U.S. to make final decision on future F-22.

[Vivendi]

And then we have the ATA issue with only some variants of Gripen carrying a gun.

Will this have an impact on the US decision on future F-22?

I am sorry but you lost me there GD.


V

 

[Grand Danois]

Will this have an impact on the US decision on future F-22?

I am sorry but you lost me there GD.


V

Stigmata is trolling.

The F-35 carries 2 air-air missiles in mud mover configuration, not ATA. And Stigmata knows this very well.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The F-35 can also fly supersonic at high altitude. There is also no F-22 in the world that can fly at M 1.7 at over ~45,000 feet without using afterburner. I'm sorry for asking the original question as I meant it to be rehetorical. However its just oppened the can for the Raptor Fan Club to launch the misrepresentation based attacks on the F-35.

 

[Grand Danois]

The F-35 can also fly supersonic at high altitude. There is also no F-22 in the world that can fly at M 1.7 at over ~45,000 feet without using afterburner. I'm sorry for asking the original question as I meant it to be rehetorical. However its just oppened the can for the Raptor Fan Club to launch the misrepresentation based attacks on the F-35.

Atmospheric limitations on supercruise (upper tropopause) caps the ceiling, much to the dismay of many a F-22A fan, just as it is suggested that operational cruise speed is max M 1.5.

Which makes this very very funny and very very sad at the same time:

http://s231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/?action=view&current=flightenvelWinCE.jpg

 

[Abraham Gubler]

OMG! Is that what I believe it is? Eric L Palmer has attempted to edit the flight envelop performance of the F-22 to add the performance zone that APA and co have used in their 'analysis'?

 

[Grand Danois]

OMG! Is that what I believe it is? Eric L Palmer has attempted to edit the flight envelop performance of the F-22 to add the performance zone that APA and co have used in their 'analysis'?

That is exactly what it is... his train of thought:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

What are your sources for "fixing" the flight envelope diagram?

October 22, 2008 1:36 AM
Blogger ELP said...

Talking to real people for years.

Of course Gen. Davis, the F-35 DOD program director made it easy when he said this a few months ago:

“The general added that a Raptor will not be able to perform close-air-support missions over a crowded area, just as the Lightning II will not be able to fly "at 60,000 feet at 1.8 Mach with six missiles waiting for somebody to come."

Close enough.

October 22, 2008 7:54 AM

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5743537665692052172&postID=7046351916123848652

 

[Abraham Gubler]

He should use his photoshop skills to add EOTS, DAS, bigger bays, over wing fuel pods, etc. to the F-22 to really make his argument convincing.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

there are some strong indications that Obama will keep Gates on...

from what traffic and noise we see, I doubt that the USAF is going to be getting any F-22's - certainly not another 50. They don't see the need.

I beg to differ, Gates will only be on for a short time to watch the withdraw of U.S. forces from Iraq but according to this article Obama is looking at Danzig who happens to be a F-22 savvy guy.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/11/defense_danzig_111108/

I myself does see the need for more F-22s because for one the F-35 wont be ready for another 6 years and we have 30 year old F-15s and 2 we don't know what the world will be like in 15-20 years times, the F-35 and 183 F-22s might be good enough for today's combat but the future? There is no way we can predict we could be in another Cold War for all we know.

 

[ChEB]

Then we have the issue of only 2! missiles in AtA mode for F-35 unless you want to sacrifice stealth, while F-22 has 8.

negative, she can carry 4 BVR AtA missiles internally.

 

[rjmaz1]

That's not even counting the fact that nearly all warplanes in the world can out-run F-35.

This post shows a lack of knowledge on the topic. Only the F-22 can clearly outrun the F-35.

All the other fighters are comparable to the F-35. They are all fuel limited when it comes to the speed at which they can run away in combat. The F-35's larger fuel capacity will allow it to chase down enemy fighters over longer distances. Once the enemy is forced to switch off its afterburners it will be easy pickings for the F-35.

To be able to engage and disengage the enemy whenever you like you have to have a significant speed and sensor advantage. No aircraft has such an advantage over the F-35.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

negative, she can carry 4 BVR AtA missiles internally.

Most likely 6 internal AAMs once the F-22 line has closed and the F-35 is in full production...2016 is likely for when this could happen.

This post shows a lack of knowledge on the topic. Only the F-22 can clearly outrun the F-35.

All the other fighters are comparable to the F-35. They are all fuel limited when it comes to the speed at which they can run away in combat. The F-35's larger fuel capacity will allow it to chase down enemy fighters over longer distances. Once the enemy is forced to switch off its afterburners it will be easy pickings for the F-35.

To be able to engage and disengage the enemy whenever you like you have to have a significant speed and sensor advantage. No aircraft has such an advantage over the F-35.

Exactly the F-15 has never gone past Mach 1.2 to Mach 1.3 in its entire 30 year service life. Since when has a Su-27 ever gone past Mach 1.3 in combat? Never and the F-35 is rated at Mach 1.6 to Mach 1.8 depending on how you look at it because 1200mph can vary in Mach numbers, wether at high or low altitude.

But my point is like you said the F-35 is equile if not better than any other fighter when it comes to speed, only the F-22 can out run the F-35 but nothing else can out run the F-35, not even the SU-35.

