Article

2007-10-05 Home Front: WoT

F22 Raptor - "I can't see the %$!@! thing,"

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2007-10-05 07:52|| || Front Page|| [11131 views ] Top

#1 On the History Channel, they had a program about the F-22 where one of the pilots said that flying it against an F-15 was "like clubbing baby seals."

Posted by Mike 2007-10-05 08:47|| 2007-10-05 08:47|| Front Page Top

#2 "See first, understand first, act first, and finish decisively."

Posted by lotp 2007-10-05 09:01|| 2007-10-05 09:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Holy crap!

Beware Russia and China. This thing will splash anything you put up in the air against it.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-10-05 09:29|| 2007-10-05 09:29|| Front Page Top

#4 "I can't see the [expletive deleted] thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."

Bwahahaha!!

Posted by Mike N. 2007-10-05 09:33|| 2007-10-05 09:33|| Front Page Top

#5 "THE GOGGLES, THEY DO NOTHING!"

Posted by anonymous5089 2007-10-05 09:41|| 2007-10-05 09:41|| Front Page Top

When the AIM-120D AMRAAM missile enters wider service, F-22s will also have the option of actively guiding missiles fired by other aircraft.

So, is that "fired by other friendly aircraft", or have they figured out some way to hijack enemy missiles on the fly?

Cause that would be wicked cool.

Posted by Mitch H.">Mitch H. 2007-10-05 11:20|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]">[http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/] 2007-10-05 11:20|| Front Page Top

#7 AMRAAM uses two-stage guidance when fired at long range. The aircraft passes data to the missile just before launch, giving it information about the location of the target aircraft from the launch point and its direction and speed. The missile uses this information to fly on an interception course to the target using its built in inertial navigation system (INS). This information is generally obtained using the launching aircraft's radar, although it could come from an infra-red search and tracking system (IRST), from a data link from another fighter aircraft, or from an AWACS aircraft.

If the firing aircraft or surrogate continues to track the target, periodic updates are sent to the missile telling it of any changes in the target's direction and speed, allowing it to adjust its course so that it is able to close to self-homing distance while keeping the target aircraft in the basket (the radar seeker's field of view) in which it will be able to find it.

Posted by Steve 2007-10-05 12:03|| 2007-10-05 12:03|| Front Page Top

#8 I would assume the rapter can guide in friendly missiles. That way you could have one act as a forward observer, in the danger zone, actively guiding in missiles from other planes that don't dare go that close, thus giving the rapter the ability to have a massive, massive, payload of missiles (that just happen to be carried by other planes on the way in).

Part of me would love to think that we used Rapters to help the Israeli's attack Syria so recently. Think about it. We want to test the thing, we want the sites destroyed, we don't really want to take the heat. Israel is willing to take the heat, wants the sites destroyed, and would love to have the Syrians confused about wtf?

Probably not what happened but I'd like to think we were that coordinated and willing to play mind-games with our enemies.

Posted by rjschwarz 2007-10-05 12:24|| 2007-10-05 12:24|| Front Page Top

#9 It occurs to me that we don't know what we could have come up with if the money put into the F-22 had been put into improving the F-15 instead.

Especially since we haven't, and aren't, going to run the F-22 production line at any sort of economic rate, and nickel-and-dimed the program away from cost-effectiveness.

(Especially since the CHinese are probably going to steal the technology anyway and are more willing to mass-produce stuff... it makes more sense for us to limit ourselves to technology development we're willing to mass-produce ourselves).

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-05 14:23|| 2007-10-05 14:23|| Front Page Top

#10 But we didn't do that.

An _alternative_ we could still do is actually make the F-22 in sufficient numbers, but we're not going to do that either.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-05 14:27|| 2007-10-05 14:27|| Front Page Top

#11 We're going to follow the path of Political Least Resistance, which also happens to be the path of maximum problems when we actually get involved in a shooting war with a peer competitor.

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2007-10-05 14:29|| 2007-10-05 14:29|| Front Page Top

#12 I remember reading a review by new pilots on the F-22 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (ajc.com), because it's built at Lockheed in Marietta, GA. Anyhoo, the pilot claimed that they ran a test where he went up against an un-Godly # of F-15s (I want to say somewhere around 12-15) all at once and SPLASHED them all without them even knowing he was there! It's like the blind trying to fight someone with a gun, when he's got a missile launcher hundreds of feet away.

