Pretty impressive. In a live firing situation it may not go as well. Every simulated missile lock in Red Flag is a kill, right? Well we all know it's not like that in real life.
Just some thoughts
Red Flag Raptors
The F-22 extended its winning streak at its first all-up Red Flag combat training exercises, where the Raptor-led "Blue" forces scored a lopsided victory over Red Air "Aggressor" forces using their best tricks.
Fourteen F-22s of the 94th Fighter Squadron at Langley AFB, Va., flew daily from Feb. 3-16 at the Nellis AFB, Nev., war game, which included more than 200 US and coalition aircraft. The F-22s didn't miss a single scheduled mission—unprecedented for a fighter so early in its operational status and a tribute to the skill of its maintainers, according to Col. Thomas Bergeson, 1st Operations Group commander.
Smith said the F-22s, augmented by F-15s, typically protected a strike package of about 50 aircraft against a numerically superior defending force. The 94th—most of whose pilots have less than 100 hours in the F-22—consistently defeated the F-15s and F-16s of Nellis' Aggressors, the 414th Combat Training Squadron. The 414th quickly upped the ante of their tactics, and by the third day, "we were seeing their 'A' game, if you will," Bergeson reported. Only one F-22 was "lost" in the war games.
Bergeson noted that "very few, if any" Red Air survived the F-22-led Blue force attack.
The F-22s went against ground threats simulating real-world air defenses, including communications jamming, networked surface-to-air missiles, and anti-aircraft artillery. The Aggressors attempted to lure the F-22s into "SAM-bushes," trying to get the Raptors to pursue them into areas densely defended by surface weapons.
Each day of the exercise involved two "wars"—a daytime fight and one at night, with eight Raptors flying during the day and six at night, Smith reported. Red Air was permitted to "regenerate"—sometimes four or five times—after being "killed" in the exercise, but Blue forces were not. That in itself represented a tougher situation than the real world, since an enemy would likely lose his best airplanes and pilots early and offer a diminishing defense as a real war proceeded.
Bergeson described the Nellis units as "probably the best Red Air on the planet" and said the F-22 pilots are now "better than we were [before] ... because of the fantastic training" the Aggressors provided.
AFA Magazine (PDF) Page 18
Originally posted by SteveR
I agree the F-22 will have similar kill ratios in a real situation, especially since the new fighter developments in the Eastern Bloc are more like agile dogfighters than BVR missileers. It would of been interesting to see what they could do to complete with the F-22, but I guess that's not on the cards yet.
Thanks for the information.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
One advantage is the ability to house larger more powerful radars. Though the Russians et al are currently lagging in fields like AESA and LPI, the progress made in such fields(and the availability of resources with better 'soft-electronics' skills) make a closing of such a gap an inevitability.
And then pure size/power of radar wins, because the more space you have, the more modules/chips/processing power you can fit in.
Originally posted by Daedalus3Finally the introduction of Russian/non-western AESA and LPI radars with larger housing radomes(Su-3Xs & PAK-FA?) will pose a serious threat for all sub-5th gen western fighters.
Originally posted by Pyros
I would hardly call that an advantage. If anything, it highlights Russia's technology lag when it comes to the miniaturization of solid-state amplifiers, receivers, and processors.
More modules and chips also equals more consumption of electricity, more generation of internal heat (which must be dissapated), greater operational weight, greater consumption of fuel, etc.
The US already has an airborn radar that is really big and has lots of chips, transmitter power and processors - its called the E-3 Sentry. Big is not what you want in a tactical aircraft. You want small, lightweight, and powerful with low heat production and power consumption.
While its true that the eventual introduction and mass production of next generation Russian radars may pose serious threats to our 25+ year old designs such as the F-15 and F-16, large radomes equal larger RCS.
This is exactly where the DoD wants it:
US = deploying state-of-the-art airframes and electronics today
Russia = marketing potential countermeasures and competitors 10 years later
Originally posted by JFrazier
I seriously doubt that the PESA units are even on par with the APG-79. The radar has the ability to generate it's own coordinates for JDAMs and the ability to simultaneously scan for ground and air targets. It may be the best multirole fighter radar out. Now Russia may catch up but at the current pace that radar tech is evolving in the US it would take awhile.
Also, the APG-81 in the F-35 will most likely be pretty close to the F-22 in capabilities except for range and number of targets it's able to track. It would also be considered a 5th gen radar.
[edit on 4-5-2007 by JFrazier]
This endeavor was undertaken after a series of reports including Project Red Baron II indicated that a pilot’s chances of success dramatically improves after he completes his first 10 missions, said Captain Shayne “Tito” Sullivan, a F-16C pilot from the 64th Aggressor Squadron. The idea behind Red Flag is therefore to “prep guys for their first 10 sorties” against adversaries flying dissimilar aircraft and surface to air threats, Toth explained.
For the Aggressor Squadrons flying against the Blue Force, the mission is to “put up as many jets as possible against the Blue escorts”, Sullivan said. The Aggressor “Red Force” will typically field six to eight F-16s and three to four F-15s for total of “around 11 jets” during a Red Flag sortie, he explained. These “Red Force” aircraft can “regenerate” as many as four times giving the Blue Force the opportunity to “kill 44 airplanes”, Sullivan said. The Aggressors challenge the Blue Force using a “building block approach” slowly building up the “Threat Level from one, two, three and four- and that goes with the electronic attack threat we do too”, he added.