For all the time I was flying fighters I knew two things for certain – 1) everyone gets slow in a dogfight, and 2) no jet could last against a Hornet in a slow speed fight. Even an average jock could make it sing.
But speaking as a Hornet devotee? Looking over my shoulder in a brawl and seeing a jet that could do the things this airplane can do would make my heart die inside me.
The crazy thing? This is what the USAF is willing to show.
But can it land on the Boat? Or… carry a load of LGBs and Mavericks?
Last summer, at the first public showing of the F-22 (Sun n Fun Lakeland, FL), I watched the P-51 lift off, then the F-22 and then an F-15. While the Eagle driver wowed the crowd, the F-22 and the P-51 marshalled to the south at about 5K ft. They did a tight circle about 3 times, then the F-22 pulled his nose up and cut across the circle to settle right in behind the Mustang. I don’t think most were watching that, they were looking north at the old timely F-155 blow by..
I was suitably impressed.
The worse thing about being in the USAF is telling your parents that you are gay.
“But can it land on the Boat? Or… carry a load of LGBs and Mavericks?”
No, but how’s a belly full of GPS guided SDBs sound?
“Once I get to 50 kt of backwards airspeed…”
Huh. Looks like he flaps his pedals at that point kind of like a new planesman did on the boat when shifting from forward (known, stable) to backward (depending on ship and screw, potentially exciting). Interesting.
America! F* Yeah!
That thing can maneuver. WOW!
I’ve seen some earlier video of that bird doing some amazing things that an ordinary jet just can’t do and if I can find it again I’ll toss you the link. It is the future of airial warfare and I don’t think there’s anything out there that is compareable. Nice video, thanks.
COOL!
And how many will we build?
Enough to cover training pipeline needs and training losses (inevitable) plus potential combat attrition and still have enough left to kick bad guys’ butts?
Unit cost is astronomical, but will come down a bit if they can get a firm commitment to a number and schedule.
Wanna bet?
Under tower and balcony,
By garden-wall and gallery,
A gleaming shape she floated by,
Dead-pale between the houses high,
Silent into Camelot.
Out upon the wharfs they came,
Knight and burgher, lord and dame,
And round the prow they read her name,
The Lady of Shalott.
Who is this ? and what is here ?
And in the lighted palace near
Died the sound of royal cheer ;
And they crossed themselves for fear,
All the knights at Camelot :
But Lancelot mused a little space ;
He said, ‘She has a lovely face ;
God in his mercy lend her grace,
The Lady of Shalott.’
Godspeed
Any Professional opinions on the handling of the F-22 v sthe Sukhoi Su-30 video thats been going around? or how about the Su-35’s
Ummm… Would the DoD head honcho’s mind painting demonstration aircraft in something other than grey? Yeah, grey and light blue are good colors if you want to blend in with the sky. You’re at an *AIR SHOW!* You want to be easily seen by the assembled masses who fund these machines!
Blue on the front third, with white stars to contrast, white in the middle third with insignia, red on the last third with perhaps some stars or squadron markings to break it up a bit. Easy for the folks to follow visually, it’s all patriotic and traditional and stuff, and looks good on camera.
– Max
T Taylor; not even funny. Inter-service razzing is one thing (presuming that you even served), your comment is not fit for a blog of this caliber.
The really interesting thing to me (aside from the amazing maneuverability of the beast), is that there is no B model – every flight, including the first flight, is a solo.
Makes realism in the sim just a little more important, eh? So far, the first class of noobs right out of UPT has done well.
Did our USAF jock pass around a donations can at the end of the airshow? Holy-moly that things is uber-expensive. And took forever to deploy.
We put a man on the moon, developed nuke subs, developed the Polaris ballistic missile sub, put up the DSP constellation of satellites, and deployed the U2, with each of these programs taking far less time to field than the F22. We’re killing our DOD with these cost and sked overruns.
We all know how I feel about plane pr0n – woot is about as sophisticated as I can get, I’m so tongue-tied at the sight.
Had the unbelieveable good fortune to see the F-22 in action at an airshow in June 2007. Nothing prepares you for it – nothing.
Pics of the sexy beast can be found here.
And then she just disappeared – literally flew thru a hole in a cloud and was gone. As you can see in the pics it was beautiful blue-sky day – no place to hide you’d think.
And Max – I put mental images of your suggested paintjob on the aircraft I saw and yowza that is some good stuff.
Know people who work on various systems for the Raptor. Thus, we got to see her in Marietta when she was rolled out for her maiden flight. Pulled into a steep climb after take off, chased by two -16s in afterburner and they were losing ground and no sign of burners or blowers going ont he -22. She was amazing without half her black capabilities. Can only imagine what she can do now.
