F-22 Raptor Thread

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
Again estimates and approved public release.
I avoid estimates by guys who can precisely judge rcs with their eyes.
We can just agree to disagree here, because i will believe in m 2+ fighter with any form of fixed inlets only after seeing actual comfirmation...
YF22 and YF23 were domonstarors not mission capable fighters there were many changes made to make raptor mission ready. Besides even if part of those were to increase super cruise, is that supposed to count against it somehow? I mean if you can fly at mach 1.8 without reheat pissing fuel behind you, you are flying at mach 1.8 with a smaller IR signature. That's an advantage. And if you need it raptor does have reheat so does lightning. That means that if they need a dash they have the dash. Super cruise is endurance running reheat is a dash.
you missunderstand. I have never told it's a disadvantage. I told what this ability is limited by internal fuel of the f-22, because due to combination of (1)significant fuel consuption even w/o reheat, (2)low fuel fraction, (3)thermal loads - raptor supercruises about as far as leading 4th generation fighters dash on their internal fuel. It is worthwhile to notice, though, what it happens only due to su-27 family being such a huge fuel cows: others don't come close. W/o flankers the f-22 could have a distinctive lead... But it just had to happen, what su-3x is the most frequent 4th gen opfor out there.
Low IR signature, as well as this very ability to sacrifice fuel fraction w/o dropping supersonic performance are obvious advantages of f-22, no disagreement here....
Raptor vs SU57? 2000kg of fuel difference in favor of Pakfa... congratulations. It's also a third of a meter wider and a meter longer.... I wonder does that mean I don't know... More room for more fuel?
1, 2000kg=20%. Not enough of a difference? In aircraft flight profile, there is a fixed part(take off, climb, combat, landing), and much lesser "range" fraction. These 2000 kgs go tere.
2, raptor isn't exactly an effective fuel-to-range converter: above mentioned approach "engine solves all" has its downsides. Uncompromised stealth, speed, maneuverability and internal carriage always "appear" somewhere else.
3, hardly a stable argument, but su-57 layout strongly reminds ATF "supercruisers" - i don't mean widow, rather other discarded proposals, which invested heavier into effective supercruise and lost. Integral layout, increased attention to supersonic drag - all play a hand.
Fuel tanks: everyone have them. But for typical 4th gen they mean just drag and maneuvering penalties. For 5th gen, we additionally sacrifice supercruise and stealth.
Second part later this evening.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Actually I'm testing Raptors can super cruise with tanks. Again still has reduced drag penalties vs fourth gens because even with tanks it's very clean and raptor' s fuselage is a lifting surface
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
yeah, good job by $400 $168m machines
Fixed that for you Jura.
What should we do? Lock them away in some vault? We paid for them to be used. If they are not used what's the point. Unlike a nuclear weapon that is 99% politics 1% Apocalypse. F22 is a fighter aircraft it's only effective if it's used.
 
Fixed that for you Jura.

LOL last time I went through this ... Nov 12, 2018

...

for me the cost of a ship is

money spent on her class

divided by

the number of ships in said class

...
here (using
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
)

Program cost US$66.7 billion
Number built 195
66700/195 is OK 342 (so in the morning I incorrectly rounded to the nearest hundred LOL)

What should we do?
save them for later?

Lock them away in some vault? We paid for them to be used. If they are not used what's the point. Unlike a nuclear weapon that is 99% politics 1% Apocalypse. F22 is a fighter aircraft it's only effective if it's used.
I didn't figure why they used them for example off Elmendorf against turpoprob Bears etc.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Look Afghanistan is a but much, I'll Grant you. But crawl walk run. Raptor was employed in Afghanistan to and then when Syria started and the Russians started loading up air denial technology. It proved useful. Every actual deployment is a lesson learned.
 
Look Afghanistan is a but much, I'll Grant you. But crawl walk run. Raptor was employed in Afghanistan to and then when Syria started and the Russians started loading up air denial technology. ...
not sure what do you mean, but I've meant combat sorties, and:

First Combat Flight Wasn’t Until 2014
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"The mission involved targeting and striking an ISIS command and control building in
Syria"
 
Top