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-22A Raptors Reportedly Intercept RuAF "Bear H" Bombers

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by WestPoint23
 


others have allready answered your questions



but - for the raptor link system to be recieve only? they wouldn`t cripple the aircraft in such a way - even link4 is 2 way - link22 is far more than that - so recieve only i totally disagree with.




posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The only thing of value they could ascertain is the time it took for Raptors to appear on scene after they entered NORAD radar coverage. But even this is a little suspect, in a real war we would not wait for a formation of Russian
bombers to approach close to US airspace before we intercepted them.


I meant the speed the F-22s cruised up to them when the bears got them on their radar... and indicator of the F-22's supercruising speeds.



Originally posted by WestPoint23
Seeing as how all NATO aircraft use the same data link and have been doing so for quite some time now. Even in the vicinity and or against other Russian systems during actual combat there is little to gain by monitoring the Raptors (receive only) capability. And tapping in such comm. links isn't exactly a walk in the park. If this is all it took for data links to be jammed or cracked it would have happened a long time ago.


The F-22 uses the same data-links as all previous aircraft before it? I thought there were two distinct systems, link-16 and the inter F-22 one.


If the datalinks are receive only, then what on earth is the net-centric warfare doctrine all about? I think your on the wrong track there.



Originally posted by WestPoint23
That's not an assumption, the F-22's can make their presence known in several ways. By deploying and activating a "squawker", flying with "radar reflectors" or using external hard points (see fuel tanks).


Of course they can - the question is do they. You assumed they do.


Originally posted by WestPoint23
I have it on good authority that two of those things were done, the other I'm not sure about.


Is it posted online?



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
...so recieve only i totally disagree with.


You can disagree with it if you wish however it is the simple truth, as much as it pains me to admit it. The F-22 Raptor can only use the highly capable Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) two way data link (transmit and receive) eith other F-22 Raptors. The Raptor is the only aircraft equipped with this unique system, as such, it is not compatible with other aircraft and their respective data link suites. You have to keep in mind that the F-22's basic systems were designed quite some time ago, as such they may initially seem lacking, until upgraded. The Radar and Data Link suites are two such examples. The AN/APG-77 was upgraded to the AN/APG-77(v)1 after the F-22 entered IOC. The same thing will be done to its data link suite, likely next year, according to credible sources. The Raptor entered IOC with a basic, relatively speaking, data link suite. It has Link 16 receive only JTIDS. In order to make the Raptor truly a net centric aircraft and a force multiplier it has to have the ability to transmit other platforms and systems data, not just receive it.

While this does not degrade the F-22's capability in any way whatsoever it does mean it is not being fully utilized. Until this issue is addressed, starting next year, it cannot share it's great ISR (situational awareness) with other platforms via data link. Currently, the limited and non secure radio must be used if Raptor drivers wish to share data or converse with other aircraft (besides other F-22's).

I refer you to the below linked posts in which I discuss this particular issue.

Post One
Post Two

Related Sources

Fixing The Raptor
F-22 Comm. Avionics
F-22 IFDL System
F-22 Raptor Avionics
AESA Data Link Capability



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
I meant the speed the F-22s cruised up to them when the bears got them on their radar.


If these particular bombers had a 3D air to air radar, and if the F-22 Raptors were supercruising, and if they were still supercruising when they came within tracking range of that radar what makes you think they were going faster than the published Mach 1.72 figure? I personally see no need for the Raptors to supercruise in the vicinity of the Russian bombers. They would have been launched early enough in advance to arrive at the probable intercept point and loiter until the Tu-95's came within range.

Now, the linked source specifies that these were Bear H bombers, the only A-A radar on these aircraft is the radar assisted tail gun fire control system. The other radars is has installed are a navigational weather radar and a SAR (ground only) bombing radar. It may have been packed with other limited mobile ELINT gear but unless it was a Bear D it was not a dedicated ELINT platform; Hence not a Tu-95 with that kind of radar installed. And yes, it is easy to visually identify whether or not a Tu-95 bomber is a D model.


Originally posted by kilcoo316
If the datalinks are receive only, then what on earth is the net-centric warfare doctrine all about?


The F-22 is kind of late to the net centric party being that it was designed when this doctrine, and technology was much more limited. However, it will soon receive the ability to also transmit to other non F-22 aircraft and systems.


Originally posted by kilcoo316
Is it posted online?


