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 Fighter Loses $79 Billion Advantage in Dogfights: Report

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


EXACTLY! I couldn't have put it better myself! There are of course weaknesses with any and every platform out there. Nothing is perfect, but saying that the Raptor is a waste of money just because it's not as good in WVR as it is in BVR is plain silly IMO. It is still one hell of a fighter and it wipes the floor with everything out there IF the pilot doesn't screw up the BVR engagement. In the end, like always, it comes down to piloting skills.

The choice to go with 2D TVC instead of 3D also had much to do with stealth. They chose stealth over maneuverability (PAK-FA is the opposite) and I can't blame them for doing so. This is one of those cases where you can't have your pie and eat it too. Either maximum stealth or sacrifice some of that stealth for an increased maneuverability.

One more thing: The reason why they fly high and fast is to give those medium ranged AMRAAMs a longer range. If you look at simulated kills like the first Red Flag the Raptor participated in, most simulated kills were made in the 60-70+ nm arena. This will be increased by as much as 40% when the 120D is equipped.

Star for your unbiased and informative post!

Also, someone said there were problems with the Oxygen system. It turns out that it was a faulty valve inside the pilots vests and not the F-22's OBOGS (link)


IT--
edit on 31-7-2012 by edog11 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by edog11
Also, someone said there were problems with the Oxygen system. It turns out that it was a faulty valve inside the pilots vests and not the F-22's OBOGS (link)

That was me, and thanks!

Good to know they worked it out, this has been a thorn in the DoDs side for some time.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
No matter what you build, a better version of it will be created by someone eventually. The costs of all this stuff is making some individuals rich and draining the rest of the countries citizens. This is just one of many expensive technologies that have become average once they are developed because every country is improving their technology. When is this raping of the working people worldwide going to end? Sorry for my negative attitude but look at the big financial mess our country is in. Soon everyone will be driving on gravel roads while all the money is shuffled to military technology and nobody has jobs because they were all sent out of the country.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


I'm not talking Raptor specific. I'm talking US military specific. If you look at Desert Storm, and every other conflict the US has been involved in, from the time that missiles became "gospel" in Vietnam, just about every missile kill has been either WVR, or just outside WVR, at relatively short range.

en.wikipedia.org...



What is most disturbing about the performance of radar-guided missile is that the vast majority of kills (69, 73, or 95%) were initiated and made effective visual range, as shown in Table 4. The acquisition of weapons systems such as the F-4 and AIM-7 missiles were designed to kill the enemy with missile strikes BVR accurate.

Unfortunately, the doctrine and practice real job do not match (even in Israel), due to the constraints above the IFF. However, even when the deficiencies were overcome and the IFF BVR shots were performed, only four of 61 were successful. This translates into a probability "kill" (kill probability) or PK only 6.6%!

There are only four withdrawals BVR documented throughout the history of aerial combat even before Operation Desert Storm. This revelation is surprising because throughout the Cold War era, the platforms of radar-guided missiles were touted as the transformation that would fundamentally change the air combat. This would consist of air combat missile platforms (fighters complex, heavy and expensive), armed with radar-guided missiles, destroying the enemy beyond visual range.

www.defence.pk...

Yeah, I know it's a forum, but it's still appropriate. If you look at the entire BVR idea, not just the Raptor, it's not nearly as effective as the theorists would like you to believe it is. When you add in other factors, like the AMRAAM motor failures, then BVR becomes even more of a problem.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


It's not entirely sure that they have. There are several knowledgeable people that are saying that it's not the OBOGS/valve/pressure suit as described. The current theory to THEM is that there is a leak in the bleed air system, brought about by altitude issues causing seals to fail, that is allowing toxins into the cockpit, NOT through the oxygen system, which is then absorbed into the body. This would explain why the charcoal filters didn't catch it when they were installed. (And is something that I said a long time ago was my leading theory as to what was going on.) This would also explain why ground crews have started complaining about similar symptoms as the pilots, even though all they do is work on the aircraft on the ground, and never fly in it.

We'll have to wait a few months and see though, as the optempo increases again.
edit on 7/31/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
So, in a shocking turn of events, each aircraft excels in the area of combat its designed to excel in.

Only incompetent pilots or stupid ROE would ever put a raptor into such a position. Basically this says that in a very unlikely subset of situations the 2nd best fighter in the world (flown by allies) has an even chance.

I doubt the USAF is losing sleep about F-22 dogfight ability.

Although they probably are about the F-35s lack of it and the fact they didn't get the numbers of F-22 they wanted.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
More on the OBOGS "solution"


The USAF's position is that the level of contaminants found in the life-support system is within acceptable tolerance limits. But the source says the service has not accounted for environmental conditions, which might cause seals to leak within the bleed air system structure. Those leaked chemicals could then be entering into the Raptor's engine bleed air system.

Once the bleed air system is compromised it affects everything downstream including the on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS), the cockpit cooling/heating system, defog, and cabin pressurization--particularly the diffuser behind the ejection seat. Moreover, because the potentially contaminated air is more likely not to be entering the cockpit via the pilot's breathing devices, the carbon filter the USAF was using to try root out potential toxins would not catch the problem. "In this scenario the design of the OBOGS should do a very good job of filtering out the contaminated bleed air [entering the pilot's mask]," the source says. "But bleed air has other ways of being introduced to the cockpit and the pilot. Testing of the carbon filter wouldn't necessarily find the toxins created in these situations because it seems that those things are all very hard to detect even when looking for them."

