Questioning: F22 analysis expanded

Questions asked
Based on “F22 analysis expandedâ€￾ by Picard


Prologue:

I went through the analysis after witnessing heavy propaganda against the American 5th gen aircrafts, particularly the F-22 Raptor.
After thoroughly reading the whole analysis I came up with some questions and some difference of opinions with the content. I didn’t perform the counter analysis rather just questioned the analysis as suggested by Picard himself. So basically I have expressed my opinions and asked questions wherever needed. I hope Picard will come up with very precise to-the point answers and not give stray answers. And hopefully this time he spends more than 45 seconds replying to this post.
Conclusion is given at the end of post
9/8/2012

Original analysis can be found @ www.indiandefence.com/forums/us-european-defence-affairs/16993-f22-analysis-expanded.html

Inappropriate claim considering it is just start of analysis, it should have rather been concluded at the end. Reduction in numbers to be procured was initiated because the threat (USSR) for which F-22 was built no longer existed. Further many other reasons followed which ultimately cut the numbers big time. There was also change of doctrine from 1991 to 2007.

Development of F-15 immediately followed that of F-16, F-22 was a radically new aircraft and was built from scratch. Many new technologies were developed. It was first time Air superiority and Stealth were combined. Although the shape of prototype and finished aircraft is different but it signify that airframe was further refined and technology matured.

[False Fact]
Where did you read it? Robert Gates whispered it in your ears in a game of TRUTH-OR-DARE?
Because we read reports every other day that USA won’t sell them to even closest of their allies. And F-35 is developed for the purpose of providing potent stealth platform to allies

You shouldn’t have used it until you have proved it in analysis

More or less TRUE

Would you ever consider the Know-How achieved by this program’s R&D as assets? The money spent on this program means that they have created a technological base for development of other manned and unmanned platforms. Lessons learnt about stealth, integrated avionics etc will be useful in future platforms.
This is much like investment in LCA Tejas of India.

F-22 WAS supposed to replace F-15s but given the low no.s of procured aircrafts they will now operate together as a team. Besides the numbers you are suggesting cannot be trusted because various sources suggest different numbers and you quoted the highest for both.

Your comparison doesn’t seem fair either. You are comparing a heavy air superiority fighter with a light interceptor/multi-role aircraft?

TRUE
LOCKHEED MARTIN cannot be trusted, How come?

Yes they are not federated; upgrades will be aimed at improving the computational power of CIPs. Wiring systems are likely to remain same. And just like in your computer if you want to upgrade processor doesn’t mean you have to change rest of the hardware too.
CIP (common integrated processor) is the brain of F-22 raptor responsible for integration and analysis of all the data from sensors. There are 2 CIPs currently installed on F-22 raptor with provision to add another one. And there is full 300% growth window in avionics capability after full upgrades.
There are three stage upgrade plans of F-22, while 1st stage is already complete, second stage has started.

Computer chips outdated, how?
Eurofighter entered service 4 years before F-22 so its chips must be outdated too, as per my comprehension of your logic

Might be the case, but I can safely assume most problems are already solved except OBOGS.
And which aircraft doesn’t encounter any problem? This isn’t a perfect world, engineers are not perfect beings. Because it is manufactured at 4 different location and there is a window of only 1/10,000 inch error. Few structural problems may creep in.

Because F-22 isn’t replacing all F-15s means it won’t be doing all of their work either. Fair? Isn’t it?
Like I said before F-22 won’t be fighting alone but with other fighters like F-15, F-16 and maybe F-35. If it is the best aircraft in inventory doesn’t mean that it has to beat all opponents alone. It will do what it is best at. This MIGHT have been a logic behind cutting F-22s numbers, upgrading F-15s and introducing F-35s.

"The F-22 is conceived and employed as part of an integrated force that provides offensive capabilities that make close engagements far less likely while retaining the ability to handle close engagements in tandem with other fighters"
-Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis, spokesperson for the USAF

I see really great potential in working as a team rather than individually. Everyone playing to their strengths and taking care of other’s weaknesses.
And F-22s data sharing and high level of networking capability certainly support that.
I think you were not aware with concept of Integrated Assault or you deliberately ignored it to push your propaganda

You suggested that USAF required 2200 aircrafts to replace their aging aircrafts, and who were those aging aircrafts? F-16 and F-15.
And you came up with idea of introducing more F-16.
Again you are suggesting 4 light weight multi-role aircrafts for one heavy air dominance fighter. Won’t that increase logistical troubles? Training 4 pilots instead of one, more ground crew, more storage space required. A huge but mediocre force, more trouble for coordinating the attack.
Like a company of soldiers attacking on O B Laden’s house rather than few Navy SeALs.

