Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

The story of how TOPGUN integrated the F-22 Raptor flights into its syllabus - The Aviation Geek Club

The story of how Topgun integrated the F-22 Raptor flights into its syllabus

theaviationgeekclub.com

 

[stealthflanker]

One interesting characteristics of F-22, particularly the F-119 engine which carried over to F-135 is the "stealthy augmentor" which designed in specific shape to block view from the turbine blades. Aside from few short articles and photos. I'm curious if there is anything else released in public domain, we have patents on radar blockers and good images of its shapes but. This stealthy augmentor seems not as many.

As for what kind of effect it can have on RCS. I made a bit of speculation. Regarding the possible shape of the stealthy augmenter.
So i modeled a simple nozzle and jetpipe along with "bullet" and 2 stages of turbines.



The exhaust blocker in view based on F-22 Augmenter. This is very speculative as i only have image from Jay Miller's book. This may work in Radar cross section reduction wise but whether this can work aerodynamically. i have no means to test it yet. I in fact dont even know what people expect aerodynamically from such device.



Material wise. The augmenter is treated with "Perfect RAM" to basically emulate the "Best expected value achievable" The "bullet" also treated similarly. The turbines and engine casing are left as PEC.

The result :

Without the Blocker​	With Blocker​

The 3D plot however does not reveal much except apparently slight reduction in spikes. The 2D contour plot of the engine however reveals considerable amount of reduction, as can be seen in the 3rd plot of the table aobove. the "nasty" powerful red spikes from the untreated turbines are gone when the treated blocker are present.

The overall strength of the RCS Median wise also considerable reduced. The simulation is done in X-band (8 GHz), and in similar manner as one i did for Su-57 radar blocker. The Median value of the RCS are as follows :

Untreated nozzle without blocker : 1.8 Sqm or 2.57 dB
Nozzle and jetpipe with blocker : 0.052 Sqm or about -12 dB

Correspond to about 34 Times reduction. Using the value for the radar detection range this correspond to about 60% reduction in detection range for possible hostile radar. Sounds VERY promising. Further reduction can be achieved if one also treat the wall of the jetpipe. I tried that approach too but the result seems to be greatly unrealistic as i am using ideal absorber.

So yeah, What do you guys think ?.

 

[Ronny]

One interesting characteristics of F-22, particularly the F-119 engine which carried over to F-135 is the "stealthy augmentor" which designed in specific shape to block view from the turbine blades. Aside from few short articles and photos. I'm curious if there is anything else released in public domain, we have patents on radar blockers and good images of its shapes but. This stealthy augmentor seems not as many.

As for what kind of effect it can have on RCS. I made a bit of speculation. Regarding the possible shape of the stealthy augmenter.
So i modeled a simple nozzle and jetpipe along with "bullet" and 2 stages of turbines.

View attachment 671414

The exhaust blocker in view based on F-22 Augmenter. This is very speculative as i only have image from Jay Miller's book. This may work in Radar cross section reduction wise but whether this can work aerodynamically. i have no means to test it yet. I in fact dont even know what people expect aerodynamically from such device.

View attachment 671416

Material wise. The augmenter is treated with "Perfect RAM" to basically emulate the "Best expected value achievable" The "bullet" also treated similarly. The turbines and engine casing are left as PEC.

The result :

Without the Blocker​	With Blocker​
View attachment 671417	View attachment 671418
View attachment 671398	View attachment 671395
View attachment 671401	View attachment 671402

The 3D plot however does not reveal much except apparently slight reduction in spikes. The 2D contour plot of the engine however reveals considerable amount of reduction, as can be seen in the 3rd plot of the table aobove. the "nasty" powerful red spikes from the untreated turbines are gone when the treated blocker are present.

The overall strength of the RCS Median wise also considerable reduced. The simulation is done in X-band (8 GHz), and in similar manner as one i did for Su-57 radar blocker. The Median value of the RCS are as follows :

Untreated nozzle without blocker : 1.8 Sqm or 2.57 dB
Nozzle and jetpipe with blocker : 0.052 Sqm or about -12 dB

Correspond to about 34 Times reduction. Using the value for the radar detection range this correspond to about 60% reduction in detection range for possible hostile radar. Sounds VERY promising. Further reduction can be achieved if one also treat the wall of the jetpipe. I tried that approach too but the result seems to be greatly unrealistic as i am using ideal absorber.

So yeah, What do you guys think ?.

That interesting that the seemingly similar shape reduce RCS by that much

 

[14yellow14]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1480539277696159745

View: https://twitter.com/beverstine/status/1480539277696159745

 

[TomcatViP]

It's not too bad when compared with same generation fighters (years of entry in service).

