Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

It is called high-low mix. F22 in the high end and f35 in the lower end.

But people in this forum always say single engine planes are obsolete. That's why I said that to show an airforce needs all kind of fighters for all kind of roles and cannot put all the money in costly twin engined birds, ending up with reduced numbers. Numbers do play an important roll in airwarfare.

 

[average american]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

It is called high-low mix. F22 in the high end and f35 in the lower end.

The F22 is almost strictly for air superiority, the F35 mainly a stealthy strike aircraft. The F22 is designed to take any thing that flys out of the air, the F35 is to take them out befor they get in the air. By now the F22 has flowen more then 20,000 training missions. Stratgy for hilo mix using F22, F35, teen fighters, drones has been refined many times.

 

[ice berg]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

The F22 is almost strictly for air superiority, the F35 mainly a stealthy strike aircraft. The F22 is designed to take any thing that flys out of the air, the F35 is to take them out befor they get in the air. By now the F22 has flowen more then 20,000 training missions. Stratgy for hilo mix using F22, F35, teen fighters, drones has been refined many times.

F35 is multirole, not a striker.....

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

3. For RCS of Gripen, http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1029-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-30.html

By the way, Do you have proof that LCA's RCS will be as low as you claim it to be.

Toan is a very good source. But this is better,

LCA is not optimised for stealth. But owing to it's size it is small. Anyway composites are only a cheap substitute to Titanium, but it will do. Composites don't provide stealth, they absorb EMR a bit more than metal. That's all.

If you are comparing F-22's stealth to LCA's then what F-22 does is it tries to mimic the RCS returns of birds.

There is a certain term called the "Clutter Rejection Threshold." A radar is capable of detecting everything in the sky, no problems. Right from water vapour to meteors to aircraft. So, radar is used differently depending on the use. The weatherman is interested in water vapour, astronomers are interested in meteors, ornithologists will be interested in birds and pilots will be interested in other aircraft. RCS could differentiate between these aspects and each radar could handle it's job without problems. For a pilot a bird, water vapour etc are clutter, so the radar software rejects this RCS and only shows larger RCS bodies like aircraft. This is called the Clutter Rejection Threshold. Until the early 80s, pilots had never had to worry about RCS for detecting aircraft. F-117 changed things.

The F-22 is no different. It has a RCS that is equivalent to a bird. So, the radar will detect the F-22 as a sparrow or a warbler. Now, your radar can pick up the F-22, be it AWACS, ground radar or fighter radar. But the software will think it to be a bird and reject it. So, even if detection is possible, the pilot will never know. Even if the F-22 is detected and engaged, the missile's seeker may not be able to see it. Even if it could, then the missile could very well engage a bird as much as the F-22. You can end up having a missile chasing a sparrow. That's stealth.

Low RCS is simply a term as an antonym to high RCS. Stealth is what the F-22, F-35, J-20 and PAKFA are. There is no point in reducing RCS if you can't get it to the level of a bird and maintain it in a combat environment. There is no point at all discussing low RCS for aircraft that are not true stealth aircraft.

The next stop for the Americans are insects. The planned 2018 bomber is supposed to have a RCS 10 times smaller than a mosquito and will be bigger than a MKI carrying around 12 tons of bombs, to a range of 10000Km and a loiter capability of over 50 hours while being unmanned.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

Toan is a very good source. But this is better,

LCA is not optimised for stealth. But owing to it's size it is small. Anyway composites are only a cheap substitute to Titanium, but it will do. Composites don't provide stealth, they absorb EMR a bit more than metal. That's all.

If you are comparing F-22's stealth to LCA's then what F-22 does is it tries to mimic the RCS returns of birds.

There is a certain term called the "Clutter Rejection Threshold." A radar is capable of detecting everything in the sky, no problems. Right from water vapour to meteors to aircraft. So, radar is used differently depending on the use. The weatherman is interested in water vapour, astronomers are interested in meteors, ornithologists will be interested in birds and pilots will be interested in other aircraft. RCS could differentiate between these aspects and each radar could handle it's job without problems. For a pilot a bird, water vapour etc are clutter, so the radar software rejects this RCS and only shows larger RCS bodies like aircraft. This is called the Clutter Rejection Threshold. Until the early 80s, pilots had never had to worry about RCS for detecting aircraft. F-117 changed things.

