Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

F22 analysis expanded

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by Picard, Apr 13, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MiG-23MLD

    MiG-23MLD Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    3,887
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    you data is wrong even for american claimed tally, it is 104:0 what it is claimed.

    Why?

    40+ aircraft downed in 1982 plus 34 aircraft in 1991, plus around 10 before 1982 by Israel downing around 5 or 6 MiG-21s and 2 MiG-25s and around 14 aircraft downed in other conflicts such as 1999.

    Of these around 5 are MiG-25s and 9 MiG-29s.

    Now something you do not mention is this tally is only given by either American or Israeli sources.


    In fact in 1991 2 F-15s are acknowledged to have been downed by the USAF, but they claimed SAMs and AAA downed them.

    The F-15E sustained two losses to ground fire in the Gulf War in 1991.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-15_Eagle
    good example of the mysteries american loses

    WASHINGTON, April 3, 2003 ** A Navy F/A-18 Hornet fighter jet went missing and an Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter crashed in central Iraq

    F/A-18C, a single-seat aircraft, went down at approximately 3:45 p.m. EST April 2 during ongoing Coalition air operations in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    U.S. forces are still searching for the F/A-18 and the pilot, who officials said ejected in the area near Kerbala.

    April 13, 2003
    ABOARD THE USS KITTY HAWK — The Navy has identified the remains of
    an F/A-18 Hornet pilot assigned to the USS Kitty Hawk and missing
    since his plane was shot down April 2, according to the aircraft
    carrier’s commanding officer. Capt. Thomas Parker said the body of Lt. Nathan D. White, 30, of Abilene, Texas, was found Saturday.
    He was a pilot with Strike Fighter Squadron 195, the Dambusters. He is survived by his wife and three children.

    April 13, 2003


    Gulf War II

    The F-15E sustained two losses to ground fire in the Gulf War in 1991. One F-15E was lost in the 2003, Invasion of Iraq, probably due to ground fire. http://www.flightlevel350.com/Lockheed_F-15_aircraft_facts.html
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2012
  2. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Your spliting hairs, 140 to 0 in air to air combat, against I will admit Russian Junk. The Russians will say anything and pay bribes big time to get India to buy their planes. At the same time they well sell the same technology and planes to China an they will side with China if their is ever a war between China and India, because they have a 2000 plus mile border with China and no defense if China was to invade. The Russian population is 142,905,200 and dropping and there are 1.5 billion Chinese looking for room and resources. They dont have to worry about a invasion by India,
     
  3. MiG-23MLD

    MiG-23MLD Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    3,887
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    look if you are going to boast, do it right and with correct numbers

    The 104 is the number of enemy planes downed by F-15s, and the ... The total includes aerial victories by American, Israeli and Saudi pilots Air Force should not relegate F-15 Eagles to boneyard - Air Force Community - Air Force Times

    but the Ruskies say

    Боевое крещение МиГ-23 произошло в небе Ливана. В целом, истребители ВВС Сирии в ходе активных боевых действий с 6 по 12 июня 1982 г уничтожили в воздушных боях 42 израильских самолета (в том числе, как минимум, пять F-15A и шесть F-16A), five F-15 and 6 F-16 downed in 1982

    http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig23liv/mig23liv.html
    Второй МИГ-25 удар во фланг уже не наносил. К месту боя не успели и израильские ударные самолеты. В непредвиденной заранее ситуации быстрее разобрались на сирийском ЦКП. Посчитав позицию более выгодной там решили перевести МИГ-25 на сближение. Цель летчик обнаружил на 40 км, захват произвел на 25 км, пуск первой ракеты - на 18 км, второй ракеты - на 11 км (бортовые средства контроля при дешифрировании подтвердили попадание первой ракеты). Израильский летчик катапультировался над морем. Сторожевые катера подобрали спасательный жилет и пакет с сигнальными средствами, хранящийся в катапультном сиденье.