If you have quoted wikipedia’s information here then why shy from copying the whole line?, let me do this. Wikipedia: “….At introduction the F-22 also had a Mean Time Between Maintenance (MTBM) of 1.7 hours, however in the 7 years since this has been improved to 3.2 hours, exceeding the original requirement of 3.0 hours by 2010….â€￾

How long will it take to combat code rest in event of need?

you are putting up your own data as per your own logic of operation, which is most probably Flawed
Now it is up to a sane man to believe it or not.

The same question, how do you know about what they do on their simulator? Don’t pretend as USAF veteran. You assume others damn too dumb.
You can simulate battlefield networking in simulator along with numerous other procedures. Thousands of inexpensive simulator hours can be logged. And simulator training also involves about 8-10 other humans too operating/Simulating other systems, so it is not totally unrealistic and useless as you are suggesting
And what sort of unreliability are you talking about?

I will repeat the same thing as I did on the “Hawaii emergency landing……â€￾ thread.
When you are spending quality time in air you don’t need to spend that much quantity of time in air.
When you are tactician in air and not a cockpit operator you can afford to spend less time in air.
F-22 having exceptional ability of data-fusion shows the pilot what he needs to see and not just spam him. This vastly improves his situational awareness and allows him to think about the engagement rather than solving puzzle of his own Flight instruments all the time.

For the first time, it was possible to put massive computing power
Into a fighter-size airframe and provide the pilot with simple, intuitive pictures of the
Tactical world surrounding his aircraft.
-Paul Metz, Chief Test Pilot of F-22

All pilots flying vintage aircrafts required large amount of time to grease with the aircraft and develop ability to make out situation from vast amount of raw data from dials and meters spread all around.
As per your habit of comparing dissimilar things you compared Top Gun Instructors’ training time to their students, Instructors are always required to be more proficient in their job as they have to teach cadets. They have to think out new tactics and test them. While the flight cadets have to learn from them and follow them.
I accept the fact that F-22 raptor is costly aircraft to operate and requires more maintenance (but not agreeing to your numbers)
12-14 hours in air aren’t that low either.

You are telling that BVR kills are un-reliable. Yeah statistics are suggesting the same
The missiles used for attempting BVR kills like Aim-7, Aim-54 etc were not that accurate as they were claimed to be and it is suggested that the only kills these missiles managed to get were against dud targets. Further their accuracy was low because they lacked the computational power to engage maneuvering targets.
So, you are questioning that so called First-Look First-Shot First-Kill ability of F-22 raptor at BVR distance is not so reliable.
But given the improved AWACS support, F-22s powerful radar, enhanced seeker and computational power of missiles, mid-course guidance, improved IFF capability the P[k] of missiles can be assumed to have improved at BVR ranges .
It is out of my scope to predict if F-22 raptor can live up to its promise of handling the threat at BVR ranges but your predictions were based on utterly old data.
if I define outer edge of BVR engagements at 80km and inner at 20km. As the aggressor moves inside the engagement zone the P[k] will start improving faster and multiple volleys may also help in getting favorable results. And its survival in within 60Km is very difficult.

Ctrl+C Ctrl+V (copy paste) analysis
Does that explain incompetency of F-22 Raptor in WVR fights with IR guided missiles?

F-22’s supporters believe F-22 is part of an integrated force and all assaults are well coordinated and will take place as a team.
Battlefield is not a boxing match.

Wing loading of F-22 Raptor is OK for a large sized aircraft, but Wing Loading is a variable parameter (as it drops ordinance and burns fuel, its weight decreases while the wing area remains constant). Apart from that I think F-22s L/Dmax is greater than F-15s’ so F-22s’ cruise speed is greater than that of F-15 therefore given the large wing area and greater velocity, its wings generates more lift.
Mr.Picard thinks that only wing loading determines maneuverability. But advanced Flight Control Laws play a good role in improving the maneuverability. The computer determines the most optimum input to perform the task commanded. Whether it has to use high lift devices like slats and flaps to increase the lift for particular maneuver or to what degree TVC can be used ( TVC can be used in all flight regimes as opposed to your thinking, deflection has not to be too large, it can just complement the flight controls with slight movements ).
TVC is very helpful in sub-sonic WVR engagements and nobody doubts that. It provides a remarkable nose pointing ability.
In supersonic flight regimes it has even greater application.