The F-22 is no different. It has a RCS that is equivalent to a bird. So, the radar will detect the F-22 as a sparrow or a warbler. Now, your radar can pick up the F-22, be it AWACS, ground radar or fighter radar. But the software will think it to be a bird and reject it. So, even if detection is possible, the pilot will never know. Even if the F-22 is detected and engaged, the missile's seeker may not be able to see it. Even if it could, then the missile could very well engage a bird as much as the F-22. You can end up having a missile chasing a sparrow. That's stealth.

Low RCS is simply a term as an antonym to high RCS. Stealth is what the F-22, F-35, J-20 and PAKFA are. There is no point in reducing RCS if you can't get it to the level of a bird and maintain it in a combat environment. There is no point at all discussing low RCS for aircraft that are not true stealth aircraft.

The next stop for the Americans are insects. The planned 2018 bomber is supposed to have a RCS 10 times smaller than a mosquito and will be bigger than a MKI carrying around 12 tons of bombs, to a range of 10000Km and a loiter capability of over 50 hours while being unmanned.

so people use composites in grippen ,F-35 and F-22 only to reduce cost perhaps, not to save weight and reduce RCS. By the way how much composites will PAKFA use over better titanium to become cheap?


Lca is optimized for low RCS in X band. No one has said it is optimized as lower as F-22 in x band.

All this bird like and insect like stealth is "OPTIMIZED FOR X BAND.MENTION IT."
IF L BAND AND VHF BAND IS USED IT WOULD REFLECT IT'S TRUE SIZE,NOT THAT OF BIRDS.

Because L to VHF band waves have 6 inches to 2 meter wavelenghts.So no amount of contouring or shaping is going to save you from detection.
This is recognized by the BARRy WATTS paper I posted.

All this will apply to X band radar. What will be the RCS of F-22 if L band and VHF band is used?
Using spectra like phase shifted radar wave bounceback can't all 4th gens like LCA fool the X band radars of F-22s and their tracking ew crafts?

Strangely this is the tactic suggested by BARRy WATTS as being the fall back for F-35 to remain stealth to VHF band radar , if tomorrows detection tech catch up with it.Then what is the difference between LCA using the same against F-35's x band radar?.

Does toan has access to the RCS reduction techniques used on LCA?
By toan's words and your claim that RCS of LCA is a third of mirage,Do you accept that LCA has less rcs than GRIPPEN.
Because toan says that grippen has 1/2 of mirage's RCS?
CAN toan also explain what makes the RAFALE which is bigger and designed 10 years before LCA, to have much smaller RCS than LCA?

In the source you quote it is mentioned 0,1 not 0.1 as RCS for grippen.What's your reply?

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

F-35 is more ground attack and less air to air, even though it is called multirole.

F-35 is fine though. If you look at many air forces around the world, they are content with the F-16 without any F-15 orders to complement it. So, there are only a few air forces which can afford a heavy fighter.

Is the US economy poor enough to neccesseciate 3 F-35 for every single F-22?
You seemed to be so dismissive of single engined fighters in non stealths. Now what's your view when it comes to stealth?

 

[average american]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

Any thing can detect an F22 if its close enough, the problem is getting close enough, not only to detect the F22 but to get a missile lock, befor being killed by the F22. So far nothing can on a regular basis and the US in its research and development have throwen every weapon plus ground weapons at the F22 by the best stragist the US has that know US tactics inside and out and nothing can out fight the F22.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA Tejas (LCA) - III

One example of an aircraft made largely from composite materials is the F-22 Raptor,

Unlike other aircraft like LCA, Rafale or EF, F-22 is primarily made of Titanium.

F-22A Raptor Advanced Tactical Fighter - Airforce Technology

The F-22 construction is 39% titanium, 24% composite, 16% aluminium and 1% thermoplastic by weight. Titanium is used for its high strength-to-weight ratio in critical stress areas, including some of the bulkheads, and also for its heat-resistant qualities in the hot sections of the aircraft.
Carbon-fibre composites have been used for the fuselage frame, the doors, intermediate spars on the wings, and for the honeycomb sandwich construction skin panels.

Here the author is correct in saying the F-22 is made from a large number of composites, but it isn't entirely made from CCs at the level you may find in LCA, Gripen, Rafale or EF. The author should have given the example of LCA or a Eurocanard instead of the F-22 which has the least amount of composites among all the modern aircraft.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

I hope you meant Astra Mk2

Haha. My bad.