Look at the Rafale or Typhoon MC rate.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

A large number of these recent mishaps with the aircraft appear to be associated with the landing gear, with multiple aircraft ending up on their bellies or nose down on tarmac, and an inspection revealed a substantial proportion of the fleet having the landing gear rigged incorrectly. I’m rather baffled that after this many years of operations, a problem with something as seemingly rudimentary as this would emerge.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

On another note, F-22 pilot from the 90th FS selected as astronaut.

Articles

 

[14yellow14]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1481338516437188610

View: https://twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1481338516437188610

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

Now reported by Aviation Week.

USAF Seeks Third-Party Vendors For F-22 Sensor, Capability Upgrades | Aviation Week Network

A long-range infrared search and track sensor, manned-unmanned teaming capability and a Thales Scorpion helmet-mounted display are on a list of new upgrades by third-party vendors sought by the U.S. Air Force for the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

aviationweek.com

Long range IRST is interesting, perhaps they'll make use of that empty bay under the nose? A third party vendor for the IRST is rather odd, as Lockheed Martin is the incumbent for both the AAR-56 and dedicated systems like the IRST21 for possible integration.

I am curious why they are pursuing the monocle-style Scorpion rather than a full display system like the JHMCS-II. It's true that the canopy shape of the F-22 is a limiting factor in terms of how bulky a helmet-mounted system can be, but the updated JHMCS appears to have cut down on the bulk from the original version.

Predictive maintenance sounds interesting and might be a hidden gem if it can significantly improve readiness and availability. Operating costs and readiness have been the main factors behind the USAF’s considerations for retiring the F-22 early, so improving these areas is vitally important for the future of the fleet.

 

[rooster]

Now reported by Aviation Week.

USAF Seeks Third-Party Vendors For F-22 Sensor, Capability Upgrades | Aviation Week Network

A long-range infrared search and track sensor, manned-unmanned teaming capability and a Thales Scorpion helmet-mounted display are on a list of new upgrades by third-party vendors sought by the U.S. Air Force for the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

aviationweek.com

Long range IRST is interesting, perhaps they'll make use of that empty bay under the nose? A third party vendor for the IRST is rather odd, as Lockheed Martin is the incumbent for both the AAR-56 and dedicated systems like the IRST21 for possible integration.

I am curious why they are pursuing the monocle-style Scorpion rather than a full display system like the JHMCS-II. It's true that the canopy shape of the F-22 is a limiting factor in terms of how bulky a helmet-mounted system can be, but the updated JHMCS appears to have cut down on the bulk from the original version.

Predictive maintenance sounds interesting and might be a hidden gem if it can significantly improve readiness and availability. Operating costs and readiness have been the main factors behind the USAF’s considerations for retiring the F-22 early, so improving these areas is vitally important for the future of the fleet.

No way. About 15 years ago I predicted the f22 would get a pop out sensor in one of the winder bays for a2g missions. That's probably where it'll go and will sacrifice one of the 9x.

 

[Firefinder]

Now reported by Aviation Week.

USAF Seeks Third-Party Vendors For F-22 Sensor, Capability Upgrades | Aviation Week Network

A long-range infrared search and track sensor, manned-unmanned teaming capability and a Thales Scorpion helmet-mounted display are on a list of new upgrades by third-party vendors sought by the U.S. Air Force for the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

aviationweek.com

Long range IRST is interesting, perhaps they'll make use of that empty bay under the nose? A third party vendor for the IRST is rather odd, as Lockheed Martin is the incumbent for both the AAR-56 and dedicated systems like the IRST21 for possible integration.

I am curious why they are pursuing the monocle-style Scorpion rather than a full display system like the JHMCS-II. It's true that the canopy shape of the F-22 is a limiting factor in terms of how bulky a helmet-mounted system can be, but the updated JHMCS appears to have cut down on the bulk from the original version.

Predictive maintenance sounds interesting and might be a hidden gem if it can significantly improve readiness and availability. Operating costs and readiness have been the main factors behind the USAF’s considerations for retiring the F-22 early, so improving these areas is vitally important for the future of the fleet.

No way. About 15 years ago I predicted the f22 would get a pop out sensor in one of the winder bays for a2g missions. That's probably where it'll go and will sacrifice one of the 9x.

Why take up one of the Winder Bays when you already have space in the nose for it?

There are 3 large holes in structure there just for that reason.

Two on the sides for side mount radars, be easily enough to add them there.

