By: GoldenPawn
- 25th September 2015 at 09:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We have lived with the propaganda and hype about the power the F-22 too long. From year 2000 to 2012.
1. F-22 is not a stealth aircraft world number one. F-35 has RCS smaller than F-22
2. The F-22 is not the aircraft avionics world number one. F-35, Typhoon and Rafale have even better technology on F-22's systems
3. The F-22 is not the most maneuverable aircraft world. Su-27/30/35, Rafale, F-15C, F-16C/E, Typhoon even J-10/11 are the maneuverability aircraft F-22 higher
4. F-22 in the duel with Typhoon, EA-18G, Rafale ....! F-22 are intended to fail.
5. F-22 aircraft is the only 5th generation no HMDS system, Typhoon, Rafale even MiG-35 are equipped with this system.
6. F-22 aircraft is the only 5th generation without using materials RAM
7. F-22 is struggling to upgrade avionics and weapons. Expected in the period 2017-2020, the F-22 can use the AIM-9X, AIM-120D and HMDS was put on equipment.
8. F-22 is a 5th generation aircraft first encounter many accidents.
9. F-22 does not have the ability to use anti-ship weapon.
10. The maximum speed of the F-22 is inferior to the MiG-21 and F-4
11. Until the present time, the F-22 only use AIM-9M, AIM-120C5/6 (unknown F-22 can use version AIM-12C7)
By: A and D
- 25th September 2015 at 11:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1. F-22 is not a stealth aircraft world number one. F-35 has RCS smaller than F-22 I have serious doubts about this.. The Raptor is the only fighter giving emphasis on rear aspect RCS reduction. There might be discrete angles where the F-35 has smaller RCS, but overall value is hardly anywhere near the F-22.
If Lockheed CEO Hewson is to be believed F 35 is the most stealthiest.
Hewson also defended the company's efforts to build the F-35 as adaptable, and "the stealthiest, smartest and most advanced aircraft in history
By: TooCool_12f
- 25th September 2015 at 14:07Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lockheed sells the F-35 and the F-22 production is shut down abd not mikely to restart any time soon... Of course he claims his product is the best, that's his job regardless if it's true or not
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 25th September 2015 at 14:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If Lockheed CEO Hewson is to be believed F 35 is the most stealthiest.
By: snafu352
- 25th September 2015 at 16:38Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What?
Have you heard of any lawsuit filed against any company because their CEO said their latest product is the bestest?
Do you really really really think a CEO is going to come out and say the product they produced prior to the current product, that they are desperate to sell, is better?
Please allow me to introduce you to reality, it seems you have yet to make her acquaintance.
Of course he did, it's his job to say such things. If the F-35 is not the stealthiest then it can only be the F-22 - his company makes both of them. Other candidates: T-50, J-20 are further down the line in service.
By: A and D
- 25th September 2015 at 18:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What? Have you heard of any lawsuit filed against any company because their CEO said their latest product is the bestest?
But that's not what I have said. And you have to be specific and not talk in general terms.
Do you really really really think a CEO is going to come out and say the product they produced prior to the current product, that they are desperate to sell, is better?
That's not what we were told. Lockheed had said the F 22 is the stealthiest aircraft ever built. They maintained this line even when the F-35 was being produced. Now they say the F-35 is the most stealthy aircraft. Question is, if stealth is the primary factor then why use the F-22 at all?
who exactly would be filing a lawsuit against this claim?:confused:
USAF of course. Because they were told the F 22 is more stealthy.
By: Vnomad
- 25th September 2015 at 19:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's not what we were told. Lockheed had said the F 22 is the stealthiest aircraft ever built. They maintained this line even when the F-35 was being produced. Now they say the F-35 is the most stealthy aircraft. Question is, if stealth is the primary factor then why use the F-22 at all?
The F-22 is long out of production. There's a decade's gap between that and the F-35.
USAF of course. Because they were told the F 22 is more stealthy.
You've got that backwards. The JSF program's requirements vis a vis stealth requirement were less stringent that that for the ATF program, as drafted by the US DoD (incl. the USAF). Based on cost considerations. However, recent statements coming from the USAF & LM suggest that the RCS actually delivered was well above spec, bettering the F-22. Critics say that, if true, this only applies to new jets and that the effective RCS will rise with time and usage.
New
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere
- 25th September 2015 at 21:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It hasn't been contradicted by anyone even from the USAF. Lockheed is the same company that designed the F-22. They will know better.
Sure, they will know better.. But it is the F-35 they are advertising for sale and the F-22 they are not.. so it kinda makes the whole thing very suspicious..
Anyway, if you guys tend to believe that an aircraft with so little emphasis put on rear aspect RCS reduction still somehow gets more stealthy than the Raptor, then my best bet is that the T-50 can be stealthier, too.. Something tells me that you're NOT gonna like that.. :)
Have you heard of any lawsuit filed against Lockheed because their CEO made this claim?
