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 Raptor as a Bomber

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
I dont think it will get cancelled. Because of its international support, and the fact it comes in 3 flavors, helps to spread itself across the board quite good.


That international support is starting to fade. The Brits are talking about reducing the number of F-35s that they are wanting to buy and that is going to drive up the cost per plane.




posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 12:54 PM
link   
The F-35 and the F/A-22 will not be cancelled.



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
ulshadow, that's the X-44 MANTA concept.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 8-8-2005 by ShatteredSkies]


nooo... its' the FB-22... prove me wrong!!!



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
The F-35 and the F/A-22 will not be cancelled.


Don`t be so sure about the F-35. Allready most of the missions can be done by a UCAV



posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin

Originally posted by jetsetter
The F-35 and the F/A-22 will not be cancelled.


Don`t be so sure about the F-35. Allready most of the missions can be done by a UCAV


True, But I still think it will go into production, and hundreds if not thousands will be built.

The other day I read that the US Army has purchased a bunch of UCAVs, there basically the next-gen Predator. Except they will be able to stay aloft for 3 days. They should start coming online in 3 years. General Atomics (the builder) got the payment of 214 million from the Army to build 48 of them (the first batch), and eventually will have 132 of em.

But the facts are obvious, you can get 4 dozen drones, for the price of a couple Raptors.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   
are there any pictures of the fb-23? I think the black widowII actually looked more like a bomber or fighter/bomber than a fighter when compared to the F/A-22, I like the raptor more as a fighter but if i had to choose a F/B is would be the F?B-23!

So are there any drawings or pictures of the rumored F/B-23 popping up?



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Unfortunatly, I dont think theres any good renderings out there yet...at least that i've seen.






posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Either the FB-22 or FB-23 would be an awsome replacement for the F111.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by Murcielago
I dont think it will get cancelled. Because of its international support, and the fact it comes in 3 flavors, helps to spread itself across the board quite good.


That international support is starting to fade. The Brits are talking about reducing the number of F-35s that they are wanting to buy and that is going to drive up the cost per plane.


One thing that the 35 has going for it though is that most countries that dont have booming aviation industry view this plane as the next F/A-16 or 18. So countries (ie. Canada) are planing to buy these planes to replace their ageing airframes on the 18's and 16's.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:37 AM
link   
One thing that the 35 has going for it though is that most countries that dont have booming aviation industry view this plane as the next F/A-16 or 18. So countries (ie. Canada) are planing to buy these planes to replace their ageing airframes on the 18's and 16's. Canada_EH post.








AUSTRALIA is in the same boat as CANADA.


[edit on 10-8-2005 by Jezza]



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Thanks for the reply Jezza and i think you reply furthers my underlying point that the 35 wont be cancelled as its come to far (shivers remebering the CF-105) and the demand for it is still high from other key countries( Aus-Can) that are relaying on the partnerships that have been formed. Oh also alot of jobs riding on the program to.... Wow its uncanny how i keep hearing the Arrow wispering in my ear.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezza
Either the FB-22 or FB-23 would be an awsome replacement for the F111.


I don't think that either one of them will ever have the flexability of the F/B-111. The number of weapons, the type of weapons and the workload reduction of having a two man crew. An FB-22 or FB-23 wouldn't even begin to approach the ability of a Vark. I would be interested in seeing an EF/EB-22 though. The existing EA-6B and the soon to be EF-18 do not have the stealth characteristics that a EF/EB-22 would. The current jammer aircraft have to start jamming radar as soon as they enter enemy airspace and the whole way to the target. An EF/EB-22 would be able to get much closer before they had to stary jamming. Add in the stealth characteristics of the airframes and you wouldn't have to have as powerful a jamming package to begin with.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by Jezza
Either the FB-22 or FB-23 would be an awsome replacement for the F111.