    This say in 1981 a MiG-25 downed a Israeli F-15

    http://www.soldiering.ru/avia/airplane/25arabian.php

    So see this not every one agrees with the american version
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2012
  4. MiG-23MLD

    MiG-23MLD Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    3,887
    Likes Received:
    1,467
  5. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    If you look at the last 50 years, any one can clearly see that Russian Equipment with the possible exception of AK47 are cheap junk and even then I would prefer an M16 or M1. US planes takes out Russian lanes 100 to 1 and then Russians have to get lucky. US tanks go thru Russian tanks like hot butter by the thousands in Israel wars and US Iraq wars., US flys over downtown Baghdad the most defended city in the world by Russian Sams and AA with out any trouble, Israel gos thru Syrian AA like its not even there.
     
  6. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Yeah, but AK47 is far more reliable than M16 will ever be.
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2012
  7. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,379
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Your right and the AK47 is just about the limit of Russian technology.
     
  8. tunguska

    tunguska Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Messages:
    3,618
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    Just want to say one thing to you "best weaponry could be ineffective if it is used by poorly trained soldiers."
     
  9. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    According to you, Russians should still be using T-34s, then. AK-47 was based on MP-44.

    But no, it is not limit, even when it comes to assault rifles. AN-94 is the latest model. However, AK-74 is still used (and yes, it is AK-74 and not AK-47) because AN-94 is too complicated to produce.

    According to you, Russians should still be using T-34s, then. AK-47 was based on MP-44.

    But no, it is not limit, even when it comes to assault rifles. AN-94 is the latest model. However, AK-74 is still used (and yes, it is AK-74 and not AK-47) because AN-94 is too complicated to produce.

    Yeah, but USAF doesn't understand that; they were cutting on training due to F22 and F35 projects.
     
  10. tunguska

    tunguska Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Messages:
    3,618
    Likes Received:
    1,379
    USAF or USA will never understand that as they believe they are only superior in this world. certainly there are good in technology but it does not mean that they can rule the whole world.
    In 1965 india Pakistan war in battle of Asal uttar Pakistani American make Patton tank are fully pitted again Indian British and French make Centurion and AMX -13 tank. This battle led to the creation of Patton Nagar (or Patton City) at the site of the battle Khemkaran. This is because a large number of Patton tanks fielded by the Pakistani forces were either captured or destroyed at the scene.
     
  11. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Well, when we're at tanks... Russians had IS-I and IS-II tanks which were comparable in many aspects to German Tiger I, yet those tanks were frequently destroyed by Tigers even when the latter were heavily outnumbered... reason? Germans had better-trained crews.
     
  12. MiG-23MLD

    MiG-23MLD Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    3,887
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    you are just claiming only that in real exercises even MiG-21 has been proven an excellent fighter, in fact let us see if F-15 can not be on trhe cross hairs of other fighters

    this is a Gripen on a MiG-21 sight mock combat
    [​IMG]
    this is a F-111 on a MiG-21 sight mock combat
    [​IMG]
    Israeli F-4 on a MiG-21 sight real combat picture
    [​IMG]
    F-18 on MiG-21 sight mock combat

    [​IMG]

    harrier on MiG-21 sight

    [​IMG]

    F-14 on MiG-21 sight mock combat

    [​IMG]
    F-15 on the cross hairs mock combat
    [​IMG]

    F-15 on F-14 sight mock combat

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    Mock victory of Mi-24 over F-15
    [​IMG]

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2014
  13. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    This is a joke, right? Your entire argument rests upon how much it cost to build an aircraft?

    What does the 'B' stands for? Usually the 'Bomber' designation, right? So why should we use the F-22, which came AFTER the B-2, nearly 10 yrs? The F-22's intro was in 2005. The NATO air campaign over Yugoslavia started in early 1999. Do you do any basic research before you post in public for all to see?

    But for the sake of the interested readers who wondered why did we used the B-2 against the Serbs, I will neither confirm nor deny the possibility that the US wanted to test an improved version of 'stealth' against similar if not superior EM assaults than what we encountered in Desert Storm.

    But first...

    [​IMG]

    The above is an example of what is called a 'runway denial' mission. It was RAF St. Eval in Jul 1942.

