|
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
-"Powerful enough radars will see it at close range, too"
Again, all the tracking ability in the world means jack if your killing implements (missiles) can't lock on.
"I can't see the fucking thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
-"Until the new AMRAAMs come on line the F-22 still has a range disadvantage"
Hi-cruise/hi-altitude launches increase missile range substantially. Here too is where the Raptor excels: The power to dictate the engagement from up high and fast. The Raptor can cruise at Mach 1.8 at 60k with a full missile load 'till it runs out of gas. A MiG doesn't come close to achieving that.
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
And even if you could track the Raptor (via IRST or radar), will your missiles' comparatively tiny--and thus less powerful--trackers be able to do the same? Pilots who go up against the Raptor WVR all say the same thing: that even if they can see/track it, it's nigh to impossible to get an actual weapons lock on it.
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Lt. Col. Larry Bruce, 65th AS commander: "It's humbling to fly against the F-22, not only because of its stealth, but also its unmatched maneuverability and power."
-"but within 20 or so miles optical/infrared sensors can still see it"
See, THIS is what I meant by your needing to read up on the Raptor. In the highly unlikely event that opponent gets close enough to use its IRST, the Raptor does have IR- as well as RCS-reducing features, much of which is classified.
...
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
-"Purpose built dogfighters still pose a major threat in WVR combat"
A threat yes. A "major" threat, no.
For the umpteenth time, the Raptor was designed to excel (dominate) in both BVR and WVR arenas. It is every bit as much a "purpose built dogfighter" as the F-16... and your MiG.
From an actual F-16 pilot who went up against Raptors: "it is a hell of a lot more manueverable than a Viper... It can turn up it's own tailpipe - if I ever got to a merge I don't think it would last long."
em745aa (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
(This is getting tedious.)
-"Incorrect, the Raptor was designed from the ground up to be an effective replacement for the F-15"
Incorrect, the F-22 was designed to fulfill the USAF's ATF (i.e. "air dominance") requirements--in both BVR and WVR arenas.
-"Heavy fighters aren't purpose built dogfighters"
To use one of your quotes, where do you get that idea? By your logic, the Flanker series must be really piss-poor WVR, seeing as they're the biggest fighters in existence at the moment.
FA22RaiseHell (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
well if the enemy's radar is powerful enough to detect the raptor in close range, will it be a possibility that the stealth era can come to an ebd when radar is advanced or upgraded to the point when the aircarfts RCS will be detacted? And yes I know that the Raptor has a few tricks, at least for the final option.
regztigershark (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
In full. The Raptor is a revolutionary fighter, but it's not perfect. Purpose built dogfighters still pose a major threat in WVR combat, especially if the pilot doesn't respect his opponent's aircraft.
The stealth helps the F-22 keep an edge in BVR, but within 20 or so miles optical/infrared sensors can still see it. Until the new AMRAAMs come on line the F-22 still has a range disadvantage. Powerful enough radars will see it at close range, too.
It still has a few tricks, of course.
FA22RaiseHell (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I'm still thinking the biggest advantage to the F/A 22 Raptor is it's stealth capability, but it was designed to be tactical fighter to replace the former interceptor(F-15 Eagle). The Raptors manuravibilty is impressive, but not to the extent to take on every damn fighter it goes after. Don't you agree?
regztigershark (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
I don't think that's correct at all. IIRC, the Su-27 is incapable of doing a kulbit because that maneuver requires thrust-vectored engines.
One thing the Raptor lacks is differential thrust-vectoring (not to mention yaw-control in post-stall environment). All it has is pitch control, which is pretty disappointing. It's why the Raptor's hover is pretty poor compared to the MiG-29OVT's version. Actually, the maneuverability doesn't even compare with the OVT, but what does? |
