Raptor in dogfight for its future

[stiz]

Did you intentionally mean to mention the Eurofighter here?

dont know about him but i do

"more recently, there have been repeated reports that two RAF Typhoons deployed to the USA for OEU trails work have been flying against the F-22 at NAS China Lake, and have peformed better than was expected. There was little suprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-boresight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight, but the aircraft did cause a suprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a suprisingly long range. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BWR engagement was canceled, and "the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more .

- When this incident was reported on a website frequented by front-line RAF aircrew a senior RAF officer urged an end to the converstaion on security grounds"

The US Air Force has already begun to take delivery of another superjet, the F-22 Raptor. This is very stealthy but costs twice the price of the Eurofighter, and reports suggest that RAF's Eurofighters have flown highly successful missions against the F-22 during recent exercises in the US.

US deployment: The RAF's 17 Sqn OEU has routinely deployed two aircraft and around 30 personnel to the USA to operate alongside US fighters including the Lockheed MartinF-22A Raptor. "The vast majority of this work is about making sure that the integration of the two platforms is working," says Walker. Asked how the fighters compare, he says: "If you want to say that stealth is a determining factor then Typhoon stands second to the F-22. But I think that as we do more work, the Typhoon will more than hold its own. It's the balance of how you use it, rather than what it is."BAE Typhoon project test pilot Mark Bowman sees even less of a capability gap. "The F-22 is three times the cost, but you would struggle to see any advantage in the cockpit design - the cost is there to maintain stealth," he says. "Typhoon is most likely equivalent, if not better. Upcoming commitments for the UK Typhoon force include involvement in a UK combined qualified weapons instructor course and possible participation in a Red Flag exercise in the USA. "We want to integrate with a multinational package and are always looking for a way to challenge the aircraft and the pilots," says Atha

The Eurofighter has also received praise from unexpected quarters, which makes it even more significant: General John P. Jumper, Commander-inChief of the US Air Force, said after flying the Eurofighter that he was impressed with it. Right after his flight on the Eurofighter on 20 July 2004, Jumper said, "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter." In particular, Jumper praised the Eurofighter's agility, manoeuvrability, acceleration and precise navigation.

During the Typhoon's visit to the US in 2005 it was pitted againt the F-22, this was not officially confirmed. The Typhoon could not see the F-22 but could detect that it was being painted by the F-22 and took "appropriate" measures with defensive aids. In one on one combat the Typhoon did the same job as on the Su-30, the F-22 could not handle the Typhoons close in and were shocked. It did not go all the Typhoon's way but the Americans had a sobering encounter, with the F-22 sacrificing much for stealth"........................

then theres the fact it was able to get a simulated kill on those 2 f15s

 

[redriver6]

In a fair fight the Sukhoi (substitute J-10, Typhoon, Rafale, etc.) will be a formidable opponent, trouble is the Raptor has been designed to be an aerial assassin. There won't be anything fair about the fight at all.

out of all four pages that quote is the key....who is the best in a close in dogfight?...i doesn't matter because you are dead before the turning starts:icon_twi:

 

[deathfromafar]

The Typhoon is an excellent aircraft leave no doubt and with outstanding avionics and agility but is a previous generation fighter coming into service nearly 20 years late and not without it's teething troubles either. Better than the F-22? Not by a longshot as evidenced by the video link I posted and declassified information regarding the superior capability of the F-22's AESA Radar set which has Low Probability of detection ultra high speed scanning and NCTR(Non-Cooperative Target Recognition) capability. Also the radar datalink capabilty of the F-22 to AWACS, other Fighters, & GR, can give the F-22 Pilot a very high situational awareness picture of the battlefield without it's potential enemies knowing it is even there before it is too late. But then again what does that matter? They will likely never be foes in the air. The Typhoon stands poised to take the market where the F-16 has aged out and the F-35 won't be applicable(even if it comes into production). The Typhoon will do just fine against any of the current Russian designs for the foreseeable future if any threats at all.

