US Stealth Air Fleet mostly grounded?

[dysta 10]

Yeah, the new generation stealth (actually low observability) aircraft might have a larger radar cross-section but they're also faster, more maneuverable and better armed, which makes them more effective.

I'm rather afraid that S400 with UHF radar system could put F-22 in misery even in maximum speed.

[rangerpl 13]

I'm rather afraid that S400 with UHF radar system could put F-22 in misery even in maximum speed.

That's true, but even S-400 has its weaknesses. The USAF isn't stupid, they wouldn't send their fighters on a suicide attack towards S-400-defended areas.

[dysta 10]

That's true, but even S-400 has its weaknesses. The USAF isn't stupid, they wouldn't send their fighters on a suicide attack towards S-400-defended areas.

Yep.

There's a rumor about the future of the fighter jet, NOBODY will going to drive that thing when UCAV can perform more than fighter pilot can do (Movie "Stealth"?). I have no idea why people still want to get themselves killed with the fighter jet, which is already overrun human limits.

[dm 9]

Sorry DM that's just not true.

Strong Dejavu! (Tho the nubers seem to have changed now mew facts have come to light)

One day that little factoid might stick properly in my brain, who knows :D

@Dysta, yeah, well, manned fighters were supposed to have been dead in the 50's, and we all know how well the phasing out of aircraft cannons went in the 60's... It'll take a little while longer yet...

[icebreakr 3101]

When two are arguing, third comes out a winner? ;)

[Rovka 14]

Yep.

There's a rumor about the future of the fighter jet, NOBODY will going to drive that thing when UCAV can perform more than fighter pilot can do (Movie "Stealth"?). I have no idea why people still want to get themselves killed with the fighter jet, which is already overrun human limits.

And I don't get the reason why people still go off to war, fighting a handpicked enemy which politicians tell them that these supposedly are.

The reason why stuff is taken out of people's hands, is for their bosses to overrule them, in order to cut down on disobeyed orders in case of having to bomb their own population!

Stuff used abroad, can easily be used against their own populace at a moment's notice, with a silent nod for command. Call me nuts, but never trust your own government!

Those politic folks have way too many shady interests to protect, and it ain't the good for you and me, the jane and joes on the street. Why the damn else would they spend so much on military, instead of financing health-care etc? New ways to create oppression-techniques! That's why..

[rksl-rock 1300]

Strong Dejavu! (Tho the nubers seem to have changed now mew facts have come to light)

One day that little factoid might stick properly in my brain, who knows

LMAO I knew I'd had this conversation before.

Anyway as you say in the 3 years since then a lot more information has come to light. That was the best information i had in 2008 (which, considering the source JSF and Lockeed has turned out to be PR BS, so i cry your pardon ).

Do you still read AFM? Around 6ish months ago there was an article in AFM or Flight (only 2 rags i bother to read now) about the F-117 retirement and the future of stealth etc. (It had a very interesting section about the Serbian shoot down of the F-117). It made some very specific claims and comparisons about RCS and some press conference quotes from a former(?) Lockheed "Stealth" engineering manager re the progression of stealth from the 80's to today. He made several reference to the "compromises" made in "Stealth design" to ensure unrestricted operations with the F-22 and F-35 unlike that of the F-117.

The one I remember more than most is," The F-117 maybe almost invisible to radar but it really isn't aerodynamic."

And there was the infamous video of that F-22 pilot giving a briefing re Indian Su30 vs. F-22 and the future of the F-35. That's on Flight global somewhere. He made several key points about the RCS failings of the F-22 and possibly the F35 against 'longer' wave radars.

I doubt we'll ever see the true figures but the rampant claims of invisibility seem to be coming to and end. With all the cost over runs spending inquiries around F-22 and F-35 snippets of the 'facts' seem to be surfacing. Lots of questions directed at the contractors asking: Are these aircraft invisible? Are they able to actually do what you claim etc? As a result of these public hearings we get to hear just how good these stealthy types are compared to current aircraft. The answer invariably seems to be not as good as we originally claimed.

