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 with external fuel tanks to increase range

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   
this is the first time i've seen F22s showing external carrying ability, guess this proves that F22s and do external carryings too









~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please read ATTN: Image Size Guidelines

[edit on 22/2/07 by masqua]




posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
It was designed to carry an external load as well.

However I don't know how stealthy they can make external stations and load bearings and how maneuverable the Raptor will be after the fact.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Where were these pictures taken?




posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Possibly these were the ones meant to fly across the Pacific to Kadena, and hence the fuel tanks..



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 12:50 AM
link   
these are the ones newly stationed at Guam/Okinawa and S Korea/Japan (the pictures are the ones stationed at Okinawa)

they are said to bring more security in the area, regarding the troublesome N Korea

However, it's more widely believed that the true intention for these F22s are to balance with the growing power of the chinese air force in the region, and to aid Taiwan in a possible conflict.

PS. since the F15s and F16s can probably do just as good against the crappy NK airdefence as the F22s can.


the external tanks aren't for stealth, but they significantly increase the reach of F22s; this also shows that F22s can probably carry external weapons to increase weapon load when needed

[edit on 2/22/2007 by warset]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Hmmm - is it just me or are the tanks not even close to parallel to the wing?


Looks like they may be having some slight seperation issues with the tanks - that'll increase drag a bit.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
these are the ones newly stationed at Guam/Okinawa and S Korea/Japan (the pictures are the ones stationed at Okinawa)
[edit on 2/22/2007 by warset]



Ah.. so like I said, they ARE the ones meant for Kadena.
The image sources also have a .cn domain so....

Pretty high res pics for the chinese!

EDIT: The tanks look like they were used for the trip to Kadena, I doubt the F-22 would be ever deployed in a drop tank config which would severely undermine its RCS signature. I think I saw a KC-135 in the background in one of the pics so I presume that the F-22s would be used as a stealth platform to achieve air superiority in any forseeable conflict.




[edit on 22-2-2007 by Daedalus3]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Hmmm - is it just me or are the tanks not even close to parallel to the wing?


They won't be paralle to the wing. To minimize drag they need to be parallel to the air flow. The wing its self will be at some angle of attack greater than that in order to generate lift.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nacnud
They won't be paralle to the wing. To minimize drag they need to be parallel to the air flow. The wing its self will be at some angle of attack greater than that in order to generate lift.



The airflow will be virtually parallel to the wing though - at least underneath the wing and behind the leading edge.


Also, if they ever intended to use those tanks with supercruising - their nose down attitude will result in downforce - just a result of the way supersonic lift is generated.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   
The Raptor was designed to be able to carry external stores be they fuel tanks or munitions, each of the F-22s four pylon is rated for 5,000 lb.

Here is more information and possible configurations. Also, the F-22 is able to completely jettison the external tanks/weapons along with the pylon itself so that it can "stealth up" and maintain it’s LO features if need be, or so that it can become more maneuverable by reducing drag and weight. This video shows the system being tested on the ground and a also test F-22 flying with two tanks on. The F-22 has carried external tanks operationally for some time now, first time was last year when they deployed to Hill AFB, and they only put the tanks on for long distance flights. However they have not tried or flown operationally with the four fuel tank configuration since IOT&E and I have not been able to locate any pictures of those tests.

Anyway, I believe they are also currently developing external "stealth pods" that would house the missiles while still not enhancing RCS by that much, they would also create less drag.

Photo sequence of pylon jettison system being tested.





Picture of F-22 with external AIM-120 AMRAAMs.



Wind tunnel picture of external pod testing.




posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 07:08 PM
link   
From the reading I have done it was always intended to have the f-22 carry external stores BUT after air superiority had been achieved. ALso some thought was given to using stealthy cruise missiles on the wing pylons. The theory is that the a/c could be used in the SEAD role and would volley off the missiles before its degreaded RCS was picked up then procede in behing the missiles.

WP, I think the 4 pylong fuel tank config is almost never used as it would inibit the use of the missile bays and leave the A/C with nothing more than a cannon

[edit on 2/22/07 by FredT]



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Well, I don't see how four tanks would prohibit missile launches more than two tanks would. In fact whether two or four wing tanks the main missile bays would not be blocked as they fire the missile downward. As for the side bays, well, the AIM-9 is launched of a rail so the tanks should not block that either.

I've heard other rumors as to why they don't carry four tanks but I don't know how true they are.



posted on Feb, 22 2007 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Does anyone know if the tanks are just standard external tanks or are they painted with some sort of RAM to at least try and decrease RCS?



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by crusader97
Does anyone know if the tanks are just standard external tanks or are they painted with some sort of RAM to at least try and decrease RCS?


Nope, they're just standard 610 Gallon drop tanks, there would be no point to coating them with RAM. They wont be carried into combat and the RCS would still be higher than normal not to mention the affect on physical performance. Plus the logistic and maintenance aspect of it, too complicating and unnecessary.



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 04:30 AM
link   
I'd like to see when F-22 test full load, four external fuel tanks with four couple of AIM-120 carried on two sides of pylon.
that would be much greater than F-15



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by crusader97
Does anyone know if the tanks are just standard external tanks or are they painted with some sort of RAM to at least try and decrease RCS?


Nope, they're just standard 610 Gallon drop tanks, there would be no point to coating them with RAM. They wont be carried into combat and the RCS would still be higher than normal not to mention the affect on physical performance. Plus the logistic and maintenance aspect of it, too complicating and unnecessary.


I would be VERY surprised if their are not a few 'special' tanks somewhere...I'm sure there are a few scenarios where they would be critical to the mission.



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by crusader97
I would be VERY surprised if their are not a few 'special' tanks somewhere...I'm sure there are a few scenarios where they would be critical to the mission.


I've just realised - its better if the tanks are NOT coated or shaped for reduced RCS.


Think about it.


F-22 on mission with drop tanks, gets detected by opposition AWACs that vector fighters towards it.


F-22 releases tanks.... what does AWACs continue to see? a blip moving in a straight line, descending, and continues to vector fighters in.


F-22 now has a free decoy.



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
You don't want the jettisoned tanks falling into the wrong hands. That would mean free samples of RAM.



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Not if there isn't any ram on them in the first place.



posted on Feb, 23 2007 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316

Originally posted by crusader97
I would be VERY surprised if their are not a few 'special' tanks somewhere...I'm sure there are a few scenarios where they would be critical to the mission.


I've just realised - its better if the tanks are NOT coated or shaped for reduced RCS.


Think about it.


F-22 on mission with drop tanks, gets detected by opposition AWACs that vector fighters towards it.


F-22 releases tanks.... what does AWACs continue to see? a blip moving in a straight line, descending, and continues to vector fighters in.


F-22 now has a free decoy.


You could even add some cheap wings to them (something akin to those on the SDB) and they would soar a pretty good distance. You could integrate it into the pylon somehow since it gets ejected with the tanks. It just makes sense though that you would have a small number of 'special' tanks around - just in case. In the military mind it's always better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it (at least when you have the resources that the USAF does). At the very least, the USAF probably has a plan to 'stealth up' a few if some weird mission requirement pops up.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join