F-22 Article in Aviation Week

[mzaharis]

Thought you folks might find this interesting. There are a few more articles available if you have a subscription, but this one doesn't require a subscription. It describes the F-22 as a VERY impressive piece of hardware, a real game-changer.

Raptor Scores in Alaskan Exercise
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?id=news/aw010807p1.xml

 

[Newpilot2b]

Good read.
Sometimes its just not fair!

 

[MarineGrunt]

Oh yeah? Just wait til they go up against the Indian Air Force....!

 

[mzaharis]

Oh yeah? Just wait til they go up against the Indian Air Force....!

How are they going to change the "rules of engagement" to make Cope India an even fight ths time - ground them? :beer:

 

[mzaharis]

Good read.
Sometimes its just not fair!

Mind you, I don't fly these things, so my opinion doesn't matter, but there's an "Air and Space Smithsonian" article which describes going to combat in an F-22 as being comparable to "clubbing baby seals" (quote of an F-22 pilot). Sometimes, an unfair fight is just what's needed, and I'm glad it's available to (too few of) our pilots!

I particularly like this line, indicating its datalink capabilities:

"However, these messages are less and less verbal. "When you watch [tapes of the Alaska] exercise, it's fairly spooky," says Gen. Ronald Keys, chief of Air Combat Command. "There's hardly a word spoken among Raptor pilots." That silence also previews some of the fighter's possible future capabilities."

 

[JimNtexas]

It's a good plane, but we are buying too many of them.

 

[Deuce130]

It's a good plane, but we are buying too many of them.

I don't think we're buying enough. As any good airlift general will tell you, it ain't about lift capability, it's about tails on the ramp. What good is a C-17 that can carry as much as 3 C-130's when you have 3 small loads that have to go to three different places? The same deal with fighters. So what if 1 F-22 can do the work of a 4-Ship of Eagles? That only works if all the fighting is in the same place at the same time. Sure would be nice of the Chinese AF to only fly when we happen to have our Raptor sorties scheduled, but I don't think they'll cooperate. If we truly buy into the superiority argument of the F-22 (which I do) then you have to have enough of them to cover the entire vul period - each and every vul period. You only get that capability with enough tails on the ramp to replace our current tails. Unless of course the new doctrine will be to fly 2-ships instead of 4-ships.

 

[Scrapdog]

It's a good plane, but we are buying too many of them.

Jim - I know you're totally against the F-22 from your prior posts and I will not try to change your point of view. I will just point out a few experiences I've had with the Raptor personally.

In my illustrious AF career (I'm saying that in good humor), I've provided "red air" to the F-22 around 7-8 times...if I remember right (maybe more). A few times in the F-15, and a few in the F-16. I've provided red air to the F-22's at Nellis for the guys flying it in the OT phase, red air to the fellas flying it at the schoolhouse at Tyndall, and red air for the guys flying it operationally at Langley. I've fought them during DCA, opposed SAT, during ACM, and during BFM. When the F-22 is on its game and is fully operational, the words to describe its capability are beyond amazing. On a broad level, each F-22 can target multiple (and I mean multiple) bandito's flying full up against them with the bandit's having little to no SA on where the F-22 is. With its supercruise and high altitude capes - the jet is dropping JDAM's at ridiculous ranges. And close in for BFM...well the nose authority and alpha it can generate is just gross. No 4th generation threat right now can hold a candle to it when you've got a competent pilot behind the controls of a full up Raptor.

They can operate in 2 ships and have the same - if not more - capability and SA than a 4 or 8 ship of F-15's. The only issue at that point becomes the F-22's gas and WRM considerations.