I don't think that either one of them will ever have the flexability of the F/B-111. The number of weapons, the type of weapons and the workload reduction of having a two man crew. An FB-22 or FB-23 wouldn't even begin to approach the ability of a Vark.


you underestimate the computer system that are now onboard a new plane like the 22's. Those computer are probably some of the fastest opeating ones ever put on a fighter/bomber or any plane for that matter. If im wrong someone please correct me but im under the impression that the amount of processing done for the pilot before he gets the info in a 22 is crazy. The plane probably tells him his best weapon to use when he should be jamming and would help in guiding munitions as well. all of that sounds like anyother plane but the 22 does it fast and better then the rest. again i end with if someone know better please tell me so.



posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Canada_EH
you underestimate the computer system that are now onboard a new plane like the 22's. Those computer are probably some of the fastest opeating ones ever put on a fighter/bomber or any plane for that matter. If im wrong someone please correct me but im under the impression that the amount of processing done for the pilot before he gets the info in a 22 is crazy. The plane probably tells him his best weapon to use when he should be jamming and would help in guiding munitions as well. all of that sounds like anyother plane but the 22 does it fast and better then the rest. again i end with if someone know better please tell me so.


I have spent enough time repairing military aircraft to know the number of glitches and non-recreatable faults that plague even the best designed aircraft. You have the possibility of shock from near misses, maintenance errors and other things that can and probably will go wrong. I would really hate to see all of the Raptors grounded because some supply dweeb sent the wrong widget.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Canada_EH

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by Jezza
Either the FB-22 or FB-23 would be an awsome replacement for the F111.

An FB-22 or FB-23 wouldn't even begin to approach the ability of a Vark.


I still have a problem with your saying that the 22's wont have the ablity of the Vark. Honestly I understand ppl saying they have fav planes but if the F-111 was that great they never would of retired in the states and we would have fleets of them instead of the 22. make that any other plane in the air force if there that great why arent we working on them instead of the 22.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Canada_EH

I still have a problem with your saying that the 22's wont have the ablity of the Vark. Honestly I understand ppl saying they have fav planes but if the F-111 was that great they never would of retired in the states and we would have fleets of them instead of the 22. make that any other plane in the air force if there that great why arent we working on them instead of the 22.


The primary reason for the retirement of the F-111 was that the majority of the airframes had reached the end of their design life. The F-111 also had a bad ratio of maintenance hours per flight hour. The Air Force has a bad habit of wanting sexy high tech aircraft and is willing to sacrifice capability to get them. I have nothing against the F-22. I think that it is a beautiful plane and one hell of a piece of technology. I do think that it is over priced and there is less need for it than the Air Force is telling Congress. I think that some of the money would be better spent on a stealth attack bomber. This is why I like the idea of a bomber varient of the F-22.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   
cool thanks for clearing that up with me Jim.

You mentioned the whole problem of over work load on the pilot if i remeber correctly too. Well i was looking back at the thread and did you happen to notice that the F/B-23 model has a duel cockpit? looks pretty slick to me, i like the look of that much at least.

[edit on 11-8-2005 by Canada_EH]



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Why is there a lot of posting going on about a good replacement for the F-111B. That plane was a piece of junk. The Air Force hyped it up so they wouldn't be stuck buying another Navy bird(F-4). IF it was so great then why did many countries cancel its order? If it wa so great then why build the F-15 or F-16. Plus the found that the sweep wing design was a serious flaw. that it creates to many stress fractures in the body. If sweep wing is so great then why aren't all of our planes sweep wing?

There is no such thing as the ultimate multipurpose plane. And that is the problem that the F-22 is going to get into. To be a bomber you have to make them bigger taking away the agility for Air-to-Air and to be a fighter it won't be extremly big so it will be limited on the amount of bombs it carries. I say call it the PB-22. The Percision Bombing raptor. That is what it will be used for. In a true Air-to-Air fight stealth isn't going to save you. If you strip down an F-16 or F-18 to their Air-to-Air Physique which is about 5-10,000Lbs less than their weight now they will detroy any plane. It is because of the buttonhook effect. They are able to turn in and out of turns harder and faster than any other plane.

But hey if you want to bomb cities then its the PB-22 all the way. Me personally I like the Dog fights that is why I choose the F-16. But because the raptor is the newest it must be the best. Keep on thinking that and when we get into a close Air Battle we will be SOL. Way to go military, Way to burn billions of Dollars on another plane that has no real job except the BS multipurpose.

Like I have said in other posts Read the biography on John Boyd "Boyd" and you will learn more about fighter planes than would ever imagine. He was the head of the Fighter Mafia who created the F-15, F-16 and A-10.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub

Why is there a lot of posting going on about a good replacement for the F-111B. That plane was a piece of junk. The Air Force hyped it up so they wouldn't be stuck buying another Navy bird(F-4). IF it was so great then why did many countries cancel its order? If it wa so great then why build the F-15 or F-16. Plus the found that the sweep wing design was a serious flaw. that it creates to many stress fractures in the body. If sweep wing is so great then why aren't all of our planes sweep wing?


