km/h for forward momentum after the summersault manuver, witch is, EXTREMLY low speed, and also means that at a lower turn in speed, the Sukhoi is most likly the winner in all gun vs gun close combat's.

the US's Raptor, just aint good enough, and will most liky crash and burn due to the wing been a composite wing.

Originally posted by Phoebus
the US's Raptor, just aint good enough, and will most liky crash and burn due to the wing been a composite wing.

Why?

You seem to be very pro-Raptor here. I disagree with your comparison. Please note that the Raptor is a modern, advanced fighter. The Flanker is not as modern or as advanced. The Flanker lacks the thrust vectoring capabilities that the Raptor displays at every opportunity. However, it can be noted that the Flanker does not need this capability. In terms of airframe, the Flanker has more in common with the Eagle or Tomcat and thus is incomparable to the Raptor.
Pugachev's Cobra is applicable in combat when one dogfights with another comparable airframe.
Assume the following: A Flanker and a Tomcat have no Air to Air capability left, save for cannon. They encounter each other and attempt to command the other through classic maneuvers. This goes on for some time. Suddenly, just as the Tomcat gets into a "kill" position, the Flanker says "PUGACHEV!!!"
The result: the Flanker gains the kill position and cooks Goose.
Who says that the Cobra has no combat use? This sort of situation has a very high chance of occurring and thus it must be assumed that of two craft of similar airframes, the one which can outmaneuver the other will emerge the victor.

However, having said that, let me say this: Another thread mentions the "Houdini" where the Raptor kills the Flanker... from 20nmi maintaining invisibility and using a nice AMRAAM.

In conclusion: While the Cobra is fast becoming obsolete, in a worst case scenario it may be the one thing that can keep you alive. DO NOT underestimate the combat applications of this fine maneuver, and DO NOT let yourself get caught in this sort of situation. The Raptor is by far the Flanker's superior but only due to its stealth technology.

Also, thrust vectoring is for pussies.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
When asked to perform at the Grand Aerial Tour as a leading role at first I was like _javascript:icon('') but then I _javascript:icon('')'d. You see, the GAT only allows those with a jet fighter to perform. The only thing I had was a Nighthawk parked out back. The rep couldn't see the joke either.

Originally posted by Darkvisor
You seem to be very pro-Raptor here. I disagree with your comparison. Please note that the Raptor is a modern, advanced fighter. The Flanker is not as modern or as advanced. The Flanker lacks the thrust vectoring capabilities that the Raptor displays at every opportunity. However, it can be noted that the Flanker does not need this capability. In terms of airframe, the Flanker has more in common with the Eagle or Tomcat and thus is incomparable to the Raptor.
Pugachev's Cobra is applicable in combat when one dogfights with another comparable airframe.
Assume the following: A Flanker and a Tomcat have no Air to Air capability left, save for cannon. They encounter each other and attempt to command the other through classic maneuvers. This goes on for some time. Suddenly, just as the Tomcat gets into a "kill" position, the Flanker says "PUGACHEV!!!"
The result: the Flanker gains the kill position and cooks Goose.
Who says that the Cobra has no combat use? This sort of situation has a very high chance of occurring and thus it must be assumed that of two craft of similar airframes, the one which can outmaneuver the other will emerge the victor.

However, having said that, let me say this: Another thread mentions the "Houdini" where the Raptor kills the Flanker... from 20nmi maintaining invisibility and using a nice AMRAAM.

In conclusion: While the Cobra is fast becoming obsolete, in a worst case scenario it may be the one thing that can keep you alive. DO NOT underestimate the combat applications of this fine maneuver, and DO NOT let yourself get caught in this sort of situation. The Raptor is by far the Flanker's superior but only due to its stealth technology.

Also, thrust vectoring is for pussies.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
When asked to perform at the Grand Aerial Tour as a leading role at first I was like _javascript:icon('

') but then I _javascript:icon('

')'d. You see, the GAT only allows those with a jet fighter to perform. The only thing I had was a Nighthawk parked out back. The rep couldn't see the joke either.

Yeah, uh huh, jinking, checking your six, disengaging the angle of attack limiter, losing your g limiter, do another Linda Blair, maintain a straight flight and then “Pugachev!!”

Thankfully, the F-14 is retired, as well as the ground attack F-117.
And another thing FAIP, hot chicks, Ferrari's, and thrust vectoring are here to stay.

See ya at the O'club

reply to post by Seekerof

So u are giving the examples of when not to use cobra in attempt to deny that its a manoeuvre that if used correctly would give advantage to flanker pilot? Its like me saying dont put an iron object into microwave or else ull brake it.

All of listed above can grant sukhoi pilots advantage in various scenarios, but if u avoid those scenarios u can win.

Originally posted by AlphaScythian
reply to post by Seekerof

 

So u are giving the examples of when not to use cobra in attempt to deny that its a manoeuvre that if used correctly would give advantage to flanker pilot? Its like me saying dont put an iron object into microwave or else ull brake it.

All of listed above can grant sukhoi pilots advantage in various scenarios, but if u avoid those scenarios u can win.

edit on 18-3-2013 by AlphaScythian because: errors

When said Flanker bleeds off all it's airspeed and forward momentum, yes it may be able to claim it's 'kill' on a single target...Before being rapidly engaged by the wingman who was with the now-destroyed aircraft. He most likely has a decent airspeed and forward momentum, and therefore the edge. He's not gonna be sat in mid-air trying to spool up and gain energy. Flanker dead.

1 kill for 1 kill isn't really the aim of the game.