Some will hate me...but..
Whether the F-22 (F-35) should enter service is largely academic. Our 'teen' airframes are wearing out.
The Gulf of Sidra incident, January 4, 1989; just about says all anyone needs to say on this subject matter. (Audio recording of engagement) Select download MP3 file
http://www.ka8vit.com/sd/shootdown.htm
The F-22 tactical use issues (never mind F-35, not even worth discussion) are:
1) Primary main weapon range / Newton’s second law of motion.
2) ECM detection of mid-course update transmission(s) for main weapon.
3) Thermal signature(s) of platform & main weapon.
4) Daylight/Moonlight contrail(s) of platform & main weapon.
5) Super-cruise only at high altitude.
Reason(s)
1) Despite claim(s) of an AIM-120D version, dimensions may be the issue. First, what is the amount of propellant possible in standard AIM-120 round? Second, FMRAAM (ramjet version) fitment inside F-22 weapons bay? The Europeans who were partnered on the AIM-120 program have since embarked on a more suitable weapon, the Meteor.
If the 'kinematics' augment is to be advanced by F-22 proponents as a key capability, to sweep the airspace of enemy fighters then there are several problems. They include: combined closure rate, maneuverability, airframe thermal heating due to air friction and hot exhaust exposure.
See:
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Raptor.html
Simplified Condition: Initial head-on frontal aspect intercept of Flanker (firing R-77M) by F-22 (firing AIM-120C). A flight of 4 to 6 Flankers flying at 500 knots, against flight of 4 Raptors flying in super cruise at 1500 knots. The combined closer rate of all aircraft would be 2000 knots (500 + 1500).
The 'kinematics' augment says that F-22 will use its faster speed to 'push' its AIM-120 missiles towards Flanker, If both opposing flights of aircraft fire their weapons, both attacker and defender missile range benefit from a head-on engagement via the closure rate. F-22 fires AIM-120C sooner but also effectively flies INTO Flankers IR R-77 (!) Missile range = launch aircraft speed + missile velocity + target speed. Raptor faces additional problems at higher speeds because of simple physics, thermal airframe heating (IRST detection) and reduced maneuvering potential due to the limits of pilot G-loads. Flanker moving at 500 knots would have enormous advantage in defensive maneuvering (AIM-120 avoidance) and to turn and fire on exiting Raptor.
Whatever the remaining aircraft, they now flash past each other at approximate 2000 knots and initiate turns, Raptor now exposes it’s hot exhaust to Flanker as F-22 make a wide sweeping turn due to it 1500 knot speed/pilot G-limit. The engagement then starts all over again. Typically this involves into a classic tuning/maneuvering contest...the dogfight.
This whole this boils down to this. If F-22 press their attack, closure rates will be so high and air-to-air weapons malfunctions (missiles fly wide) such a regular occurrence (on both sides) that F-22 aircrews will be in a dogfight within moments after calling "fox-3" Against the Advanced Flanker is truly a nightmare scenario.
R-77 See:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/weapons/q0261.shtml
2) Flanker will most certainly be equipped with a Threat Warning System that listens for Raptors AIM-120 mid-course update (data burst transmission) after F-22 weapon release. From here two (2) things could happen. First, the Threat Warning System triggers automatic release of expendables (chaff/flares). See page 41 'c'. Second, Flanker pilot then initiates a defensive 'beaming' or 'beam-turn' maneuver. See page 36-37 'c', page 97 ’d’.
3) IRST see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infra-red_search_and_track
Flanker uses as primary system for gun firing solution. Development/advancement cycles for IRST systems would be orders of magnitude more frequent than F-22 airframes changes, combined with IR-versions of the R-77 (R-77M1) missile being the first problem. The second is Flanker radar (slaved to IRST). The IRST may see something and then point its main radar straight at F-22, (straight to ‘track’).
The canard equipped versions of the flanker is an astonishing aircraft.
Please see: (w/sound)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1o3rov7cB4"]YouTube - Su-37 presentation video[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xY0t_mPv6I4"]YouTube - Sukhoi SU-30 Flight Demonstration[/ame]
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000976.html
Beaten the F-15 time to clime records,
http://www.ausairpower.net/flanker.html
http://www.air-races.com/aircraft/Sukhoi Su-31.htm
4) Self-evident. Anything supersonic makes contrails (even a smokeless AIM-120)
5) F-22 low-bypass engines are the key to its high altitude super cruise capability. Low bypass engines require more use of reheat (afterburner) at lower maneuvering speed and/or altitudes. This is plainly evident, see:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUgPscDjf7U"]YouTube - F22 Langley 2007 Friday Evening Demo[/ame]
Also F-22 unusual 'speed-brake' control scheme may also reveal its true nature as an aircraft more akin to the Lockheed YF-12, than the plane it replaces, the F-15, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_YF-12
If Raptor is to be flown at high altitudes and high speed vs. Advanced Flanker a situation similar to what occurred in the early stages of the Falkland conflict could emerge. Argentine Mirages stayed at high altitudes while Royal Navy Harriers remained at medium altitudes (neither side content to give away his advantage) in what is best described as a series of 'non-engagements'.
The Russians were forced to counter our superb F-14, F-15, F-16 and F-18. The Flanker appears to be able to that job (F-14 w/AIM-54 was a big maybe) very (very) well. Cope India was a nasty shock to air force brass. Yes the analysts tried to diminish the results, but they said the same thing about the cobra maneuver, (which the F-22 has been out copying). Now as we all know this maneuver was just a hint at Flankers jaw dropping agility – the analysts were wrong.
A astute observer may also notice things like published range for the F-16 and even the F-15 are always with drop tanks, the Mig-29 and Sukhoi are published without tanks.
All Flanker (and Mig-31) really need to do is scare off our AWACS, (Joint Stars) and tankers. Bottom line is the next war will likely start and end during the flight time of a KS-172.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novator_KS-172_AAM-L
The Flanker airframe has enormous growth potential typified by the Su-27M and Su-34. The Advanced Flanker Series (canard/thrust vectoring) might just be….the most significant fighter aircraft since the Spitfire.
The Europeans tested the non-mid-course-update version of AMRAAM (AIM-120), and its kill probability dropped below that of their existing Skyflash weapon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyflash
One last note. If Mr. Clancy's comments are correct: that a future opponent would need to indeed track every object down to say the size of an insect to 'see' the F-22 Raptor. Uh well, they'd just focus on "insect" sized object(s), flying in a straight line, line abreast of say about a mile separation, at high altitude, around 1.5+ Mach....
Those should be your F-22s.
The Russians appear to have thought through all these issues with the precision of a chess master.
Checkmate?
Note: China is in possession of large numbers of Flanker. Historically however the Chinese Air Force combat performance would best be described as abysmal.
- Olaf Brescia / Sacramento, CA
c) Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units In Combat- Cooper, Tom; Bishop, Farzad; Osprey Publishing, 2004.
d) ...And Kill MiGs, Air to Air Combat From Vietnam to the Gulf War (3rd), Squadron/Signal Publications, Lou Drendel.
e) Air War South Atlantic - Ethell, Jeffrey L.; Price, Alfred - New York, NY, USA: MacMillan, 1983.
