F/A-22: To Fly High or Get its Wings Clipped

eckherl

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The F - 22 is not the first aircraft that we havent sold on the world market and it will not be the last, it has some technology advancements that we do not want known to the world community, what that is I do not know and for the majority of you, you do not know either so all we can do is speculate.

I will not pretend to know sh_t about aircraft but I have talked to American fighter pilots both in the U.S Navy and Air Force and when I have asked them what world fighter aircraft do they most respect in capabilities the Typhoon ranks as one of the top premier aircraft that is currently out there. The French have built some impressive combat aircraft also and a good reason why they are not selling more is probably because the countries most interested in purchasing aircraft already have strong military ties with either the U.S or with Russia and going out of that friendship circle to purchase something could indeed sour relations in some way.
 

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
The F - 22 is not the first aircraft that we havent sold on the world market and it will not be the last, it has some technology advancements that we do not want known to the world community, what that is I do not know and for the majority of you, you do not know either so all we can do is speculate.

I will not pretend to know sh_t about aircraft but I have talked to American fighter pilots both in the U.S Navy and Air Force and when I have asked them what world fighter aircraft do they most respect in capabilities the Typhoon ranks as one of the top premier aircraft that is currently out there. The French have built some impressive combat aircraft also and a good reason why they are not selling more is probably because the countries most interested in purchasing aircraft already have strong military ties with either the U.S or with Russia and going out of that friendship circle to purchase something could indeed sour relations in some way.
I don't know if anyone ever asked for it but I doubt the US would have considered selling the B-52 to anyone else (although they did offer its six engine predecessor, the B-47E, to the RAAF in the mid 60s). I would also think that the F-106 Delta Dart interceptor, with its sophisticated (for its day) fire control system, was another aircraft that the USAF would have been reluctant to sell, even to a close ally.

Cheers
 

AGRA

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Talk about believing one's own propoganda.

Mod edit:

Magoo is right.

PM him if you want to discuss things personally.
Is this opening up dangerous ground?

Many of us here choose to use a pseudonym (or 'handle') because we are either in a position where we shouldn't necessarily be talking about things we know, or have been told things by people who shouldn't have done so, or the opinions expressed are personal and not necessarily those of the organisations we work for.

Although many on this board know who I am, the opinions I express are mine and not those of the publication I write for. I'm sure AGRA is in the same boat, and I suspect you are as well Occum.

Perhaps the mods can make a ruling on this matter?

Cheers

Magoo

Mod edit:

Sorted and will be watched in future.
Did I miss something here during my weekend away at Lavarack? "Occum" playing to his usual high standards of deportment... Obviously AGRA is not the name on my birth certificate; my parents were not so cruel. I chose the title for some freedom of opinion, however unlike some people using aliases online I have kept away from white anting and posting false positive referrals to my own work within Defence. So I have little to fear from any ‘outing’ so to speak. Thanks to the Mods for what would appear to be some protection on this front and once again further confirmation – if it was needed – of the character of some…

Interesting is whether Boeing would export the Global Hawk and predator. There's quite a lot of countries who are interested in the above...
Well the former is a Northrop Grumman product and has been sold to the Germans and long attempts to place it here in Australia. The later is a General Atomics product and has been sold to the British and widely marketed elsewhere.

The US has been very sensitive with exporting stealth technology, in the old days when aircraft were just aluminium and engines there were little export issues to allies. The US offered the B-48 ‘Hustler’ and A-5B ‘Vigilante’ to Australia for the acquisition that settled on the F-111. At the time they were both the leading edge of USAF and USN aircraft. They wouldn’t offer us technology to produce the nuclear bombs that the aircraft was meant to carry however.

So far only Australia has received approval for products with designed in stealth (JASSM and F/A-18E/F). JSF is designed from the start to have exportable levels of stealth and the US has been reticent in allowing some countries to join as partners, in particular Israel.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
...Interesting is whether Boeing would export the Global Hawk and predator. There's quite a lot of countries who are interested in the above...
Italy & the UK have bought Predator (already in service), Germany is buying Global Hawk. The Germans are putting their own sensor package in their Global Hawks ("Eurohawk", but that's not because the USA won't export the original kit. The Germans just want a different set.
 

