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.

 

Is the Raptor capable of this...

page: 11
1
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by grunt2
ahhh, is only about avoid speculation, nothing more, why deviwasp, you also dont like the M1.8 f22 max speed???



[edit on 4-8-2005 by grunt2]

I dont know the max speed of the F-22 and I doubt anyone outside the project really does know.




posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 04:19 AM
link   
To play devils advocate here, may I make an observation?

IF it is the case, as stated on another thread, that the USAF are only saying the F-15 is outclassed because they want more Raptors, then is it not possible that the Raptors pilots are NOT the great harbingers of absolute truth they are being made out to be here? That they may in fact be over-egging the Raptors capabilites in order to further bolster their position? Just a thought.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Of course, waynos, that may be a possibility, though I highly doubt it.
Does taking out 5 F-15s in three minutes indicate what you are saying?
Five Eagles In Three Minutes

The Raptor has done this to F-16s, as well.
Would Britain's DERA, the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency indicate thus when in simulations against the Su-35's, the Raptor had a 10:1 kill ratio versus the next best Western fighter, the EF-2000 Typhoon had a 4.5:1 kill ratio?

The matter of the validity and credibility of those who have piloted the Raptor and what they mention and assert, should not be downplayed as simple pilot hogwash and over-hyped bravado. Too many consistencies in their descriptions and claims that carry-over from one pilot's description to another pilot's descriptions. Another facet here is the experience alone of those who have flown in the F-22 and have expressed what they have in the links provided in this topic thread.

The question that really needs to be asked was did those F-15 pilots, that participated in the Indian exercise, were they holding back enough to make the need for the F-22 seem even more of an urgency. Or perhaps the USAF allowed such restrictions then played the role of how they got so massively beat so as to make the need for the Raptor become of paramount urgency.





seekerof

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Of course, waynos, that may be a possibility, though I highly doubt it.
Does taking out 5 F-15s in three minutes indicate what you are saying?
Five Eagles In Three Minutes
[edit on 5-8-2005 by Seekerof]


I'm always weary of these reports of plane X taking out k*Y planes in some lightning fast time frame. But thank you for the link I'd never read the actual details of this engagement. It seems to me the credit for this kill really goes to the AMRAAM. A well hidden SAM battery would have done the same job on the F-15's. Any aircraft which ECM'ed your own missiles would have done the same job on the F-15's. etc. I would like to see how the raptor did against the F-15's in several different types of engagments (with in VR for instance).

On this topic of speed, it doesn't show the Raptor is any more advanced as top speed (nor acceleration nor supercruise) never became a factor in the engagement. This seems more like a "wow factor" demonstration than a real test of the Raptor's capabilities.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by LemonAide]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Its also similar to when the RAF downed the F-15`s using the Typhoon (in an exercise) it was over in a minute and the eagle drivers never stood a chance - and they were the upgraded ones!



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:43 AM
link   
yeah, but it istn't same thing to train combat and to expirience it...



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
Its also similar to when the RAF downed the F-15`s using the Typhoon (in an exercise) it was over in a minute and the eagle drivers never stood a chance - and they were the upgraded ones!


Could we have some more data on this exercise??
I'm assuming you're talking AESA equipped F-15Cs?? Also equipped with the
AIM-120B/C/D..? (whatever is the latest..)



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Seekerof, I do not doubt at all the Raptors superiority, I was merely thinking in terms of pilots saying it can supercruise at mach 2 or whatever the claim happens to be.

Regarding the Typhoon beating the F-15, I don't think it was an actual pre arranged excercise (unless there was one I don't know about, which is entirely possible) but the 17Sqn crews I spoke with at Waddington said 'it happens all the time'. Something to do with the F-15 jockeys getting curious about the new plane on the block and wanting to take a crack at showing who's still the boss, apparently the Typhoon jockeys have not yet lost a 'bounce'. This is back to pilots telling the truth or not but as they are fine upstanding British chaps, why not?



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
ahhhh Seekerof, the main "arguments" of you and othere guys are

1) its secret
2).........and why not????



"its secret"

all -not only the f22- the military planes performances are officialy confidential, but in the end their performances are very public, the only figure that keep in "secret" ar the special top max speed, but its seems that the raptor is a veeery special case, only because you dont like -or dont understand- the max M1.8 and supercruiser M1.4-1.5

you repeat again and again the "public consume", only to hold the myth and the speculation

"why not?"

yeah, why not?, after all the plane is the most advanced, most cool, most everything, huge t/w. etc...but if these are your argun¡ments, then are just speculative


is incredible, only in this forum that M2 supercruiser just become in a fact sooo easely


again the pilots arent saying that M2 supercruiser is only a editorial comment, but the fanboys change the original exaggerated M1.8 to M2 veeeery easely


with that "classified" argument the f18 can reach M2.5, the f14 M3, the f15 M3, su27 M3, and goooooo with the speculation


so stay in your speculative fairy tales, if you love these fantasies, i cant do anymore




[edit on 5-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Good point, the plane should be secret, however there is tons of material on the web...



