The F-22 overperformance

F-22 Raptor To Make Paris Air Show Debut.



To pique consumer interest, Lockheed Martin has revealed better than expected performance for the stealth fighter.

The F-22s overperformance includes a radar cross section that is “better” than was contracted for, the company says. That classified requirement has been calculated at a -40 dBsm, about the size of a steel marble. By contrast, the F-35 is thought to be a -30 dBsm, the size of a golf ball. Supercruise is at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5. And acceleration – although company officials would not say from what speed or at what altitude – is 3.05 seconds quicker than the requirement of 54 seconds.

In nonafterburning military power the Raptor can operate at just more than 50,000 feet. However, it is known that the F-22 opened its aerial battles at about 65,000 feet during its first joint exercise in Alaska, apparently using afterburner.

There also is a mysterious admission that the range of the Raptor’s Northrop-Grumman/Raytheon active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar is 5 percent greater than expected. That means a cushion of an additional 5-6 miles of detection range against enemy aircraft and missiles.

Aviationweek.

Can't say I'm surprised...

[edit on 5/2/2009 by C0bzz]

My God,

I freaking love our technology. When the aliens arrive, they're in for a shock ;D

So they are exporting the F-22? I thought this whole time they weren't. It doesn't make sense to sell ANY country our air superiority fighter does it?

reply to post by midnightbrigade


A) You're an idiot for wanting to attack the first aliens we meet, if you dont already live in america, an idiot like you should move there
B)Think about how far away they came from and you think a raptor with a pretty good radar system is gonna worry them???
C)Seriously are you american? You know the rest of the world hates america right?

The first batch of F-35 is being 'sold' to Israel long before most US front line units. US sales to Israel entails that US giving no interest loans, an increase in annual subsidies and a discounts for 'discovered faults'.

Israel needs the F-35 ASAP, but it doesn’t think the aircraft is perfect by any means. Weaknesses include a one-man cockpit, the perishability of its stealth and the need to use Israeli-specific equipment. The IAF’s plan is to get more than 100 F-35s the minute they are available. What will be inside is still a question.

Of Israel being unique will mean that various in built tracking systems, electronic IDs and sealed circuitry protecting technological secrets will have to be removed or replaced with Israeli material.

“Israel has a very unique requirement, it doesn’t operate in a coalition [and it has a] different kind of strategic relationship to the U.S. than the other F-35 partners,” says Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s vice president and general manager for the F-35. However, he says the overseas release of the first export aircraft will be no sooner than 2014

Within 12 to 24 months, this technological leap will be in the hands of the Chinese or the highest bidder.

www.aviationweek.com... plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3ab4252fa8-bad7-4868-83bd-0d3b1c3ae3b0

do they also mention it has the most intensive of all USAF maintenence requirements and if any are missed or done in a shoddy way then the raptor becomes detectable at killable ranges from todays fighters?

whilst the `tech` might be great - it also puts a huge burden on the men and women looking after it

reply to post by midnightbrigade


So they fly across time and space to our planet and see our best planes unable to leave the atmosphere.

Seems to me that would kind of be like a scuba diver being jealous of a guy with a snorkel.

Peace

reply to post by Harlequin


It's been the same for all the stealth aircraft. The B-2 maintenance guys were bragging when they hit 65% mission capable rate. The F-22 will mature and the maintenance will get easier as they figure out better ways to do it.

Originally posted by Harlequin
do they also mention it has the most intensive of all USAF maintenence requirements and if any are missed or done in a shoddy way then the raptor becomes detectable at killable ranges from todays fighters?

whilst the `tech` might be great - it also puts a huge burden on the men and women looking after it

Maintenance of stealth is a lot less costly than replacing non-stealthy aircraft and pilots, that were lost to enemy fire.

Originally posted by C0bzz

F-22 Raptor To Make Paris Air Show Debut.



To pique consumer interest, Lockheed Martin has revealed better than expected performance for the stealth fighter.

The F-22s overperformance includes a radar cross section that is “better” than was contracted for, the company says. That classified requirement has been calculated at a -40 dBsm, about the size of a steel marble. By contrast, the F-35 is thought to be a -30 dBsm, the size of a golf ball. Supercruise is at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5. And acceleration – although company officials would not say from what speed or at what altitude – is 3.05 seconds quicker than the requirement of 54 seconds.

In nonafterburning military power the Raptor can operate at just more than 50,000 feet. However, it is known that the F-22 opened its aerial battles at about 65,000 feet during its first joint exercise in Alaska, apparently using afterburner.

There also is a mysterious admission that the range of the Raptor’s Northrop-Grumman/Raytheon active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar is 5 percent greater than expected. That means a cushion of an additional 5-6 miles of detection range against enemy aircraft and missiles.

Aviationweek.

Can't say I'm surprised...