Posted by BA 2007-10-05 15:25|| 2007-10-05 15:25|| Front Page Top

#13 My brother flies F-15E's. He has been in engagements with the 22's. And yes, they got their asses whooped. The 22 is that damn good. On another note, the 15 isn't done yet. The Air Force is initiating an upgrade, the F-15 will be receiving the same radar/sensor package as the 22's. The radar itself is a huge upgrade. Not to mention the sensor/data integration upgrades. The F-15 will continue to own the skies for many more years.

Posted by AllahHateMe 2007-10-05 15:37|| 2007-10-05 15:37|| Front Page Top

#14 The F-15 is still one of the best planes ever built. The only problem is that it isn't very stealthy. Now with a F-22 acting as a spotter and guiding missiles into oncoming waves of russian or chinese planes...
Wow.
Any enemy planes that survived and engaged the F-15s would have a very, very short lifespan.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-10-05 15:42|| 2007-10-05 15:42|| Front Page Top

#15 Regarding stealth: for bombers, you would only need stealth for the first wave or two, during which you would take out all or most of the surface to air assets as well as the command and control sites, after which you could send in a barn door loaded with ordnance unopposed by ground assets.
fighters stealth could be limited to visual minimization techniques because due to the vast superiority in ecm, enemy radar would be hindered, if not downright blinded. look at the flat paint used by our current tacair forces; visually it absorbs reflections and the lack of garish colors (aka nose art / tail flashes) help to blend the jet with the sky. the biggest reflective ojcet on the jet is the canopy, but if you can manage the glint factor, you can pretty much depend on the ecm to manage the enemy's incoming.

Posted by USN, Ret. 2007-10-05 16:12|| 2007-10-05 16:12|| Front Page Top

#16 I just wonder how close we are to eliminating manned aircraft as well as our nuclear arsenal. What with "rods from god", google earth/gps, and UAVs, raptors may soon only be useful as control platforms.

Heck - a pea-sized meteorite had southern Minnesota and western Wisconsin all agog the other day - imagine the effects when we seriously test space based weaponery.

Posted by Unereque Platypus5520 2007-10-05 17:25|| 2007-10-05 17:25|| Front Page Top

#17 Iff not being done already, the USAF reportedly is desirous of converting a few of its heavy manned bombers into UAV testbeds.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-10-05 20:29|| 2007-10-05 20:29|| Front Page Top

#18 When thinking about the value (or not) of the F22, don't assume that the enemy will always be as far behind as currently WRT electronics.

The F15 is a great airframe. But it simply cannot carry and utilize the incredible degree of computing resources of the F22. Those resources make possible an awe-inspiring amount of sensor fusion - possibly to include off-board sensors as DOD's global information grid evolves, and possibly even to include automated coordination with unmanned systems.

Posted by lotp 2007-10-05 21:07|| 2007-10-05 21:07|| Front Page Top

#19 I just wonder how close we are to eliminating manned aircraft as well as our nuclear arsenal

The acronym you want is UCAV - unmanned combat air vehicle. Envisioned, some tech developed, major issues re: doctrine, tactics and lawfare about their use at the moment. That will probably change over time.

Posted by lotp 2007-10-05 21:09|| 2007-10-05 21:09|| Front Page Top

#20 Loves me some good old incredible American technology.

but if you can manage the glint factor

I would imagine that we are using PVD (Physical Vapor Deposition) deposited silicon nitride or some other anti-reflective coating on our fighter jet canopies.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-10-05 23:24|| 2007-10-05 23:24|| Front Page Top

23:44 JosephMendiola
23:36 Zenster
23:35 JosephMendiola
23:34 Zenster
23:33 JosephMendiola
23:32 Jocasta
23:28 JosephMendiola
23:27 Jocasta
23:24 Zenster
23:07 Anonymoose
22:59 Zenster
22:56 Zenster
22:49 ed
22:49 Frank G
22:48 Beavis
22:48 Zenster
22:47 trailing wife
22:44 crosspatch
22:41 Chuckles Jaise7272
22:38 JosephMendiola
22:35 Halliburton
22:33 Halliburton
22:33 JosephMendiola
22:30 crosspatch