Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

Scott Kenny said:
While I admit that the pod shown under the bizjet has a notch in the nose and does generally look like the pods seen on F-22s, no pictures of that notched-nose pod on an F-22 have emerged yet.
Click to expand...

May be there're different iterations/models.
Time will tell soon.
 
quellish said:
Currency = training
Click to expand...
But depending on when they were doing the training relative to expiration dates can be setting things up for test series. Or getting pilots new to the squadron ready for a test series.

Old example: The USN generally required annual weapons qualifications. SSBNs had an exception because we basically operated on an 8 month cycle and we'd only run weapons quals every other off-crew (once in 16 months). After 9-11 that exception was revoked and we needed to re-qualify every 8 months due to operational cycles. Every off-crew we had to send everyone through weapons quals.
 
Last edited:
eagle said:
So has it been established that both pods will carry IRST sensors? I.e. also the one without window.
Click to expand...

I think the consensus from some of the more knowledgeable posters is that both pods have an IR window and that some angles or models might obscure that fact.
 
eagle said:
Could be a placeholder, of course. But to me it looks like the orange pod does have an IRST sensor, whereas the other one previously spotted under Catfish doesn't.
Click to expand...

As is common with avionics development there are different test fixtures being flown.

The pod used on N757A is definitely an IRST pod.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think the consensus from some of the more knowledgeable posters is that both pods have an IR window and that some angles or models might obscure that fact.
Click to expand...
The pods mounted on the right wing never had any visible window from any angle, even on the scale model shown a couple of months ago only the pod on the left wing has a visible window, the two pods are different, if both are IRSTs they operate at different wavelengths
 

Attachments

  • 1782234106025.png
    1782234106025.png
    197.7 KB · Views: 110
  • 1782234412700.png
    1782234412700.png
    975.5 KB · Views: 112
Last edited:
Sandboxx has put out a short video concerning a 2018 LM proposal to build a new F-22 version using F-35 tech:


In 2018, Lockheed Martin proposed building a new version of the F-22 Raptor that came equipped with all of the advanced technology developed for its younger sister, the F-35, resulting in a hybrid 5th-generation fighter with unmatched stealth, aerobatic performance, and situational awareness. In other words, Lockheed Martin wanted to build a monster, but making monsters is not cheap, and that ultimately shot this proposal down before it could get off the ground.​
Click to expand...
 
Solidus said:
The pods mounted on the right wing never had any visible window from any angle, even on the scale model shown a couple of months ago only the pod on the left wing has a visible window, the two pods are different, if both are IRSTs they operate at different wavelengths
Click to expand...

With a conventional IRST (legion, whatever) you want it all but can’t have it - all the capabilities of a radar without emitting anything. But you don’t get range. The target could be in your face but you can’t smack it.

But if you have TWO working together some distance apart, they can work stereoscopically and give you range - pretty much a good target track.

And that could be a game changer.

These are not conventional pods. Do we really think that an IRST that has to operate with an external skin temperature of over 200 degrees would have a conventional “window”?
 
quellish said:
These are not conventional pods. Do we really think that an IRST that has to operate with an external skin temperature of over 200 degrees would have a conventional “window”?
Click to expand...
To be fair, it's opaque (we can take 1960s interceptors as a reference), but still very much different from surrounding material.
quellish said:
But if you have TWO working together some distance apart, they can work stereoscopically and give you range - pretty much a good target track.
Click to expand...
I wonder what are the restrictions. 20th century coincidence rangefinders had significant max range limitations, tied to optical base; after certain value, accuracy dropped dramatically, and in modern engagement terms, it wasn't all that far.
 
Ainen said:
I wonder what are the restrictions. 20th century coincidence rangefinders had significant max range limitations, tied to optical base; after certain value, accuracy dropped dramatically, and in modern engagement terms, it wasn't all that far.
Click to expand...
While true, there are tricks that have been developed that allow you to treat a pair or more sensors as a single giant aperture the size of the distanace between the sensors. And then you use a scale inside the optics relative to image size given a recognized target size.
If you're looking at something that looks like a Flanker, you know the wingspan and fuselage length, some trigonometry will give you the apparent size based on the "angle on the bow" to the viewer.​
 
NMaude said:
And can we not have cheap low information replies, that was just a short video and I thought the information content was adequate.
Click to expand...
This video adds basically no value, it’s a regurgitation of surface level information that even a cursory Google or Wikipedia search can answer.

It also ignores some of the more interesting possibilities and implications reported for the proposal, like the redesigned and potentially enlarged wings, alternative engine options, etc.

This content is little more than a headline regurgitation.
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
It also ignores some of the more interesting possibilities and implications reported for the proposal, like the redesigned and potentially enlarged wings, alternative engine options, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that if the video had been significantly longer it would've gone into these details.
 
Ainen said:
To be fair, it's opaque (we can take 1960s interceptors as a reference), but still very much different from surrounding material.

I wonder what are the restrictions. 20th century coincidence rangefinders had significant max range limitations, tied to optical base; after certain value, accuracy dropped dramatically, and in modern engagement terms, it wasn't all that far.
Click to expand...
The XF-108 & YF-12A had two. Whether for field of view, redundancy, or ranging is anybody's guess.
 
njiiaf said:
Are there any plans to upgrade the F-22 cockpit in the near future? Perhaps something like a Large Area Display?
View attachment 816667
Click to expand...

No. They are swapping the HUD from a CRT to an LCD image engine, but the flat panels are already LCDs. A single display like the LAD would require redesigning the whole cockpit.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom