First combat use of the F22 Raptor
- Thread starter Drew99GT
- Start date
- Status
Will they fly with external fuel tanks ?
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Will they fly with external fuel tanks ?
Very doubtful - compromises stealth.
If they were flying strikes, they were carrying the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) that was built specifically to fit in the internal weapons carriage bays in the F-22....thus keeping them stealthy...
Given the airplane's speed and range (supercruise, etc.), it would be easy to tank (inflight refuel) the airplane hundreds of miles away, then it would penetrate the most heavily defended areas at very high altitude, and supersonic speed, while avoiding radar detection...and deliver those precision SDBs...right on target...
Will they fly with external fuel tanks ?
Very doubtful - compromises stealth.
If they were flying strikes, they were carrying the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) that was built specifically to fit in the internal weapons carriage bays in the F-22....thus keeping them stealthy...
Given the airplane's speed and range (supercruise, etc.), it would be easy to tank (inflight refuel) the airplane hundreds of miles away, then it would penetrate the most heavily defended areas at very high altitude, and supersonic speed, while avoiding radar detection...and deliver those precision SDBs...right on target...
Last edited:
This article by David Axe today on the F-22 is interesting:
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
Are they even designed to use external tanks?
As said above, they would negate the stealth nature of the aircraft.
In that neighborhood in the world, no telling who might spill the beans about your approach. I suspect you need to be stealthy a fair bit for security reasons.
As said above, they would negate the stealth nature of the aircraft.
In that neighborhood in the world, no telling who might spill the beans about your approach. I suspect you need to be stealthy a fair bit for security reasons.
Get any aircraft out of it's advantage and you can shoot them down.
The question is will such kills be commonplace, or will the F-22s successfully be used to maximize their advantages?
After all, even the Poles managed to shoot down close to one German plane for each they lost in WW2 before they finally fell to Germany. We figured out how to shoot down the "superior" Japanese Zero with inferior planes before we got better aircraft. And so on.
I'm not worried that some great pilots managed to get kills against an F-22. I'll be worried if fresh out of flight school pilots routinely shoot down F-22s in scenarios where the F-22 has the advantage.
Originally Posted By: AdmdeVilleneuve
This article by David Axe today on the F-22 is interesting:
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
The question is will such kills be commonplace, or will the F-22s successfully be used to maximize their advantages?
After all, even the Poles managed to shoot down close to one German plane for each they lost in WW2 before they finally fell to Germany. We figured out how to shoot down the "superior" Japanese Zero with inferior planes before we got better aircraft. And so on.
I'm not worried that some great pilots managed to get kills against an F-22. I'll be worried if fresh out of flight school pilots routinely shoot down F-22s in scenarios where the F-22 has the advantage.
Originally Posted By: AdmdeVilleneuve
This article by David Axe today on the F-22 is interesting:
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
Originally Posted By: AdmdeVilleneuve
This article by David Axe today on the F-22 is interesting:
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
Hmmmm....well, once, when flying an F-14 off the USS Theodore Roosevelt, I had clearly and thoroughly defeated a French Mirage in a scheduled air combat maneuvering sortie. Yet, while I was behind him, with my gunsight on his cockpit...he was saying "Magic, Magic" on his radio...implying that he was taking a heat-seeking missile shot.
What he was shooting at was a mystery to me...there was nothing in front of him (from my vantage at his 6 o'clock, I could see what he was seeing)...just me, squarely behind him, in complete victory.
Funny...when he reported back to his base, the French squadron claimed that he had shot me with his "Magic" missile...which, unless that thing fires backwards (it doesn't), was clearly impossible. A blatant falsehood. No proof, other than his radio call (back to his controller) that he was firing a "Magic" missile...and I had my HUD footage of the gunsight on his canopy...but it was classified footage...so we didn't argue the ridiculous claim.
So, I wouldn't give a ton of credibility to the French Fighter Pilot...any French Fighter Pilot...particularly not this grainy HUD shot in which they claim to have shot an F-22...
This article by David Axe today on the F-22 is interesting:
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2014/09/23/when_the_french_shot_down_an_f-22_107455.html
Hmmmm....well, once, when flying an F-14 off the USS Theodore Roosevelt, I had clearly and thoroughly defeated a French Mirage in a scheduled air combat maneuvering sortie. Yet, while I was behind him, with my gunsight on his cockpit...he was saying "Magic, Magic" on his radio...implying that he was taking a heat-seeking missile shot.
What he was shooting at was a mystery to me...there was nothing in front of him (from my vantage at his 6 o'clock, I could see what he was seeing)...just me, squarely behind him, in complete victory.
Funny...when he reported back to his base, the French squadron claimed that he had shot me with his "Magic" missile...which, unless that thing fires backwards (it doesn't), was clearly impossible. A blatant falsehood. No proof, other than his radio call (back to his controller) that he was firing a "Magic" missile...and I had my HUD footage of the gunsight on his canopy...but it was classified footage...so we didn't argue the ridiculous claim.
So, I wouldn't give a ton of credibility to the French Fighter Pilot...any French Fighter Pilot...particularly not this grainy HUD shot in which they claim to have shot an F-22...
Last edited:
I hope the military has a chance to explain how they work and something about their tools and weapons to the politicians before the politicians start making more policy decisions. They could do it in terms the politicians understand, gun goes pop, bomb goes bank and airplane goes weeeeeee......
I thought the F22 wasn't really a close combat type fighter anyways? Isn't the idea to super cruise around, get within missile range, launch, and wait for the contacts to drop off the screen?
I assume something like an F16(or whatever is more maneuverable these days) would out maneuver it if the pilot keeps the speeds high enough for the f22's low speed tricks not to be used.