 

[ChEB]

Most likely 6 internal AAMs once the F-22 line has closed and the F-35 is in full production...2016 is likely for when this could happen.

I meant for the F-35. The 35 is set to carry 4 AIM-120s internally. The F-22 carries 6 Aim-120s plus 2 Aim9s internally. There are some articles around claiming that the F-35 can be configured to carry a couple more internally but I haven't seen the proposed setup.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Most likely 6 internal AAMs once the F-22 line has closed and the F-35 is in full production...2016 is likely for when this could happen.

The USAFRL has designed two new conceptual ATA bay configurations for the F-35A. One has four AMRAAM sized missiles per bay and the other that "throws away the rule book" has six per bay. Since these are simply multiple ejector rack configurations they don't require any actual engineering work to the aircraft. Roll out of the new configurations could be achieved very, very quickly. What has been stopping it to date is the USAF campaign for increased F-22 production. Once this is dead and buried the F-35 ATA weapons bay configuration will follow very quickly. So the F-35 will have up to eight or 12 AMRAAM sized missiles available for internal carriage and possibly from when it reaches Block III standard (~2015).

 

[tphuang]

The USAFRL has designed two new conceptual ATA bay configurations for the F-35A. One has four AMRAAM sized missiles per bay and the other that "throws away the rule book" has six per bay. Since these are simply multiple ejector rack configurations they don't require any actual engineering work to the aircraft. Roll out of the new configurations could be achieved very, very quickly. What has been stopping it to date is the USAF campaign for increased F-22 production. Once this is dead and buried the F-35 ATA weapons bay configuration will follow very quickly. So the F-35 will have up to eight or 12 AMRAAM sized missiles available for internal carriage and possibly from when it reaches Block III standard (~2015).

I don't see what's the point of carrying that many. It makes far more sense to carry 8 missiles of a combination of AMRAAM and AIM-9X. That should be all you would ever need. And if we take the recent comment from the red flag leak seriously, you might want to carry more AIM-9X. Carrying more would just increase the weight.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

12 AMRAAMs is less weight (4,000 lbs) than 2 GBU-31 JDAMS and 2 AMRAAMs (4,700 lbs) so it won't detract from the F-35As base mission performance. Obviously replacing some of those AMRAAMS with ASRAAM or AIM-9X Blk 2 (for WVR LOAL capability) will reduce weight as they are lighter weapons.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I beg to differ, Gates will only be on for a short time to watch the withdraw of U.S. forces from Iraq but according to this article Obama is looking at Danzig who happens to be a F-22 savvy guy.

None of the US exchange personnel have your confidence - and at a procurement level we already know that the USD spend is under the gun.

I'd bet my left nut that you won't see 50 extra F-22's under the Obama Govt - they're focussed on other issues in defence and the USAF fixed wing air superiority assets aren't it.

 

[merocaine]

GF, how do you see US defense priorities shaping up over the next few years?
When you say other issues, have you got any pointers?
A curious punter!

 

[gf0012-aust]

GF, how do you see US defense priorities shaping up over the next few years?
When you say other issues, have you got any pointers?
A curious punter!

well, i guess if I really want to shoot myself in the foot - and depending on the eternal struggles between the Executive (SecDef/SecState/POTUS and the Military Service chiefs)...

IMO emphasis is on

less emphasis on theatre responses
greater emphasis on an ability to respond with force and precision (eg SSGN's and hypersonics)
greater emphasis on non state responses - terrorists, pirates, state sanctuary events
space based event management (basically this has happened since GW1 - but it's been finessed since then)
next generation of VLO platforms - precision and projection issues and relying even less on friendly forward bases

all IMO, so all potentially rubbish ideas.

 

[Feanor]

Another priority to emphasize, fixing the acquisition system.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

The USAFRL has designed two new conceptual ATA bay configurations for the F-35A. One has four AMRAAM sized missiles per bay and the other that "throws away the rule book" has six per bay. Since these are simply multiple ejector rack configurations they don't require any actual engineering work to the aircraft. Roll out of the new configurations could be achieved very, very quickly. What has been stopping it to date is the USAF campaign for increased F-22 production. Once this is dead and buried the F-35 ATA weapons bay configuration will follow very quickly. So the F-35 will have up to eight or 12 AMRAAM sized missiles available for internal carriage and possibly from when it reaches Block III standard (~2015).

What 12 internal AAMs? That would be awesome lets hope that is true than the USAF really does not need anymore F-22s.

I don't see what's the point of carrying that many. It makes far more sense to carry 8 missiles of a combination of AMRAAM and AIM-9X. That should be all you would ever need. And if we take the recent comment from the red flag leak seriously, you might want to carry more AIM-9X. Carrying more would just increase the weight.

Well if the USAF does not get the 381 F-22s which is most likely and they need to replace some 700 F-15s and counter the possible SU-35 threat then 12 internal AAMs would be a good idea.

None of the US exchange personnel have your confidence - and at a procurement level we already know that the USD spend is under the gun.

I'd bet my left nut that you won't see 50 extra F-22's under the Obama Govt - they're focussed on other issues in defence and the USAF fixed wing air superiority assets aren't it.

Oh my mistake I forgot that maintaining a good air force is not a top priority anymore...man I miss the Cold War.