All aircraft experience a loss of control effectiveness at supersonic speeds. To
generate the same maneuver supersonically as subsonically, the controls must be deflected
further. This, in turn, results in a big increase in supersonic trim drag and a subsequent loss
in acceleration and turn performance. The F-22 offsets this trim drag, not with the horizontal
tails, which is the classic approach, but with the thrust vectoring. With a negligible change
in forward thrust, the F-22 continues to have relatively low drag at supersonic maneuvering
speed. . But drag is only part of the advantage gained from thrust vectoring. By using the
thrust vector for pitch control during maneuvers the horizontal tails are free to be used to
roll the airplane during the slow speed fight. This significantly increases roll performance
and, in turn, point-and-shoot capability. This is one of the areas that really jumps out to us
when we fly with the F-16 and F-15. The turn capability of the F-22 at high altitudes and
high speeds is markedly superior to these older generation aircraft. I would hate to face a
Raptor in a dogfight under these conditions.
-Paul Metz CTP F-22 told this in an interview, and this source is certainly far more credible than Picard who stated the fact without any evidence backing it up

About Air-show tricks
We have seen flankers doing cobras and tail slides in air shows and generally everybody considers them very maneuverable BUT if we go by your own logic of wing loading determining the maneuvering capabilities
F-22 has wing loading 375kg/m2, Su-27 has wing loading 371kg/m2 while Su-30 has 401kg/m2 and F-22 along with flanker variants are TVC equipped. Apart from that wing area of F-22 is way larger than that of flankers. And flankers are larger than F-22 in both length and width.
Notably F-22 has a very clean body surface while flankers have to carry pylons most of the times. Flow field around F-22 can be visualized to be much more uniform and stable reducing pressure drag. While others have to face parasite drag too.

sick of it

F-22 never claimed invisibility! Its camouflage attempted to delay visual identification. Don’t know to what extent it is effective.
Infrared detection: efforts were made to reduce (not eliminate) its infra-red signature and with special paints its emissivity was greatly reduced, arrangements were made for leading edge cooling. Its IR signature can be assumed to be lower than that of 4th gen. aircraft of similar size.
Apart from that not much information was ever made public regarding suppression of thermal signature of American stealth platforms like B-2 Spirit, F-117 Nighthawk, F-22 and now F-35.
Acoustics: F-22 does have acoustic suppression arrangements, anyway who has battlefield deployable acoustic sensors?
Mr.Picard once read a report that Eurofighter Typhoon managed to get in WVR ranges to F-22 raptor by sensing its radar and consequently jammed F-22’s radar. Hence F-22s radar is detectable and jammable and both Europeans and Russians have such RW
The authenticity of china lake exercise report is itself disputed we really do not know what happened there. But drawing conclusions from such contested sources that the very powerful radar which hops frequency 1000 times every second can be detected, continuously tracked and ultimately jammed from BVR ranges is absolutely WOW.
Detecting it once in a while might be possible but jamming seems difficult and a wishful thinking.

How far could the sonic booms be heard? Sonic booms travels slower than supersonic fighters and by the time they are heard aircraft would have gone really far. There are plenty of reasons against any significant usefulness of sonic booms for detection

This means total disregard to what LPI actually means, you think detecting a LPI radar in battlefield swarmed with signals from zillions of sources would be easy? You are taking concept of jamming LPI in a very optimistic manner.

This is function of an integrated force. And send a couple of growlers along.

F-22 will radiate in EM spectrum

F-22 is a heavy air dominance class fighter which is marginally larger than F-15 and but smaller than all Flankers. So in its weight class its size is totally acceptable. But if you go on to compare its size with Typhoon and gripen then it is for your own pleasure.
How is it stealthy in night only? Yeah visual identification cannot be done at night but all other sensors work just fine even in night.

I will count how many times you repeated this thing.

Heavy weight class fighter, so would be large. Many fighters (all flankers) of this class are larger than F-22.
Size only betrays visual stealth in very close ranges
Already discussed your flawed perception of F-22's maneuverability
This is not World War 2 where pilots used to chase tails and do SPRAY-and-PRAY once a fighter got into gun sight momentarily.
Doors may delay missile separation by half-second or so which may be crucial sometimes.

Quite annoying to hear the same thing over and over again. How does large size mean inferiority?

