• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Flyaway said:
Damaged F-22 makes comeback after six-year repair job

A Lockheed Martin F-22 grounded since a trainee pilot’s error led to a crash landing in May 2012 could be ready to return to service next March after a nearly six-year-long repair job, according to a new US Air force document.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/damaged-f-22-makes-comeback-after-six-year-repair-jo-444022/
Sounds like quite a lot of effort for a jet we only needed 187 of and then quit production. /sarc.
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
46
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Harrier said:
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
Giving it to Northrop Grumman rather than the Phantom Works would probably be a better bet. That FB-23 would be real useful about now. (Though probably left behind in comparison to the PCA being developed.)
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,289
Reaction score
59
sferrin said:
Harrier said:
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
Giving it to Northrop Grumman rather than the Phantom Works would probably be a better bet.
Guess it depends on which data rights the US government purchased and which were on offer.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
marauder2048 said:
sferrin said:
Harrier said:
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
Giving it to Northrop Grumman rather than the Phantom Works would probably be a better bet.
Guess it depends on which data rights the US government purchased and which were on offer.
Maybe they're trying to throw Boeing a bone. ??? Doesn't make sense to pick them over Northrop.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
marauder2048 said:
sferrin said:
Harrier said:
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
Giving it to Northrop Grumman rather than the Phantom Works would probably be a better bet.
Guess it depends on which data rights the US government purchased and which were on offer.
Maybe they're trying to throw Boeing a bone. ??? Doesn't make sense to pick them over Northrop.
Maybe Northrop has already done similar avionics/sensor work under another black program(s)....
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Harrier said:
It used to be said that the best replacement for the Buccaneer would be an updated Buccaneer.

Seems some in the USAF may feel the same about the F-22:

http://www.sldinfo.com/redefining-the-next-generation-fighter-aircraft-build-out-air-combat-capability-by-shaping-a-21st-century-version-of-the-century-aircraft/

Give the Skunk Works and the Phantom Works one each and 3 years....
Michael Wynne was United States Secretary of the Air Force during the George W Bush administration from 2005 to 2008. The incumbent United States Secretary of the Air Force is Heather Wilson. Are any decision makers currently listening to Wynne's opinions?
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,289
Reaction score
59
Wynne is still very active in the AFA and Air Force leadership does at least hear him out.

On a related matter: interesting interview with former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak (F-22 related excerpt below).

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/military/sd-me-mcpeak-speaks-20171113-story.html

Carl Prine: As an outsider, maybe I’m looking at this as you don’t get all the credit you
deserve for doing some good things and you get too much blame for other things. I don’t think
you get enough credit for the F-22. You were driving a lot of that.

Merrill McPeak: Right. And including trying to convince Obama. I spent ‘08 in Iowa, in
the snows of Iowa, introducing Obama in high school gymnasiums. And when we get back
into the van to drive to the next stop, we’d watch basketball. And I’d try to get a word in
edgewise about the F-22.

Then he went and canceled it.

Carl Prine: That was (Secretary of Defense Bob) Gates.

Merrill McPeak: That was Gates. Don’t even get me started on that.

Carl Prine: I think he might be the most overrated Secretary of Defense ever. I really do.

Merrill McPeak: You and I should go have a beer!

Carl Prine: Gates was a great politician.

Merrill McPeak: I can think of no national security problem that was improved by Bob
Gates. But his main virtue was that he wasn’t Don Rumsfeld.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
marauder2048 said:
Wynne is still very active in the AFA and Air Force leadership does at least hear him out.

On a related matter: interesting interview with former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill McPeak (F-22 related excerpt below).

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/military/sd-me-mcpeak-speaks-20171113-story.html

Carl Prine: As an outsider, maybe I’m looking at this as you don’t get all the credit you
deserve for doing some good things and you get too much blame for other things. I don’t think
you get enough credit for the F-22. You were driving a lot of that.

Merrill McPeak: Right. And including trying to convince Obama. I spent ‘08 in Iowa, in
the snows of Iowa, introducing Obama in high school gymnasiums. And when we get back
into the van to drive to the next stop, we’d watch basketball. And I’d try to get a word in
edgewise about the F-22.

Then he went and canceled it.

Carl Prine: That was (Secretary of Defense Bob) Gates.

Merrill McPeak: That was Gates. Don’t even get me started on that.

Carl Prine: I think he might be the most overrated Secretary of Defense ever. I really do.

Merrill McPeak: You and I should go have a beer!

Carl Prine: Gates was a great politician.

Merrill McPeak: I can think of no national security problem that was improved by Bob
Gates. But his main virtue was that he wasn’t Don Rumsfeld.
I particularly enjoyed the honest comments of the F-35.
 