Magoo

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Italy & the UK have bought Predator (already in service), Germany is buying Global Hawk. The Germans are putting their own sensor package in their Global Hawks ("Eurohawk", but that's not because the USA won't export the original kit. The Germans just want a different set.
Eurohawk will carry an EADS developed ELINT/SIGINT package, similar to that of the planned but as yet unbuilt Block 30 Global Hawk for the USAF.

Cheers

Magoo
 

Magoo

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Thanks for the inputs. Just checking, does the RAAF have a similar UAV capability? If not, is there any reason why the predator isn't acquired?
Yes it does and, it's coming...

The ADF will possibly acquire a mix of Global Hawks and Predator Bs in the next couple of years to replace part of the AP-3C force from around 2012.

Magoo
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
Thanks for the inputs. Just checking, does the RAAF have a similar UAV capability? If not, is there any reason why the predator isn't acquired?
Just to clairify, RAAF does not currently possess a UAV capability, however the Australian Army does with the current Scan Eagle and Sky Lark UAV's. Army has a longer term plan (JP-129) to acquire a more permanent capability.

RAAF however plans to acquire UAV capability under AIR-7000 as Magoo suggested. It's just taking it's "sweet" time however, exactly like Army...
 

harryriedl

Active Member
Verified Defense Pro
Italy & the UK have bought Predator (already in service), Germany is buying Global Hawk. The Germans are putting their own sensor package in their Global Hawks ("Eurohawk", but that's not because the USA won't export the original kit. The Germans just want a different set.
and the UK preditors are being armed


UK looks to arm expanded Reaper force
By Tim Ripley

UK Royal Air Force (RAF) chiefs want to arm their soon-to-be-delivered General Atomics Aeronautical Systems MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for strike operations against Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan later this year.

The Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, told Jane’s that the RAF has also increased its requirement for the upgraded version of the Predator UAV from two to three air vehicles. When urgent operational requirement (UOR) approval for the purchase of the Reapers was approved by the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) in 2006 it was not envisaged that the UAVs would be armed.

"Predator B [Reaper] is coming later this year to give us a persistent striking capability, which is key to attacking the type of targets we need to attack," said ACM Torpy. "It is cleared for [the Lockheed Martin AGM-114 laser guided] Hellfire. We will use the same weapons as the Americans at first because that is the quickest way to get capability," he added.

"We will not need convincing of what [the Reapers] will deliver for us. We are buying three, up from two. Our aspiration is that the [Predator force] will get bigger, 12 for a start," said ACM Torpy.
Link: http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jd...0504_1_n.shtml
Reply With Quote
 

Grand Danois

Entertainer
Note the question mark... :D

Stealth aircraft only need one active sensor and all non-stealthy adversaries are revealed, and target info shared. The non-stealthy adversaries will only know the location of the single active emitter, which can stay out of range or cover itself behind non emitting air cover.

Full SA vs partial SA. Full targeting info vs limited targeting info.

Hmmm.

Take a look a another slide from the same presentation. Sensor fusion... Imagine no radar return, a single ESM signal from that one emitter. No information on the other a/c. It is now non-cued IRST (+laser ranging?) vs LPI AESA.
 
Last edited:

BKNO

Banned Member
IRST and IR AAMs doesnt NEED ranging when paired together for BVR intercepts.

Only a similar detection range and with sensor fusion they enhance eachother capabilties meaning that of the IR seeker can be greatly increased and it can be fired in BVR....

A few facts about this new generation of IR seekers and BVR performances.

First, during the kosovo campaign, RAF tornado F-3 exchange pilots flying AdA Mirage 2000 Cs reported using the MAGIC II seeker to keep track of their leaders in adverse MTO conditions, through cloud and rain.

They also used these MAGIC IIS to track and detect the tankers well before they could acquiere them visualy.

This beats their own bvisual acquisition capabilties and de-facto is the very definition of BVR.

Now some squadron noises gives some Mirage 2000-5Fs pilots words of MICA capable of detecting tatgets at up to 70 km in optimum conditions, they also uses them as IRSTs.

BOTH AIM-9X, AIM-132 an MICA have seekers with BVR capabilties in the case of the two first, this is the first time that IR seekers have a detection range superior to their motors.