    RAF St Eval - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Notice the pattern of bombs that pretty much tell us the mission was a failure.

    Now here is something dramatically different...

    [​IMG]

    Most people missed the operative phrase '...the effects of mass without having to mass,...'

    The contrast could not be more radical. The intention of a runway denial mission is to somehow deny the enemy from using his runway system. That could mean invading the base, or utterly destroy the runways. Back in WW II, bombings means massed formations of dozens or even hundreds of aircrafts were necessary to destroy one bridge, one railway segment, or an airbase. No different for runway denial. That is what is meant by 'to mass', which is to deliver large quantity of ordnance upon a target area. The 'effects of mass' would be that denial of an instrument of war.

    What people also missed is that the US did not need the B-2 to create that 'effects of mass'. We could have done it with a few B-52 or B-1 missions. With today's smarter bombs, we would need far less bombs than what was needed back in WW II. Instead, we used the B-2 which flew from continental US (CONUS) to deliver a very few smart bombs which impacted at precise locations to achieve the intention of 'runway denial' to the Serbian Air Force. We SUCCESSFULLY denied the Serbs the use of a runway system with only six bombs. Now count how many bombs the Germans dropped on St. Avel and FAILED such denial.

    And how many B-2s were lost? None. Probably none were detected in the first place.

    I did? Where?

    In what ways was the F-117 'superior' to the F-15? The F-117 have no radar and could not carry missiles. The only are that the F-117 was superior, or rather inferior, to the F-15 was its low radar observability.

    Because the F-22 came around in 2005. Do much basic research? Apparently not...

    :lol: Now that is funny. See this little 'dingleberry'...???

    [​IMG]

    It is called a 'Luneberg' lens and is a radar RCS enhancer...

    RCS Radar Cross Section, Lüneberg Reflector lensref - Luneburg radar
    The F-22 and F-117 usually flies with enhancers. The luneberg lens is the best for the F-22.

    [​IMG]

    Once the luneberg lens effects are detected, there is no way -- at this time -- for any radar systems to accurately gauge the true RCS of a complex body. Luneberg devices can be tuned -- by physical construct -- on how much increase of RCS for a complex body. I used to work with them. So please do not tell me how the French or anyone can '...soak up all the trons...' and analyze the signals. Perhaps in your alternate universe with alternate physical laws. But not in this one.

    It proved that an improved method to achieve 'stealth' worked. Successfully at that.

    Out of how many sorties?

    F-117A: Allied Force Missions
    Two aircrafts lost out of 34 THOUSANDS sorties. That is not an air defense combat record to boast about at the bars. No one care that one F-117 was lost. Far wiser heads than yours worry about that 850-1 ratio. You should as well.

    Because the F-22 came around in 2005. Do much basic research? Apparently not.

    With your pathetic criticisms of the F-22 so far, may be you should quit arguing.

    Out of 850 sorties? No wonder you have to make so much hoopla about the one.

    Try at least 10 yrs. of development, R/D, troubleshoot, and finally deployment. So do you really think we worry that much that China got a hold of the F-117's wreckage? But here is where your limited thinking is revealing. All it takes is one look at the differences between the F-117 and the B-2. If you have any shred of critical thinking skills, you would have pause and wondered how are they so different and yet have the same physical result: An extremely low radar cross section. It would also tell you that we got something better than the F-117 in line and that is the F-22.

    Do much critical thinking and basic research? Apparently not. The F-117 have no radar and could not carry missiles. Its main defense is through low radar observability which would enable it to escape detection. But calling the F-117 'superior' to the F-15 and F-16 reveals your non-experience in the military affairs, lack of critical thinking skills, and neglect to perform basic research before you post.

    Wow...This is truly amazing on how people are willing to make fools out of themselves. Ferraris make a series of high performance sports cars. One better than the next. But does that mean the previous model is trash just because the next model have better technology and refinement?