And one on top specific set there for a IRST system.

These systems where cut down to Fited for but not with late in the program to save money.

There are more then enough space there for a pop out laser IRTV system with enough space for a similar field of view as in the Sidewinder bays.

 

[fightingirish]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1481730838173822977

View: https://twitter.com/MIL_STD/status/1481730838173822977

 

[isayyo2]

Lockheed has alluded that the spaces once reserved for the cheek arrays and AIRST have been used for other purposes.

Back in 2017, Ken Merchant, who was then Lockheed’s vice president for the F-22 program, told Air Force Magazine that “we really don’t have the real estate” to fit an internal IRST in the jet, at least in an installation comparable to the Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) in the F-35.

The F-22 Raptor Could Finally Get The Infrared Sensor It Was Originally Promised

An infrared search and track sensor was originally dropped from the F-22 on cost grounds, but now the Air Force wants to try and add it back.

www.thedrive.com

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

I do wonder if newer, more compact hardware can reclaim that space. Furthermore, several people have mentioned that problems with EOTS integration may have due to with the sensor’s vertical footprint, while the space on under the forward fuselage appear to be designed for a longitudinal sensor. The fuselage bulkheads have inverted “V” notches, presumably for the sensor.

That said, if OMS allows third party vendors to bid for the IRST, they may be able to design a new sensor to fit the space that’s available. That said, I think a variant of the IRST21 may also work, as it’s also a “long” sensor.

 

[Kurfust]

One interesting characteristics of F-22, particularly the F-119 engine which carried over to F-135 is the "stealthy augmentor" which designed in specific shape to block view from the turbine blades. Aside from few short articles and photos. I'm curious if there is anything else released in public domain, we have patents on radar blockers and good images of its shapes but. This stealthy augmentor seems not as many.

As for what kind of effect it can have on RCS. I made a bit of speculation. Regarding the possible shape of the stealthy augmenter.
So i modeled a simple nozzle and jetpipe along with "bullet" and 2 stages of turbines.

View attachment 671414

The exhaust blocker in view based on F-22 Augmenter. This is very speculative as i only have image from Jay Miller's book. This may work in Radar cross section reduction wise but whether this can work aerodynamically. i have no means to test it yet. I in fact dont even know what people expect aerodynamically from such device.

View attachment 671416

Material wise. The augmenter is treated with "Perfect RAM" to basically emulate the "Best expected value achievable" The "bullet" also treated similarly. The turbines and engine casing are left as PEC.

The result :

Without the Blocker​	With Blocker​
View attachment 671417	View attachment 671418
View attachment 671398	View attachment 671395
View attachment 671401	View attachment 671402

The 3D plot however does not reveal much except apparently slight reduction in spikes. The 2D contour plot of the engine however reveals considerable amount of reduction, as can be seen in the 3rd plot of the table aobove. the "nasty" powerful red spikes from the untreated turbines are gone when the treated blocker are present.

The overall strength of the RCS Median wise also considerable reduced. The simulation is done in X-band (8 GHz), and in similar manner as one i did for Su-57 radar blocker. The Median value of the RCS are as follows :

Untreated nozzle without blocker : 1.8 Sqm or 2.57 dB
Nozzle and jetpipe with blocker : 0.052 Sqm or about -12 dB

Correspond to about 34 Times reduction. Using the value for the radar detection range this correspond to about 60% reduction in detection range for possible hostile radar. Sounds VERY promising. Further reduction can be achieved if one also treat the wall of the jetpipe. I tried that approach too but the result seems to be greatly unrealistic as i am using ideal absorber.

So yeah, What do you guys think ?.

Good job.

I read time ago, from some official in Lockheed, that F-35 had stealth augmentor too.

 

[_Del_]

A third party vendor for the IRST is rather odd, as Lockheed Martin is the incumbent for both the AAR-56 and dedicated systems like the IRST21 for possible integration.

It's an SBIR solicitation, so the goal is to seed money to nonprimes.

It's also Phase II, according to the article here, so a pool of small companies have been looking at this doing R&D for at least six months-- possibly longer. Couldn't get the link to the solicitation to open, so I don't have any particulars.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

A third party vendor for the IRST is rather odd, as Lockheed Martin is the incumbent for both the AAR-56 and dedicated systems like the IRST21 for possible integration.

It's an SBIR solicitation, so the goal is to seed money to nonprimes.

It's also Phase II, according to the article here, so a pool of small companies have been looking at this doing R&D for at least six months-- possibly longer. Couldn't get the link to the solicitation to open, so I don't have any particulars.