In the case of Typhoon, sensor fusion with AIM-132 allows naturally for a higher level of detection probability in BVR , very much as it would do with a radar it allows for the IRST to clue the seeker on a target that its own detection probability would allow for and help it not to disregard the target in the noise clutter.

This is NOT possible with internally mounted weapons.

Some home work:
Laser range-finders are used in Ada service to complement the radar in both A2A and A2G since the Jaguars and Mirage F-1 CTs.

In A2A it is logical to assume that a target will use ECMs and make radar ranging difficult for the level of accuracy needed for A2A gunery.

In A2G the lack of precision allowed by radar SAR make the presence of laser range-finder useful for gun precision, THIS HAVE BEEN THE PRIMARY ROLE OF THE LASER-RANGE FINDER AND STILL IS.

In every case, PIRATE DOES allow for BVR firing of AIM-132 and doesn't posses a laser range-finder; the same applies for OSF.

Those writing that an IRSTs needs laser range-finding for BVR engagements are simply miss-informed on the real purpose of the laser.

For a starter, when OSF contract was passed by DGA to Thomson TRT in 1991, laser technology barely allowed for a range of <> 33 km which is WAY less than that of the AAM seeker in service with AdA/MN now and more or less that of the MAGIC II seeker at the time.

Then there is the little matter of performances degradations of the laser being also WAY higher than that of an IRST/IR seeker in adverse MTO conditions.

Also, AdA doesn't assume that the opponent will not be protected and as laser detection is not too much of a luxury for us, the use of laser range-finding is NOT considered as part of the conceipt of "Dicretion".

To finish, these AAMs are capable of tracking very much like the IRSTs they are slaved to, they are lock-on after launch or lock-on before launch capable, and already posses datalinks allowing for mid-flight target updates.

To get datalinks capabilties you will have to wait for AIM-9X block II and still wont have their BVR range, speed and end-game maneuvrability (MICA).

For the FIRST Mirage 2000 MICA IR firing on 23d June 2005 at CEV Cazaux, the aircraft used its radar for a BVR intercept but MTO conditions were very bad, data link was also used during the inertial flight sequence of the MICA.

This was the worst case scenario where weather conditions reduces the range of an IRST and in cany case the 2000 doesn't posses one.

The target was destroyed.

I havent read ANY reports on the use of the MICA IR bar some comments on what sort of astonishing capabilties it provided the pilots with.

From internal sources it know that OSF "works perfecly".

In most case from medium to high altitudes the IRST and IR seekers will meet much more favourable conditions and this will cause a lot of worries to all potential opponents including L.O aircrafts.

With sensor fusion, these AAMs can be launched at targets using IRSTs, Radars, Link-16 and EW Suite, (SPECTRA can target a radar and allows firing of both MICA IR/EMs and AASM) and HMDS, i am not sure of Typhoon capabilites thought (ECM SUITE) but it would be interesting to check these out...

In the case of MICA, one of AdA top brasses (général Rouzaud) reported that it can be fired bacward and provided for a greater range than that of the pursuer AAMs due to the combined AAM velocities.

He saids that this was pushing them to rewrite their own tactical book or reshot some of "Top gun" scenes.

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/7950/2000cigognesid7.jpg
This doc is extracted from the website of the Air Defense Squadron 1/2 Cygones based at my old A-B B/A-102 Dijon.

AdA\Groupe de chasse 01_002 Cigognes-4.htm

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/1926/micavendeeap4.jpg
This one from the 1/7 Vendee where they INSIST IN DICREET INTERCEPT:

Avec la version IR, l'acquisition de la cible se fera dans une totale discrétion jusqu'à l'impact.

AdA\Le missile MICA.htm

Clearly, the world of Air Combat is changing FAST, those who think that low-speed/low-Gs and L.O are enough to survive one of Europe newbies have to rethink big time.
 
Last edited:

Rich

Member
First, during the kosovo campaign, RAF tornado F-3 exchange pilots flying AdA Mirage 2000 Cs reported using the MAGIC II seeker to keep track of their leaders in adverse MTO conditions, through cloud and rain.

