F-22/F-35 vulnerability to IR detection?, page 2


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 29-4-2006 @ 11:45 AM by urmomma158
Why would they be shortened and why ASSUME that the F-22 only flies at 50,000ft.

My point isn't that there are off the shelf missiles that can shoot down the F-22 with ease, but rather that the technology exists to make anti-F22 weapons systems reasonably quickly, such as combining latest generation IIR (Imaging Infra Red) seekers with medium/long range AAMs/SAMs.

Say the F-22 is launching an AMRAAM at an upgraded Su-30MK? Flanker from say 60km range. The upgraded Flanker could detect the incomming AMRAAM at say 30km (if not greater) and by doing a quick radar scan in that secto determine that it probably came from a stealthy launch platform. By firing a long ranged IIR seeking missile down the reverse path in a LOAL (Lock On After Launch) mode they at least get a IIR weapon into the general ball park of the F-22. If the F-22 is at about 50,000ft, where the air temperature is about -70degreesC(?) and the jet plume is up to +1000degreesC, finding it shouldn't be hard. A datalink between the missile and the Flanker and/or a ground control unit would further assist follow-up shots. Remember that the AMRAAM and its planned upgrades are far from the longest ranged AAMs - the various Russian K-172 and European Meteor WAAAYYYY out range it.
Well they would be shortended the Flanker and The raptor would face each other head on The raptor's plumes are in the back. Not to mntion its Ir signature is minimal compared to other fighters that's why it would be shortended. plus it can slow down its speed to further lower it.


reply posted on 29-4-2006 @ 12:44 PM by WestPoint23
Originally posted by planeman
Why would they be shortened and why ASSUME that the F-22 only flies at 50,000ft.


An F-22 in BVR engagement will most likely fire from that altitude to gain an altitude advantage over an enemy and to give the AIM-120 an increase in rage of 30-50%. Now imagine the already long range AIM-120D with a 50% increase in rage.

Boeing has joined the Meteor program with the intention of marketing the missile in the US. The situation is complicated by the fact that the F-22 needs it less than other fighters. Earlier this year, F-22 chief test pilot Paul Metz confirmed that the F-22's speed and altitude capability acts as a booster stage for the common-or-garden AMRAAM. At M1.5 and at greater altitude than the target (the F-22 has a very fast climb rate and a service ceiling well above 50,000ft), AMRAAM's range is 50% greater than is the case in a subsonic, same-altitude launch.

Link


Originally posted by planeman
My point isn't that there are off the shelf missiles that can shoot down the F-22 with ease, but rather that the technology exists to make anti-F22 weapons systems reasonably quickly, such as combining latest generation IIR (Imaging Infra Red) seekers with medium/long range AAMs/SAMs.


If a Flanker detects the AMRAAM at 30 KM (18.5 miles) out he has about 20 seconds to fire his missile and eject. Now lets assume that the F-22 at this stage is about 60 KM away from the Flanker, this is still outside its detection envelope. Now say the Flanker pilot miraculously fires his AAM within a very close vicinity of the F-22 it would still mean that AAM would have to fly to its last programmed location without any upgrades from the downed Flanker. The AAM would now have to start searching for the F-22 which at this time could be several miles from its last firing position. When you consider that the ranges of even the latest IR seekers aren't that great and that the F-22 has a lower IR signature than most fighters the probability of a kill will be very low.

Originally posted by planeman
Remember that the AMRAAM and its planned upgrades are far from the longest ranged AAMs - the various Russian K-172 and European Meteor WAAAYYYY out range it.


Not entirely true, the AIM-120D is supposed to have a 50% increase in range over the already long ranged AIM-120C-7. To get an idea of what kind of numbers I’m talking about, check out this source and do the math. And as for the K-172 can I get some more information about this missile?

[edit on 29-4-2006 by WestPoint23]


reply posted on 29-4-2006 @ 01:04 PM by Daedalus3
Here's another good read for Flanker flight tactics in engaging non VLO a/c..

