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.

 

F-22 /thoughts and opinion about this article.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 02:30 PM
link   
westpoint, look around, the russians knows the stealth tech, but also that tech is overated, anyway they are testing su35s, look the yak 130, or the su-34

the su47 wasnt stealth, like the 1.44 both were unstable concepts test planes

a stealth design can be adapted on the flankers, perhaps the pakfa could be based on the su27, obviusly sacrificing supercruise

the f22 isnt in service, is more a pre-service to test operative behaviour-and costs- in real service, much like the f104 was, the service is programed to 2010

the truth is that the f22 proyect development was sooooooooooo slow that the plane was easely outmatched by the general technology evolution

links, links, links, hell the riccioni commentaries are veeery well known, also the true cost per plane, there is nothing new in the NR report

what is very interesting is the new radars under deployement, long wavelenght = stealth dead, but i mean about the f117, not the f22, this last is veeeery conventional to be considered stealth -also because there are othre requierements-, but also is nothing new

but there is a huge media supporting the stealth stuff, because are billion dollars involved

"The Late Col. Boyd is probably rolling his grave becasue of Gen Riccioni's comments. "

ohhhhhh wahat a crap



[edit on 29-8-2005 by grunt2]




posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   

what is very interesting is the new radars under deployement, long wavelenght = stealth dead, but i mean about the f117, not the f22, this last is veeeery conventional to be considered stealth -also because there are othre requierements-, but also is nothing new


The longer the wavelength of the radar the shorter its range, if you want a radar that can detect stealth know that it will have about a 20 mile range.
There are currently 51 Raptor at Nellis AF Base in Nevada, not yet in operational status but will soon be.


[edit on 29-8-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 02:56 PM
link   
there are 24-30 f22 in current pre-service, the total output was 40-50 planes, but counting dynamic models, test models, etc..

low frecuency have longer range than high frecuency, like the light, compare the range between IR or UV, basics electomagnetics

btw nice lady in your avatar, who is her????

[edit on 29-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

The first production F/A-22 was delivered to Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on January 14, 2003. As of late 2004, 51 Raptors are in service, with 22 more ordered under fiscal year 2004 funding. F/A-22 DIOT&E (Dedicated Initial Operational Test and Evaluation) occurred on October 27, 2004. The first production F/A-22 crash occurred at Nellis Air Force Base on December 20, 2004, during takeoff. The pilot ejected safely moments before impact. As of April 2005, the accident is still under investigation but investigators are pointing to a software malfunction, not pilot error. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is scheduled to occur around December of 2005.

Source Wikipedia
Also the woman in my avatar is Audrey Hepburn, I though everyone knew who she was?



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub
I think that this would be a very interesting WVR battle. The Su-37 is a larger airframe ( 10ft. longer) but the weight is very similar. Empty I think the Su-37 weighs 565lbs more. The thrust is only 4,500lbs lighter in the Su-37 and they both have thrust Vectoring. They both pull 9g’s. I would say that this sounds pretty evenly matched. Start them side by side and let them get it on.


www2.acc.af.mil...

www.globalsecurity.org...


F-22 has much lower wing loading resulting in ability to make sharper turns. It has also much higher thrust to weight ratio resulting in faster climbing, more effective TVC and such.

[edit on 29-8-2005 by longbow]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:29 PM
link   


F-22 has much lower wing loading resulting in ability to make sharper turns.


Wouldn't shaper turns mean increased G forces...especially at higher speeds. I can see it as an advantage at slower speeds (really slow...under 200mph). But at mid to high speeds Pilots can only handle 9-10g's. Unless there is a new cockpit design in which the pilot sits and feels no G's, then the sharper turn thing really doesn't matter. They will all be turning at the same radius to keep it at 9g's.



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   
westpoint, man that is a missinterpretation, these 51 raptors are the total buildt, not the operative ones,

www.reviewjournal.com...



The unarmed F/A-22 destroyed Monday was assigned to the 53rd Wing's 422 Test and Evaluation Squadron. It was one of about 25 Raptors the Air Force has received so far, and one of eight assigned to the testing program that began at Nellis in January


i would never know who the hell was the lady!!!
, i dont like old movies
, but is beauty lady

[edit on 29-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   

i would never know who the hell was the lady!!!, i dont like old movies


I don’t either, but some are just timeless classics.


]westpoint, man that is a missinterpretation, these 51 raptors are the total buildt, not the operative ones,
]

Also I know about that, but as my source said IOC is scheduled around December of 05.



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub

Wouldn't shaper turns mean increased G forces...especially at higher speeds. I can see it as an advantage at slower speeds (really slow...under 200mph). But at mid to high speeds Pilots can only handle 9-10g's. Unless there is a new cockpit design in which the pilot sits and feels no G's, then the sharper turn thing really doesn't matter. They will all be turning at the same radius to keep it at 9g's.


F-16 pilots have been known to take 11-12 for short durations. You angle the seat back like in the Falcon and the G tolerances go a little higher, because the blood flow changes in your body. I think the highest I've ever heard anyone taking was 13 for about a second before they started to black out.



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub



F-22 has much lower wing loading resulting in ability to make sharper turns.


Wouldn't shaper turns mean increased G forces...especially at higher speeds. I can see it as an advantage at slower speeds (really slow...under 200mph). But at mid to high speeds Pilots can only handle 9-10g's. Unless there is a new cockpit design in which the pilot sits and feels no G's, then the sharper turn thing really doesn't matter. They will all be turning at the same radius to keep it at 9g's.


Seems you don't really understand wing loading factors. To sum it up, it all depends on structural design. If a plane can't withstand a certain amount of wing loading it will literaly fall apart in flight.