Always? Huh?
God hail the SPY who knows nature of every exercise, engagement and every kill
Am not saying that F-22 can never be defeated in BVR or WVR engagements its only you who make so daring comments that F-22 is utterly ineffective in BVR engagements and flying turkey in WVR.

Anyway its True that these door things take time, but are not utterly useless. They were there in place to prevent the fight getting so close.

The reasoning seems to be more handicapped then the aircraft itself. If it take half second more doesn’t mean F-22 will never be able to take a successful shot with its exceptional maneuverability.

Knowledge about TVC application is totally in-adequate.
Please enlighten me what sort of aerodynamic deficiencies are you exactly talking about. We have already seen that all flankers have greater or equal wing loading to F-22 raptor. And i cannot figure out any other advantages they enjoy.

Unclear and controversial.

First of all F-22 raptor carries 6 AIM-120MARAAM and 2 AIM-9 Sidewinders in VLO configuration.
Unclear why it would take 4 raptors to kill single target, still living with old P[k]?

Infrared cannot be lowered below a certain degree but F-22s IR signature is lower as compared to aircraft of similar size

Can you detect sounds at BVR ranges?

Visual is for WVR only and that too for last 10-15km, by that time your radars would have picked it too

What is this radar footprints? It is already optimized against radar detection and its radar is not that easy to detect and track.

You can be sure that Electronic emissions of F-22 raptor are lower than any other aircraft in world. Infact it will detect your emissions before you could. But if you decide to go total Mute and Deaf then its another case.

During IFF procedures the other aircraft has to produce complicated encrypted keys, which only friendly aircrafts know. Codes are getting complex and are very hard to replicate.
What are you trying to do by emitting in 10GHz band?

too wishful to think that ARM with its small seeker and low computational power can detect signals from LPI radar and lock onto them.

.

Daring and Imaginary I would say, I am sure you cannot back-up your claim.

Keep repeating I am counting

.

Again you are concluding from unclear source. There are no hard evidence to back-up your claims

I will not touch these comparisons; you chose to compare so-called weaknesses of F-22 with other aircrafts’ strengths while plainly ignoring their own weaknesses

Exaggerated

All aspect stealth is not equally good but not that bad enough either to give away location in a jiffy. Also detection depends on various other factors like relative positioning of radar and to what degree stealth deteroited.
And even if enemy radars can see tiny blip on their radars usually the signature won’t be large enough to co-ordinate attack + you yourself said that EW aircrafts accompany stealth aircrafts and combined with RWRs of F-22 and jamming abilities of raptor I wonder there won’t be much left for enemy radar to see.

Valid points, but then what is use of SEAD and integrated force

Are fights supposed to be fair? No
Stealth Fighters certainly have these shortcomings but they don’t have to pay penalties for them rather the stand-off weapons and SEAD/DEAD missions will pave way for their operation. Then stealth platforms will help in achieving air-dominance over enemy territory.
This is how integrated force is supposed to work.

IRSTs are not weather independent, their performance against optimized platforms is unknown hence detection range may be lower than claimed. And given the fact that they to scan a huge size of area for detecting targets it is not always possible to detect all of them. Also only few provide 360[SUP]o[/SUP] coverage hence detecting a target behind Field Of View is also difficult. Raptor does lack IRST so it cannot detect others using the same way but its radar can compensate for that.
I was pondering if in any case if IRST does manage to detect F-22 at BVR it will still have to close in and fire IR guided missiles, which could be very hard. Use of IR guided BVR missiles is unclear because their seeker cannot be that powerful that it can achieve lock at 80kms anyway if its launcher tries to send Mid-course guidance it will fall prey to Raptor’s passive sensors. Besides missile launch at BVR ranges holds all accuracy problems as does other active/semi-active RH missiles.
So the opponent aircraft can get in WVR to Raptor only if raptor could not handle them at BVR ranges

Theoretically possible but performance standards remain unclear in actual battlefield environment where the sensors will be swarmed with signals from all over, hence it would be very difficult to differentiate between background noise and LPI radars.
For time being you should forget about detecting any other EM emission from F-22 Raptor because extensive work has been done to manage and suppress them. And an altogether different level of equipment is required to detect them. The IFDL system of F-22 raptor shares information without actually making radio calls, its working is classified and it is measure to prevent giving away radio signature.