Taxi–the -22 has more systems, more capability and more “stuff” crammed into her than any airplane in history. Talk about mission creep? The initial proposal asked for a low-visibility attack jet to replace the -15. The -22 does that, takes care of the -16s role, doubles as a light bomber, can attain speeds north of mach 2.2 (actual number is secret), and has legs like a pony express rider. If she’s expensive ask the Air Force why.
Respects
OAM
OAM, I’m with you on capability. The plane is magical. I also know that quantity has a quality all its own. The F22 can physically be in only so many places at once.
This is an interesting read on how our acquisitions are AFU.
http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12065#toc
I just saw my first F-22 Thursday at Buckley AFB making some min-radius turn right over our head while we were loading up for drill. Very, very impressive.
I just had a thought (snark-types: shut up)…
The Raptor has some bigtime radar on it that can see further than any other fighter plane out there, yes? If so, what are the odds of it ever needing/using its amazing slow-speed and small-space maneuvering abilities?
FBL, that’s the same sort of reasoning that caused the Phantom to be produced without an internal gun. “Hey, we’re gonna kill ‘em all BVR with these Sparrows (called the Great White Hope during Vietnam), what do we need a gun for?”. As it turns out, the gun was needed, because missiles never get them all, and when you run out of them, it’s your last best chance. Everything that starts with an F (except for the -117, which really isn’t a fighter) built since the Phantom has had an internal 20mm.
And the aircraft is that maneuverable for two reasons: the in-close engagement zone, and missle avoidance. Those neat square corners and tight turn radius are gonna really confuse the heck out of a lot of gomers.
FbL- I asked the same question of some pilots when we were testing some of the new whiz-bang radar upgrades on the Rhino. The answer I got was that at some point, you will run out of missiles and have to take it to a close in, turning, guns fight. And some of our potential adversaries (ahem. . .China. . .ahem) have lots of aircraft to throw up in the sky, so if that day comes, maneuvering is going to be critical to survivability. Of course, something like the Raptor also has the option of being able to run away at 2.2M, which is a nice option to have, too.
FBL, Byron,
And that, in a nutshell, is one of the reasons we are looking at the F-22 and not the F-23….
That video of the F-22 is indeed spectacular. I wish I’d gotten to see one strut it’s stuff when I was at Nellis in March, but all I got to see was the Acceptance Demonstration Show by the Thunderbirds….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDtP6w02ep4
That F-22 sure is sweet! And expensive…
Anyway, the heritage flight on that vid was very cool. Always nice when they do that.
Quantity does have a quality, but so does being the only man with a gun in a knife fight. If I can kill you before you see me, kill you before you can reach me and then get in close and blow you away, I have a distinct advantage.
The 7th squadron (screamin’ demons) was just reactivated at Holloman AFB, New Mexico. It will be a squadron of F22s.
Link: http://kob.com/article/stories/S447450.shtml
That handsome guy on television is my husband! He’s the new commander (shameless plug, sorry, but I am proud)
I heard he landed with 1/2 a tank after the demo! Just kidding.
Let me see- a SuperHornet costs 85 mil and a Raptor 175 mil. That makes a Raptor ~2 times more expensive. Does that mean it’s performance and range would have to be more than twice as good… From what I just saw- as a fighter- YES. Taxpayers- take notice.
Chunks,
Fighter-Attack is a US Navy aberration created to make up for faulty technica andl acquisition practices brought on by declining budgets…Add on- bolt on can’t compete with elegance and supra performance designed in. Pure fighter.
Anyone who dares fly within it’s range will die.
b2
Waay-cool. As for myself, I wanna see one of them Heritage Flights before I die…
Now show me an OK 3 wire and I’ll be really impressed.
…and TT — no cigar. The really embarassing thing about being in the Air Force is having to correct your Mom in front of the old ladies at church when she tells them you’re in the military.
And the turn and burn stuff at airshows with the F-22 has little to do in how it does it’s primary killing. Passive sensors, speed and altitude and being able to toss an AMRAAM 50% longer than the other guy.
Yup. If you’re flying an F-22, you’ve got supercruise…which does very nasty things to SAM envelopes, and won’t help enemy AAM envelopes, either.
The real issue is whether or not the AF would get to use BVR capabilities in a real-world environment. In a pitched battle against the Commie Horde, probably. In a limited-war situation…maybe not.
Badbob- How’s that F-22’s RCS when it get smacked by a few 7.62×39s? It’s not a ground attack aircraft, despite having some minor capability.
ELP- Does the F-22 find a way to exist in an alternate physical universe? AMRAAMs need an active sensor for launch and after; so not so passive.
