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.

PAK-FA vs F/A-22 - Analysis

Discussion in 'Indian Air Force' started by jagjitnatt, Jul 11, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. gambit

    gambit FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    96
    Does. Called radar warning receiver (RWR). Like it or not, despite advances in infrared detector, radar still reigns supreme in giving us these vital target resolutions: location, speed, altitude, heading, and aspect angle.

    Infrared detection give only one thing: location. Or more like general direction.

    Here is where you have a misunderstanding of the radar detection process.

    Radar is essentially a stochastical (statistical) process, meaning it must be time dependent. An LPI transmission is actually detected by the target's RWR set but because whatever pulse characteristics employed is inconsistent over time, the detected transmission is discarded. The word 'interception' here means more than just being detected but actually analyzed and discerned to be relevant. Detected is one thing, analyzed and discerned to be relevant (warning) is completely different.
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. Death.By.Chocolate

    Death.By.Chocolate 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    88
    True, but what is the probability 1 in 2, 1 in 1,000 or 1 in one million? Do you know?
     
  3. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Liking your posts as usually Gambit. However, as you mention, the "probability" of a succesful analysis depends on both radar capabilities in "inconsistenting"(allow me that neologism, i'm not english born") the transmission and the capability of target to discern it.
    Much of the latter also depends on data target's defense system are fed with...(i'm thinking about the complete refusal of US to use ANPG77 radar vs Rafale in engagements considering spectra may also register transmissions).
    Another point i would like to mention, because it is becoming more and more important in present engagement rules : it is definitive identification of target.
     
  4. satya

    satya Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    94
    @halloween did you mean that US may not have used apg-77 thinking that SPECTRA may record its transmissions?
    Yeah highly probable, or they may have used it in more general manner.

    IAF SU-30MKI also did not use their radar for the same reason when they participated in red flag.

    Off topic: did you visit india?
     
  5. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Yes, understand record, not register (misusage due to french verb enregistrer = record). And no, i still intend to do so, but couldnt this year :sick: (had to change car, not so much money left...)
     
  6. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    Noone US are actually going to fight, but against those enemies you don't need F-22 anyway.

    China can outnumber F-22s easily, and considering that F-35, stealth ground attack aircraft, is going to replace F-16 and F-18, USAF and USNAF will find themselves outnumbered against China once 4th generation

    aircraft are replaced. And China is main excuse used to justify stealth aircraft.

    Insane number, thanks to F-16 and F-18, aircraft they don't particularly like, and are trying to replace them with F-35.

    Depends when that war actually happens. If it is after F-15, F-16 and F-18 are retired, then yes.

    I have nothing to reconsider. My logic can easily be applied to F-35 too.

    And F-22 went from 750 to 187 aircraft. Let's see where will F-35 end.

    Failed to justify my claims how? I have proven that BVR combat is unproven, and it is obvious to anyone with even meager knowledge of military history that superior numbers usually triumph over superior technology.

    Which still means that element of surprise is lost, and leaves at least bird doing the targeting vulnerable. And Raptor will have to come fairly close if it expects to get a lock on a modern fighter.

    Considering their performance in World War II and Vietnam... I doubt it (in World War II, fighter imposed by FDR turned out to be best USAAF fighter of the war, for example).

    It doesn't, but you missed my point again.

    1. Internal carriage means larger aircraft for same loadout, with more base drag, and more drag while turning

    2. Air-to-air missiles are already designed for a minimum of drag, and while internal carriage reduces drag, it increases weight, maiking your claim about kinematic performance and fuel questionable. Conformal missile

    carriage can reduce drag while not increasing weight or complexity

    3. Internal missile carriage also means that missile's seeker has very limited FoV, and it also limits aircraft's ability to launch missiles on a whim (shoot and run)

    4. It also increases maintenance requirements and cost of aircraft, owing to greater complexity

    Heavier aircraft means more inertia, more fuel expenditure, and lower maneuverability with same thrust to weight ratio and

    Why I would compare it with heavy fighters when I have stated several times that all heavy fighters are unnecessary?

    Important things are wing loading, thrust to weight ratio, fuel fraction and weight itself.

    Greater weight means more inertia, and thus lower agility with all other things the same. It also means more fuel consumption, more thrust required to achieve same acceleration and more wing to turn. It also means more fuel

    required to achieve same range.

    Yes, I know. But I am complaining about F-22 as it is, not as it could be, or could have been.

    Anyone radiating will give themselves away; and noone smart will use radar to find stealth aircraft. Or use radar at all.

    LPI is not NPI, and it isn't very hard to detect either. Especially since USAF uses very specific frequency range to get all-weather capability.

    Radar warner doesn't work if enemy is not radiating. And while I know IRST doesn't give distance, there are two or three ways to circumvent that problem (first is using laser rangefinder, which isn't good idea since it basically turns IRST into active sensor; second is to use data from two or more IRSTs to triangulate position of target; third one is to calculate distance to target from its apparent size; but last one would require distance to be close enough for IRST to recognize silhouette, and would require precise size data on every fighter in the world from every aspect, so I'm not sure how practical it is). Besides, RWR doesn't give range information either.

    Not as much as "fool" as "allowing politicians, capitalists and bureocrats to dictate weapons procurement while not looking at past wars for clues".
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
  7. satya

    satya Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    94
    F/A-18 super hornets are gonna stay so does F-16 Blk 50+, newer F-15s for many more years. F-35 will start replacing the older generation aircrafts. Also I don't think China can still outnumber USA 3:1 or even match 1:1 so lets just forget it




    Crazy USAF will retire all aircrafts at once without replacing them :tongue:



    I would still ask you to re-consider.


    Proved how? with ancient P[k]? BVR is not necessarily 120km its anything outside envelope of WVR range missiles. The deeper you move into the zone the more probability of kill is there.