Edit. As for the rest of the 'facts' thrown out about the raptor../yank

[edit on 29-8-2005 by Aether]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
[quote
Also I know about that, but as my source said IOC is scheduled around December of 05.


well it say "As of late 2004, 51 Raptors are in service" as late 2004, but in that time there were omly 25 f22 in service, is obviuos that the number must be higher, thats the reason i put arround 30 planes



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   


Seems you don't really understand wing loading factors. To sum it up, it all depends on structural design. If a plane can't withstand a certain amount of wing loading it will literaly fall apart in flight.


Ok so the plane can make shaper turns....Not the pilot.

I am pretty sure that we are at or close to our limit on Aircraft manuverability. It is not because of the plane but because of the pilot. Anyways it really doesn't matter because with all this new technolgy a close dogfight is 50 miles apart. So in that respect the F-22 kills (Until the enemy comes out with a stealth fighter also....Then its old school WVR)

[edit on 29-8-2005 by Timcouchfanclub]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   
"wing load", "wing load", puff im tired with that!!!!, the plane agility dont depend only in wing load, there are other factors like aspect ratio or leading edge ratio, or lerxs or lift centre, induced relative drag etc....

the f16 have a better sustained ratio -an aerodynamic feature- than the mirage 2000, but the mirage have better wing load....

also the f22 60º isnt turn is max AoA, neither sustained.....

"wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load", "wing load",


[edit on 29-8-2005 by grunt2]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timcouchfanclub



Seems you don't really understand wing loading factors. To sum it up, it all depends on structural design. If a plane can't withstand a certain amount of wing loading it will literaly fall apart in flight.


Ok so the plane can make shaper turns....Not the pilot.


Did you bother to read what I posted earlier? Pilots can take up to 11-12Gs. not sustained for long term, but in a dogfight you AREN'T going to be taking sustained G loads. The longer you turn, the faster you die in most dogfights. The pilot G load depends on the individual, you can't say "Pilots can only take 9-10 Gs before they black out."



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   
the key for the su27 agility are the high aspect wing, huge verical tails, lerx, lift body, and other features, achieven max AoA of 90º

the f22 aerodynamics were performed for high subsonic, supersonic, later they increased the delta aspect wing due their subsonic turn problems



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:34 PM
link   

as posted by grunt2
the truth is that the f22 proyect development was sooooooooooo slow that the plane was easely outmatched by the general technology evolution

How many times do you and I need to go round and round on this?
You are gravely mistaken and have yet to support your "the truth is" premise and assertion. Name those current aircraft that outclass and outmatch the F/A-22, will ya? I'm so looking forward to see what you put forth as such. Be sure that they are in serial production, as well.

As for some of the other matters being discussed and brought forth, there are a number of well-sourced past arguments and discussions that can be readily found with the ATS search feature or by manually going thru the first 2-10 pages of topics within this forum.
One here that grunt2 is quite familiar with:
Is the Raptor capable of this...

And also, anything remotely coming out of couterpunch is bogus. It is so bogus, that military aviation and military air industry news sites carry nothing from them, nothing. Yet, lo and behold, a counterpunch article has found its way into this aircraft forum. :shk:




seekerof

[edit on 29-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:42 PM
link   


Did you bother to read what I posted earlier? Pilots can take up to 11-12Gs. not sustained for long term, but in a dogfight you AREN'T going to be taking sustained G loads. The longer you turn, the faster you die in most dogfights. The pilot G load depends on the individual, you can't say "Pilots can only take 9-10 Gs before they black out."


Yeah I read it and I would like to meet the pilots who can take up to 12g's. The max amount a pilot can handle his craft for a very short time(seconds) is 9g's...The record a guy handled was 40g's on a rocket sled. But I think he ended up having internal bleeding and wasn't to good after (I am not even sure he lived). I have never heard of a fighter pilot doing 13g's. They would get to 10 and be out cold.

G limts



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Timcouchfanclub,
You are aware that new g-suits/G Suits were designed for the F/A-22 fighter pilots?
Info here:
F220013 - Unique Life Support Equipment for F-22 Operations


Description: The equipment will provide pilots with protection needed in a rapid acceleration, environmentally constrained air vehicle with high inside cockpit noise levels. Equipment consists of an Advanced Technologies Anti G Suit (ATAGS), an Aircrew Cooling Garment, and Active Noise Reduction (ANR) earphones.

JUSTIFICATION: Major Advantages: 1. Advanced Technologies Anti G Suit will increase G-Protection in a highly maneuverable aircraft and will decrease fatigue associated with the affects of G forces on the body. Increase G protection and decreased fatigue equals increased operational capability. 2. The Aircrew Cooling device will provide cooling around the upper torso therefore significantly decreasing heat stress associated with life support equipment layering. 3. Active Noise Reduction earphones reduces and filters excess noise. F-22 design causes high noise levels not associated with current aircraft inventory and cockpit studies indicate noise level inside the cockpit with canopy closed will exceed safe noise limits as defined in AF Occupational Safety Standards. The F-22 was designed with this equipment capability requirement.


More sources can be found and supplied if necessary.
IMHO, one can simply research such themselves, like starting here:
new G suits designed for F-22 pilots






seekerof

[edit on 29-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I've watched videos from HUDs of several planes where you can SEE the G meter hit 11, and in one case 12, and the pilots were clearly heard grunting, and in at least one talking still.

[edit on 29-8-2005 by Zaphod58]



posted on Aug, 29 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
I just found out about the G-suits two weekends ago at the air show, they where talking about them on the radio.

[edit on 29-8-2005 by SpittinCobra]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join