If you look at pure costs...as Deuce said...we need more F-22's, not less. A new F-22 is extremely expensive, but an 8 ship of F-15's is just as costly - if not more in manpower due to the increasing maintenance perspective. Our current fleet of F-15's and F-16's is getting older by the day, and now is just a good a time as any at funding a new stealthy fighter...especially if you look at the increasing threats that China and N. Korea have with their double digit SAM's and growing air force's thanks to the Russian hooligans willing to sell to anyone with enough money. Remember Jim, you need to look at the threats in the next 15-20 years just as much as the ones right in front of your nose.

I know you served your country in the F-111 as a Nav and for that I thank you. But don't you think your outlook on air superiority is a bit myopic based on your background? That is not a flame, please don't take it that way - just a simple question. If you actually saw the capes of the F-22 firsthand, I'd take a bet anyday that you'd change your tune within seconds.

 

[dtfl]

Jim - I know you're totally against the F-22 from your prior posts and I will not try to change your point of view. I will just point out a few experiences I've had with the Raptor personally.

In my illustrious AF career (I'm saying that in good humor), I've provided "red air" to the F-22 around 7-8 times...if I remember right (maybe more). A few times in the F-15, and a few in the F-16. I've provided red air to the F-22's at Nellis for the guys flying it in the OT phase, red air to the fellas flying it at the schoolhouse at Tyndall, and red air for the guys flying it operationally at Langley. I've fought them during DCA, opposed SAT, during ACM, and during BFM. When the F-22 is on its game and is fully operational, the words to describe its capability are beyond amazing. On a broad level, each F-22 can target multiple (and I mean multiple) bandito's flying full up against them with the bandit's having little to no SA on where the F-22 is. With its supercruise and high altitude capes - the jet is dropping JDAM's at ridiculous ranges. And close in for BFM...well the nose authority and alpha it can generate is just gross. No 4th generation threat right now can hold a candle to it when you've got a competent pilot behind the controls of a full up Raptor.

They can operate in 2 ships and have the same - if not more - capability and SA than a 4 or 8 ship of F-15's. The only issue at that point becomes the F-22's gas and WRM considerations.

If you look at pure costs...as Deuce said...we need more F-22's, not less. A new F-22 is extremely expensive, but an 8 ship of F-15's is just as costly - if not more in manpower due to the increasing maintenance perspective. Our current fleet of F-15's and F-16's is getting older by the day, and now is just a good a time as any at funding a new stealthy fighter...especially if you look at the increasing threats that China and N. Korea have with their double digit SAM's and growing air force's thanks to the Russian hooligans willing to sell to anyone with enough money. Remember Jim, you need to look at the threats in the next 15-20 years just as much as the ones right in front of your nose.

I know you served your country in the F-111 as a Nav and for that I thank you. But don't you think your outlook on air superiority is a bit myopic based on your background? That is not a flame, please don't take it that way - just a simple question. If you actually saw the capes of the F-22 firsthand, I'd take a bet anyday that you'd change your tune within seconds.

Honest question - if the jet wasn't on it's game and had a pilot on an off day (we all get them) - how would it fare? Reason I ask is F4 buds told me how they beat F15s in the old days - but Im not sure this is the same type of contest.
And on another note - when the F35 becomes operational allows the F22 to perform OCA/DCA only (I am assuming that will happen) - wil that help with the lower #s we are buying?

 

[Scrapdog]

Honest question - if the jet wasn't on it's game and had a pilot on an off day (we all get them) - how would it fare? Reason I ask is F4 buds told me how they beat F15s in the old days - but Im not sure this is the same type of contest.
And on another note - when the F35 becomes operational allows the F22 to perform OCA/DCA only (I am assuming that will happen) - wil that help with the lower #s we are buying?

Well...I guess I'll give you the famous weapons school answer - it depends! LOL Honestly, I'm not sure how it would do if both the jet and the pilot were off on their A games because there are so many variables with each mission being so dynamic. I did fly a few sorties against a guy going through IPUG (in the F22 at Nellis) and he didn't have his A game on and busted the ride. I don't really recall if we got in untargeted on that one...however we may have.