Other methods like LIDAR, Background Scanning, Over The Horizon Radars, Bistatic/Multi-static radars , acoustic detection, Ultra Wide Band radars, Cell phone network, IR illumination may provide feasible detection of a stealth platform but notably None of them is currently active or have sufficient coverage to poses any threat to stealth platforms at present. These technologies are still conceptual and have very minimum or no battlefield application.
And their discussion here does not endanger F-22’s status at present.
Once these technologies become applicable, we’ll discuss their implications on F-22 Raptor.

It is certainly possible to detect LPI radars but the questions worth asking is Whether current RWRs are capable enough to detect and track radiation from LPI radars?

At BVR ranges F-22 is certainly effective than any other aircraft currently fielded, but given the relative inaccuracy of BVR missiles at long distances. BVR range can be compressed within 80kms to assume high P[k].
Exercises are indeed preplanned but they have certain objectives, and if you fail to achieve them then you LOSE! And F-22 has not been reported to LOSE too often.
Unrealistic, until it’s a real war all exercises will remain unrealistic in varying degree. But again you are supposing that F-22s exercises are totally unrealistic. I can only call it wishful thinking in order to validate your point of view.

Question rises again: HOW? How do you know about the way exercises take place, what are their objectives, what situations they simulate, what procedures they follow and what are the results. Until you know precise answer to them you shall refrain from drawing conclusions based on random reports.

And USAF isn’t shooting a movie about “Glorious F-22 Raptorâ€￾ that they would always make it victorious.

When they are operating an aircraft they would like to know each and every weakness of it and try to remove them or suppress them by evolving appropriate strategy. This is among many reasons behind doing Air-to-Air exercises

And if someone ask you actually fill a bible you will come up with half-baked imaginary BS like this stuff which you call analysis.
Again the same self-assumed BS, How many times will you repeat it?

If opponent forces shut down IFF then there is NCTR but still closing IFF doesn’t mean you achieved anything it only means you are leaving it on aggressor to decide whether he shoot or not. And in event of a direct engagements sometimes there is not much doubt that the bogies you see ahead of you are your targets. Radar may further help in determining the size and shape of the body hence making it easier to decide if its enemy aircraft.

Like many other put-up facts I don’t know where it came from.

No point of seeing alternatives, after reading this amazing piece of writing

you are on a deception mission.

That’s very professional indeed

Conclusion


It’s not a conclusion of Fighter’s abilities but of the analysis presented.

The title suggests an analysis but author’s approach was reinforcing a preconceived notion.
Logical structure of information presented was missing. Article was structured in a manner that will help in defaming the F-22 Raptor. Like economic discussions and cost over-runs were first to be discussed followed by widespread corruption and malpractices in American defense Industry. This paved the way for making the readers believe that the end product was going to be crap.
In an analysis all Positive and negative points should have been discussed. Then there must have been room left for readers to decide the conclusion. But un-justifiable words for performance and capabilities like “Poor, Bad, Ineffective, Uselessâ€￾ etc were used even before proving the point. I could not find a single strength of F-22 in whole “Analysisâ€￾.
Repetitions were used as tool to avoid giving the reason behind claim. Repetitions target the sub-conscious mind of readers, when the same thing is repeated again and again it manages to bypass the logic hence reader considers it as truth.
For example F-22 Raptor was claimed to be of average or poor maneuverability and it was backed with silly and incomplete reasons like large size, high wing loading and useless TVC. Besides that no other reason was given. But there were several direct and in-direct repetitions of this claim.
Vulnerability to IRST was another example.
Matters were further worsened by representing data from disputed sources, analysis was based on random reports and they were the base of all the “Truth about F-22 Raptorâ€￾.
Credibility of analysis is questionable; it is largely based on irrelevant and false data and is both conceptually and factually wrong. Information is presented in manner that only pushes the agenda of author.
There was a preceding report “F22 analysisâ€￾ and it was even worse

 

That was very impressive and a lot of work, thank you.