But as with any tool, you get better results when used correctly. With the right tactics even "low observable" planes might just have the edge over the new generation of air defence radars.

[Star Four One 10]

I think it had it's day.

The secret in "secret weapon" is card that can only be played once.

Imagine instead that it had been a Cold War scenario when F117 first flew, and they took down soviet air defences with it, not Saddams.

Whatever your smoking, I might start.

Stealth will always be a card that will be played upon - the Raptor and F-35 are just another building block for the next Generation of a/c.

Saddam operated one of the most heavily defended SAM networks on the earth, he had one of the largest active militaries, and he had a airforce - a big one. Funny, on Zero hour it was assumed allied air losses would be 40%.

Which reminds me, I should get back to that other thread with your delightful response. Right after I finish my walkaround, and briefing.

S41

[Baff1 0]

Serbia also had one of the most heavily defended SAM networks on earth.

Stealth worked against Saddam, but failed against Serbia.

Why? Because it's secret was out by then.

The first time they used it it couldn't be tracked because no one knew what to look for. The second time they used it, it got shot down.

The third time they used it... oh no there wasn't a third time. the next time they attacked Saddam, they used NAP aircraft to suppress the SAM systems instead.

That's what I mean about secret weapon. A weapon that has been kept secret has no counter.

So stealth was "the be all and end all of airpower" the first time it was used. The enemy knew of no counter for it.

But now, it's just another weapon tech that can be countered by rock, paper or scissors.

If you use stealth, I just use a radar with a longer aerial. Advantage countered.

Edited August 14, 2011 by Baff1

[nowke 1]

something about F-117A nighthawk about serbian Zoltan Dani who shoots a stealth

US pilot after 12 years meet Zoltan

[Fox '09 14]

The F-22 is grounded for Oxygen issues. Several pilots have reported Hypoxia effects over 22,000ft and it is now believed to be the cause of the crash of the F-22 in Alaska.

those scumbags have the nerve to want more money even though we gave them billions of dollars to spend on that damn project.

[Prydain 1]

those scumbags have the nerve to want more money even though we gave them billions of dollars to spend on that damn project.

They have the nerve because' date=' after all the time and money they wasted already, nobody has stopped them.

The F22 is a massive joke that has had the American people throwing their money at Lockheed Martin for [u']zero[/u] gain.

[nodunit 397]

something about F-117A nighthawk about serbian Zoltan Dani who shoots a stealth

US pilot after 12 years meet Zoltan

Touching moment, I wonder what the two talked about..even the handshake alone alone was a great sight, to see that..as opposed to popular belief these days that past enemies will always hate one another in future simply isn't true.

As for why people do it? Who knows it could be any number of things, I have a fascination with helicopters and attack helicopters especially because of their amazing technology and pushing the limits of the mind. At the same time I love silng loading helicopters because they test the dependency and trust of a whole team. In the majority of cases it's more for the backround of the object and what it does not so much the war itself,afterall if you wanted to be a pilot of a particular aircraft, or a driver of a particular vehicle then the reason is due to something you like about it yes? Think of an adult playing a very expensive toy they always wanted.

Edited January 27, 2012 by NodUnit

[reconteam 19]

Serbia also had one of the most heavily defended SAM networks on earth.

Stealth worked against Saddam, but failed against Serbia.

One F-117A was shot down by a skilled SAM battery with a lot of luck on their side. Most of Serbia's air defense network had been suppressed but a few clever units were able to operate in a manner which allowed them to launch a few SAMs occasionally. Does this mean stealth failed? No, stealth is just another aspect to survivability, it's not a method to make an aircraft invulnerable. Also, the only area where the F-117A would have a clear advantage in terms of stealth would be in its IR signature, although both the F-22 and F-35 include some features (nozzle design and cooling of the leading edges of the F-22) designed to cut back on this somewhat.