The combination of Su-30 and R-27ER/ET (NATO designation AA-10), flown and fought in a competent fashion, also represents a significant threat. Even though the R-27ER is only a semiactive radar-guided missile, the extra maneuvering capability resulting from the large motor is a significant improvement over the basic R-27. Basic Russian air force doctrine has long suggested following a semi-active missile launch immediately with an IR missile launch, such as the R-27ET. Theory has it that the target aircraft's crew will be occupied spoofing the inbound radar missile, only to fall to the second missile.

The R-27ER, while only semiactive, also outperforms the baseline R-77 ( AA-12) in terms of kinematics. The R-77 motor has a simple, and short, burn profile, which has resulted in disappointing performance, piquing the Russian air force's interest in developing the K-77M rather than fielding the basic AA-12 in any numbers. The K-77M (K denotes a missile still in development, while R reflects an inventory weapon) is an upgraded R-77 with improvements that include a larger motor with a burn sequence profiled to increase range.

The oft-touted, but yet-to-be-fielded, R-27EA active variant of the AA-10 could further enhance the Su-30's capabilities, were an export customer to buy the derivative. In terms of one-on-one combat, the second-generation Flanker family presents a considerable threat to aircraft not designed from the outset as low observable, unless they are capable of extended-range BVR missile engagements. For instance, this threat drove the British selection of a rocket-ramjet missile to equip the Eurofighter.



Please keep the bias aside before reading this..
Its pretty good:
Source

As for the K-172, I doubt the AIM-120D even matches this proposed missile in range..
But the K-172 is customised for slow moving atargets at ranges of 300km+? and hence sounds like more of a anti AWACS missile rather than a standoff BVR fighter weapon.


EDIT:
Most of Stealth Spy's posts on this page deal with the Ks-172. Mostly described as a AWACS killer but some vague and surprising references to it being capable against smaller targets and even cruise missiles

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Pic links courtesy of ch1466 from the same thread page:

www.military.cz...
img58.exs.cx...
www.mipagina.cantv.net...

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Daedalus3]

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Daedalus3]



reply posted on 2-5-2006 @ 02:58 PM by kilcoo316
Originally posted by urmomma158
Different block numbers eg block 10,20,30 etc of the AC had the same basic shape but improved(F16). And as the system gets older you can replace them for less with upgraded one's. The same airframes wont be used forever. Not only that but we aren't getting that many Raptors just yet (just 180) although the production line will get extended. Newer Raptor models will come out. Not only that but new AC based on the same basic design but can be a different AC like the FB 22.



The block numbers signify upgrades to materials, sensors etc.


Basically everything but the internal airframe and the critical surface shapes. Apart from the CFTs obviously, but these were limited to areas where there aerodynamic impact would be minimal.


Now, the F-22's shape is optimised already, therefore will not be changed. Its materials may be changed, but since the design doesn't rely on them it will make little difference.

Its the laws of diminished returns you get as you approach optimal performance - the only place I know of where this doesn't seem to apply is formula 1!



The FB-22 (if it happens) is going to be a completely different aircraft as far as I am aware, and from what I was told a while back by a guy from Lockheed, he referenced more to the black widow for the bomber - kinda hard to put into words, but it almost seemed they weren't interested - strange, but just the way it was said.


The only way I can see the F-22 reduce its RCS significantly will be with active cancellation or plasma stealth.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



The Avro Arrow resurfacing?
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Nasa:Silent and Efficient Supersonic Bi-Directional Flying Wing
  Posted 8 days ago with 5 member flags
Can anyone shed any light on what this aircraft may be doing?
  Posted 13 days ago with 2 member flags
Impressive Climb Rate of The F-14A+ and F-14D
  Posted 18 days ago with 1 member flags
ufo???
  Posted 10 days ago with 1 member flags