 

[tigisfat]

out of all four pages that quote is the key....who is the best in a close in dogfight?...i doesn't matter because you are dead before the turning starts:icon_twi:

actually, that doesn't matter either because the F-22 is non-deployable.:gossip:

 

[stiz]

The Typhoon is an excellent aircraft leave no doubt and with outstanding avionics and agility but is a previous generation fighter coming into service nearly 20 years late and not without it's teething troubles either. Better than the F-22? Not by a longshot

well to me the fact its in service is proof that it is better, seeing as how its a working aircraft and not a prototype

 

[deathfromafar]

well to me the fact its in service is proof that it is better, seeing as how its a working aircraft and not a prototype

That's hardly credible criteria of which is better. Besides, the Raptor is in service regardless of what some here have said. Has been patrolling the skies of Alaska and other locations. There are 135 of them in existence as of this month(out of the 188 to be built). How about the Typhoon? About 145 or more perhaps? Maybe the 400 plus will be built or maybe they will be cut deeper like the F-22 under these economic times. Time will tell.

actually, that doesn't matter either because the F-22 is non-deployable

Source: Langley AFB home page

http://www.langley.af.mil/news/story_print.asp?id=123079316

and: F-22 Raptor completes first trans-Atlantic deployment(Old news)

http://www.langley.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123107759

 

[Panther_99FS]

I love these 'no win' threads...

 

[deathfromafar]

I love these 'no win' threads...

Ahh come on Panther, you love it like the rest of us! LOL! We could have the FS developers rig a simple animated "Pistol Duel" option here to settle an argument! LMAO!:karate:

 

[tigisfat]

Ahh come on Panther, you love it like the rest of us! LOL! We could have the FS developers rig a simple animated "Pistol Duel" option here to settle an argument! LMAO!:karate:

.............I was there when the Raptors went to England. Regardless of wording, sending three aircraft to an airshow is not what I'm talking about when I talk about deploying. I'm talking about deploying to fly combat sorties in the joint AOR.

You can't google your entire debate.:hand: Clearly, "F-22 deployment" or something similar was used.

 

[deathfromafar]

.............I was there when the Raptors went to England. Regardless of wording, sending three aircraft to an airshow is not what I'm talking about when I talk about deploying. I'm talking about deploying to fly combat sorties in the joint AOR.

You can't google your entire debate.:hand: Clearly, "F-22 deployment" or something similar was used.

Is fully capable to deploy anywhere they need be. You may be active USAF but are clearly outside of the gouge(I know ranking Officers & NCO's inside that program and they say otherwise despite the rampant never ending rumor mill in the service. Was similar to the argument I witnessed when a USAF E6 F-15E Engine Tech made at a bar recently claiming that all the B-52H's were retired and that a "New" B-52 had replaced it. He apparently misread or misunderstood the retirement of the 18 airframes to make it easier to maintain the remaining.

BTW, there are soon to be coming overseas deployments for the Raptor that will dispel this little disagreement.

 

[Panther_99FS]

We could have the FS developers rig a simple animated "Pistol Duel" option here to settle an argument! LMAO!:karate:

Hmmm.....

 

[deathfromafar]

Hmmm.....

I kinda thought you might like that Idea.......

 

[tigisfat]

Is fully capable to deploy anywhere they need be.

As long as they've got their own KC-10, 40 maintainers and only airshow taskings for each three aircraft, right?

You may be active USAF but are clearly outside of the gouge(I know ranking Officers & NCO's inside that program and they say otherwise despite the rampant never ending rumor mill in the service.

Of course, I beg to argue that I'm in the gouge, I'm telling the truth, and those who take a difference are the ones looking in and spreading viral rumors.:d

But seriously, I sometimes feel like I'm the only one on the planet who's being realistic about the F-22. I'm used to being told the F-22 is the greatest aircraft ever by everyone I come across. Most of them have only see it do backflips and are not very well read.

Was similar to the argument I witnessed when a USAF E6 F-15E Engine Tech made at a bar recently claiming that all the B-52H's were retired and that a "New" B-52 had replaced it. He apparently misread or misunderstood the retirement of the 18 airframes to make it easier to maintain the remaining.

Jeez, give me more credit than that. You're right though, I do love hearing from the people in service that know everything but don't keep their finger on the pulse like the aforementioned F-15E guy.

BTW, there are soon to be coming overseas deployments for the Raptor that will dispel this little disagreement.

Well, I certainly hope so,and I hope I will stand corrected. After all, they're not just anyone's tax dollars; they're mine.

 

[Panther_99FS]

But seriously, I sometimes feel like I'm the only one on the planet who's being realistic about the F-22.

What do the folks at Tyndall & Langley say in comparison to your views?

 

[tigisfat]

What do the folks at Tyndall & Langley say in comparison to your views?

The only F-22 people I've come across are the Nellis guys and the airshow team. It's to be expected of them that they be on the bandwagon, especially the airshow guys.