It was, until the author, a Raptor crew chief stationed with the 90th FS in Elmendorf, edited his post. Apparently the USAF has not yet publicized this event, it has not authorized anyone to comment about it.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by WestPoint23
 


erm , then to be net centric its useless - 1 raptor cannot guide anothers AMRAAM as it cannot transmit to the missile via data link - infact - if , as you state - then raptor onlyas SARH capability as it cannot supply mid course updates (via link16) to missiles within the area.



holy #e - the raptor , if what your saying is true , is utter crap!!

everyone has Link16 - gosh even the Gripen can update mid course AMRAAM (needs link16 or better)

you cannot just hand over the missile from aircraft to another without data handshaking - but if what you say is true (and i doubt it) the raptor cannot do this!


1 Aircraft to 1 target.... damn and from everything you have posted i thought the USAF had got out of the 60`s.



posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


No you cannot use a Raptor to actually guide the AMRAAM and why would you? It has its own seeker afterall and such guidence would be better carried out by C3I assets anyway.

However what was reported in AAWST a while back. During exersizes in Alaska the F-22 acted as a mini AWACS. It couls use the cross feeds from the data link to deconflit other aircrafts missiles. ie two planes targeting one bandit thus saving missiles and targeting more aircraft.

[edit on 11/28/07 by FredT]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


Who told you that Link 16 or fighter to fighter data link is required to update missiles in flight? Let's not get carried away here without knowing the facts, the F-22 can indeed update it’s AMRAAM's in flight and so could other aircraft long before they had fighter to fighter data links. Furthermore, Raptors can provide complete radar picture and guidance for other Raptors (IFDL), hence they can guide and update other Raptors AMRAAM's.



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 02:47 AM
link   
eermm.. interjecting in this heated discussion again,

Wstpt,
Can you give some info on the USAF non-recce(bomber et al) patrols of other nations like Russia/China.
Do they result in intercepts and the likes?

Thanks,

DD3



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 02:56 AM
link   
Just thought I'd mention that I heard the scramble on Thanksgiving. I was frying a turkey late and the racket of them either coming back or leaving was pretty obvious. I live closer to the airport than the base, yet the 22's can overpower the noise of frequent commercial flights.

Also, my roommate last year was a titanium fabrication specialist in the USAF working in the F-15 hangars before they switched to 22's here at Elmendorf.
He claimed, as he was training, that there was a gel that they apply to the 22 each time they fly all over its body. He said it came in unmarked paint cans and looked as if it had metal flakes in it. But each time it had to be scraped and then reapplied.

[edit on 11/29/2007 by Anubis Kanubis]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 03:36 AM
link   
now i am confused - both WP and Fred say conflicting things!

fred says the raptor act as mini awacs and can share data

yet WP says the data link is recieve only (no transmit) ergo - no data sharing cause i only listens;

and


all long range weapons need mid corse updates - in the case of the AMRAAM it needs at least 2 to acurately reach beyond 60 miles - the RAF had an issue with the F3 torndao`s not being equipped with a data link so they couldn`t update the missiles guidance (remember missile = small seeker) so the effective range was the same as sky flash


so , therefore - to supply the missile with mid course updates *without* the use of awacs the raptor will have to operate in SARH mode for amraam for long range shots


remember fire and forget - in the case of active misiles - is not at longer ranges.


so if WP is right and fred wrong , then the above is true


but (more than likely tbh) WP is wrong , the Raptor HAS a data link (link16 or more likely link22) and 1 raptor in a better position can mid course update via data link another ones missiles - which was the whole idea behind the single lead - shooter further back concept (picture on ats somewhere)


edit:

WP

before you carry on the personal insults you need to read up

integrator.hanscom.af.mil...

c4i.kaist.ac.kr...

www.lm-isgs.co.uk...

IFDL is a version of Link22 and is netcentric - it uses BACN to connect to the net centric systems.


therefore your comment about the system being `receive only` is wrong.

which funnily enough was the whole point i was making.

[edit on 29/11/07 by Harlequin]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Harlequin, I will attempt to explain this one more time, please read carefully, thanks for the vote of confidence by the way.


Here is my original statement.