Astra Mk2 will most probably come in more or less the same package size as Mk1 and with more or less same guidance and control. To not integrate it would be a news.

I suppose so. I don't know the dimensions and specs of either except for the range.

I suppose the size and weight of Mk1 is in the same class as the Aim-120A/B. Mk2 may be the equivalent of Aim-120C-5 to 7. I mean, the specs on BR are very similar to the ones on Aim-120A/B rather than RVV-AE, which has a larger diameter. But some sources show a length of less than 3.6m and some show 3.8m.

TMC website shows a difference of 0.11m length between RVV-AE and RVV-SD. Of course, the fins design is different too, like Mk1 and Mk2. RVV-SD is 15 Kg heavier than RVV-AE. Astra has a smaller warhead. So there may be differences. Also depends on how heavy our seeker might be too.

 

[Twinblade]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Haha. My bad.



I suppose so. I don't know the dimensions and specs of either except for the range.

I suppose the size and weight of Mk1 is in the same class as the Aim-120A/B. Mk2 may be the equivalent of Aim-120C-5 to 7. I mean, the specs on BR are very similar to the ones on Aim-120A/B rather than RVV-AE, which has a larger diameter. But some sources show a length of less than 3.6m and some show 3.8m.

The max range of Aim-120A/B has been quoted between 50 to 75 Km. RAF quoted that Aim-120C5 has an additional 10% range over Aim-120B. The improvements in Aim-120C5 onwards have mostly been due to better launch and flight profiles and shrinkage of electronics giving way to a longer motor resulting in Aim-120C7 and Aim-120D variants. The humongous ranges quoted for Aim-120D are for launch from an F-22 flying at 60,000 feet and over M 1.3. Astra missile has an impressive head on range of 80 km at 38000 feet and 110km at 48000 ft with a platform launch velocity of 0.9 mach, you can extrapolate the range with a supersonic launch at a very high altitude. Astra mk-1 from whatever information available is definitely matching latter variants of AMRAAM family, at least in range and flight, if not in seeker and eccm performance. Astra Mk-2 would involve a dual pulse motor that will take the missile up very high where it can cruise with very little drag, the second motor will start burning when the missile descends close to the target and will definitely have a lot of energy for end game maneuvering, thus expanding the no escape zone by manifold.

 

[Decklander]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Never ever believe these ranges. They are just guidelines. A true fighter pilot wud like to use his guns to kill. In all BVR successes, the launch aircraft always saw visually his target get hit. So do bot get bothered about what F-22 and F-35 brochures say. They are all bullshit. The best BVR impacts have taken place at less than 50% of the stated range of the BVR missile. That too way back in Gulf wars. With active cancellation like spectra, You will be lucky to get a BVR hit on a 4.5gen ac irrespective of range

 

[Defcon 1]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Never ever believe these ranges. They are just guidelines. A true fighter pilot wud like to use his guns to kill. In all BVR successes, the launch aircraft always saw visually his target get hit. So do bot get bothered about what F-22 and F-35 brochures say. They are all bullshit. The best BVR impacts have taken place at less than 50% of the stated range of the BVR missile. That too way back in Gulf wars. With active cancellation like spectra, You will be lucky to get a BVR hit on a 4.5gen ac irrespective of range

Sir can you please explain the logic behind American doctrine to rely on stealth fighters to get closer to adversary and firing BVR on them and then running away? Thanks

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

The max range of Aim-120A/B has been quoted between 50 to 75 Km. RAF quoted that Aim-120C5 has an additional 10% range over Aim-120B. The improvements in Aim-120C5 onwards have mostly been due to better launch and flight profiles and shrinkage of electronics giving way to a longer motor resulting in Aim-120C7 and Aim-120D variants. The humongous ranges quoted for Aim-120D are for launch from an F-22 flying at 60,000 feet and over M 1.3. Astra missile has an impressive head on range of 80 km at 38000 feet and 110km at 48000 ft with a platform launch velocity of 0.9 mach, you can extrapolate the range with a supersonic launch at a very high altitude. Astra mk-1 from whatever information available is definitely matching latter variants of AMRAAM family, at least in range and flight, if not in seeker and eccm performance. Astra Mk-2 would involve a dual pulse motor that will take the missile up very high where it can cruise with very little drag, the second motor will start burning when the missile descends close to the target and will definitely have a lot of energy for end game maneuvering, thus expanding the no escape zone by manifold.