And how does an F-22’s AMRAAM get any farther? Speed/Alt might buy you a little… but c’mon.
BlackEagle603, I have no problem telling people that I once served in the worlds largest paramilitary organizaton
.
Course, then I remember spending almost three years building and humping bombs and other explosives from various jungles to the flight line, putting them on planes (usually F4’s and Buffs) and it KIND of felt like being in the military.
Actually, felt pretty damned good.
Loved being on the flight line and around planes, especially at O’dark early. Special place.
>and being able to toss an AMRAAM 50% longer >than the other guy.
I had no idea the F-22 had the capability to toss an AMRAAM 50% further than something along the lines of a legacy fighter.
I guess they use a special, extended range version of the AMRAAM?
Interesting nonetheless.
“I had no idea the F-22 had the capability to toss an AMRAAM 50% further than something along the lines of a legacy fighter.
I guess they use a special, extended range version of the AMRAAM?
Interesting nonetheless.”
What ELP was getting at was that its supercruise capability gives it an extended engagement envelope. If it can go Mach 1.5 expending no more effort (relatively speaking) than an F-15 going Mach 0.8, it’s missile envelope is expanded by that much more. Also, being able to do this at 50,000+ ft. as opposed to 30,000 expands it as well.
Chunks, check out the F-22s datalink capability. One can act as a mini-AWACS for the rest of the flight, meaning only one has to give away it’s existence with active radar. And yes, they are working on (if they don’t already have) a way to launch AMRAAMs using passive sensors only.
Thanks for the explanation, Mike.
Understood…
Too bad the Navy wasn’t able to obtain a “CVN” version of the F-22.
I guess once you add 10,000+ lbs of landing gear and structural modifications to wings and fusalage, performance would take a hit.
Instead the Navy gets a single engine F-35C. I guess the F-35 will be the first single engine fighter/attack aircraft operating from Aircraft Carriers since the A-7E.
Anyway…apologies, just rambling.
Thanks for the replies, guys. I wasn’t arguing that all those acrobatic skills were unnecessary, just wondering how much they’d actually be used. As you pointed out re: the missiles, I obvious wasn’t thinking too far ahead.
FbL, Re your comment # 20 above… I think it was obvious you weren’t thinking at all… Best (ICSFTH)
Chunks,
It don’t matter how much or little- air to mud stuff it can/can’t carry.
It’s a pure fighter. Not an F/A utility hauler!
Go back in time..Even the F-16 was considered a fighter only, 20 years ago. Eagle, too. Air to mud missions for these aircraft only evolved because of the “speed is life” attack requirement, the rejection of low altitude attack tactics and the fact that nobody really challenged us air to air!
The Raptor, as premier USA FIGHTER aircraft, continues that process and instills fear…
The Navy’s mission was blue water dominance. F/A concept was simply a force multiplier concept on a short range throw-away A-7 replacement. The Hornet is only preeminent in Naval Aviation because it is the only thing left by default…
b2
B2, You might want to check out your pricing on that bird. The 171mil ea. you quote is way low after you add in the 69 Billion development program. I know the “advertised” Unit Fly-Away costs are in the area you quote but, that does not include that 383 million each in development costs. And of course, with the massive reduction of units (from the original request of 750 of these down to around the neighborhood of 180) we the taxpayer get that 5th generation screwing.
Of course we now have that 5th Generation counter to what, at most a 3ard or 4th generation threat? Oh well, we can only hope we can use this marvelous airframe, maybe with a little more mission creep we can get our money out of it, anyone for “stealth” mail delivery!!!
Jimmy T
As Walt Cunningham was known to say, “Jesus, what an aircraft!”
Mike, without going into time lines and such, it’s not going to buy you much. Take a look at the way AMRAAMs work… for the best results, you need active radar, until a certain point. As far as data links… have you worked with them? Their data links aren’t exactly setup premier for outside help. If you’d like to talk about it more, we can meet up in the scif.
Was channel surfing last night, and caught the History Channel doing a story on the F-22. It’s called Dogfights of the Future and describes how the Raptor, F-35, and other air/space craft might be used in upcoming conflicts.
It’ll be reshown Sunday morning for anyone who’s interested.
How many million?? Shoot one down and there goes the national budget.
[...] finally found the time to take a look at this video that was posted over at Lex’s. Good comments on this post (as usual at Lex’s) [...]
hello
i have enjoyed your site tonite and watched the raptor do its stuff. and i have seen the hornet do its stuff. i do not see what you see as i have never learned to fly. all i see when i watch any of these birds fly, even the old ww11 planes, is wonder.