Originally posted by WestPoint23
The F-22 Raptor can only use the highly capable Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) two way data link (transmit and receive) eith other F-22 Raptors. The Raptor is the only aircraft equipped with this unique system, as such, it is not compatible with other aircraft and their respective data link suites


Now, the IFDL is not related the Link 11/16/22 family, it is a separate and unique system specifically designed for the F-22A Raptor. It only functions with other Raptors and their IFDL system as it is not compatible with other (non F-22) data link suites. The IFDL allows the F-22 to pass and receive data (radar image etc…) only to and from other Raptors. So yes it can therefore guide missiles and weapons from other Raptor in this manner. And yes, a flight of Raptors can all share one big radar picture amongst each other. It even allows aircraft with passive radars to still have a complete radar image via the IFDL.

The below quote is from your first link… Emphasis added by me.


By the year 2010, a US soldier on the ground should be able to use cellular phone technology to text-message a pilot flying a Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor.

For one, the F-22A was designed to be nearly network-silent, lest a data transmission give away the stealthy fighter's electronic signature. The airframe carries for now a low-probability-of-intercept Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL): an isolated channel that can be received only by other F-22As.

Moreover, the F-22A is not due to receive a conventional datalink until some time after Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08).

Link



Included in the CNI system is an Inter/Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) that allows all F-22s in a flight to share target and system data automatically and without radio calls. One of the original objectives for the F-22 was to increase the percentage of fighter pilots who make 'kills'.

With the IFDL, each pilot is free to operate more autonomously because, for example, the leader can tell at a glance what his wing man's fuel state is, his weapons remaining, and even the enemy aircraft he has targeted. This link also allows additional F-22 flights to be added to the net for multi-flight coordinated attack.

Link


Once again, the emphasis is mine.


Secure F-22-to-F-22 data link (receives data from other aircraft, such as the E-3) allows passive collection of vital information critical to determining enemy intent.

Permits communication with a fighter's wingmen without dependence on radio.

Link


Notice, it mentions a Raptor to Raptor two way data link yet specifies that it can receive data from other aircraft, such as an E-3. This is consistent with everything I have been saying.


The TRW Communications/Navigation/Identification (CNI) system includes an intra-flight datalink, JTIDS Joint Tactical Information Distribution System link…

Link


I have already explained what the IDFL is and how it works. Now the JTIDS is an older Link 16 subsystem which, currently, only allows the F-22 Raptors to receive data from other Link 16 equipped systems. However I must stress, yet again, it does not allow it to transmit data with those Link 16 equipped systems.


Originally posted by Harlequin
fred says the raptor act as mini awacs and can share data


Yes, it can act as a mini AWACS/Rivet Joint and it can share data with other AC (besides IFDL equipped Raptors). However while it can technically do this, it is a far cry from what it will be able to do when it receives a proper update to its data link suite. I will show below exactly what Fred was referring to and will explain why his comments are neither wrong nor contradicting. I will also show how you misinterpreted his comments and overlooked previous information I provided.


Originally posted by Harlequin
yet WP says the data link is recieve only (no transmit) ergo - no data sharing cause i only listens;


Yes West Point did say that, and he will repeat it one more time, currently the F-22A Raptor has a receive only capability with other (non F-22) Link 16 equipped aircraft. As I mentioned above this is not contradictive to what Fred said nor is it false, despite your conclusion on the matter.


Originally posted by Harlequin
to supply the missile with mid course updates *without* the use of awacs the raptor will have to operate in SARH mode for amraam for long range shots


No, you do not need to have a two way Link 16 data link system installed into a fighter for it to be able to update it’s missiles in flight. This function is handled by a separate system via the on board radar. Although Link 16 equipped assets can also, if need be, update compatible missiles.


Originally posted by Harlequin
so if WP is right and fred wrong , then the above is true


Neither I nor Fred are wrong in this case, you are just slightly confused, with respect to this topic.


Originally posted by Harlequin
IFDL is a version of Link22 and is netcentric - it uses BACN to connect to the net centric systems.


No it is not, it is a stand alone system which was specifically designed for the F-22A Raptor. It is not compatible, currently, with any other data link system, nor any, current, ad hoc information network. BACN is not currently operational and is still in development, prototype phase. The current system will likely enter operation in the coming year and a goal of the BACN program is to eventually make the IFDL system of the F-22A Raptor compatible with it. However, until that happens my statement is correct.


