F-22A in air-ground trials

[Kilo_302]

Hey guys,

Article/pictures on the latest F-22A exercises, including air-to-ground missions. Pretty interesting stuff, and while its not exactly the battlefield interdiction mission the JSF will apparently excel in, it does sort of challenge the pro-JSF crowd as to the limited versatility of the F-22A.


http://www.ausairpower.net/raptor-ex.html

 

[Arsenal]

Sexy.

 

[Kalatzi]

Any further news on its proposed anti-ied role???
Before I get flamed I'm not making this up

 

[Infanteer]

What are the Taliban or AQ Air Force going to do to counter it?

 

[a_majoor]

Talk about a gold plated screwdriver (being used as a hammer).

If you want a bomb truck, get something with the size and carrying capacity (F-15 Strike Eagal or something bigger)

If you want to go into the weeds and hammer people, then you need an A-10 or attack helicopter

If you need general purpose air power (because you don't have a large military budget, for example), then a multi role aircraft like the new "Super Hornet" would fit the bill.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Talk about a gold plated screwdriver (being used as a hammer).

If you want a bomb truck, get something with the size and carrying capacity (F-15 Strike Eagal or something bigger)

If you want to go into the weeds and hammer people, then you need an A-10 or attack helicopter

If you need general purpose air power (because you don't have a large military budget, for example), then a multi role aircraft like the new "Super Hornet" would fit the bill.

You're assuming the primary mission is to hit Taliban-like targets.  I would counter the F-22 is being constructed to operate in an S-300 environment where frankly I wouldn't want to be in an A-10 or an F-15E.


Matthew. 

 

[crazyleggs]

You're assuming the primary mission is to hit Taliban-like targets.  I would counter the F-22 is being constructed to operate in an S-300 environment where frankly I wouldn't want to be in an A-10 or an F-15E.


Matthew.   

Exactly.  Considering it will be able to chuck small diameter bombs (SDB) at supersonic speeds and at ranges around 60nm, it kind of negates the SAM threat (plus stealth on top of that).  In fact, the F/A-22 could be used for destruction of enemy air defenses (DEAD).  Think of it as a F-117 / F-15C hybrid.

 

[aesop081]

Think of it as a F-117 / F-15C hybrid.

Like all multi-role platforms, "jack of all trades, master of none"

The sheer cost of the F-22 program will haunt it for its entire operational life.

 

[a_majoor]

You're assuming the primary mission is to hit Taliban-like targets.  I would counter the F-22 is being constructed to operate in an S-300 environment where frankly I wouldn't want to be in an A-10 or an F-15E.


Matthew. 

Given the vast price tag of the F-22, even the USAF will be hard pressed to field them. Given the vast price tag of the F-22, even the USAF will be hard pressed to field them. There needs to be a balance between a a balance between affordability and utility. Given the F-22 is purpose built as a fighter/interceptor, asking it to take on a secondary task for which it is ill suited seems a bit silly.

If you are going to bomb someone, use a bomber! Given the advances in PGMs over the past few years, a B-52 can hit point targets from long stand off distances (or dump the entire stick on your head), giving the air commander great flexibility. There was a proposal to use the F-22 fuselage as the basis for an intermediate bomber (sort of the analogue to the F-111 in terms of size, range and payload), which does sound useful since you now have something with a combination of speed, range and payload, but the downside to that idea is the R&D cost for new wings, engines, systems and avionics.

 

[tomahawk6]

The F-22 while very expensive, around $300m a copy, it is the most capable fighter in the world. By selling it as a fighter-bomber might expand the buy and drive down the cost. Japan is very interested in this aircraft
but right now foreign sales of the aircraft are prohibited Congress may reverse course. I think limited sales is a good thing. The technology is secret so sales should only be to our most reliable allies.

Here is a nice web site on the F-22.
http://www.f22fighter.com/

 

[FredDaHead]

Isn't there a new Sukhoi that can outfly the F-22 though? Sure, at long distances it's probably superior (given the technological advantages) but in a dogfight, I don't see the F-22 winning against many current-generation fighters.

Of course, I'm a Navy boy, not an Air Force boy, so I don't know all the details.. not that I could understand them, anyway.

 

[Mike Baker]

Fred are you talking about the SU37?

 

[FredDaHead]

Fred are you talking about the SU37?

I don't know. All I remember is a mention of a Russian bird that was more capable than the F-22, and I figured some airheadsair force people might know about it.

(Just kidding about the airheads thing, of course.)

 

[tomahawk6]

Any "dogfight" with an F-22 will be at BVR.You need to remember that the F-22 has stealth characteristics which should make it difficult to engage.

 

[FredDaHead]

Any "dogfight" with an F-22 will be at BVR.You need to remember that the F-22 has stealth characteristics which should make it difficult to engage.