 

[Panther_99FS]

Some old news--> http://www.tyndall.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123029424

 

[deathfromafar]

Tigisfat, as I recall you're a Bone Guy correct? I remember very well all about the B-1's development even during the 1970's(I suspect before you were born) when I first followed it's coming out. I remember when Doug Benefield who was the chief B-1 test pilot was killed in the first Bone crash. All during that time, elements inside the Air Force called the B-1 a "White Elephant" which was a doomed piece of garbage. Then President Carter cancelled the project outright only to have President Reagan bring it back. I remember the fierce debate in congress just for 100 airframes and Reagan won his fight for the plane with the opposition party in place. Had he not, there would be no B-1B right now, period. Even then, the complexities of the plane and it's early teething troubles dogged the program from the 80's well into the 90's. I remember good friends of mine who were in SAC describing the B-1 as hopeless and would never see combat due to it being filled with too many bugs and fatal flaws. Are they saying that now? No! Why, because dedicated folks(I bet like yourself) worked hard to make the B-1 a credible and viable war machine in spite of it's detractors. It's speaks for itself right? The Raptor is new, it is complex unlike any figher aircraft in history. It won't be perfect any more than any other man made machine. But like many before it, I fully expect it to overcome any challenges it faces and eventually overcome the doubters. Thus I expect if it must see combat, it will do what it is advertised to do.

 

[Lazerbrainz2k3]

But seriously, I sometimes feel like I'm the only one on the planet who's being realistic about the F-22. I'm used to being told the F-22 is the greatest aircraft ever by everyone I come across. Most of them have only see it do backflips and are not very well read.

In the last few posts there have been links galore about the F-22 really doing this, or really doing that, but none on your hypothesis. As you've said you haven't run into people from the F-22 team, and that's fine because the rest of us here haven't, either. But to say all the reports quoting those who are on the team are simply from those "on the bandwagon," or that most of the unwashed who disagree with you are "not very well read," is rather presumptuous, don't you think?





And Panther, yes, these threads are always interesting. It's a great example of the irresistable force paradox.

 

[tigisfat]

In the last few posts there have been links galore about the F-22 really doing this, or really doing that, but none on your hypothesis. As you've said you haven't run into people from the F-22 team, and that's fine because the rest of us here haven't, either. But to say all the reports quoting those who are on the team are simply from those "on the bandwagon," or that most of the unwashed who disagree with you are "not very well read," is rather presumptuous, don't you think?





And Panther, yes, these threads are always interesting. It's a great example of the irresistable force paradox.

Do you read before you post? I mean, seriously. That's why I stopped responding to you, kind sir.

 

[tigisfat]

Tigisfat, as I recall you're a Bone Guy correct? I remember very well all about the B-1's development even during the 1970's(I suspect before you were born) when I first followed it's coming out. I remember when Doug Benefield who was the chief B-1 test pilot was killed in the first Bone crash. All during that time, elements inside the Air Force called the B-1 a "White Elephant" which was a doomed piece of garbage. Then President Carter cancelled the project outright only to have President Reagan bring it back. I remember the fierce debate in congress just for 100 airframes and Reagan won his fight for the plane with the opposition party in place. Had he not, there would be no B-1B right now, period. Even then, the complexities of the plane and it's early teething troubles dogged the program from the 80's well into the 90's. I remember good friends of mine who were in SAC describing the B-1 as hopeless and would never see combat due to it being filled with too many bugs and fatal flaws. Are they saying that now? No! Why, because dedicated folks(I bet like yourself) worked hard to make the B-1 a credible and viable war machine in spite of it's detractors. It's speaks for itself right? The Raptor is new, it is complex unlike any figher aircraft in history. It won't be perfect any more than any other man made machine. But like many before it, I fully expect it to overcome any challenges it faces and eventually overcome the doubters. Thus I expect if it must see combat, it will do what it is advertised to do.

Advanced, yes. Complicated? I personally don't think the F-22 is more complicated than it's contemporaries. It's software is the most complicated thing about it, and that's not beyond the realm of what should be reliable.

Here's what I think in a nutshell: There's nothing specifically wrong with the F-22; but it's not enough of anything done right to warrant it's own pricetag. For a quarter billion dollars, there should be no debate as to whether it's worth it, whether it's capable and whether a cheaper aircraft can down it on any playing field.

It's refreshing to see you know a bit about it--The B-1 world is one of incredible successes and failures. For that reason, I try to avoid talking about it outside of our circles.