After being awarded the contract, the Northrop Grumman system's first test came within a year at the Joint Expeditionary Forces Experiment 2006 (JEFX 06), which was held in April that year. Flying aboard the high-altitude WB-57 testbed aircraft owned by NASA, the BACN payload established a live network on the test range.

Since that experiment, the USAF has moved quickly to expand the pace and scope of the development programme. The BACN payload was one of two initiatives in the experiment selected for transition to immediate deployment. The system will be deployed operationally in JEFX 08, with the mission of providing the entire networking infrastructure to conduct the large-scale event.

"BACN Spiral 1 was demonstrated in JEFX 06; Spiral 2 with additional capability will be demonstrated in JEFX 08," the USAF said.

Air force officials have also moved to insert the payload on a more accessible airframe than a NASA testbed.

The payload is now being installed on the Gulfstream GV-01: a testbed platform owned by the manufacturer. This action would allow the USAF to easily transition the payload to the Gulfstream G550 special-mission aircraft if a broader deployment is ordered.

Finally, the USAF announced in October 2006 that the BACN payload's gateway services would be expanded to include the F-22A's IFDL. The F-22A fleet would instantly become compatible with the battlefield network without the need to install new radio antennas or modify its mission system software, as would be required to incorporate TTNT or JTRS.

"BACN will allow the [F-22A] IFDL to connect to the net," Twyman said. "This is a low-cost and robust method of doing that."

Link


The IFDL will eventually be compatible with the operational BACN and be able to connect via an ad hoc network with other platforms and systems using data links, however as it stands this has not yet happened.

Part 2 Continued...

[edit on 29-11-2007 by WestPoint23]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Now to clarify what Fred was referring to.


Originally posted by FredT
However what was reported in AAWST a while back. During exersizes in Alaska the F-22 acted as a mini AWACS. It couls use the cross feeds from the data link to deconflit other aircrafts missiles. ie two planes targeting one bandit thus saving missiles and targeting more aircraft.


The article which Fred mentions is this one, let me quote and explain.


Perhaps the most important revelation by the 27th Fighter Sqdn. was demonstrating the F-22's ability to use its sensors to identify and target enemy aircraft for conventional fighters by providing information so they could engage the enemy sooner than they could on their own. Because of the advanced situational awareness they afford, F-22s would stick around after using up their weapons to continue providing targets and IDs to the conventional fighters.

"We always left F-22s on station to help, but we didn't designate any one aircraft to provide data," says Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver, the unit's commander. "It was critical that every F-22 out there provided all the data he had."


As you can see Fred is correct, F-22A Raptors can pass on data to other aircraft (non F-22s) even though they only have a receive only version of the Link 16. So how you may ask is this possible? Well, lets see, if it's not the IFDL, and not the JTID (receive only Link 16) then it must be the good old fashioned, but overlooked, radio. That's right, the simple human transmitting data the old fashioned way over a tactical radio. I did mention this before but apparently it was overlooked.


Originally posted by WestPoint23
Currently, the limited and non secure radio must be used if Raptor drivers wish to share data or converse with other aircraft (besides other F-22's).


All the emphasis' were added by me, I apologize in advance for the quoting, but people tend not to read links and make the connections unless you do it for them.


"When I look down at my scope and put my cursor over a [friendly] F-15 or F/A-18, it tells me who they are locked on to," he says. For example, "I could help them out by saying, 'You're double-targeted and there's a group over here untargeted' . . . to make sure we got everybody." F-15 targets will be latent because of the radar sweep.

However, these messages are less and less verbal. "When you watch [tapes of the Alaska] exercise, it's fairly spooky," says Gen. Ronald Keys, chief of Air Combat Command. "There's hardly a word spoken among Raptor pilots." That silence also previews some of the fighter's possible future capabilities.



"If a Rivet Joint is trying to get triangulation [on a precise emitter location], he can get more [voice] information" from an F-22, Keys says. "If an AWACS sees a heavy group 40 mi. to the north, Raptor can come up and say it's two F-18s, two F-15s and four F-16s."



Moreover, Keys says, modifications are underway to transmit additional target parameters--such as sensitive, high-resolution infrared data--from the F-22 with a low-probability-of-intercept data link.

"Getting data into an F-22 is not hard," Keys says. "Getting it out [while staying low observable] is more difficult. We bought the links, but we just don't have them on yet."



"I could talk to an EA-6B Prowler electronic attack crew and tell them where a surface-to-air missile site was active so they would immediately know where to point their electronic warfare sensors," Tolliver says.