Ok if you know the history of the F-111 you know that it came from the ATF program started by McNamara in the 60's to try to build a common fighter aircraft for the Air Force and the Navy. As a fighter the F-111 is a prime example of why you can't have design by committee. The F-111 proved to be too heavy for use on carriers and so the Air Force was stuck with them. Instead of letting them rot the Air Force found a use for them as attack bombers in Vietnam. I'll give you the point on the F-111's swing wing pivot having stress fractures, but that was resolved in the 80's by replacing the airframe attachment points. The lessons learned from the F-111's pivoting wing and advances in metalurgy were applied by Grumman on the F-14. Improvements in aerodynamic design namely improvements to flap and leading edge slats as well as boundry layer control has eliminated the need for a swing wing for land based aircraft. You may see it again on carrier based planes.


There is no such thing as the ultimate multipurpose plane. And that is the problem that the F-22 is going to get into. To be a bomber you have to make them bigger taking away the agility for Air-to-Air and to be a fighter it won't be extremly big so it will be limited on the amount of bombs it carries. I say call it the PB-22. The Percision Bombing raptor. That is what it will be used for. In a true Air-to-Air fight stealth isn't going to save you. If you strip down an F-16 or F-18 to their Air-to-Air Physique which is about 5-10,000Lbs less than their weight now they will detroy any plane. It is because of the buttonhook effect. They are able to turn in and out of turns harder and faster than any other plane.


Your statement about multipurpose planes is 100% dead on. We havent been talking about making a bomber out of the F-22, what we have been saying is that you could make a totally seperate attack aircraft that would share many of the same systems and components with the F-22 that there would be a great cost savings in money and infrastructure.

The only thing that stealth is good for is to evade radar. That isn't going to do you much good in a dogfight. The AMRAAM missile has a range of 30 miles and there is talk of increasing it to over 60 miles. Problem is that very rarely do the rules of engagement let you shoot at an aircraft that can't be identified visually. Murphy's Laws of Combat state that "If you can see the enemy, he can see you.". There goes your stealth advantage. In close the F-22 is not much better than the fighters that we have now.


But hey if you want to bomb cities then its the PB-22 all the way. Me personally I like the Dog fights that is why I choose the F-16. But because the raptor is the newest it must be the best. Keep on thinking that and when we get into a close Air Battle we will be SOL. Way to go military, Way to burn billions of Dollars on another plane that has no real job except the BS multipurpose.


The F/B-22 or F/A-22 won't be any good for bombing cities because it can't carry enough bombs to make it worthwile. What it can do is to remove the ground based radar and high altitude surface-to-air missile systems. This would clear the way for planes like the F-15E and B-52's with preciscion weapons



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub

Why is there a lot of posting going on about a good replacement for the F-111B. That plane was a piece of junk.

There is no such thing as the ultimate multipurpose plane. And that is the problem that the F-22 is going to get into. To be a bomber you have to make them bigger taking away the agility for Air-to-Air and to be a fighter it won't be extremly big so it will be limited on the amount of bombs it carries.

But hey if you want to bomb cities then its the PB-22 all the way. Me personally I like the Dog fights that is why I choose the F-16. But because the raptor is the newest it must be the best. Keep on thinking that and when we get into a close Air Battle we will be SOL.

Way to go military, Way to burn billions of Dollars on another plane that has no real job except the BS multipurpose.


You know you coming off as a real jerk eh just so you know.

First of the main point behind the vark that we talked about was the over workloading.

Next the raptor since being worked into the F/A role has been made capable to drop bombs like the JDAM with out changing the structure of the actual plane. As far as i know that is, someone like intelgurl would be able to correct me if am wrong. so if thats true the wieght would only be changed by the type of armament which even your F-16 would suffer from.

Oh also the raptor is capable of some of the crazyist crap ive ever even heard of next to the cobra. That is it can actually do this with a military payload too sorta like the super hornet when it came out it was one of the first planes that would preform with a payload at an airshow and still pull off its crazy stuff.

Multipurpose is not BS. the facts are that the theatre that war is acted out in is always changing and it nice to be able to say to one plane that just shot down a fighter to go bomb a target in the same area. There is past wars where single purpose planes have proved how when they get in the wrong situation they are screwed.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join