I don't think the F4 vs. F15 comparison is quite fair. The F22 is NOT a conventional fighter - the whole stealth capability adds another entire dimension to BVR tactics and the way it employs which none of our current front line fighters posses (besides the Raptor of course).

When the F-35 comes out, I do think we'll probably see a shift of the F22 doing more OCA/DCA type scenarios...however IMHO it will still keep its role in doing TST as well. It has that logic built into its software already - and with the new SDB coming on line, the Raptor will pack quite a punch with big time BVR air-air capes as well as extremely long range precision bombing abilities.

 

[DaveGriffin]

Well...I guess I'll give you the famous weapons school answer - it depends! LOL Honestly, I'm not sure how it would do if both the jet and the pilot were off on their A games because there are so many variables with each mission being so dynamic. I did fly a few sorties against a guy going through IPUG (in the F22 at Nellis) and he didn't have his A game on and busted the ride. I don't really recall if we got in untargeted on that one...however we may have.

I don't think the F4 vs. F15 comparison is quite fair. The F22 is NOT a conventional fighter - the whole stealth capability adds another entire dimension to BVR tactics and the way it employs which none of our current front line fighters posses (besides the Raptor of course).

When the F-35 comes out, I do think we'll probably see a shift of the F22 doing more OCA/DCA type scenarios...however IMHO it will still keep its role in doing TST as well. It has that logic built into its software already - and with the new SDB coming on line, the Raptor will pack quite a punch with big time BVR air-air capes as well as extremely long range precision bombing abilities.

"Pack quite a punch" and SDB don't belong in the same sentence. The SDB certainly has its place, but don't mischaracterize it. It's a little bomb developed so that the F-22 can carry a couple of bombs and justify the /A tacked onto the F-22's model designator.

 

[Scrapdog]

"Pack quite a punch" and SDB don't belong in the same sentence. The SDB certainly has its place, but don't mischaracterize it. It's a little bomb developed so that the F-22 can carry a couple of bombs and justify the /A tacked onto the F-22's model designator.

Dave - as usual, you don't have a friggin clue. With the F22, the SDB will be able to be dropped much further than any AF or Navy fighter currently on the books. And the Raptor will be able to carry quite a few of them. Not only does the little guy pack quite a punch - it minimizes the collateral damage substantially vs. the 500, 1000, & 2000 pounders we've currently got. (But you already know all this I'm sure since you're such an expert on Global Strike Capes). Just in case you forgot in your brilliance, here's part of an article from globalsecurity.org:

The Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) is half the weight of the smallest bomb the Air Force uses today, the 500-pound Mark 82. It uses a 250 pound-class warhead that has demonstrated penetration of more than 6 feet of reinforced concrete. Utilizing a smaller weapon improves aircraft load-out and mission effectiveness. The size and accuracy of small diameter bombs allows aircraft to carry more munitions to more targets and strike them more effectively with less collateral damage. Because of its capabilities, the Small Diameter Bomb system is an important element of the Air Force's Global Strike Task Force.

The Small Smart Bomb is a 250 pound weapon that has the same penetration capabilities as a 2000lb BLU-109, but with only 50 pounds of explosive. The 250 pound-class warhead that has demonstrated penetration of more than 6 feet of reinforced concrete. With the INS/GPS guidance in conjunction with differential GPS (using all 12 channel receivers, instead of only 5) corrections provided by GPS SPO Accuracy Improvement Initiative (AII) and improved Target Location Error (TLE), it can achieve a 5-8m CEP. The munition, with a smart fuze, has been extensively tested against multi-layered targets by Wright Laboratory under the Hard Target Ordnance Program and Miniature Munitions Technology Program. The length to diameter ratio and nose shape are designed to optimize penetration for a 50lb charge. This weapon is also a potential payload for standoff carrier vehicles such as Tomahawk, JSOW, JASSM, Conventional ICBM, etc.