That's another joke, right? Both aircraft are ITAR classified but hey, let's steal the data and sue their CEO for false advertising..
By: FBW
- 25th September 2015 at 22:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sure, they will know better.. But it is the F-35 they are advertising for sale and the F-22 they are not.. so it kinda makes the whole thing very suspicious..
Anyway, if you guys tend to believe that an aircraft with so little emphasis put on rear aspect RCS reduction still somehow gets more stealthy than the Raptor, then my best bet is that the T-50 can be stealthier, too.. Something tells me that you're NOT gonna like that.. :)
That's another joke, right? Both aircraft are ITAR classified but hey, let's steal the data and sue their CEO for false advertising..
There are nuances in what is released for public consumption. The F-35 could have a lower frontal RCS than the F-22 and still have an all-aspect RCS several times greater. Considering how both are to be employed, one NEEDS to have a lower RCS from all angles, one does not. We do know that the RAM used in the F-35 is both more effective and more durable as the F-22 is being retrofitted with RAM developed for the F-35.
You have a tendency to read into the statements related to the F-35 with askew perspective. A statement can be both correct and purposely misleading. It is not in the best interests of any nation to release unequivocal statements related to the performance of a particular platform.
It is too early to make any pronouncements on the T-50 being "stealthier" than any other fifth gen platform. Personally, I want to see how the development program addresses the obvious hot spots, or doesn't depending on the design goals. It is a leap to assume that the RuAF puts the same emphasis on RCS over maintainability/cost effectiveness that the USAF has.
By: F/A-XX
- 26th September 2015 at 00:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'll give blackadam the benefit of the doubt and assume he was on drugs when he wrote this absolute nonsense.
The greatest flaw of the F-22 is that we ended production too early with too few aircraft built. Its other weaknesses (lack of helmet mounted sight for example) can largely be corrected. It would be great if it had some more internal fuel to work with but it still beats the F-15C in that regard.
It's inaccurate to say that the F-22's engine nozzles are "fixed". Chances are they are still less efficient than a variable asymmetric nozzle but they still adjust for the thrust of the engine.
By: Sheogorath
- 26th September 2015 at 03:59Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
F-22 processor system is less than iphone 6. F-22 just as the technology of the 1990s
That's completely irrelevant. Fighter jets just don't need to computer power of an iPhone. A fighter jet's CPU doesn't need to generate 3D graphics, nor play music, nor any of the trivial but computer intensive crap phones do nowadays.
By: topspeed
- 26th September 2015 at 07:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's completely irrelevant. Fighter jets just don't need to computer power of an iPhone. A fighter jet's CPU doesn't need to generate 3D graphics, nor play music, nor any of the trivial but computer intensive crap phones do nowadays.
Buy a SONY ( xperia ) phone...seems to work just fine...and they haven't violated thousands of patents like the few other brands have.
New
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon
- 26th September 2015 at 10:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
disagree about that statement on the switch from all around stealth to just frontal.
quite a number of designs continued using F-22 or similar 2-D butts in their design.
the only reason why others continue using traditional 3d ones is because they can't or decided not to.
By: Andraxxus
- 26th September 2015 at 14:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I agree its not happening at 20k feet. He probably mis-spoke. Don't think air shows are really relevant. But point again was that the (F-15) pilot put the F-22 on a pedestal when it comes to BFM.
I don't see why people think airshows are NOT relevant. It happens anywhere from 0 to M1.0, at sea level, it readily demonstrates the S/L (read = best) kinematics of the aircraft.
But again, even with 'we more than held our own' comments, that admiration for the F-22 still filters through. I find it hard to believe that its, as you suggest, entirely unfounded.
Well, F-22 is the best air superiority fighter currently flying. I don't see why it should not be admired. Possibly, they were suprised that their Typhoon bested the maneuverability of F-22.
“What the aircraft can do, it’s incredible. The Typhoon just doesn’t do that.”
Typhoon cannot even do X-31 doing what's the point? Since when TVC has a single effect on "turn rates" or "excess power"? As the name implies "post-stall maneuverability" means aircraft is stalled. Available lift (and maneuverability) is smaller than Clmax (equals to best turn rate).
If wingloading divided by lift coefficient is lower, an aircraft will turn tighter. TVC won't change that.
The greatest flaw of the F-22 is that we ended production too early with too few aircraft built. Its other weaknesses (lack of helmet mounted sight for example) can largely be corrected. It would be great if it had some more internal fuel to work with but it still beats the F-15C in that regard.
I don't think it beats:
Wing area = 56m2 to 78 m2 = 39% increase.
