• 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
13,116
Reaction score
1,178
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
2,128
Reaction score
148
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
13,116
Reaction score
1,178
Thought there was an empty space for the IRST like there is for side arrays? ???
 

icyplanetnhc

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
120
Reaction score
32
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
671
Reaction score
31
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
2,773
Reaction score
231
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
1,385
Reaction score
410
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
13,116
Reaction score
1,178
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
2,773
Reaction score
231
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
9,928
Reaction score
977
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
9,928
Reaction score
977
https://www.themaven.net/warriormaven/air/f-22-refines-dogfighting-air-to-air-combat-ops-icdFasQ2JkSLMD12bysHBQ
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,928
Reaction score
977
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
2
bobbymike said:
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
I sure am glad that we decided it was too obsolete to build another 180 to hold us over until (if) the NGAD machine comes on line.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
452
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
bobbymike said:
Charlie - And how exactly did you do that Maverick?
Maverick - I was inverted
Iceman - Bulls**t!

https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/03/01/f-22_raptor_executes_a_mind-blowing_inverted_somersault_300674.html
https://youtu.be/mx23RYC5Tks
 

Empire

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
86
Reaction score
1
The US Air Force estimates it would cost more than $1.7 billion over 11 years to upgrade 34 Lockheed Martin F-22s Block 20 Raptors to Block 30/35 configuration.
This is partly because some items are no longer in production, like the upgraded APG-77 variant used on the 30/35.
This is the last I heard on this!!! Did congress turn it down or is it hidden in the budget some where? Anyone hear anything? Some things no longer in production but what do they do when those some things really break on the aircraft??
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
954
Reaction score
41
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/how-chinas-new-stealth-fighter-could-soon-surpass-the-us-f-22-raptor/

Interesting point made re:slow pace of upgrades to F-22. Makes me think about the disruptive changes in auto and rocket industries instigated by Musk. Musk has his desk in the middle of the Tesla plant. He's chief designer for SpaceX and knows every bolt in Falcon 9. Who at LM, Boeing or NG has that level of drive, expertise and the wherewithal/freedom to execute?

Do we need a Musk or another Hughes in the aircraft industry?
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,128
Reaction score
148
The problem might not be something that requires a company CEO from sticking his desk on just one aspect of his/her companies business and getting things moving faster. The problem may have to do with the fleet size, and no active program that can amortize more expensive development expenditure. Just google the total cost to the taxpayer of Increment-3 capability and on a per unit basis, it is quite a lot of money. Had we had 400 aircraft there would have more incentive to aim for faster and more giant leaps. That said, an architecture overhaul and a move towards Open Mission System architectures are expected next to the program so that should help. Imagine if the aircraft would have been built like we did with the F-15s and you would have much more capability at this stage given the economies of scale and a hot production line. But no, wishful thinking and the massive amount of money spent in Iraq basically put an end to that as it did with so many other plans.
 

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,450
Reaction score
158
Do we need a Musk or another Hughes in the aircraft industry?
In the AI/robots era, talented people makes the difference more than ever
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
954
Reaction score
41
Empire said:
The US Air Force estimates it would cost more than $1.7 billion over 11 years to upgrade 34 Lockheed Martin F-22s Block 20 Raptors to Block 30/35 configuration.
This is partly because some items are no longer in production, like the upgraded APG-77 variant used on the 30/35.
This is the last I heard on this!!! Did congress turn it down or is it hidden in the budget some where? Anyone hear anything? Some things no longer in production but what do they do when those some things really break on the aircraft??
But they can't look at using F-35's APG-81 radar until they start the upgrade program. Do these numbers make any sense? $50m per jet?

This sounds like $29.95 to me. You know the drill. Late night TV. "What's the max they'll pay without thinking about it?" $29.95. If you wanted to make it sound like you'd actually worked the numbers you'd say $47.83M or something. Picking $50M is just lazy.

And 11 years? That's 132 months. With 800 workers that's ~515k hours per jet. For upgrades? It takes Boeing ~80 days to build a new 777.

I'd send them back to the drawing board to show me a plan with breakdowns to the hourly level per task. Something is terribly wrong here.

I might even be tempted to offer one each to LM, Boeing and NG and tell them whoever comes up with the most successful upgrade plan, with objective being <$20M, <100,000hrs per jet and a plan to finish all 34 in <4 years, gets the gig. Winner also gets some additional preference in F-22 replacement program.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,928
Reaction score
977
https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/04/04/5th-gen-fighters-tag-team-air-force-red-flag-exercises.html

Two nearly back-to-back Red Flag exercises at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, in recent months have helped prepare airmen taking part in the drills for warfighting scenarios across the globe.