    You are treading in an area you know nothing about. If the F-22's RCS is as low as the F-117 and the F-22 is better equipped, better maneuverability, better armed, and better sensored, it means the new methods for achieving low radar observability enable us to have a more capable airframe that can do more than just being low radar observable. But as far as the singular feature that made them stands out -- low radar observable -- the F-117 is just as effective today as it was yesterday.

    One out of 850 sorties? I hope ALL air defense of the world think like you do.

    Here is where your lack of critical thinking skills further reveals you.

    If you are faced with a soldier who is standing in front of you AND you are aware of an unseen soldier/sniper around the area, who are you going to fight first?

    Likewise, if a pilot detect incoming hostiles AND he know that there is a flight of F-22s lurking about, what choice does he have in engagement? Just like you facing the soldier: None. You have no choice. With the F-22, now any pilot have to assume he is being stalked as well as being confronted and both the seen and unseen opponents are equally dangerous.

    That is the double threats we can present to any adversary.

    You do not want to know, for it would bring tears to your eyes and send you into a deep despair for the defense forces of your nation. Utterly helpless, that is.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Yes, when it was heavy bombers which bombed from 5 000 - 10 000 meters up... like USAF did during more or less entire war, as did RAF - Russians, on the other hand, invested heavily into Close Air Support, and it paid off. Stukas, unlike heavy bombers, were often successull in far smaller number, capable of both destroying bridges as well of providing quite accurate support to ground troops, but were vulnerable without heavy escort, and their production ended in early 1943, and they were never deployed in large enough numbers. And that despite the fact that most successful Stuka pilot had over 500 tank kills, second most succesfull had cca 300 tank kills credited.

    B2, on the other hand, is capable of flying low and slow when necessary, but it operates exclusively at night (which, by the way, is far safer environment than day).

    He is talking about possibility of Rafale detecting F22s radar. That "dingleberry" has nothing to do with it.

    This is for First Gulf War and Kosovo.

    Aircraft --- Approximate Total Sorties Flown Both Wars --- Losses --- Loss Rate/Sortie
    F-117 ---------------------- 2,600 ------------------------------ 2 ------- 1/1,300 sorties
    A-10 ---------------------- 12,400 ------------------------------ 4 ------- 1/3,100 sorties

    And keep in mind that A-10 is an aircraft primarly oriented towards daylight operations, whereas F117 operates at night, which is far safer environment. Losses of F117 in Gulf War One were zero. But two squadrons of A10s as well as some F111Fs also flew at night - their losses were same as that of F117 : zero. 83% of A10s that were hit made it to a safe landing, and A10s mission capable rate was over 90%.

    In Kosovo, NATO launched 36 000 sorties, fired 743 HARM anti-radar missiles, and dropped 24 million pounds (10 900 tonnes) of munitions of which 6,728 were precision-guided. They knocked out 3 radar SAM batteries; inflicted 387 military and 1 400 civilian casualties (despite some NATO claims of 5 000 - 10 000 military casualties). Serbs, on the other hand, fired 845 radar SAMs - they shot down one F117 and one F16, and damaged another F117, which made it back to base and was withdrawn from service.

    In Afghanistan war, 2001, 30-man combined US/Afghan team was ambushed by 800 Talibans. Single B1B which was probably nearby tried to help, but couldn't fly low and slow enough to reliably identify targets. Two A10s were sent - as soon as they opened fire with cannons, Taliban attack ceased, and A10s covered team for next 6 hours. (Taliban also tried to negotiate a release of some captured ANA members if US team was to call off A10 support).

    In Second Gulf War, 10-day strategic bombing campaign failed to topple Saddam's regime, despite the fact that 1500 precision bombs were dropped on first two days (plan was to drop 10 000 bombs, but wasn't fullfilled). Two F117s and 34 Tomahawk missiles failed to kill Saddam. Once ground attack was launched, Saddam's regime toppled in 21 days.

    In short, effectiveness of "stealth" aircraft was meager when compared to legacy aircraft.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2012
  15. MiG-23MLD

    MiG-23MLD Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    3,887
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    F-22 and any stealth aircraft are delicate machines see

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2014
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page