Nor does the USAF appear to have taken into account the toxicity of normally benign chemicals when they are heated to a certain point--such as when those substances are passing through the jet's bleed air system. The source uses the example of tricresyl phosphate, which is found in many lubricants on the flight line.

"If you take tricresyl phosphate (TCP) and tested it like the air force did in 1954--they found that the clouds formed at 600° Fahrenheit are much more toxic than the undecomposed material," he says. "A 1995 air force study found oils containing TCP when heated at high temp changed the compounds and increased the neurotoxicity."

That would account for Raptor maintainers getting sick on the ground-which the USAF's current conclusion does not account for. The USAF says those ground incidents are unrelated to pilots' physiological problems in the air.

According the service, the maintainers inhaled engine exhaust fumes from the flight line, but the symptoms they describe bear similarities to those experienced by the pilots.

Linky thingy



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The current theory to THEM is that there is a leak in the bleed air system, brought about by altitude issues causing seals to fail, that is allowing toxins into the cockpit, NOT through the oxygen system, which is then absorbed into the body. This would explain why the charcoal filters didn't catch it when they were installed. (And is something that I sad a long time ago was my leading theory as to what was going on.) This would also explain why ground crews have started complaining about similar symptoms as the pilots, even though all they do is work on the aircraft on the ground, and never fly in it.

Good point, and something i thought when i first read about the issue. Why would the airframe techs be affected?

And if i remember correctly, they thought they had fixed the issue a couple times before, only to have pilots complain of the same issues. Many pilots have actually refused to fly these things. Hopefully the issue is fixed once and for all. Shame to ground such incredible fighters and risk the health and lives of highly trained pilots.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by nightbringr
 


The issue is "fixed" for now, because of operational restrictions on the fleet. They have to remain within 30 minutes of a divert base, and below 40,000 feet.

The only exception is a deployment to the Japan region (which is a whole other mystery in and of itself). They can remain within 90 minutes of a base, but the tankers all have to have an F-22 pilot in the boom pod during every refueling, and on hand to talk to the pilots in event of an emergency, and they have to carry enough fuel to get a fighter to landing at low altitudes if necessary.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I am assuming the source of the information is 'Red Flag' from the recent one where the Germans claimed some degree of success against the F22?



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by hp1229
 


Red Flag Alaska yes is where some of it has come from. There were several interviews with the German pilots, and a number of F-22 decals that have shown up on the aircraft involved.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
How bad could the F-22 be?

After all the Chinese copied it so it if was such a "turd" they wouldn't have.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Whats the old story about the space program? NASA spend millions on the developement of a pen that will write in space...the Russians just use a pencil.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


It's not that it's bad, it's that the fan boys are learning that not all aircraft are perfect in every way, like they want to believe with the Raptor.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by rebellender
from my limited in the Know, this thing is a flying turd over 50,000 ft. it becomes slow and unresponsive, hence its vulnerability. I think the platform is designed for Mach 5 but doesnt have the engines.

Unmanned aircraft preform beyond the limits of human ability, welcome to the New Age


Most aircraft are much less responsive at 50,000 feet. Not alot of atmosphere for lift, control surface effectiveness, air for engines......
edit on 31-7-2012 by SrWingCommander because: sp



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I seem to remember that the Rapter was passed over for it's competitor the YF 35 because of airframe de-lamination in flight. Something about the epoxy resin . reply to post by nightbringr
 



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Which is ironic in that the first like 30 F-22s had unfixable RAM issues, short of re-skinning them. The RAM would come off in flight because of the glue that was used to attach it to the skin.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
The main thing about the F-22 (as mentioned already) is not to get into a dogfight.

Anyhow, the main limiting factor in a dogfight these days isn't the aircraft, but the meat-bag pilot operating the aircraft. We already hit that end of the flight envelope hard with the F-15, F-16, and F-18. (All are capable of producing G's that could black-out or cause internal hemmoraging in a pilot. Ditto of top-tier fighters produced by other countries.) Vectored thrust and computerized flight controls help in some minor cases, but I'd guess the typical flying one uses to engage an aircraft in combat doesn't make too much use of them. Hovering in a near-stall at high angle of attack is more or less airshow stuff that would make you an easy target in most cases.

I guess pilots already know this, and supposedly the F-22 pilots are picked from the top F-15 pilots so they'll also know what to do in a dogfight if they somehow screw up the one particular advantage their aircraft does have. Also with enough practice and various scenario engagements during training, some of the better up and coming pilots with "less capable" aircraft will occasionally get the one-up on them. What better way to let pilots know not to discard their few advantages too easily.



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
The AIM-9X has leveled the field for non-thrust vectoring fighters, radar ability doesnt come into play, just heat seeking. In the close in dogfight while aircraft are changing altitude and speed "mixing it up" theres plenty of heat for a lock and with the of bore tracking ability theres no chance. But the gun is still on there for a reason.

Nowdays SAMs and radar controlled AAA are the bigger threats and thats more why the F-22A was developed, to be a more survivable combat aircraft in a modern world.

Wise man once said "Never fly the A model of anything." Past has shown they usually get it right by the "C" model.

edit on 31-7-2012 by StratosFear because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Great thread.

I enjoyed the read and all your insight into the matter and agree with a lot of the points you made on the topic. The vertical climb the f22 has is one of those things that makes you want to watch over and over again.

This thread reminded me to go spend a few minutes watching those clips again.




new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join