They also used these MAGIC IIS to track and detect the tankers well before they could acquiere them visualy.

This beats their own bvisual acquisition capabilties and de-facto is the very definition of BVR.
Oh horsecrap! There have been plenty of instances of fighter aircraft sneaking right up on the enemy, without the enemy seeing them using their eyes. So in that case is the definition of BVR "past 100 meters"?

On the other hand if the pilot happens to be looking in the right direction, and the sun glints off the enemy just right, they can see them from kilometers off. So is that the definition of BVR? Either way you cant define BVR strictly using the limits of the human eye, human brain, weather, and which way the pilots head is turned.

And in your first paragraph, the Kosovo one, how far was the lead aircraft from the others tracking it? Or is this another of your super-secret secrets you can only hint at, because of your super-secret job title? If it was "close enough" then you can track the lead with your nose.

Now some squadron noises gives some Mirage 2000-5Fs pilots words of MICA capable of detecting tatgets at up to 70 km in optimum conditions, they also uses them as IRSTs.
Oh brother!
 

BKNO

Banned Member
Mod edit:

That's enough guys. Get back on to the topic or don't bother posting anymore in this thread.

Regards

AD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rich

Member
Mod edit: That's enough guys. Get back on topic or don't bother posting anymore in this thread.
Regards

AD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Falstaff

New Member
Interview with John Harvey

Just found this Interview with "AIR VICE MARSHAL JOHN HARVEY
PROGRAMME MANAGER FOR NEW AIR COMBAT CAPABILITY, ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE" in this week's JDW. Nothing new in there, but I thought you guys might be interested nevertheless.

For many of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) partner nations, the planned procurement is one of the most significant aircraft purchases in their history.
For Australia it is likely to be the costliest and largest single fleet procurement it has made and may bet he sole fighter aircraft for the Australian Defence Force into the second half of the century. Criticism of the programme has come from a number of angles, including the US funding oversight body, the Government Accountability Office and from within the political body both in the US andAustralia as well as other partner nations.
In Australia the conservative government, which has been in power for more than a decade, has remained solidly behind the programme. The next 18 months will be crucial for the programme inAustralia; at the end of 2008 the government, which may be the existing conservative party or the more JSF-critical Australian Labor Party,will need tomake a commitment to buy the aircraft.
The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) programme manager for new air combat capability, Air Vice Marshal John Harvey, acknowledges the challenges in the
programme but believes they will be overcome and that it remains the right aircraft in terms of major criteria. AVM Harvey says the programme is progressing well and will achieve unit cost targets, but there is still a major effort required to achieve a raft of key parameters. He believes the design of the software for the aircraft is the biggest technological hurdle,with the hardest possibly yet to come, but there are strengths industrial partners can rely on.
“A big part of the software had to be done just to get the aircraft flying [which took place in December] and the first test pilot said the aircraft was about 12 months more mature than the LockheedMartin F-22 stealth fighter was at the same stage,” AVM Harvey said.“We have had the second test pilot flying it and hewas very impressedwith thematurity. “Software is goingto be the big challenge but you need to remember it is 10 years after the F-22 and largely the same people are doing it, so I think that is a very big risk reduction. “Another good risk mitigator is that exactly the same production line is being used for the production aircraft as for the test aircraft.”
On the Australian front, one of the challenges being worked on is to make sure there is an information technology infrastructure able to support the logistics chain,which is key to the F-35&s support system.
AVM Harvey plays down criticism of the aircraft's capability and accusations that any effort tomake it stealthy on the first day ofwarmake it less useful as a ground-attack platform. “A major recent development in the JSF programme is the inclusion of the Small Diameter Bomb [SDB] in the Block 3 capability,” he aid. “An individual [stealthy] JSF can carry eight SDBs,with which it can attack eight individual targets on a single mission, as well as two advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles; I would argue that is quite a big capacity evenwithout any externalweapons.”
TheAustralian government's decision to purchase 24 Boeing F/A-18F Block II Super Hornet fighter aircraft to supplement its existing Hornet fleet and compensate for any slippage in the F-35 schedule has meant a possible reduction in the planned F-35 purchase. Previously, the proposal had been to buy up to 100 F-35s but this number is more likely to be 75 aircraft if the Super Hornets remain in service: a decision that may not be made until after the commitment to purchase F-35s in 2008.
The first F-35 for the RAAF is planned for delivery in 2013; initial operating
capability, namely first squadron operational, is planned for 2015 and full operating capability (FOC) for 2018. AVM Harvey says 75 F-35s would not be required for FOC–16 aircraftwould be enough to declare a squadron of 12 as operational if attrition, maintenance and training requirements are reconsidered – and a maximum delivery rate of 15 a year could achieve that.
Under current proposals, RAAF Williamtown will have a training unit and two squadrons and RAAF Tindal a third squadron; if a fourth F-35 squadron is created, it would take over from the Super Hornets based at RAAFAmberley. AVM Harvey says cost estimates released inApril show the cost of the aircraft remains on target – USD47 million based on 2002 US dollars – and he is confident that capability can be delivered within the planned budget.
“We estimate a need for [the RAAF to operate] about 100 aircraft and we are confident we can do that,” he said. “The question is how many jobs do we want to do and what is the level of threat we are against?We have been involved for a couple of years in high-fidelity exercises in theUS; we have a good idea of what each individual aircraft can do. It is more on our side [that we have work to do].
“What is the interaction between the F-35 and the weapons, the airborne early warning and control aircraft, the tankers? What is the sustainment required?What is the level of threat? They aremore the drivers for us than
the aircraft&s capability.”
In the long term, the through-life cost of the aircraft is likely to be an
important factor, particularly since it is vital to affordability: one of the pillars
critical to the programme&s success.
“Typically, in the past, the support was two-thirds of the aircraft&s cost,”
AVMHarvey said. “JSF has tried to balance that to about equal by reducing
the support cost rather than increasing the unit price. One of the ways
they are doing that is by building support improvements into the aircraft,
particularly the advanced electronically scanned array radar,which should
not need to be touched through the aircraft&s life.Additionally, they have
removed all the pyrotechnics for ejecting the weapons and [the aircraft
now] uses air, which reduces maintenance. The concept of global sustainment
is also going to provide benefits through economies of scale.”
Damian Kemp Jane$s Aviation Editor, Canberra
 