Airfoil = 64A203 to 64Ax05.92 = Thicker airfoil corresponds to higher drag coefficient.
Thrust = 108kN to 156 kN = 44% increase.
Yet fuel increase is from 6385 kg to 8200 kg, only 28% improvement. So F-15C will exceed F-22 in both flight range, and full AB combat persistance.
BTW; I do believe F-35 may have better overall RCS than F-22.
-Its newer, Its RCS material is better and seen as F-22 upgrade.
-Its physically much smaller, around 67% if we take mass, 55% if we take wing area.
-DSI is known to have RCS improvements compared to splitter plate.
So these should automatically translate to better frontal and side RCS.
Rear RCS?
there is mentioned "round" exhaust. F-35's fuselage is not circular, only nozzle is. If we talk about the fuselage, F-22's rear fueselage is equally curved, and it has stinger between engines whereas F-35's rear fuselage is much cleaner. On wings and elevators, F-22 has 3 parallel surfaces visible at the rear (that follow Leading Edge, Trailing Edge, and there is cropped wingtips), F-35 has only 1 (only Trailing Edge); thats a big improvement translates to less spike zones than F-22. Again I want to mention F-35 is much smaller than F-22. Nozzle may or maynot be problematic. It does have RCS threatments, and since there is only 1 nozzle, even if it has twice RCS return of F-22's, overall RCS won't be bigger than F-22s.
This is all wild speculation, but I don't think we should dismiss the possiblity of F-35 having better *overall* RCS than F-22.
Posts: 206
By: GoldenPawn - 25th September 2015 at 09:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
what do you smoke, it seems a good one weed
Posts: 130
By: A and D - 25th September 2015 at 11:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If Lockheed CEO Hewson is to be believed F 35 is the most stealthiest.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/bizwatch/2015/02/22/lockheed-maryllin-hewson/23628169/
Posts: 3,259
By: TooCool_12f - 25th September 2015 at 14:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lockheed sells the F-35 and the F-22 production is shut down abd not mikely to restart any time soon... Of course he claims his product is the best, that's his job regardless if it's true or not
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 25th September 2015 at 14:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's a joke, right? :)
Posts: 2,661
By: Vnomad - 25th September 2015 at 15:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Gen Mike Hostage said something similar.
Posts: 130
By: A and D - 25th September 2015 at 16:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It hasn't been contradicted by anyone even from the USAF. Lockheed is the same company that designed the F-22. They will know better.
Have you heard of any lawsuit filed against Lockheed because their CEO made this claim?
Posts: 2,248
By: snafu352 - 25th September 2015 at 16:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What?
Have you heard of any lawsuit filed against any company because their CEO said their latest product is the bestest?
Do you really really really think a CEO is going to come out and say the product they produced prior to the current product, that they are desperate to sell, is better?
Please allow me to introduce you to reality, it seems you have yet to make her acquaintance.
Posts: 2,814
By: Levsha - 25th September 2015 at 16:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Of course he did, it's his job to say such things. If the F-35 is not the stealthiest then it can only be the F-22 - his company makes both of them. Other candidates: T-50, J-20 are further down the line in service.
Posts: 2,814
By: Levsha - 25th September 2015 at 16:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
who exactly would be filing a lawsuit against this claim?:confused:
Posts: 427
By: Peregrinefalcon - 25th September 2015 at 18:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You are welcome...if it`s directed to me ;)
Posts: 130
By: A and D - 25th September 2015 at 18:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But that's not what I have said. And you have to be specific and not talk in general terms.
That's not what we were told. Lockheed had said the F 22 is the stealthiest aircraft ever built. They maintained this line even when the F-35 was being produced. Now they say the F-35 is the most stealthy aircraft. Question is, if stealth is the primary factor then why use the F-22 at all?
USAF of course. Because they were told the F 22 is more stealthy.
Posts: 2,661
By: Vnomad - 25th September 2015 at 19:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-22 is long out of production. There's a decade's gap between that and the F-35.
You've got that backwards. The JSF program's requirements vis a vis stealth requirement were less stringent that that for the ATF program, as drafted by the US DoD (incl. the USAF). Based on cost considerations. However, recent statements coming from the USAF & LM suggest that the RCS actually delivered was well above spec, bettering the F-22. Critics say that, if true, this only applies to new jets and that the effective RCS will rise with time and usage.
Posts: 8,850
By: MSphere - 25th September 2015 at 21:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sure, they will know better.. But it is the F-35 they are advertising for sale and the F-22 they are not.. so it kinda makes the whole thing very suspicious..Anyway, if you guys tend to believe that an aircraft with so little emphasis put on rear aspect RCS reduction still somehow gets more stealthy than the Raptor, then my best bet is that the T-50 can be stealthier, too.. Something tells me that you're NOT gonna like that.. :)
That's another joke, right? Both aircraft are ITAR classified but hey, let's steal the data and sue their CEO for false advertising..