The F22 is a massive joke that has had the American people throwing their money at Lockheed Martin for zero gain.

Oh yes, because it would be far wiser to kill our fighter developments and keep flying the same designs for the next 40 years...

The F-22 has its share of problems but it's an incredibly capable aircraft with more potential than currently recognized. Maybe it wouldn't have had so many troubles if the program wasn't constantly being messed with by Congress and the Pentagon throughout the 1990s. Constant changes in specifications, procurement numbers, funding, the decision to stretch out the EMD phase, and the consolidation of the aerospace industry during the time were bound to create some problems.

Edited January 28, 2012 by ReconTeam

[Hans Ludwig 0]

To all the F22 haters, what other aircraft can super cruise?

[maddogx 13]

To all the F22 haters, what other aircraft can super cruise?

The Eurofighter.

[Hans Ludwig 0]

The Eurofighter.

Past Mach 1.5?

[dekster 1]

F111?

[maddogx 13]

Past Mach 1.5?

Go look it up?

[eble 3]

I'm sure once they fix the F22, all third world countries will be worried again.

The F22 is a cold war relic, which funnily enough mostly likely can be tracked by ancient AA systems.

[Star Four One 10]

I'm sure once they fix the F22, all third world countries will be worried again.

The F22 is a cold war relic, which funnily enough mostly likely can be tracked by ancient AA systems.

You know nothing about what you preach. Just like Baff.

Cold war relic is a term used against design principles. Ever wonder why the Raptor isn't deployed to Iraq or Afganistan?

[slatts 1978]

You know nothing about what you preach. Just like Baff.

Cold war relic is a term used against design principles. Ever wonder why the Raptor isn't deployed to Iraq or Afganistan?

A. its grounded

B. its an air superiority fighter

C. the taliban dont have migs/flanker

[reconteam 19]

Funny how "Cold War relics" have fought all of our wars since the end of the Cold War. What a stupid insult.

[Nicholas 5]

Past Mach 1.5?

Mach 1.5 = 1,140mph (1,840km/h)

Eurofighter EF2000 Typhoon Max Speed: 1,321mph (2,125km/h) at 36,090ft (11,000m)

Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor Max Speed: 1,450mph (2,335km/h) at "altitude" Not sure what specific altitude though. Service ceiling is 65,000ft (19,812m)

All information derived from "The Encyclopedia of Military Aircraft" by Robert Jackson.

[PELHAM 10]

The F-22 is the best air superiority fighter in the world by any measure. Yes they have a problem with the OBOGs but that will be fixed in the end. Yes it's possible to detect it's presence with IRST and LW radar but that does not guarantee an intercept or shoot down because that requires SW radar doesn't it? The situation that occurred with a slow F-117 is unlikely to happen with an F-22 in supercruise. Supercruise also means greater deployment and stand-off ranges for the weapons.

In testing, an F-22 dropped a 1,000 lb (450 kg) JDAM from 50,000 feet (15,000 m), while cruising at Mach 1.5, hitting a moving target 24 miles (39 km) away. It also produces a 40% greater range for air to air missiles.

It's real Achilles heel is cost, not just the production cost but the maintenance. The US Air Force had to cut training flight hours by a third this year because it's so expensive to put in the air.

---------- Post added at 10:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:01 AM ----------

Mach 1.5 = 1,140mph (1,840km/h)

Eurofighter EF2000 Typhoon Max Speed: 1,321mph (2,125km/h) at 36,090ft (11,000m)

Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor Max Speed: 1,450mph (2,335km/h) at "altitude" Not sure what specific altitude though. Service ceiling is 65,000ft (19,812m)

All information derived from "The Encyclopedia of Military Aircraft" by Robert Jackson.

Depends where you look - wikipedia:

Eurofighter

Maximum speed: **At altitude: Mach 2 (2,495 km/h/1,550 mph)

F-22

Maximum speed: At altitude: Mach 2.25 (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h)

Figures like this are meaningless though. You need to judge aircraft on overall performance.