F-22 Raptor Thread

[Air Force Brat]

in China, there's a school of researchers who doubt the potency of those "terminated best", such as the F-22, the Sea Wolf, and the DDG1000, they never subscribed to the much hyped Hollywood style invincibility of those weapons.

you don't scrap your very best after so much treasure, toil, and time. the end of the cold war is a convenient excuse, but the rise of China and the coming back of Russia seems failed to resurrect those terminated best.

to be honest less, we are more worried about going broke than the rising of China or the old grouchy bear waking up? Our stuff works, our good stuff works lots better? we don't need to resort to spinning yarns out of some school of thought that denies reality. I have repeated from day one, that a "true fifth gen" is very expensive, that applies to Seawolf and DDG-1000 as well.

no need to beat your little war drum either?

 

[b787]

in China, there's a school of researchers who doubt the potency of those "terminated best", such as the F-22, the Sea Wolf, and the DDG1000, they never subscribed to the much hyped Hollywood style invincibility of those weapons.

you don't scrap your very best after so much treasure, toil, and time. the end of the cold war is a convenient excuse, but the rise of China and the coming back of Russia seems failed to resurrect those terminated best.

In History all weapons are tested, F-22 has not been tested yet, same is F-35, does not matter what you throw to each other only history will show who is right, but something i am sure of, is the US has started development of a better plane than F-22

 

[b787]

to be honest less, we are more worried about going broke than the rising of China or the old grouchy bear waking up? Our stuff works, our good stuff works lots better? we don't need to resort to spinning yarns out of some school of thought that denies reality. I have repeated from day one, that a "true fifth gen" is very expensive, that applies to Seawolf and DDG-1000 as well.

no need to beat your little war drum either?

If you re call history you will see for each weapon is built another is designed with superior qualities, F-22 very likely will meet its match and even will be surpassed, it happened to every weapon system, victory sadly in war is granted to better tactics and strategic thinking.

Just read the History of the P-51 versus the Me-262, or the history of the Zero versus the Hellcat.

No weapon is perfect and always factors like training tactics and producibility play a part in their success as weapons

 

[Brumby]

If you re call history you will see for each weapon is built another is designed with superior qualities, F-22 very likely will meet its match and even will be surpassed, it happened to every weapon system, victory sadly in war is granted to better tactics and strategic thinking.

Just read the History of the P-51 versus the Me-262, or the history of the Zero versus the Hellcat.

No weapon is perfect and always factors like training tactics and producibility play a part in their success as weapons

No one is claiming that the F-22 is perfect of that the F-22 will not be surpassed eventually. What is your point though? Everyone stops developing and go back to Bi-planes?

 

[Hyperwarp]

Tracking an F-22 is one thing but locking on to it and shooting it down is another.

 

[Brumby]

Tracking an F-22 is one thing but locking on to it and shooting it down is another.

Specific to the article I think it is a bunch of conjecture being used to try to spin together a story as if there was a successful track on a F-22. At a practical level, I have no problem believing that the Chinese may have detected a F-22 through their surveillance radar. The story becomes a lot less credible when the claim extends to it being able to track the F-22. The questionable nature is simply related to the nature of radar technology. A UVF/VHF radar by characteristics can detect a VLO object at a longer distance but the downside is it only provides information on bearing. In a sensor net, I would then expect that this information is cued to X/S band radars to conduct a box search in a certain direction. The cued search success is partly depending on luck and location of the radar as a RCS profile of a F-22 would in my opinion require it to be located maybe 40 nm away to have any success. A track is much more demanding than detection and would at a minimum require three successive detection operating in a radar mode set at least with a 80 % probability of detection. At a tracking state, information on azimuth, elevation and range would be available to generate a minimum firing solution although the F-22 could easily break lock by jamming simply because it has a S/N advantage given its VLO feature.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Specific to the article I think it is a bunch of conjecture being used to try to spin together a story as if there was a successful track on a F-22. At a practical level, I have no problem believing that the Chinese may have detected a F-22 through their surveillance radar. The story becomes a lot less credible when the claim extends to it being able to track the F-22. The questionable nature is simply related to the nature of radar technology. A UVF/VHF radar by characteristics can detect a VLO object at a longer distance but the downside is it only provides information on bearing. In a sensor net, I would then expect that this information is cued to X/S band radars to conduct a box search in a certain direction. The cued search success is partly depending on luck and location of the radar as a RCS profile of a F-22 would in my opinion require it to be located maybe 40 nm away to have any success. A track is much more demanding than detection and would at a minimum require three successive detection operating in a radar mode set at least with a 80 % probability of detection. At a tracking state, information on azimuth, elevation and range would be available to generate a minimum firing solution although the F-22 could easily break lock by jamming simply because it has a S/N advantage given its VLO feature.

Exactly, you can shoot what you can't "lock on" to. The F-22 is still the queen and will no doubt remain so into the foreseeable future, no one has any specifics on the upcoming six gen?

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Actually it's the other way around since you can't lock on to a target what you can't trace. The targeting radar is much stronger and is consecutive instead of a scanning radar which is sequential scanning the entire area once verified and tracked by scanning radar the coordinates are fed to into the targeting radar which fires a strong consecutive radar towards the target.

Realistically a stealth craft really doesn't need to be stealth from start to end where the opponent doesn't know what hit him. A stealth craft only needs to be stealth long enough so the stealth craft is able get close enough to shoot his opponent first. The stealth craft can be spotted at this point since he will be breaking away and more importantly the opponent would not have time dicking around trying to obtain a firing solution against the stealth plane since they would be preoccupied trying to gain a firing solution against the missile heading right towards them.

 

[FORBIN]

because it has a S/N advantage given its VLO feature.

What is it

 

[Jura The idiot]

What is it

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!