Jeb

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
258
Reaction score
13
Watch this F-22 slam on the brakes at 0:36. :eek:

https://youtu.be/XOV_ovsq8HE?t=36s
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
909
Reaction score
11
Flyaway said:
Damaged F-22 makes comeback after six-year repair job

A Lockheed Martin F-22 grounded since a trainee pilot’s error led to a crash landing in May 2012 could be ready to return to service next March after a nearly six-year-long repair job, according to a new US Air force document.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/damaged-f-22-makes-comeback-after-six-year-repair-jo-444022/
If a pilot does a belly landing in war the jet is out unless the war lasts longer than 6 years? That seems too long a time to repair.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
NeilChapman said:
Flyaway said:
Damaged F-22 makes comeback after six-year repair job

A Lockheed Martin F-22 grounded since a trainee pilot’s error led to a crash landing in May 2012 could be ready to return to service next March after a nearly six-year-long repair job, according to a new US Air force document.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/damaged-f-22-makes-comeback-after-six-year-repair-jo-444022/
If a pilot does a belly landing in war the jet is out unless the war lasts longer than 6 years? That seems too long a time to repair.
Sounds like an exercise in engineering.

BTW, how many years have we been at war right now?
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
105
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/us-f-22-raptors-fire-flares-chase-russian-fighters-out-of-deconfliction-zone-over-syria/article/2643497

I'm sure they were keeping up international relations.............ya know giving them the bird
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Airplane said:
BTW, how many years have we been at war right now?
By the definition you're implying? Zero.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
bobbymike said:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/us-f-22-raptors-fire-flares-chase-russian-fighters-out-of-deconfliction-zone-over-syria/article/2643497

I'm sure they were keeping up international relations.............ya know giving them the bird
Any idea how close they got? That would be awesome video if it's like the stuff we see of Sukhois flying off the wingtips of our 'spy' planes.

Also, why wouldn't just use Eagles for this role instead of giving Russians up close experience with Raptors?
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
Any idea how close they got? That would be awesome video if it's like the stuff we see of Sukhois flying off the wingtips of our 'spy' planes.
There is a very strong possibility that a video of this incidence exists. ;)
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
bring_it_on said:
Any idea how close they got? That would be awesome video if it's like the stuff we see of Sukhois flying off the wingtips of our 'spy' planes.
There is a very strong possibility that a video of this incidence exists. ;)
Call me crazy, but I think the Ruskies may actually try to take out an F-22 by "accidentally" bumping into one... What rules (do we know of) are our aviators flying with when the Russians do something stupid like try to barrel roll over a -22?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Airplane said:
bring_it_on said:
Any idea how close they got? That would be awesome video if it's like the stuff we see of Sukhois flying off the wingtips of our 'spy' planes.
There is a very strong possibility that a video of this incidence exists. ;)
Call me crazy, but I think the Ruskies may actually try to take out an F-22 by "accidentally" bumping into one... What rules (do we know of) are our aviators flying with when the Russians do something stupid like try to barrel roll over a -22?
Do you honestly believe F-22 pilots are dumb enough to let that happen? An F-22 isn't a P-3.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
bring_it_on said:
Any idea how close they got? That would be awesome video if it's like the stuff we see of Sukhois flying off the wingtips of our 'spy' planes.
There is a very strong possibility that a video of this incidence exists. ;)
Call me crazy, but I think the Ruskies may actually try to take out an F-22 by "accidentally" bumping into one... What rules (do we know of) are our aviators flying with when the Russians do something stupid like try to barrel roll over a -22?
Do you honestly believe F-22 pilots are dumb enough to let that happen? An F-22 isn't a P-3.
Obviously not, but what are rules they fly under when the Russians get too close? It's a valid question regardless of what you think.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
TomcatViP said:
ON CNN, there was the specific mention that the 22 pilot had to manoeuvre to prevent a collision attempt.

"One Su-25 flew close enough to an F-22A that it had to aggressively maneuver to avoid a midair collision,"
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/14/politics/us-f-22-intercept-russian-jets-syria/index.html
Yep. Which would indicate they wouldn't just fly straight and dumb waiting to get hit. Also, I'm sure they'll be watching for the possibility going forward.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
0
If you don't believe there are rules in place on how to handle aggressive Russians just because our pilots are not dumb, then whatever.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Airplane said:
If you don't believe there are rules in place on how to handle aggressive Russians just because our pilots are not dumb, then whatever.
You're the one who can't seem to decide if F-22 pilots are stupid enough to allow a Frogfoot to ram them.
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
909
Reaction score
11
sferrin said:
Airplane said:
If you don't believe there are rules in place on how to handle aggressive Russians just because our pilots are not dumb, then whatever.
You're the one who can't seem to decide if F-22 pilots are stupid enough to allow a Frogfoot to ram them.
I'm guessing there are two rules...

1. Always be ready to kill the other guy.
2. Don't do stupid shit.

It's likely that "don't allow the other guy to ram your plane" falls under the 2nd rule.