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 25th September 2015 at 22:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There are nuances in what is released for public consumption. The F-35 could have a lower frontal RCS than the F-22 and still have an all-aspect RCS several times greater. Considering how both are to be employed, one NEEDS to have a lower RCS from all angles, one does not. We do know that the RAM used in the F-35 is both more effective and more durable as the F-22 is being retrofitted with RAM developed for the F-35.
You have a tendency to read into the statements related to the F-35 with askew perspective. A statement can be both correct and purposely misleading. It is not in the best interests of any nation to release unequivocal statements related to the performance of a particular platform.
It is too early to make any pronouncements on the T-50 being "stealthier" than any other fifth gen platform. Personally, I want to see how the development program addresses the obvious hot spots, or doesn't depending on the design goals. It is a leap to assume that the RuAF puts the same emphasis on RCS over maintainability/cost effectiveness that the USAF has.
Posts: 203
By: F/A-XX - 26th September 2015 at 00:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I'll give blackadam the benefit of the doubt and assume he was on drugs when he wrote this absolute nonsense.
The greatest flaw of the F-22 is that we ended production too early with too few aircraft built. Its other weaknesses (lack of helmet mounted sight for example) can largely be corrected. It would be great if it had some more internal fuel to work with but it still beats the F-15C in that regard.
It's inaccurate to say that the F-22's engine nozzles are "fixed". Chances are they are still less efficient than a variable asymmetric nozzle but they still adjust for the thrust of the engine.
Posts: 176
By: Sheogorath - 26th September 2015 at 03:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's completely irrelevant. Fighter jets just don't need to computer power of an iPhone. A fighter jet's CPU doesn't need to generate 3D graphics, nor play music, nor any of the trivial but computer intensive crap phones do nowadays.
Posts: 2,619
By: topspeed - 26th September 2015 at 07:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Buy a SONY ( xperia ) phone...seems to work just fine...and they haven't violated thousands of patents like the few other brands have.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 26th September 2015 at 10:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
disagree about that statement on the switch from all around stealth to just frontal.
quite a number of designs continued using F-22 or similar 2-D butts in their design.
the only reason why others continue using traditional 3d ones is because they can't or decided not to.
Posts: 932
By: Andraxxus - 26th September 2015 at 14:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't see why people think airshows are NOT relevant. It happens anywhere from 0 to M1.0, at sea level, it readily demonstrates the S/L (read = best) kinematics of the aircraft.
Well, F-22 is the best air superiority fighter currently flying. I don't see why it should not be admired. Possibly, they were suprised that their Typhoon bested the maneuverability of F-22.
Typhoon cannot even do X-31 doing what's the point? Since when TVC has a single effect on "turn rates" or "excess power"? As the name implies "post-stall maneuverability" means aircraft is stalled. Available lift (and maneuverability) is smaller than Clmax (equals to best turn rate).
If wingloading divided by lift coefficient is lower, an aircraft will turn tighter. TVC won't change that.
I don't think it beats:
Wing area = 56m2 to 78 m2 = 39% increase.
Airfoil = 64A203 to 64Ax05.92 = Thicker airfoil corresponds to higher drag coefficient.
Thrust = 108kN to 156 kN = 44% increase.
Yet fuel increase is from 6385 kg to 8200 kg, only 28% improvement. So F-15C will exceed F-22 in both flight range, and full AB combat persistance.
BTW; I do believe F-35 may have better overall RCS than F-22.
-Its newer, Its RCS material is better and seen as F-22 upgrade.
-Its physically much smaller, around 67% if we take mass, 55% if we take wing area.
-DSI is known to have RCS improvements compared to splitter plate.
So these should automatically translate to better frontal and side RCS.
Rear RCS?
there is mentioned "round" exhaust. F-35's fuselage is not circular, only nozzle is. If we talk about the fuselage, F-22's rear fueselage is equally curved, and it has stinger between engines whereas F-35's rear fuselage is much cleaner. On wings and elevators, F-22 has 3 parallel surfaces visible at the rear (that follow Leading Edge, Trailing Edge, and there is cropped wingtips), F-35 has only 1 (only Trailing Edge); thats a big improvement translates to less spike zones than F-22. Again I want to mention F-35 is much smaller than F-22. Nozzle may or maynot be problematic. It does have RCS threatments, and since there is only 1 nozzle, even if it has twice RCS return of F-22's, overall RCS won't be bigger than F-22s.
This is all wild speculation, but I don't think we should dismiss the possiblity of F-35 having better *overall* RCS than F-22.
Posts: 584
By: Robbiesmurf - 26th September 2015 at 16:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You throw an awful lot of figures around Andraxxus, do you actually understand them?