    With RWR you can at best tell you are being radiated, how will you tell if its raptor or something else,

    You are a history student, naturally you like to derive conclusion on present based on past.



    help me grab it then, i seriously want to know

    Yeah larger body, But more base drag??? can you prove it in F-22's case because If i try to visualize the flow field I can't figure out how those carriages caused base drag.

    do you agree that externally mounted missile significantly increase drag? Missiles are designed for minimum drag for their own flight. But when they are hanged on wings with pylons they add drag and you cannot deny it, while internally carried missiles don't have such problem.
    Internal carriage is just a hollow space in body where missiles can be mounted i don't think that causes too much increase in weight.

    Kinematic performance:
    1. Your external missile creates drag. Affecting speed and fuel consumption.
    2. asymmetry of weight distribution when missile from one wing is launched, and farther the missile is mounted on a wing more imbalance of weight it creates.

    IR guided missiles may have limited FoV but BVR missiles don't have such problem, and whim isn't exactly a whim as you may think. There is a sequence before missile separates the aircraft. I don't think there will be any considerable delay in launch of an internally carried missile because doors start to open as soon as fire button is pressed.

    Maybe, but benefits seems more



    I have already read your arguments on this with Vritra, and wasting time again is futile.


    i will present the maths behind these things someday. That would be more decisive


    Finally a question again

    why Eurofighter and gripen are aspiring for TVC?
     
  8. Death.By.Chocolate

    Death.By.Chocolate 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    88
    When did USAF refuse to use the APG-77? I think you mean USAF declined BVR engagement with the Rafale.
     
  9. Death.By.Chocolate

    Death.By.Chocolate 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    88
    Su-30 MKI must have used its radar at Nellis. Radar operation in 'normal flight mode' (NAM) is required when flying in formation primarily to prevent mid air collision. In this mode, the radar detects contacts in the aircrafts flight path. Some pilots prefer to 'lock on' to his or her flight lead with the radar operating in ACM (Air Combat Mode). The radar is relied upon for safety, the suggestion that it is switched off during peace time sorties is hard to believe.

    In combat, depending on mission requirements OR or when ordered to 'go silent' the aircraft can operate under strict emission control this is when all radar emissions cease. The F-22 is less constrained in this regard because a volume scan of all contacts is performed in fractions of a second. A task that will take the MKI, F-16 or other legacy aircraft an average of 15 seconds to perform.
     
  10. nicolas10

    nicolas10 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    153
    And do you?
     
  11. nicolas10

    nicolas10 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    153
    RWR works only if your target emits. Good luck intercepting an aircraft flying with it's radar off without using your own radar.
    And if both you and your target is flying radar off, and you are fed its location by awacs or GCI, you may as well be flying a F15.

    As for IR detection, it gives you more than location, and there are some algorithm that have been worked on to give range and heading. Triangulation with several planes can also work to give a more precise track.

    I know how it works, but how can you be so sure that new top of the line digital ESM won't be able to discriminate LPI radar signals?

    Nic
     
  12. halloweene

    halloweene Major MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    4,346
    Likes Received:
    2,357
    Yes, several times, most probably for the abovementioned reasons
     
  13. Death.By.Chocolate

    Death.By.Chocolate 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    88
    Good, then you won't have any trouble finding a source for your claim that the USAF refused to use the APG-77.
     
  14. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,865
    Likes Received:
    3,024
    They are going to stay for now. Are there any plans for zero-houring F-16s?

    I don't think that replacing fighter with light bomber counts.

    Pk at missile's maximum range is essentially zero. Noone actually fires missiles at maximum range; and "ancient" Pk is still relevant. Missiles advance, but so do aircraft and so do countermeasures.

    It doesn't matter. If IFF is off, Raptor can't tell what exactly it is targeting either, especially with all jamming it is going to encounter; but once you know you're being targeted, you can close in to ID the emitting aircraft by either

    Sorry, but that is only way to derive conclusions.

    “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat itâ€￾
    George Santayana

    Larger fighter requires more fuel, higher thrust-to-weight ratio, and lower wing loading to achieve same performance as smaller fighter due to all mass it has to throw around.

    Base drag as in drag in level flight, with no stores. F-22 has large frontal cross-section and quite square body, none of which helps drag.

    I know they do add drag, but I don't agree that it is "massive".

    Which increases size of body, weight of body due to requiring addition of more material to facilitate formation of weapons bay, plus addition of mechanism required to open bay doors (and lower the missile, in case of Sidewinder bays).

    Correct. But weapons bay increases drag, and adds weight to the air frame.

    IR missiles are not very heavy, and again, what prevents fighter with external carriage from fighting only with centerline missiles?

    BVR missiles are as dangerous to user as to the enemy.

    Depends on how do you look. But stealth can simply be defeated by enemy going passive; and SAMs can use VHF radars.

    Then why are you wasting time? :laugh:

    I have provided several values for different aircraft in my analyses. In all of them F-22 scored good, but nowhere near the best.

    Better supersonic maneuverability, marketing trick and lower fuel expenditure in normal flight.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
  15. Picdelamirand-oil

    Picdelamirand-oil Lt. Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    8,328
    Likes Received:
    6,264
    Country Flag:
    France
    Arabian Aerospace - Raptor rules the desert roost

    For these training missions, the F-22As flew only within visual range 1 vs 1 BFM (Basic Fighter Manoeuvring) sorties, and did so carrying under-wing fuel tanks, and with radar reflectors fitted, preventing opponents from seeing how ‘stealthy’ the F-22 is in operational configuration, or from experiencing the F-22’s AN/APG-77 radar and highly advanced AN/ALR-94 passive receiver system.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page