Dave - I think all your BS about carrier landings suits you better than bellying up to the bar on a subject you obviously have absolutely no SA about.

 

[SIG600]

Dave - I think all your BS about carrier landings suits you better than bellying up to the bar on a subject you obviously have absolutely no SA about.

He dosen't know anything about landing on the boat either... don't encourage him.

 

[Huggyu2]

New F-16 with all the trimmings: ~$50M
F-22: $230M
Scrapdogs rebuttal on SDB's: priceless.

 

[414Flyer]

Dave - as usual, you don't have a friggin clue. With the F22, the SDB will be able to be dropped much further than any AF or Navy fighter currently on the books. And the Raptor will be able to carry quite a few of them. Not only does the little guy pack quite a punch - it minimizes the collateral damage substantially vs. the 500, 1000, & 2000 pounders we've currently got. (But you already know all this I'm sure since you're such an expert on Global Strike Capes). Just in case you forgot in your brilliance, here's part of an article from globalsecurity.org:

The Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) is half the weight of the smallest bomb the Air Force uses today, the 500-pound Mark 82. It uses a 250 pound-class warhead that has demonstrated penetration of more than 6 feet of reinforced concrete. Utilizing a smaller weapon improves aircraft load-out and mission effectiveness. The size and accuracy of small diameter bombs allows aircraft to carry more munitions to more targets and strike them more effectively with less collateral damage. Because of its capabilities, the Small Diameter Bomb system is an important element of the Air Force's Global Strike Task Force.

The Small Smart Bomb is a 250 pound weapon that has the same penetration capabilities as a 2000lb BLU-109, but with only 50 pounds of explosive. The 250 pound-class warhead that has demonstrated penetration of more than 6 feet of reinforced concrete. With the INS/GPS guidance in conjunction with differential GPS (using all 12 channel receivers, instead of only 5) corrections provided by GPS SPO Accuracy Improvement Initiative (AII) and improved Target Location Error (TLE), it can achieve a 5-8m CEP. The munition, with a smart fuze, has been extensively tested against multi-layered targets by Wright Laboratory under the Hard Target Ordnance Program and Miniature Munitions Technology Program. The length to diameter ratio and nose shape are designed to optimize penetration for a 50lb charge. This weapon is also a potential payload for standoff carrier vehicles such as Tomahawk, JSOW, JASSM, Conventional ICBM, etc.

Dave - I think all your BS about carrier landings suits you better than bellying up to the bar on a subject you obviously have absolutely no SA about.

Also, its not the F/A-22, its the F-22. The A thing was short lived.

 

[DaveGriffin]

Another aviation week article. Looks like the Predator B is better suited to ISR ops in Iraq than the F-22. Good thing, the Predator B is a lot cheaper and can be operated fron a double wide in NV.
Whatever ends up working best, the bad guys are in some deep sh*t.