I assume something like an F16(or whatever is more maneuverable these days) would out maneuver it if the pilot keeps the speeds high enough for the f22's low speed tricks not to be used.
They're coming in from tremendous distance to bomb western targets in Aleppo and others close to the Med. I've been wondering when they'd saddle up one or more of the five CVNs and their associated squadrons and escorts sitting idle in Norfolk and get them into the fray from the West off the Mediterranean coast of Syria, but they've been content to bomb from the East. One wonders if they don't want non-stealthy TacAir subject to SAMs. It WOULD suck to get an aircrew captured by these guys.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I thought the F22 wasn't really a close combat type fighter anyways? Isn't the idea to super cruise around, get within missile range, launch, and wait for the contacts to drop off the screen?
I assume something like an F16(or whatever is more maneuverable these days) would out maneuver it if the pilot keeps the speeds high enough for the f22's low speed tricks not to be used.
Pretty sure there's no scenario in which the F-22 is NOT superior to anything out there. A few planes may have some advantages, but overall the best they can do is put up a good fight.
Ideally, yes, the F-22 will engage BVR and exit ASAP. But it's plenty deadly in close engagements, too.
Also, don't forget that a LOT comes down to pilot training. Our pilots are among the very best in the world, and only the very best of our pilots fly the F-22...
I thought the F22 wasn't really a close combat type fighter anyways? Isn't the idea to super cruise around, get within missile range, launch, and wait for the contacts to drop off the screen?
I assume something like an F16(or whatever is more maneuverable these days) would out maneuver it if the pilot keeps the speeds high enough for the f22's low speed tricks not to be used.
Pretty sure there's no scenario in which the F-22 is NOT superior to anything out there. A few planes may have some advantages, but overall the best they can do is put up a good fight.
Ideally, yes, the F-22 will engage BVR and exit ASAP. But it's plenty deadly in close engagements, too.
Also, don't forget that a LOT comes down to pilot training. Our pilots are among the very best in the world, and only the very best of our pilots fly the F-22...
F-15E and Super Hornet can also get the job done.
Lets be realistic, a 1950's era jet would get the same job done here also. The ISIS folks are not well organized/established enough to run serious anti-aircraft.
The Syrian government is not going to stop an outside attack on their own enemies in the civil war.
The Syrian government is not going to stop an outside attack on their own enemies in the civil war.
Astro how would you rate the SU35/37 and PAK-FA? Do you think the S300, S400 and S500 missile batteries are a real danger to the F22 like its claimed?
I suspect both are true.
The Syrian government may posture a bit, claiming this is an outrage, a violation of their sovereignty. While privately, being grateful for the help.
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Lets be realistic, a 1950's era jet would get the same job done here also. The ISIS folks are not well organized/established enough to run serious anti-aircraft.
The Syrian government is not going to stop an outside attack on their own enemies in the civil war.
The Syrian government may posture a bit, claiming this is an outrage, a violation of their sovereignty. While privately, being grateful for the help.
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Lets be realistic, a 1950's era jet would get the same job done here also. The ISIS folks are not well organized/established enough to run serious anti-aircraft.
The Syrian government is not going to stop an outside attack on their own enemies in the civil war.
The entire reason the Raptor was used in this environment was for the U.S. to be able to say a Raptor was used in combat.
Chance of shootdown was as close to zero as it could possibly be. Use or non-use of external tanks was inconsequential. This is a perfect case of using a Ferrari to transport farm produce when a deuce and a half truck was called for.
Chance of shootdown was as close to zero as it could possibly be. Use or non-use of external tanks was inconsequential. This is a perfect case of using a Ferrari to transport farm produce when a deuce and a half truck was called for.
Yep. Would be embarrassing if the F-22 remained a hanger queen and rack up no 'combat' flight hours.
Originally Posted By: Trav
Astro how would you rate the SU35/37 and PAK-FA? Do you think the S300, S400 and S500 missile batteries are a real danger to the F22 like its claimed?
I wouldn't want to be in ANYTHING over Syria and have a SAM sent my way. We haven't "played" against Soviet anti-air in decades, I doubt they really want to get cozy with it here. We have no idea what's in the hands of ISIS after having had their way throughout Syria the past year and change. Who wants to bet they don't have SAMs of whatever variety? I'm suspecting we aren't using Bugs over there (in Syria proper) specifically because of the SAM threat. They aren't terribly stealthy, if at all (better than the old Toms and Intruders, probably), but the notion of POW's in the hands of ISIS and the inevitable result is more than the USN and National Command is willing to risk.
Astro how would you rate the SU35/37 and PAK-FA? Do you think the S300, S400 and S500 missile batteries are a real danger to the F22 like its claimed?
I wouldn't want to be in ANYTHING over Syria and have a SAM sent my way. We haven't "played" against Soviet anti-air in decades, I doubt they really want to get cozy with it here. We have no idea what's in the hands of ISIS after having had their way throughout Syria the past year and change. Who wants to bet they don't have SAMs of whatever variety? I'm suspecting we aren't using Bugs over there (in Syria proper) specifically because of the SAM threat. They aren't terribly stealthy, if at all (better than the old Toms and Intruders, probably), but the notion of POW's in the hands of ISIS and the inevitable result is more than the USN and National Command is willing to risk.
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Yep. Would be embarrassing if the F-22 remained a hanger queen and rack up no 'combat' flight hours.
Speaking of "hanger queens", where is the 20 billion dollar F-35? Oh, stupid me, ten years in, still not delivered, still "Not Mission Capable".
Yep. Would be embarrassing if the F-22 remained a hanger queen and rack up no 'combat' flight hours.
Speaking of "hanger queens", where is the 20 billion dollar F-35? Oh, stupid me, ten years in, still not delivered, still "Not Mission Capable".
- Status