BKNO

Banned Member
How it works:

Whatever AAM (IR/EM) you're using, your target is going to be designated in a particular way.

In this case, by the Target Designator box (TD box).
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1586&stc=1&d=1180089897
It is a square that identifies the LINE OF SIGHT (LOS) to the Launch & Steering (L&S) target.

The TD box flashes when the L&S target/LOS is outside the HUD FOV.

Target identified as friendly have an X through the centre of the box.

Pretty OVIOUS how useful this tool can be when you have to look for a tanker before refueling.

Knowing where to look you have much more chances of acquiring it ealier than if you were searching visualy only.

As for going through cloud layers at 100m you are mystaking the Blue Angels for combat pilots in operational and combat conditions.

Flying that close to another aircraft without visibility is a pretty dumb thing to do.

To illustrate i chose a pic of the symbology of F-35 HMDS which even if it is not allowing for reading the parameters i can tell it is indication the use of an AIM-120, only by the missing IR seeker circle, the Velocity Vector being straight ahead the IR Seeker Circle would be present if an IR AAM had been selected.

HMDS Symbology is identical to that of a HUD at this angle.

The RED circle is my photoshop work to give YOU a visual clue what a TD box looks like.

Thats HOW AdA pilots seek, detect and lock on targets passively in BVR since Mirage 2000/MAGIC II in BOTH VFR and IRF (VCMs).
 
Last edited:

Raptor.22

New Member
yep i totally agree, the F-22 is the best fighter jet in the sky though i was still kind of shocked by the killing of 8 F-16's in less than 15 minutes. Thats some crazy skill right there.

i really like how the AAM missiles can come out of the fuselage of the F-22 Raptor. The stealth is crazy, its compared to the stealth of a F-117 Nighthawk. Theres not one 90 degree angle on the exterior of the F-22 Raptor.

Probably my favourite feature of the jet is the thrust vectoring. The speed of elavation is crazy. The F-22 Raptor can go from sea level to Mt.Everest in less that 45 seconds :)
 
Top