 

@Satya,
there is no doubt that this ac is a marvel of tech. However to claim it to be undefeatable is wrong. Also even if I agree with your conclusion, few points need to be highlighted,
Too much of reliance on flying high and supersonic speeds at those altitudes. A Mig-25R had a radius of turn of 90kms at 80k feet flying at Mach 2.0 as the ac cud not bank much. F-22 is claimed to pull 6G even at 65k at supersonic speed. If that is true, it still means a radius of turn of nearly 25kms. Let us assume that F-22 uses TVC to reduce the Radius Of Turn. Even than its turn path will bring it very close to the opposing fighter. Americans have always known the crowding tactics of Russians. You will need to launch a horde of F-22s to be able to shoot them all down from BVR range. AIM120 has 30% higher range when fired from 50k in a look down shoot down mode as it is helped by gravity in a rarified atmosphere and this combines to give it a range boost of 30%. IAF came to know about it in kargil war and than the world came to know about it. Lack of IRST and Helmet mounted cueing is not a problem for F-22 as it has other sensors to make up for them. But the problem is that its skin and shape is stealthy only to X-band and not stealthy to L-band. Plus we all know its vulnerability to rains and FOD.
F-22 has the most sophisticated sensor fusion but many a times it becomes very confusing for pilots as they are not able to switch from one pix to another on a screen in front of them that results in poor weapon firing speed for a pilot. Lastly you must also analyse the mental make up of a pilot who is flying F-22 (Over confident) and a pilot who knows that he is up against an F-22(under confident).
A person who knows his weekness also knows how to overcome them and emerges a winner. Before you learn about the weekness of your enemy, learn about your own weekness. Than you will know what the enemy make try to exploit and how you must block that to exploit the weekness of your enemy.

Many airforces like IAF, rely on a factor called mental tuning and making a guy realise that his tactics and training will win the day for him even if the ac may not be the best. This kind of training has served us well in wars. So when an F-22 pilots meets IAF pilots, it will be an over confident pilot against a very confident pilot. In all such battles, over confident pilots have been the loser.

 

@Satya ---I appreciate your work.

 

Sir, I never claimed it be a undefeatable and I am very well aware that no aircraft can be unbeatable, the whole motive behind this writing is to end propaganda few people have been running for quite some time that F-22 is a bad and useless aircraft.

I don't know how much americans rely on flying high and fast but turn radius can be decreased by lowering speed. Also Mig-25 pilots were cautious of not overstraining the aircraft. But in F-22 raptor computer prevents airframe overstraining. Hence pilot can bank as hard as he wants to without worrying while computer will provide him optimum turn performance.

F-22 is part of integrated force and can act as mini AWACS once he gets look on target he can direct other legacy fighters to shoot at target. Therefore in a mixed formation its first objective is getting the first look. Then he can direct other aircrafts towards the target

USAF has more combat experience than any other air force in world. It is a highest grade professional force and I am sure it must have trained pilots to remain humble and act professionaly. As a ex-officer you must be already aware of the fact that there is no place of vanity and over-confidence in military.

 

In real life we have throwen everything we have by the best piliots in the world at the F22 and so far nothing has come close to defeating it. I sincerely believe the reason we wont sell the F22 even to our close allies is it has some astonishing military technology that is secret and deadly. Those the cold hard facts. Its rather ridculous that some Russian Plane thats years away from production, if ever can defeat it.

 

It is introduction, and I suggest you check how essays are written.

And no, USAF never wanted reduction of F22 numbers; they repeatedly stated minimum requirement of 381, and government reduced numbers to 187, not USAF.

Wrong, F15 was developed first, F16 used some of technologies (engine, for example) developed for F15.

I phrased it incorrectly, but it doesn't change the fact that Lockheed Martin and many members of Congress are pushing for it.

I don't have to prove it, it is well known to anyone who isn't biased, idiot or both.

More or less TRUE

Same situation was with F15, yet it never cost anywhere near to what F22 costs.

I quoted highest because these are most reliable. Lockheed Martin, its Congress lobby et al all have vested interest into lowering actual costs.

My point is that both F15 and F16 can provide far higher numbers than F22; and one aircraft can be only in one place at one time.

Chip choice is made far before aircraft enters service. And in F22's case, yes, upgrading one component means replacing entire system.

Which doesn't speak in favor of programme management at all.

F22 was supposed to replace F15, until it was realized it won't provide numbers.

I'm not ignoring it, it's just that it wasn't original plan (capability to communicate with older fighters was retrofitted into F22s once it was realized that aircraft won't be produced at originally planned numbers).

Which can be equipped with new electronics, and won't have problem of aircframe wear, and as such can be used as a stopgap measure before development of 4.5 generation replacement.

Except that company of soldiers will be able to fight a battle against another company, while these few SEALs would get crushed.

I didn't quote Wikipedia, I didn't even know it was on Wikipedia in first place.

You can believe me, you can believe Lockheed Martin lobbysts, or you can go and do bit of research yourself.

Simulators can't simulate real flying environment, such as changing G forces, environmental factors, or even complete physics envelope.