[edit on 5/2/2009 by C0bzz]

And there have been other articles/pilot anecdotes of supercruising from M1.82 to M1.9 as well. I suspect the altitude limitation is more based upon airspeed as well, rather than A/B or not, as the F-22 has as much thrust in military power as an F-15C in full A/B. What is most interesting though is the remark about the RCS being smaller than -40dBsm. One thing that looks odd though is the detection range figure. A 5 percent increase over the expectation is going to be more than 5 or 6 miles.

reply to post by BlueRaja


now when those super dooper raptors have a mission availablity rate of under 60% will cost $8 billion to upgrade and research for a aircraft allready in production , and is not actually meeting the DoD targets for performance (the same targets it was selected over the YF-23) , and is suffering far worse that the B2 with corrosion (comments from John Young DoD)

2007 KPP`s were actually scored LESS than the same tests in 2004

no aircraft in history has ever done that

www.flightglobal.com...

and thats the last part - whilst its the showcase fighter , certain people within the airforce see it as a white elephant. and a bloody expensive one.

Harlequin, you're using a bureaucrat and someone who wants to kill the Raptor program as a source for Raptor performance? I think I'll stick with pilot comments, seeing as how they're apparently tasked with the burden of actually flying this aircraft.

reply to post by TheRealDonPedros


LOL that did make me laugh

2nd line!!

3rd

4th

omg light speeeeeed! hehe

reply to post by WestPoint23


if you actually read the link its from a supporter of the F-22 programme , and also the USAF own reports on the natuer of the maintenence issues.


i would rather believe the people who fix it when the pi,ots break it rather than a paid to say this pilot.

edit:

The DoD are the people who say what the aircraft should and shouldn`t do - and when it fails the KPP`s in 2004 , and even more failures in 2007 - there is a problem with the aircraft.

a pilot just does as he or she is told , and whilst it is a fine aircraft - it fails on the KPP`s.

[edit on 5/2/09 by Harlequin]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Harlequin, you're using a bureaucrat and someone who wants to kill the Raptor program as a source for Raptor performance? I think I'll stick with pilot comments, seeing as how they're apparently tasked with the burden of actually flying this aircraft.

The recent mission capable data for FY2008 on F-22s had a mission capable rate somewhere in the 62 percent range.

Statement of fact

I think that's troubling.

Statement of subjective opinion.

Follow-on operation tests in 2007 raised operational suitability issues and noted that the airplane still does not meet most of its KPPs. It meets some, but not all. Key performance parameters. The trend in those operational tests, there was an IOT&E, a follow-on test I think in 2004 and a follow-on test in 2007. The trend is actually negative.

The maintenance man hours per flying hour have increased through those tests.

Statement of fact

The last one was a substantial increase. The airplane is proving very expensive to operate, not seeing the mission capable rates we expected. And it's complex to maintain.

Statement of subjective opinion.



If either of the statements of fact are wrong - the press will grill him over it.

The other two excerpts you can disregard as opinion.

It kind of reminds me of when the US Army first go the Apache (I know, I'm dating myself). At first, they were real hangar queens. Not just mechanically, but the weapons systems never seemed to be 100% (you could shoot Hellfires, but not the gun & vice-versa). Over time, things got better. It's not like Hughes handed them to us and said "good luck". They worked with the Army on making this thing more reliable and easier to maintain. I think this is fairly typical of any brand new system being implemented.

The USAF was rather happy with the B-2 fleet in 2006 when they got to a 66% mission capable rate. It was mostly brought about by using a new RAM coating that made it easier to remove panels on with less damage to the RAM.

The F-22 is undergoing the same problems that the B-2 has gone through. Give them time to learn the tricks and shortcuts to the maintenance issues, and they'll improve too.

Its interesting to note that an AWST article from a few months back listed only the F-22 as being able to operate with impunity in a SAM environment that had the S-400 system in place.

THe F-35 would not and the B-2 was vulnerable during prolonged time in the denied area as "clues" began to add up and eventually it could be tracked down.

Originally posted by FredT
Its interesting to note that an AWST article from a few months back listed only the F-22 as being able to operate with impunity in a SAM environment that had the S-400 system in place.

That's a little too oversimplified, however the Raptor (*independent of support systems*) is probably the most survivable air asset in such a scenario. Not only does it have superb VLO it also has persistence (20,000Lb of fuel) @ high speed & altitude. Its RCS will significantly reduce the engagement envelope of any SAM unit, and its kinematic performance will even further reduce the engagement envelope (Mach 1.9 at 60,000 continuously is no joke).

Couple this with the fact that the F-22's avionics and sensors allow it to have capabilities similar to a Rivet Joint, AWACS, J-STARS and EW platform. It also has a weapon package to deal with air to air and air to ground systems, including SAM's (SEAD/DEAD mission).

This allows the F-22 to be flexible and operate in any airspace, near fighters or near air defense units. It can deviate from the "blue line" to persecute any target, from day one. That's an impressive capability to have.

[edit on 6-2-2009 by WestPoint23]

^^ that is pretty much on the money as the what the F-22 is supposed to do BUT

in the DoD report it states that since the 2004 KPP`s the Raptor has slipped in key performance - now , we will likely never know exactly which parts of the KPP it has slipped in - but for the official report to say its not as good now as it was in 2004 is of itself damning.