Is SBIR strictly for third party vendors, or can the prime/incumbent also bid?

 

[_Del_]

SBIR max size is 500 employees-- that rules out all the big contractors.

My interpretation based on the little we know is that they want to integrate the ISRT, and after batting things around with LM weren't terribly impressed with what LM laid out, so they took the opportunity to seed some money around via SBIR to see what other ideas might be floating out there. There are a myriad of other possible interpretations that could be equally viable at this point because I don't know much.

If one of the boutique firms shows something attractive and feasible, then they'll decide how the work gets split. I'd imagine a larger contractor will get a big slice of the pie because the SBIR companies are usually not set up for a major project involving hardware-- but that isn't necessarily a given. They could be awarded enough to set up their own line, hire employees, etc. It will all depend on the particulars.

Also, extremely possible that noone gets awarded a phase III contract if the customer doesn't like the responses it gets.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

Human error, tech glitches and tape caused May 2020 F-22 crash

The Air Force declined to say whether anyone was disciplined for the incident.

www.airforcetimes.com

Interesting myriad of errors that caused the accident, from both the maintenance and the pilot side. The design of the flight control system could have been more forgiving, but still, this was an avoidable loss.

 

[mkellytx]

Interesting myriad of errors that caused the accident, from both the maintenance and the pilot side. The design of the flight control system could have been more forgiving, but still, this was an avoidable loss.

There's always a chain that could have been broken, or Swiss cheese that lined up. What's most disturbing is the pervasive lack of discipline/attention to details throughout that unit. It's also telling that information came from a command directed investigation not an AIB.

 

[TomS]

"“maintenance error made after the aircraft was washed” that “impacted control inputs transmitted to the aircraft.”"

Maybe water was where it shouldn't be and affected the air data system?

Or perhaps they installed plugs in the air data system to prevent water intrusion while washing the plane and forgot to remove one when they were done.

I hate to say "I told you so." But I told you so.

 

[Manuducati]

F-22 flying with stealthy external pods.

F-22 Raptor Spotted Flying With Stealthy Underwing Pods

The pods are likely part of an ongoing initiative to retain the F-22's potency until its replacement arrives.

www.thedrive.com

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

Not really fond of a podded IRST solution. I suppose it may be better than nothing but I do question the harm it causes to the radar signature.

It's possible that they're looking to combine the functionality of ECM and EO into the pod. The front portion of the pod looks rather slimmer than the Legion pod, which makes me wonder why it couldn't be integrated into a fairing under the nose.

 

[Ronny]

Not really fond of a podded IRST solution. I suppose it may be better than nothing but I do question the harm it causes to the radar signature.

Those things look like cross eye jammer or maybe HPM weapon?

 

[BDF]

Not really fond of a podded IRST solution. I suppose it may be better than nothing but I do question the harm it causes to the radar signature.

It's possible that they're looking to combine the functionality of ECM and EO into the pod. The front portion of the pod looks rather slimmer than the Legion pod, which makes me wonder why it couldn't be integrated into a fairing under the nose.

I'm not either. It's not clear to me that these are IRSTs or test shapes for IRSTs. The pod on the aircraft left wing appears to have a different coating on the nose than the one on the right and kind of looks like a treated sensor window. But it could also just be the angles of the pictures. What's odd is that these pods only appear to have LO shaping from the front, the sides are barn doors RCS wise. Nothing like those LO external weapons pods.

I do recall reading an article about IRST on the Raptor where a manager in the SPO said they may have room in the upper nose (ala flanker) to put a IRST if they were to install modern displays which would free up additional space behind the panel. That would be preferable IMO.

My hope is that these are EA pods and their concept of operations is for a couple of jets per say two flights would carry these pods. I suspect that if they're IRSTs that it may be the same general conops.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

I do recall reading an article about IRST on the Raptor where a manager in the SPO said they may have room in the upper nose (ala flanker) to put a IRST if they were to install modern displays which would free up additional space behind the panel. That would be preferable IMO.

I believe you're referring to this.

The F-35 and F-22 Teach Each Other New Tricks | Air & Space Forces Magazine

A dozen years after the F-22’s operational debut and two years after the F-35 was declared ready for c

www.airforcemag.com

The flat panels in the F-22 cockpit were cutting-edge when they were built, but compared to modern flat screens, they are thick and bulky. Merchant sees a chance to replace them with an F-35-like display thin enough that the new processors could fit right behind them, allowing easier service and freeing up space elsewhere on the airplane for growth mission hardware.