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   
The thing with the Raptor is will it be paramountly needed in the future. I'd think you would want to acquire the aircraft and train with it first, so when needed it can be used effectively.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by EngineMan2145]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
No country, be it Russia, be it China, be it India, etc., releases fully disclosed data on advanced weaponry systems, be they aircraft or MBTs, etc. Furthemore, no country places such information for open access and discernment on the internet making such national security secrets and advantages readily available and known. If countries did, grunt2, there would be no need for security clearances and national security interests and secrets.

Geez, top speed during supercruise is nothing special, even if you know it, it won't help you one bit. It would only be a design goal, unless you get actual blueprints of the engine you won't be able to do anything with just a figure on a piece of paper.


Besides, even if you could, Russia doesn't have the money to build a competing design both China and India are not that advanced yet for some several years to come.



Originally posted by Seekerof
Please, continue to enlighten us to what you really know, k?

I suggest you follow your own advice and stick with the facts instead of speculating while hiding behind "it's classified, so it must be superduperfast".



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 03:31 PM
link   


Uh, riiiiiiiiiight.
There are a couple industry insiders on this board, grunt2, among others who have operational military experience, as well as those who work for governmental aeronautical defense agencys as civilains. None who I know, except one, has any problem whatsoever in letting someone know, such as youself, their credentials or for whom they work for.


Bing! Bing! Bing!


My father works on the Raptor just about every day, for Lockheed in GA.


Though, as I mentioned, I'm never really sure when he is just blowing smoke up my ass about numbers, etc....but he's been QUITE proud of the work they've done on the bird....and you can hear the excitement in his voice, like a kid at Christmas,


I'm not going to drop names, but if you really want to check creds, as a kid in the 80's, I lived in Lockheed compound L-160 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and went to RICS school (later changed to SAIS-Riyadh). That should be enough to confirm something for those that wish to.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by Harlequin
Its also similar to when the RAF downed the F-15`s using the Typhoon (in an exercise) it was over in a minute and the eagle drivers never stood a chance - and they were the upgraded ones!


Could we have some more data on this exercise??
I'm assuming you're talking AESA equipped F-15Cs?? Also equipped with the
AIM-120B/C/D..? (whatever is the latest..)


No, they we're F-15E's.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   


they've done on the bird....and you can hear the excitement in his voice, like a kid at Christmas


yes, there are kind and kind of engieeners, i also have heard comments from guys that are very disapointed because the loooong time that the proyect have in the research -but well...in the end that give you more money
/is only a joke/-, some thinks that the plane will be greate, but also will have some shortcomings, one thing is a succefull design-that also had problems- like the f15,the proyect was ended-after the test- only in 4-5 years, the 22 have 15 years -much like the f4-, some thinks that the plane will be good, but also will have some problems, specially in the subsonic corner velocity and other stuffs, that was the reason of the increase of the aspect on the production planes, obviously there are engieeners, pilots mechanics that are somewhat sentimental with the machine

i just come here to have a objetive technical discussion, but then come the patriots, the fans, the myths, the "classified", buahhh


[edit on 5-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Simon666
Geez, top speed during supercruise is nothing special, even if you know it, it won't help you one bit. It would only be a design goal, unless you get actual blueprints of the engine you won't be able to do anything with just a figure on a piece of paper.


Apparently, you have no clue as to how supercruise enhances BVR, air-to-air missile ranges, detections, ECCM, ESM, etc.?





Besides, even if you could, Russia doesn't have the money to build a competing design both China and India are not that advanced yet for some several years to come.

Just "several years"? Try 8-12 years behind.





I suggest you follow your own advice and stick with the facts instead of speculating while hiding behind "it's classified, so it must be superduperfast".

I'm not sure where you have been during this ongoing 11 page discussion, but you might want to re-read this thread before running off with your own speculative comments. I have presented, time and time again, along with a couple others, nothing but facts. You?






seekerof

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by grunt2
i just come here to have a objetive technical discussion, but then come the patriots, the fans, the myths, the "classified", buahhh



Certainly no need to
your eyes.
There are a number of members who have continually gave imput into this discussion that would certainly argue that you are definately not here to objectively have a technical discussion. Cause if you were, you would not blatantly continue to disregard what some of us have been presenting and indicating to you, huh?

Part of me says your nothing but a troll looking to be nothing but a disruptive factor in any type valid and objective discussion. The other part of me thinks that you may indeed wish to discuss things, but only from your particular point of view, all the while, providing little to nothing in technical terms and sources to back anything you have said. See, the object of having an objective technical discussion is take what others are countering with with some degree of merit or validity, something for which you have yet to have done. You simply continue to dismiss and play off what is being technically presented to you.

You are not here for an objective technical discussion, IMHO.




seekerof



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:33 PM
link   


Geez, top speed during supercruise is nothing special, even if you know it, it won't help you one bit. It would only be a design goal, unless you get actual blueprints of the engine you won't be able to do anything with just a figure on a piece of paper.


You do know how much fuel you save when you supercruise, there by increasing your aircrafts range. Not only that, but it also increases the range of your missiles somewhat for BVR combat.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:41 PM
link   
look seekerof, again and again you repeat that "is classified" and "why not" "is classified" and "why not""is classified" and "why not""is classified" and "why not", again you can believe in your fairy tales, im just dot care


have a nice day


[edit on 5-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by grunt2
have a nice day


I hope this is an exit, this forum doesn't need any more static.




top topics



 
1
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join