Aviation Week and Space Technology

Technology Will Be Key to Iraq Buildup

Jan 14, 2007 By David A. Fulghum

Any U.S. military surge in Iraq will be far more than a troop increase.
A key element in the deployment will be an accelerated effort to bring more and newer technologies to bear on the foe, in part by targeting insurgent commanders, often through their communication networks, say Pentagon and aerospace industry specialists. Even the F-22 with its advanced electronic surveillance and analysis capability is being considered for deployment into theater from Okinawa this year during the stealth fighter's first air expeditionary force assignment.
The Pentagon is scrambling--in tandem with a crash reworking of the 2008 President's budget, due in February--to make sure that the ground force in Iraq, enlarged by 21,500 troops, will "have more advanced technology tools to work with," says a retired U.S. Army official with insight into the service's preparations. "There's certainly going to be more precision weapons available and more special operations teams that can provide precision targeting." But what the military really will be focusing on are electronic emitters, primarily communications used by insurgents.
One goal of the technology infusion in Iraq will be to decapitate the leadership of some insurgent cells quickly and map their communications to reveal additional layers of their networks. Well before the White House's call for troop increases last week, the military and industry were conducting an urgent examination of sensors and weapons that could provide more network-centric-based options for increasing the clout of what's expected to be a relatively small and difficult-to-sustain increase in ground forces.
"Will there be more airpower going to Iraq in the next days, weeks, months? Hell, yes," says a senior Air Force official. "The plan is to clear some insurgent areas and militia strongholds in Baghdad and keep them cleared. There will be precision weapons applied wherever there's an enclave, a storage area or logistics activity--boom, boom, boom. It will be fixed-wing attack of critical targets within urban areas."
In fact, the number of suitable weapons for precision attacks with minimum collateral damage is growing. The 250-lb. Small-Diameter Bomb (SDB) made its debut in theater last year, providing close air support to ground troops. Meanwhile, the Air Force continues work on a new variant called the Focused Lethality Munition (FLM), which will combine an SDB casing with a new explosive fill that will confine the weapon's blast effects to within 100 ft. of its detonation point. Boeing is the contractor for both SDB and FLM.
A surge in aviation would accompany any increases in ground forces, agrees former Air Force chief of staff, Gen. (ret.) John Jumper. "The numbers of locations, of patrols, the tasking through the combatant commander are accompanied by everything that goes along with that--more logistics, fuel and support from the air and sea," he says.
........
At the heart of the effort will be unmanned and manned aircraft networked to a greater degree than ever before. However, that doesn't mean a large number of UAVs will be shipped to Iraq even though they are available. The bottleneck is in the U.S. There the shortage of "cockpits" and aircrews (located at Nellis AFB, and Creech AFB, Nev.) needed to fly the unmanned systems operating in Iraq and Afghanistan is the limiting factor.
Those monitoring these programs say there will be additional UAVs deployed, including some new designs; but primarily changes will involve improved ISR capabilities for existing UAVs such as the Global Hawk and Predator. Another thrust will be the addition of improved network-centric warfare systems that, by linking the output of many platforms, can provide wider coverage and better situational awareness for the ground troops.
While unmanned aircraft will sometimes carry weapons, the primary thrust (at least initially) will be to focus on beefing up the ISR payloads on UAVs while relying on manned aircraft to provide precision delivery of weapons.
"The Air Force has lots of strike capability, but not enough [ISR] collection," a Pentagon official says. Therefore, the need for linkages between manned and unmanned aircraft and operators on the ground will be "a driving emphasis," he says.
What's being batted back and forth in Pentagon planning circles is whether to use the advanced electronic surveillance capabilities of the F-22 Raptor, which will have its first expeditionary deployment this summer.
Right now the stealth fighter doesn't have the data links installed that would let it instantaneously deliver its high-resolution data to other aircraft and ground stations. Until the new, low-probability-of-intercept communications are on the fighter, getting the electronic order of battle (what's emitting and where) information off the aircraft will always have to wait until the aircraft lands and the data can be downloaded (AW&ST Jan. 8, p. 47).
"F-22 doesn't have the link, and crucial to the network-centric improvements [in Iraq] is being able to move the data," the Pentagon official says. The effort to support the new surge "is really an integration issue," he says. "F-22 deployment is still a maybe. The increase in ISR collection capability will be done primarily with unmanned aircraft." Even the Predator B, which has six weapons stations and is expected to deploy to Iraq, would devote most of its payload to sensors rather than missiles.
"They've been close to sending it in once or twice before," Jumper says. "That wouldn't surprise me at all. It would be able to do a lot more" in the ISR world than conventional aircraft. The F-22 does a different mission."
Others think not. "The F-22 community is itching to go, but I don't think it's going to happen," an Air Force official says. "There are airplanes already there and you don't really need it. As for a surge, the only thing you could do for the next two years is additional ISR payloads for Predators and Global Hawk."
With Amy Butler in Washington.