The next step will be to pass the detailed information about surface-to-air missile locations, capabilities and emission details (called parametrics).

"If I have characterized, say an SA-10, I can send it verbally to AWACS and they can send it out to other platforms," says Maj. Shawn Anger, an F-22 instructor with the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. at Tyndall AFB, Fla. However, "I can't pass the parametric characterization. Hopefully, we'll be able to shoot it up the radar"--a new capability for the radar, which is being developed to send large, high-bandwidth imagery files.


Further articles which support my information.

Please Read The Entire Article


Even after using up all eight of their air-to-air missiles, he said, the F-22s did not have to leave the fight. The Raptors, protected by their stealthiness, could fly far ahead of the rest of their force, using their powerful onboard sensors to fill in the gaps where AWACS could not see, such as behind mountains. Raptor pilots could talk their non-Raptor colleagues into the vicinity of enemies no one else could spot. The F-22s were acting, in effect, as forward air controllers.

Link



Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne has said that he wants all friendly platforms in an area to be able to see what an F-22 sees with its systems. At present, this kind of "common air picture" is not attainable because existing systems cannot transmit F-22 displays to other aircraft. Pilots must communicate by voice. Several F-22s, however, can share the same situation display. Data links that will allow the transmission of more information to other aircraft is one of the planned improvements for the program.

Link


This took quite some time to put together so I hope everyone understands what I am trying to say. Oh and by the way, Fred was "wrong" on one point; Raptors can indeed, currently, update their AMRAAM's in flight via a midcourse update.

[edit on 29-11-2007 by WestPoint23]



posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316

Originally posted by cloakndagger
I bet we will try and use our B2's to test their early warning systems. My guess is they will never know we were there. We will just have to turn around and leave without an escort.



I'll guess your wrong... your very wrong.


Both on technical and political aspects.


The B-2 is so stealthy they have to attach plates that will reflect radar when flying around the USA. Their passive ability allows them to not transmit and fly between existing radar which also helps the bird to stay hidden. If something does hit them it is in the outer range of the radar and not returned to the station. Believe me if the Russians knew a B-2 was in their airspace then WW3 would definitely start. The B-2 isn't used as a practice or testbed against a country with enough nuclear weapons to end all life as we know it.



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   
WP - whilst we may not agree and have heated discussions - i honestly appreciate a very very good post like your 2 - star`s on both and *tip my hat*

great work


now wheres the custard for that humble pie......



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice

Originally posted by Now_Then






The perception that Russia is once again stretching her muscles is, while very much a secondary effect, a welcome byproduct of these flights.

The fact that they are flying close to non-Russian airspace IS Flexing thier muscle, and more is yet to come.



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cloakndagger
I bet we will try and use our B2's to test their early warning systems. My guess is they will never know we were there. We will just have to turn around and leave without an escort.
Thats what they thought over the skies of Kosavo, until an old maintained SA-6 reminded them

Now over Russia is over 1600 S-300PMU-2's and 32 new S-400's I wonder what type of reminder U.S.A.F. will get from Russia



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Oh and by the way, Fred was "wrong" on one point; Raptors can indeed, currently, update their AMRAAM's in flight via a midcourse update.


When you are right you are right. Savor the flavor, its not often i get my aviation facts wrong


Cheers



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by YASKY
 


Thats quite a simplistic explanation of the events surrounding the shootdown of the F-117 eh? Also given the persistent rumors of the Russikies selling thier nazi like Serb brothers as well as the Iraqi's advanced air defence systems, as far as Im concerned its alot of arm chair bluffing about the invincibility of these systems



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


What are you trying to say, your not spacific so I can't understand?
If your trying to say, "It's because the Russkies sold them those SAMs thats why the were able to shoot it dow, not with thier Serb tech."
If thats what your saying, well what I was saying WAS a complament and reminder of Russia's great SAM's



posted on Dec, 1 2007 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by YASKY
 


I think Freds point is that simplifying the situation to a old rusty missile kicking the F-117 out of the sky is wayyyy to simpilified. The F-117 have been acknowledged to have been flying the same track night after night. the SAM wasn't a old rust bucket. Also its unclear if the practise of a buddy system was or wasn't being used that night.

If you need to be directed to a thread that flushes out this I can direct you but this thread should stay on the OP's original subject.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join