It's possible that the space freed up from thinner displays can reclaim the area that was once allocated to the IRST. That said, I'm not quite sure what they would have even put into that bay in the first place. See the inverted v-notches in this CAD model of the structure.

View attachment 672512

 

[Fluff]

Human error, tech glitches and tape caused May 2020 F-22 crash

The Air Force declined to say whether anyone was disciplined for the incident.

www.airforcetimes.com

Interesting myriad of errors that caused the accident, from both the maintenance and the pilot side. The design of the flight control system could have been more forgiving, but still, this was an avoidable loss.

I'm just in awe of the recent losses, the RAF/RN left a large air intake cover on, now we are using tape to cover a precision sensor, and leaving the tape on. Its been a few years since I handled aircraft, and I assume every aspect is documented and the equipment designed for every task.

it was normal if you did something to make an opposite open entry, so fitted tape to 2 x air sensor, and an open task, for the removal of tape from 2 x air sensor. This way you are covered, and their is an open task visible, hence the aircraft cannot be flown, until the task is closed.

 

[TomcatViP]

Couldn't that just be a training aircraft to simulate the next Gen of stealthy cruise missile? Under one wing there is the EO sensor of the simulated missiile. Under the other, the datalink, packed inside the same pod to cut some cost. Flight profile? The Raptor simply fly the same trajectory as the simulated stealthy missile, explaining why RCS was refined for head-on frontal sector only.

 

[Josh_TN]

Over on tanknet someone suggested the possibility one of the pods was a datalink translation from IFDL to MADL so they could talk to F-35s. One other thing that occurred to me is that IIRC F-22s don't have link16 transmitters. It's non LPI format, but there might be situations where that either doesn't matter or you still want one aircraft in a flight to be able to retransmit F-22 data to other forces in a more universal protocol.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

A datalink pod may certainly be a possibility; someone has pointed out that the pods don't have an air inlet for cooling like you see on the Legion IRST pod and other E/O targeting pods and ECM pods. Would the outboard wing stations even be plumbed for cooling?

 

[flateric]

Couldn't that just be a training aircraft to simulate the next Gen of stealthy cruise missile?

Just like Raytheon don't have ther own testbeds

 

[TomcatViP]

@flateric : Not a testbed, a training aircraft to simulate the missile flight path and attack mode (the carrier airframe must be stealthy to act as a credible surrogate).

 

[flateric]

It just can't credible surrogate. You test sensors on testbed, shape on RCS range and then combine them in test article like it was with JASSM, LRASM etc

 

[quellish]

This year (and last) two efforts they have been working on are Low Drag Pylon and Sensor Systems. It probably has something to do with one or both of those.

 

[zebra159357]

Air Force Deploying F-22s to UAE, CENTCOM Boss Says | Air & Space Forces Magazine

U.S. Central Command boss Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced a squadron of F-22s will go to UAE to combat drone and missile strikes.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

This year (and last) two efforts they have been working on are Low Drag Pylon and Sensor Systems. It probably has something to do with one or both of those.

or version of ADVANCED AIR TO AIR PYLON from F-35 fleet

 

[rooster]

This year (and last) two efforts they have been working on are Low Drag Pylon and Sensor Systems. It probably has something to do with one or both of those.

or version of ADVANCED AIR TO AIR PYLON from F-35 fleet

Its pretty clear the pylons are frontal stealth only just from the from the flat slab sides.... Too me that indicates ground attack role. You would not degrade raptors stealth and speed for an air superiority role. That to me further indicates a sead/dead role. The raptor already has built in EW. Therefore this is some kind of directed energy type of system for defeating a specific threat that raptor currently may not be able too defeat or may need help defeating better. I would also bet it is able to be jettisoned so that the raptor may regain its LO for egress if required. All speculation and they may be for maritime strike for all we know

 

[NeilChapman]

Air Force Deploying F-22s to UAE, CENTCOM Boss Says | Air & Space Forces Magazine

U.S. Central Command boss Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced a squadron of F-22s will go to UAE to combat drone and missile strikes.

www.airforcemag.com

A squadron of the world's most advanced air superiority fighters are being deployed to help the UAE respond to drone and missile strikes? Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Josh_TN]

It’s probably a hedge against a potential Iran-Israeli conflict if the nuclear talks end without an agreement. Israel has been unambiguous about what the next step is.

 

[zebra159357]

It’s probably a hedge against a potential Iran-Israeli conflict if the nuclear talks end without an agreement. Israel has been unambiguous about what the next step is.

Yep. The "50% mission rate" F-22s are not deployed to UAE to just look for drones