The Raptor in the Real World (F-22 alert)

In little more than a year, the Air Force has transformed its newly operational F-22 into something remarkable—a weapon of true intimidation. The Raptor has proved itself time and time again in USAF’s toughest wargames. In live exercises, it has trounced the best “opponents” USAF can muster. It hits them at unprecedented speeds and altitudes—and with impunity.

The F-22 does this while in the hands of operators—not test pilots, but rank and file fighter pilots. They consider it to be nearly as reliable as mature F-15 and F-16 fighters. Moreover, the Raptor has shown capabilities that may vastly amplify the power of the rest of the force.

The 1st Fighter Wing, located at Langley AFB, Va., now operates two 20-fighter F-22 squadrons. The 27th FS, which in December 2005 became the first operational unit, is today pulling real-world alert as part of an Air and Space Expeditionary Force (AEF) deployment to Kadena AB, Japan. The 27th’s sister squadron, the 94th FS, is at Red Flag exercises in Nevada this month, marking the Raptor’s operational debut in that wargame.

In May, the 94th will also deploy on an AEF rotation. Its destination has not been announced. A third F-22 squadron, to be based in Alaska, is now taking shape.

Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver, 27th FS commander, said his unit has been working toward the Kadena deployment for about two years.

“We worked hard to bring this jet to initial operational capability,” Tolliver said in an interview in his Langley office, “and, when we accomplished that in December ’05, the celebration was great, but the next day, we got everybody in the squadron [together, to] make sure they understand the focus: what’s next. Well, AEF 5 and 6 [has] ... been our focus ever since.”

I've read that the Su-30 consistently beats the f-15.

I've also read that the F-22 consistently beats the F-15 at 4:1 odds. Beats it so bad, that the F-15 pilots don't even realize that Raptors are around until they find out they've been shot down.

I read a few months back that 4 Raptors shot down 16 Eagles (in war games) , and the Eagles never knew they were there. 16 planes, with never a heads up, a chance to evade, and most definitely a not chance to fight back.

Maybe the Su can beat the F-15 when they engage. What happens when it doesn't get a chance to engage a Raptor?

Some quotes from Aviation Week & Space Technology:

THE SCENARIO in which the Su-30 "always" beats the F-15 involves the Sukhoi taking a shot with a BVR missile (like the AA-12 Adder) and then "turning into the clutter notch of the F-15's radar," the Air Force official said. Getting into the clutter notch where the Doppler radar is ineffective involves making a descending, right-angle turn to drop below the approaching F-15 while reducing the Su-30's relative forward speed close to zero. This is a 20-year-old air combat tactic, but the Russian fighter's maneuverability, ability to dump speed quickly and then rapidly regain acceleration allow it to execute the tactic with great effectiveness, observers said.

Those skeptical of the experiments say they're being used to justify the new Aim-9X high-off-boresight, short-range missile and its helmet-mounted cuing system, the F-22 as an air superiority fighter and, possibly, the development of a new long-range air-to-air missile that could match the F-22 radar's ability to find targets at around 120 mi. They contend that the Su-30MK can only get its BVR missile shot off first against a large radar target like the F-15. While it's true that the Su-30 MK would not succeed against the stealthy F-22 or F-35, neither would it regularly beat the nonstealthy (but relatively small radar cross section) F-16 or F/A-18E/F, they said.

"http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/comparison-f15-su30-1.html"

Wrong. It was designed by American engineers employed by North American Aviation, and approximately 15,000 A-36 & P-51's were built by American employees in Dallas and Los Angeles. The original design for the P-51 stemmed from a suggestion by the British Purchasing Commission in 1939 that North American Aviation establish a production line to augment production of the Curtis P-40. But the request wasn't presented with any urgency and wasn't taken seriously at the time.

However, "Lee" Atwood had been toying with the idea of designing a fighter at North American, and had examined the P-40 at various times and felt that a considerably better design could be developed.

In Jan 1940, the British Purchasing Commission renewed their suggestion that North American Aviation build P-40's. At which time Atwood went to the British Purchasing Commission and told them he could make a better plane. After some dickering went on, Sir Henry Self who headed the British Purchasing Commission, called Atwood front and center and told him and made not of the fact that North American never had designed a plane, but if Atwood could get ahold of wind-tunnel and flight test data, it would increase their confidence in North American Aviation's abilities in moving forward in a timely way.

Atwood then arranged to pay $56,000 to Burdett Wright, then general manager of the Curtiss Division for wind-tunnel and flight test data. This sum would reimburse Curtis their out-of-the-pocket expenses and a proportion of the costs of the tests. He then went back to Sir Henry Self, and presented him with a contract for 320 NA-73's, equiped with an Allison engine, certain armaments to be furnished by the British, and an airframe to be designed and built by North American Aviation, not to exceed $40,000 per plane.

At the time, no drawings or specifications were presented, except some free-hand sketches to demonstrate proof-of-concepts. The letter contract was the sole document in existance at the time. Neither did the original concept include the laminar airflow wing. This was incorporated into the subsequent design through work done by aerodynamics department of North American Aviation engineering group (the concept being origninated by Ed Horkey who was one of the aerodynamic specialists in the division).

By the spring of 1942 several test pilots had flown the P-51 and to a man were quite impressed by its handling and performance. For a fighter it was reported that it was remarkably docile, having light control forces, and the only complaint was that of weak aileron responses. This was all in context of a low/medium altitude fighter. However, above 25,000' the Allison struggled in the thin air.

The consensus was that the P-51 kicked anything in the sky's butt below 15,000 (including the Spitfire V - the standard RAF dayfighter). In April of 1942, Rolls Royce test pilot Ron Harker was invited to take the P-51 for a spin and when he did wheels down, he said "Its a bloodie good aeroplane, laddie; it only needs a little more poke."

And the idea to meld the Spitfire V's two-stage two-speed turbo-charged Merlin 61 with the P-51 airframe was born.

And as they say, the rest is history.

As good as the piloted Raptor is, in the future it will be consigned to second eschelon defenses, behind drone fighters. Drone fighters, en masse. The reason being that once remote control technology of drone aircraft is internationalized, the obvious response to high-tech, high-performance is sheer numbers. Imagine creating drones as cheaply as an expensive car? How do you stop an air flotilla of 10,000 drones, except by flying 10,000 drones of your own? What about 100,000? How many nations could produce 100,000 automobiles for their war effort? China alone makes about 2.5 Million a year. World production is greater than 40 Million cars a year. Such drones could be flying, 750lb. bombs. Or they could fire a machine gun at any aircraft without their FOF signal. They could carry a large amount of cluster bombs. Best of all, they could be totally expendable.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.