F-22 More Revolutionary than I thought! Apparently it has no Avionics at all!

[Zachstar]

Guess its time to sound the horn for more F-22s?

[Task Force]

wonder what that Horn sounds like.

[Dowly]

Shove a popsticle up your bumm and find out.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Honestly, statements like this worry me. I sure would like to know, time allowing, how the computer came to this conclusion! After all, it'll be ME that will be explaining things if I hit an airliner or something, not the computer.

One word - AESA. THe F-22's version is similar to the Aegis system and it has such a fine resolution, it can identify a target by its shape. It also has such a narrow beam capability that it is unlikely to be detected. It is actually a system of about 50 radars that individually send out weak signals that are thrown out as interference by an RWR on an enemy aircraft, but collect it as one picture.

Couple this with the myriad of other sensors for identification.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Want to bring down a F22? Write a software app and Presto!

You could build a virus for any platform these days. Problem is, you'd have to have intimate knowledge of F-22 programming. Not likely to happen ever.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

LOL just what I was thinking.

Arent these going to fall under the budget axe anyhow?

Stupid that they are. The F-35, though the second most capable aircraft in the world now, is not going to have the same length of life the F-22 will have. Its just a second rate frame comparatively.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Just talked with a friend who is an F-16 pilot. He just told me how he got his ass kicked by F-22's in training.

-S

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Just talked with a friend who is an F-16 pilot. He just told me how he got his ass kicked by F-22's in training.

-S

So? Wouldnt that be like having a WWI fighter vs. a WWII fighter?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Dowly

So? Wouldnt that be like having a WWI fighter vs. a WWII fighter?

Can't argue there!

-S

[Captain Vlad]

Hopefully our pilots are smart enough to not open any emails from the Bank of Nigeria while on a mission.

Hopefully they don't come with vista.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Rilder

Hopefully they don't come with vista.

Only partially. They come with NVidia no less. Those displays are powered by GeForce 3 no less!

As many know, I'm not a particular fan of NVidia with all their antics in the last couple years. I do have an engineering sample GeForce 3 about 1 foot from my head as I type this though. Modified with a special cooler and copper RAM sinks. I should plug this in and see if it still works.

-S

[XabbaRus]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

One word - AESA. THe F-22's version is similar to the Aegis system and it has such a fine resolution, it can identify a target by its shape. It also has such a narrow beam capability that it is unlikely to be detected. It is actually a system of about 50 radars that individually send out weak signals that are thrown out as interference by an RWR on an enemy aircraft, but collect it as one picture.

Couple this with the myriad of other sensors for identification.

-S

Do you have a reliable source for that?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Do you have a reliable source for that?

Any AESA page can give you a good run down on it, though the F-22's is a more advanced version of AESA with probably a 250+ (large target) nmi range. With AESA, you even have built in jamming and hacking tools. You can theoretically overload a missile sites computer systems with it. Kind of like a power surge.

Maybe it is not 50, but 1000:

The F-22's Northrop Grumman/Texas Instruments-built AN/APG-77 radar is an active-element, electronically scanned (that is, it does not move) array of over 1000 finger-sized transmitter / receiver modules. Each module weights ca 15g and has a power output of over 4W. The APG-77 is capable of changing the direction, power and shape of the radar beam very rapidly, so it can acquire target data, and in the meantime minimizing the chance that the radar signal is detected or tracked.

http://www.f22fighter.com/radar.htm




Manufactures site:
http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/so.../f22aesaradar/

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Aviation Week on the F-22. I've come to the conclusion that secrecy seems to kill projects in Congress. So maybe ultimate secrecy on any platform is not a good thing.

-S


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...aw020909p2.xml

F-22 Design Shows More Than Expected

Feb 8, 2009

By David A.

FulghumHoping to win support for F-22 production beyond the current 183 aircraft, Lockheed Martin is revealing proprietary data that show performance in several areas is better than baseline requirements.

Moreover, the U.S. Air Force is taking the fighter to the Paris air show for the first time this summer, says Larry Lawson, executive vice president and general manager of the F-22 program. The promise of additional U.S. and, possibly, foreign sales has removed any obstacles.

The problem confronting the company is that Raptor backing is splintered. Senior Pentagon acquisition officials want to shut down production to cut defense spending. Congress wants more production to keep aerospace industry jobs going. Air Force leadership is setting on a new minimum requirement for 240-250 aircraft (about another 60 F-22s) but hasn't made the new number public, apparently waiting to introduce it as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review.

Another emerging issue is that some of the early, 550 low-rate-production F-35 Joint Strike Fighters will cost more (roughly $200 million each) than the $142 million it takes to buy a Raptor. That puts the Air Force in the position of spending its near-term fighter recapitalization money on aircraft they can't deploy until about 2014.

In addition, the secrecy-obscured question of just how good the F-22 is as an air-to-air combat design remains unanswered. It's a complex issue that involves the world of electronic surveillance and attack, information operations, network-centric roles and advanced radar. Right now, the F-22 is one of only two stealth fighters being flown. That may change in a decade as Russia and China introduce new designs. Advanced F-15 radars have a slightly greater range, but the F-22 can use its stealth to move closer to targets. U.S. aggressor pilots work daily to find ways to outmaneuver F-22s, but so far they've only accomplished a few kills, always by some fluke, says Lawson.

The F-22's newly revealed areas of overperformance include a radar cross section that officials will only characterize as "better" than what was asked for. Pentagon officials have said privately that the desired signature from certain critical angles was -40 dBsm., the equivalent radar reflection of a steel "marble." By comparison, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has a signature of -30 dBsm., about the size of a golfball.

Supercruise is at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5. Acceleration - although company officials would not say from what speed or at what altitude - is 3.05 sec. faster than the requirement of 54 sec. In nonafterburning, full military power, the Raptor can operate at slightly above 50,000 ft. However, it is known that the F-22 opened its aerial battles at about 65,000 ft. during its first joint exercise in Alaska, apparently using afterburner. There is also a mysterious admission that the range of the Raptor's Northrop Grumman/Raytheon active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar has a range 5% greater than expected. That means a cushion of an additional 5-6 mi. of detection range against enemy aircraft and missiles.

Ranges of the new lines of AESA radars are classified. But they are estimated at about 90 mi. for the smallest (aimed at the F-16 radar-upgrade market). The F/A-18E/F and F-35 (with radar ranges of 100 mi.) are followed by the F-22 (110-115-mi.). The largest is carried by the upgraded F-15Cs and Es (125 mi.). By comparison, the range for a mechanically scanned, F-15C radar is 56 mi. according to Russian air force intelligence. U.S. aerospace officials agree that an AESA radar "at least doubles" the range over standard military radars.

When coupled with the electronic techniques generator in an aircraft, the radar can project jamming, false targets and other false information into enemy sensors. Ranges for electronic attack equal the AESA radar plus that of the enemy radar. That could allow electronic attack at ranges of 150 mi. or more. The ability to pick out small targets at a long distance also lets AESA-equipped aircraft find and attack cruise missiles, stealth aircraft and small UAVs.

Lockheed Martin also makes an economic argument for continuing Raptor production. The F-22 unit cost in a USAF multiyear purchase is $142.6 million (average unit flyaway cost). Initial unit cost of the F-35 will be around $200 million and then start dropping as production continues. In Japan, the decision to indigenously build small numbers of F-15Js and F-2s (a larger F-16 design) drove their cost to roughly $100 million each. The Eurofighter Typhoon would likely cost even more in a small production run.