An F-22 is likely to negate entire squadrons of enemy aircraft. This fact is obviously not unknown to Raptor drivers. But I would doubt there are "specific" rules just for F-22's. All US fighter pilots would frown upon losing their ride for a bit of bump and tickle at 25k feet.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
NeilChapman said:
But I would doubt there are "specific" rules just for F-22's. All US fighter pilots would frown upon losing their ride for a bit of bump and tickle at 25k feet.
Oh, for sure.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
6
H/t to TomcatVip from Keypubs:

One thing the jets could not share is the F-35’s electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), the diamond-shaped wedge under the F-35’s “chin” that provides many of the visual and infrared sensors other jets must carry in pods. Though the Air Force is considering an infrared search and track (IRST) system for the F-22 to help it better see stealthy adversaries, Merchant said, “we really don’t have the real estate” in the same location on the F-22. “We’re looking at other options.” He was unable to elaborate due to classification.

In cooperation with the Air Combat Command, Merchant said, Lockheed is looking at trying out some new capabilities for the F-35 on the F-22 first.
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2018/February%202018/The-F-35-and-F-22-Teach-Teach-Other-New-Tricks.aspx
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Thought there was an empty space for the IRST like there is for side arrays? ???
 

icyplanetnhc

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
95
Reaction score
1
Website
aiaa.seas.ucla.edu
It’s possible that after the deletion of the AIRST requirement, other components like wiring or avionics racks were rearranged to make use of the freed up space. That being said, the EOTS assembly itself doesn’t seem particularly bulky though, but perhaps freeing up space for it and additional supporting items (i.e. cooling, wiring) may be too involved and expensive?
 

Colonial-Marine

Fighting the UAV mafia.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
626
Reaction score
6
If only there was a production line up and running which could incorporate changes like an IRST into new aircraft and maybe even retrofit old ones. A crazy thought I know. Blessed be the wisdom of former DefSec Gates.

Question to anybody with a better understanding of aerodynamics about me, what about the F-22's design necessitated such large vertical stabilizers?
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,595
Reaction score
25
Colonial-Marine said:
Question to anybody with a better understanding of aerodynamics about me, what about the F-22's design necessitated such large vertical stabilizers?
Basically, there has been a history of high-alpha/high speed aircraft having vertical tails too small for the stability and control requirements. So LM decided to be extremely conservative in their design and make them so large they knew they wouldn't have a problem, other than added weight, drag, and cost; apparently, their trade studies showed it was worth the trade off.

Of course, IMHO, they make the F-22 kind of butt ugly, both figuratively and literally, as a result. But aircraft are designed to mission requirements, not looks. Needless to say, I am cutting the VT's down on my model kits; because I can. ;)
 

Attachments

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
796
Reaction score
50
Sundog said:
Colonial-Marine said:
Question to anybody with a better understanding of aerodynamics about me, what about the F-22's design necessitated such large vertical stabilizers?
Basically, there has been a history of high-alpha/high speed aircraft having vertical tails too small for the stability and control requirements. So LM decided to be extremely conservative in their design and make them so large they knew they wouldn't have a problem, other than added weight, drag, and cost; apparently, their trade studies showed it was worth the trade off.

Of course, IMHO, they make the F-22 kind of butt ugly, both figuratively and literally, as a result. But aircraft are designed to mission requirements, not looks. Needless to say, I am cutting the VT's down on my model kits; because I can. ;)
Can you do that and still call the result an F-22. Surely naming a kit after an existing product, means the design should be the same?
What are the existing laws ref product description and kit naming?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
217
Sundog said:
Colonial-Marine said:
Question to anybody with a better understanding of aerodynamics about me, what about the F-22's design necessitated such large vertical stabilizers?
Basically, there has been a history of high-alpha/high speed aircraft having vertical tails too small for the stability and control requirements. So LM decided to be extremely conservative in their design and make them so large they knew they wouldn't have a problem, other than added weight, drag, and cost; apparently, their trade studies showed it was worth the trade off.

Of course, IMHO, they make the F-22 kind of butt ugly, both figuratively and literally, as a result. But aircraft are designed to mission requirements, not looks. Needless to say, I am cutting the VT's down on my model kits; because I can. ;)
Still better than the YF-22. Those tails were HUGE.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,595
Reaction score
25
Foo Fighter said:
Can you do that and still call the result an F-22. Surely naming a kit after an existing product, means the design should be the same?
What are the existing laws ref product description and kit naming?
Given the number of model kits that have been produced with a number of inaccuracies; Yeah, no problem.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
105
https://www.themaven.net/warriormaven/air/air-force-preps-f-22-for-2060-new-sensors-radar-avionics-ai-BMw9vbS3xk2dymJlS4PW2g?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=34652d2709-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-34652d2709-81812733
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
8,654
Reaction score
105
https://www.themaven.net/warriormaven/air/f-22-refines-dogfighting-air-to-air-combat-ops-icdFasQ2JkSLMD12bysHBQ
 
Top