But as the Air Force continues to talk about the next high-end fight with a near-peer adversary, its most advanced fighters, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, did not train together in either exercise.

Red Flag, established in 1975 at the end of the Vietnam War, is an integrated, multi-force training exercise within a simulated combat environment. There are three planned this year.

"We brought a notional force of F-35s into the [second] exercise, and it was really more about their sensors than it was about their stealth," said Col. Michael Mathes, commander of the 414th Combat Training Squadron. Military.com spoke with Mathes on March 23, the day Red Flag 18-2
 

SpudmanWP

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
41
If they really wanted to use them together, they could have put up a BACN.
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,128
Reaction score
148
The AF plans to put the TACLink-16 capability on the F-22A into DevTesting in about a years time following which it will begin installing it on the fleet (2020). That should give it a level of 4th to 5th and 5th to 5th capability that has been lacking but is desired none the less. However, true 5th to 5th would have come via MADL which was approved for the f-22, by the JROC but then set aside due to cost and risk (at the time). It makes some sense to begin thinking about that in the early 2020s as well once the current set of upgrades have been implemented. The F-22, F-35 and the B-21 ideally need to be able to talk via a common discrete directional data-link without the need of a gateway.
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
2
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

 

Jeb

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
277
Reaction score
27
Wow, look at the skidmark it left. Maybe the pilot was trying to control the slide with rudder action and the flight control system was manipulating the stabs as well?
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
252
Reaction score
27
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

probably pilot took action when he felt flame out of one the engine.

thus ht moved differentialy
 

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
954
Reaction score
41
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
2
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.

But the part about the pilot not knowing the engine flamed out..... There are no indicators? Warnings? When you feel the plane sinking back to the runway, my first instinct would be to add full power. Did he just get a few feet up and not have time to react?

Ever since the YF-22 incident, the Raptor has had bad luck with runways and belly landings and runway strikes.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
1,794
Reaction score
534
Bumped for 1500ft and slide for 5000ft (sorry don't have the proper quotation).
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,116
Reaction score
1,178
Airplane said:
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?
Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.
Yeah. Good thing we bought so many of them.
 

fightingirish

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
2,302
Reaction score
526
Up on her legs again so far...
Photo via Air Force amn/nco/snco Group on Facebook.
Link: https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/16/f-22-incident-alleged-to-be-engine-power-loss-pilot-lands-gear-up/
 

Attachments

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
2
stealthflanker said:
Wish for quick recovery.
I am pretty sure in these incidents they have to gut the airframe of engines and avionics and inspect it millimeter by millimeter.

I would love to see the process by with the lower belly is repaired... you know, the skin or non-removable panels. It must be a weld and grind operation to smooth fill up the scrapes and fill gaps from sliding a mile down concrete.

Considering how long it took to repair the other Raptor, NGAD or PCA or whatever the acronym is of the day will be flying by the time this Raptor is repaired!!
 

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
410
Considering how many years this sort of incident has been happening, do they not design easy inspection and repair abilities into these aircraft now?
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,226
Reaction score
207

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,928
Reaction score
977

NeilChapman

Interested 3rd party
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
954
Reaction score
41
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
 

Airplane

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
432
Reaction score
2
NeilChapman said:
Airplane said:
LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)
The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.

An air superiority fighter compared to what? Compared to F-15s and F-16s and SU-27s and J-10s, the F-35 is already the better platform. No mods needed. Just need to buy enough to overcome having only 4 AAMs.

What are you going to do to an F-35 airframe to make it an air superiority fighter? Bigger wings for a lower wing loading? That could affect roll rate. Add weight and drag. Make it longer? Then you've got a heavier aircraft with just one engine and again more drag.

It's engine is already the most powerful fighter engine in the world and it's kinematic performance could be marginally improved with another 3-5k lbs of thrust. (the 35C really could really use more thrust).

What Lockheed is talking about is an improved F-22 airframe (more durable stealth) with F-35 sensors.

That's why this is in the F-22 thread and not the F-35 thread. This is obviously an improved F-22... Which by the way if the Japanese still wanted to buy it, considering the F-35 is more advanced in many ways, there is no more need for this 20 year old export ban on the -22. That export ban was absolutly stupid. We're selling the F-35 to every country that wants it. Israel for example isn't exactly a nation that I trust with our highest tech fighter.... the F-16 found its want into the Lavi and that found its way into China. Hmmm...
 
Top