F-22 flying and defying physics

I say scrap them both and go back to the Sopwith Camel.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bah, a ten-year study on the effects of introducing the Camel, a five year study on the implementation, a concurrent study on capabilities and upgrade desirability.
And then a study on "best production methods"...
Factor all that in and the unit cost will be in the millions.
"Are you sure we don't want to use artificial fibres for the fabric covering? Maybe if we made them out of Kevlar. And we haven't got anywhere to put the radar, and how do you expect us put an ejector seat in that cockpit..."

The only advantage is that everyone knows beforehand that it's already out of date.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The F-22 is an amazing aircraft.

Absolutely the best as to systems and maneuvering.

If it could operate in the rain, or in dust, or etc... you know, things that occur routinely in theatres of war, we might actually get some use out of it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.f-16.net/news_article3622.html

 

Not quite.

What makes you think it can't?
It's an all-weather fighter and operates in the same conditions as any other all-weather fighter.

 

You know... I went to google and typed in 'f22 and rain' and the link you posted was the second one. AFTER a link from the Wash Post citing problems with rain and etc.

So... nice 10 seconds at google skipping the link you didn't want to acknowledge.

I know(casually) a pilot who flies them and we've discussed the planes a bit.

What I posted is accurate. Rain and dust have caused serious problems with that plane, including after the propaganda piece from the Air Force that was linked to above which claims there are none.

That plane was designed to be difficult to cancel from the start, and it's a bit of a disaster. But since it was a perfect example of how the military industrial complex works, it will very difficult to cancel as a project because they very carefully distributed the project over like 45 states. So they have 45 senators and even more congressmen defending it politically. As well as Air Force propaganda to defend their budget and their 'baby'.

Here's an excerpt from an article a little father down the 'f22 and rain' google search, note the date, it's months after the propaganda piece Nasor linked to saying there were NO problems with rain:

No surprise that in this article there is more Air Force propaganda to defend this. They call these problems 'normal', months after the Air Force strongly denied there were any problems with rain at all. In a court of law that's called "credibility issues".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

From your link.
It's not an F-22 problem per se so much as an airframe/ systems integration problem.
F-22s operate from much the same bases as any other fighter, under much the same conditions.

The original assertion (not from you, simply with regard to F-22) was

That's what's not true.

 

It doesn't need cancelling; production finishes this year (I think it's this year, for the last four) and the production lines are already closing down.
After that... zip.

 

SU-30 MK has way more maneuverability than F-22.

 

The new PAK FA has already better characteristics than junk F-22.

 

Source?
Link?
Actual figures?

Which characteristics?
Source?
Link?
Anyone can make an absolutely brilliant one-off, what will it be like when (if) it's in production?

More rabid, unthinking pro-Russian waffle.

 

sorry but info on Tu-50 characteristics is classified to westerners.

 

Oh nice get out, but that doesn't excuse you:

And it's NOT Tu-50 (Tu is Tupolev, the T-50 is from Sukhoi), neither is your statement "classified to Westerners" meaningful or helpful: it's classified to many people, including Russians.
I sincerely doubt you know as much about it as I do.
Either way you're in no position to make such claims as "The new PAK FA has already better characteristics than junk F-22" because you don't know.

 

The Sopwith Camel 2012 has better characteristics than either of those.

 

Have you any idea as to why theyre not going to continue this program? How many have they made/sold etc?

 

yeah!! and it has the added bonus of getting bugs in your teeth. Plus, you get to wear one of those nifty scarfs.

 

Cost, AFAIK, and due to cost the USAF didn't get all it wanted (~170 acquired vs. ~380 asked for).

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/
(I make that 168).

 

Well, I might have to agree up to a point. For comparison, there is the video in the first post.Here is 4 videos comparing them:

http://blog.flightstory.net/129/video-f-22-raptor-vs-su-37-vs-su-30-vs-eurofighter-typhoon/

The more important question is, when was the last time when there was a real dogfight between 2 similar characteristic adversaries and what are the chances of occuring it in the future?

I bet not even in the Gulf war was there many real dogfights. The US made sure that Irak's airforce was crippled before fighter jets showed up. Nowadays the machines are so expensive and the pilot program costly and timeconsuming that the military can't efford to lose lots of them. So they are not engaged until airsuperority is already there...

And against boxcutters and people hiding in the mountains in caves they are ineffective....For football games for a flyover they don't need to be very maneuverable, flying a straight line will do...

 

Depends what you mean by "dogfight".
Guns kills? Falklands, probably.
Close range air-air missiles? Kosovo, maybe.
Chances in the future?
Depends who's fighting.
Combat persistence (i.e. on board kills - the number of missiles carried) of F-22 is fairly low: when you run out of missiles and there's still bad guys left in the air the average fighter jock isn't going to say "Time to go home" he's going to mix it - a gun is the one air-air system that the bad guy can't spoof.
Interestingly (that's a euphemism) F-35 is intended to carry only a podded (and therefore less than accurate) gun.

Not quite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War_air_campaign

Um, fighters are how you get air superiority... (traditionally at least. There's always Dr. Alfred Price's dictum: "The ultimate in air superiority is a tank in the middle of the runway").