That's why I said it would win because of technology, but flight capabilities-wise, it seems a bit lacking. It seems like the F-14 of a new era: ultra-powerful but not exactly good for dogfights. Now all we need is Top Gun 2: Raptor.

 

[Astrodog]

The Russian SU-37s and Mig-29OVTs don't give much more than cute airshow demos. They can definately outfly a CF-18 or any other 4th gen kit but you have to remember that during these airshows they are modified and carrying very little fuel/weight.. no way they could do it to that extent with a few pylons and some fuel. The F-22 is the only true 5th gen fighter and can probably outfly most hummingbirds, has the latest thrust vectoring technology and the only limit to its capabilites is the human body sitting inside that can't withstand many G in comparison with the airframe (no UAV mentions, please!!!). As was mentioned the only dogfight a -22 driver is getting into is one for fun when he gets bored of being a 'sytems operator'. As one F-22 driver put it from an adversaries perspective regarding the -22s capabilities; "first you see nothing, then you die." And you might want to let the Grumman guys know that the Tomcat isn't good at dogfighting, they might as well remove the cannon..

 

[FredDaHead]

And you might want to let the Grumman guys know that the Tomcat isn't good at dogfighting, they might as well remove the cannon..

I've always read that although it can defend itself in a dogfight, it's ill-suited for them. The F-14 was an interceptor, conceived to shoot down Tupolev bombers before they could release cruise missiles and blow up aircraft carriers. Like the Arrow, it was extremely capable in it's role, but was not quite as good in other roles. (Ok, so it's not quite an apt comparison, I know.)

Besides, Tomcats don't fly anymore... except in Iran.

 

[aesop081]

Any "dogfight" with an F-22 will be at BVR.You need to remember that the F-22 has stealth characteristics which should make it difficult to engage.

A note on that....

BVR engagements are often thrumped by political and tactical considerations ( as they were in Vietnam ) where positive VISUAL identification of targets will be required.  The advantage that the F-4 had in Vietnam over NVPAF Migs was negated by this and forced the F-4s into visual turning dogfights.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Given the vast price tag of the F-22, even the USAF will be hard pressed to field them. Given the vast price tag of the F-22, even the USAF will be hard pressed to field them. There needs to be a balance between a a balance between affordability and utility. Given the F-22 is purpose built as a fighter/interceptor, asking it to take on a secondary task for which it is ill suited seems a bit silly.

If you are going to bomb someone, use a bomber! Given the advances in PGMs over the past few years, a B-52 can hit point targets from long stand off distances (or dump the entire stick on your head), giving the air commander great flexibility. There was a proposal to use the F-22 fuselage as the basis for an intermediate bomber (sort of the analogue to the F-111 in terms of size, range and payload), which does sound useful since you now have something with a combination of speed, range and payload, but the downside to that idea is the R&D cost for new wings, engines, systems and avionics.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

To have $300 million multi-role aircraft that can not only provide absolute air superiority against opposing fighters, but deploy a variety of ground attack munitions as needed seems like a great investment in comparison to more $2 billion B-2 bombers that have zero anti-air capability.

My bottom line is in this day and age, "cost savings" are only worthwhile if the assets you buy can still do the job and survive.  In that vein, I would say you absolutely need the F-22 / B-2 in combination as the pointy end of the spear.  After the enemy's ability to defend itself is neutralized, that's when you can bring in the more cost-effective bombtrucks.


Matthew. 

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I don't know where some of you guys are getting your information, but with kill ratios like 108:0 against F-15s (see below), I'd have to say it's not a bad fighter (it's primary role).  Other Exs have shown similar results.  It's radar systems permit it to act like a force multiplyer for other types as it is able to relay tons of tactical information to other aircraft (one would have to guess that the F-35 will have a similar capability).  Also bear in mind the much of the cost of the F-22 is already sunk (research costs that have already been incurred): what should be looked at is their incremental cost (i.e., the cost of producing additional units, not the total cost of the program), which is much closer to current estimates for the JSF (and might actually be more cost-effective):

"Even without stealth, this is the world's best fighter," General Lewis said. "The F-22, its ability with speed and maneuverability, is unprecedented. The problem with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in establishing air dominance is that you have to buy two or three to replace the F-22, because it only has half the weapons load, and it doesn't have the speed. You can't replace (the F-22) one-for-one with an F-35 or any other legacy fighter such as the F-15E."

During Exercise Northern Edge 2006 in Alaska in early June, the F-22 proved its mettle against as many as 40 "enemy aircraft" during simulated battles. The Raptor achieved a 108-to-zero kill ratio at that exercise. But the capabilities of the F-22 go beyond what it can do. It is also able to help other aircraft do better.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123022371