For the first time, it was possible to put massive computing power
Into a fighter-size airframe and provide the pilot with simple, intuitive pictures of the
Tactical world surrounding his aircraft.
-Paul Metz, Chief Test Pilot of F-22

All pilots flying vintage aircrafts required large amount of time to grease with the aircraft and develop ability to make out situation from vast amount of raw data from dials and meters spread all around.
As per your habit of comparing dissimilar things you compared Top Gun Instructors’ training time to their students, Instructors are always required to be more proficient in their job as they have to teach cadets. They have to think out new tactics and test them. While the flight cadets have to learn from them and follow them.
I accept the fact that F-22 raptor is costly aircraft to operate and requires more maintenance (but not agreeing to your numbers)
12-14 hours in air aren’t that low either.[/quote]

My point is that it harms pilot training.

First, BVR missiles are large and heavy – they have to be to reach targets. That harms their maneuvering capabilities, and they can't have wings a slarge as aircraft.

Second, IFF capability of F22 won't improve over F15s until it gets modern IRST – and IRSTs US use are outdated.

Except USAF is replacing all legacy airframes with stealth ones.

TVC can be used, but it doesn't always improve maneuverability.

Below 150 knots, yes.

Correct.

I have explained exactly that several times, and while it may not have been present in analysis, it is because one published here is relatively old, and I'm still working on next version.

When have I compared F22s maneuverability to that of Flanker? And yes, Flankers are very maneuverable... at air shows. They do have good maneuverability, but so does F15. But it isn't comparable to that of Eurofighter Typhoon.

Of your myths being blown up? Yeah, it can happen.

I never said it did. But it did claim „very low observability“.

That is correct, but it still can allow modern IRST to detect it from beyond its own engagement range (including that of BVR missiles). Which can be problem, for obvious reasons.

IR Signature Comparison Jet Fighter - Rafale - F22 - EF2000 - F18 - F16 - SU30 - YouTube

Farnborough Day 1 Flying Display in Infrared - YouTube

Nonexistent, except for exhaust plume.

I didn't say that Russians have it, but yes, Europeans do have such jammers.

Spread frequency jammers exist.

It can be sued by air defense nets.

In such area, why use active radar at all? Why not use passive radar (viola! Another way to counter F22! And Eurofighter already thought of it). And yes, noise can be isolated.

Which can also accompany non-VLO aircraft.

And get detected.

My comment about F22s size was because it is... gasp! F22 analysis. But I don't think Flankers are any better.

Some opponents don't have VHF radars and IRST.

Yet you'll fail to understand how actually important it is.

Yes, I know that. And I have already mantioned it as a point against Su-27 and derivatives in other places.

Although they are still lighter than F22, despite being physically larger.

And F22 may find itself in that range far more often than it likes.

Two words: IFF and jamming.

And revealed you know nothing about TVC.

It will be crucial quite a lot. Yes, off-boresight exists. But it is still advantageous to position yourself into optimal position, and to launch as quickly as possible once you did it.

Larger detectability in visual and IR spectrum, as well as to HF, VHF and passive radars.

Larger weight, drag and inertia -> inferior maneuverability, increased energy loss.

Nothing changed since YF-22.

Which will happen anyway. Wasted effort.

Except its maneuverability is not exceptional.

Large drag caused by stealth requirements. However, you are correct WRT wing loading; and I have just noticed that I have deleted that part since.

Unclear in what way?

Yes, I have noticed that mistake.

Which was never disproven.

Older aircraft of similar size, yes, and there are sources of IR signature than cannot be lowered, such as air friction and compression of air in front of aircraft. Important, since F22 is supposed to engage enemies at supersonic speeds and high altitudes.

No, but that is unimportant. F22 will have to close to WVR to be effective at all.

Correct, which means F22s stealth is useless.

I am explaining how stealth is measured. And radar is easily detected, even LPI.

„Total mute and deaf“ does not exist when your aircraft has IRST. IRST+RWR-equipped opponent can go all passive, rely on ground radars, AWACS, or simply its own sensors, and wait for fighter stupid enough to use radar.

Problem is not IFF hijacking. Problem is that signals from IFF transponder can be detected by enemy.

And I have already explained what USAF is trying to do by emitting in 10 GHz band.

Too wishful to think it can't.
.

Congratulations! You have proven that you don't understand how stealth is achieved!

Tip: majority of RCS reduction is achieved by shaping. RAM only takes care of last decimale point.

Which doesn't mean you are closer to understanding how important it is.

.

No it isn't exaggarated, stealth fighters are optimised for minimum nose-on RCS, it is increased from any other direction.

And jamming aircraft make stealth useless.

True, but it means that main justification for stealth aircraft is out of picture.

All that can be achieved more successfully and at lower cost with 4.5th gen aircraft.

Radar will get detected; and IRST is most capable passive sensor there is.

That is correct. But it means that F22 loses element of surprise, which is main point behind its procurement.

Which will, with low reliability of BVR missiles and F22s low numbers, happen far more often than one would like it.

True, but as I said, LPI isn't that hard to detect – harder than classic radar, yes. Besides, you have missed another point – passive radar–equipped fighter can use noise to detect F22. Eurofighter is already thinking about it.

They are not that far from bieng feasible, and considering how long F22 and F35 are supposed to remain in service...

Modern ones? I'd say yes.

Well, of course. If everything is set up to favor F22 (BVR-only engagement, no IRST or RWR allowed, no ARMs allowed), of course it is going to achieve lopsided ratios. Check exercises with ATF.

Call it all you want.

Sources.

You forgot one reason: propaganda.

Well of course, ignore everything you don't like, and call it bullshit.

How convenient.

And how NCTR exactly works? I do have some ideas, but none that will answer IFF problem reliably.

One of these 371 PDF documents I have on PC about air force.

Yes, Typhoon would be superior alternative, but I don't think USAF would like to fly foreign aircraft.

Corrected.

And speaks volumes about how reliable USAF's and pilots' claims about F22 capability are.

Where have I said it is anything else?

I have pointed out all positive things about F22 I was able to find.

Admittedly, it wasn't much.

 

A pending request for a military technology transfer of radar-evading paint from a U.S. to an Israeli manufacturer would turn an Israeli pilotless aircraft into a deadly missile that could evade "all radars the U.S. has sold" to the Middle East The quantity of the stealth aircraft coating, called Signaflux, ordered by Israel also raises questions about Israeli intentions.
The coating has been ordered by Israel Military Industries for its pilotless "Delilah," which is capable of delivering a 1,000-lb. warhead to targets within 240 miles of the point of launch, according to Aviation Week & Space Technology. Its my understanding that the USA is going to paint all US planes with a version of this paint and Israel also.

My understanding that Boeing invented such a paint in 2002. I would expect Russia and China has developed it by now. What most people dont realize is that the design, composite, paint are just a minor part of what makes a stealth plane stealthy, the US is the only country that has went through 3 generations of stealth plane that has developed and used stealth technology.

 

In the videos posted above, one can very clearly see that when looked from below, every ac is as visible in IR as anyother. F-22 is designed to fly high for combat and I have repeatedly stated that it will light up like a bulb at that altitude for IRST. Jaguar is very difficult to detect at low levels and the best of IR WVR missiles cant get a lock on it beyond 2 kms. Do you know why?

At low levels the grnd reflections mask the ac IR radiations and than this ac has over hung tail which further masks its IR signature for a fighter which is trying to look at it from above. So if any ac wants to shoot it down, it will have to descend to its level to get a lock from a safe distance otherwise they will be picked up by Jaguars before they pick up Jags.
I have done DACTS with this ac in SH. We were able to pick them up from long distance over sea but overland we had problems. It was than that we realised that temp diff over sea is very small while over land it varies by wide margins. So we had to retune our tactics for dogfight over land and dogfight over sea.

 

You do realize the F22 and F35 have a number of ways of decreasing their IRST signature, special ehausts, circulating fuel thru the edges and bottom and ehausting the heat through baffles on the top back, special composite materials that are resistant to heat. Remember the F22 is the 4th generation of stealth planes we have built, you might say the F35 is the fifth,,, americans are not stupid, for Gods sake we just landed a vehicle the size of a car on Mars thats suppose to operate for 2 years.

 

And all of that obviously doesn't help much. Besides, it accounts only for part of IR signature, and doesn't reduce signature of air round aircraft one bit.

 

I think a little common sense will tell you the air passing over a plane at 1800 MPH does not heat, unless the object it passing over is hot and then it would be very little. I have never seen any IRST pictures behind a plane that showed the air was hot.

 

There is a thing called "shock cone". Air gets compressed, and do you know what happens to air when it is compressed? It heats.

 

This should be simple to solve, show me a IRST picture of the heat from a shockcone.