The Aim-120 range is tabulated in two ways. It is primarily due to the dual pulse motor. In a standard config where the Aim-120D is fired in a straight line, the range is 120Km. In a lofted trajectory, the range increases to nearly 180Km. In this config, the missile follows a ballistic path up to 25 Km and then drops down towards the enemy aircraft. This isn't a speed related range. You explain the same principle for Astra Mk2.

Anyway, there was a pretty good article that had come out a few years ago. It listed Astra Mk1's ranges at every altitude. Do you have it?

 

[Twinblade]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

It is primarily due to the dual pulse motor.

Aim-120D does not have a dual pulse motor, the increase in range was due to improved flight profile, sustained burn and GPS aided navigation. ATK is considering multi pulse motor for the next generation air to air missile. It is the first time that multi pulse propulsion is being considered for a US missile.
http://www.atk.com/news-releases/atk-awarded-rocket-motor-technologies-development-contract-for-next-generation-air-to-air-missiles/

Anyway, there was a pretty good article that had come out a few years ago. It listed Astra Mk1's ranges at every altitude. Do you have it?

Yeah, here it is.
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Indias_Astra_tested_for_night_operations_999.html

 

[Decklander]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Sir can you please explain the logic behind American doctrine to rely on stealth fighters to get closer to adversary and firing BVR on them and then running away? Thanks

Stealth by definition is a defensive aid and not offensive. Its purpose is to allow the attacker to remain hidden and undetected till attack and after that run away without being detected.
In modern warfare, the advent of RWR & MWR has taken away the surprise element of BVR. So whenever you launch a BVR missile you will need to illuminate the target or provide passive guidance like Spectra using data link. Which means you will have to transmit at some stage which will expose you. Even if you do not pick up the data link transmissions, the MWR will pick up the missile at some stage.

we also have GCI-ground controlled intercept wherein the attacker is picked up by ground radars who guide the defender to the target by giving directions on radio and position them at a point in space wherein they have to just lockon and fire. Stealth allows you to stay hidden to GCI. Also deep inside enemy territory you won't have the luxury of GCI so autonomous intercept capability overrides all other considerations.
These problems can be solved by two different approaches, one is stealth and the other is long range, stand off weapons. USA has taken stealth route thru F-22 & F-35 while russia has taken second route of low observable ac with long range stand off weapons.

If you may recall, old soviet tactics of making Mig-21s fly thru the swarms of attacking forces at supersonic speeds without much bothering to shoot any of them. The idea was to force the attacker drop their bombload to fight and thus take out the assets from the battle for next 4-5 hrs as these ac will need to return for refueling and rearming to be able to join the battle again.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Aim-120D does not have a dual pulse motor, the increase in range was due to improved flight profile, sustained burn and GPS aided navigation.

Interesting. I think I remember reading it on an established western news daily like Janes or Aviation Week. Perhaps they were wrong.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

So all versions of tejas will have BVRs in 120 plus Km range if not now , definitely later on , comparable to any other long range BVR in any other modern fighter.

having IRST now or later on doesnot change anything.

Eventhough BVrs have high max ranges in reality 90 percent air to air kills are achieved under 50 Km range, fancy ranges look good on paper though.

Because switching on the radar in hostile air space advertises the presence of the fighter

and makes a fighter a sitting duck for all sort of defence measures irrespective of whatever long range BVRs they have.

As enemy fighters will be vectored in such a way to avoid the nose cone of the fire control radar and sneak up to deliver the killing blow.

So these fancy 120 plus ranges are good across sparsely defended airspace all over the world from Afganisthan to zimbabwae but have no practical uses in heavily defended air space guarded by Awacs and a host of fighter patrols along with heavy ground radars.

Since it is foolish to switch on the radar and betray ones presence when every attack mission success is premised on surprise whether you are flying 4.5th gen fighter or 5th gen fighter..

So for deep penetration strike missions armed forces will rely more on hyper sonic cruise missiles, UCAVs in future not on fancy 5th gen Low observable fighters with pony bomb loads.

Even re usable hypersonic vehicles are being developed for this purpose .

 

[Decklander]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

AIM120D has slightly more fuel, better guidance and the range increase is touted only for F-22 which is supposed to fire it from 50-60k ft height and at speeds exceeding M1.3. firing speed of M 1.3 adds nearly 30% to the range.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Which means you will have to transmit at some stage which will expose you. Even if you do not pick up the data link transmissions, the MWR will pick up the missile at some stage.

I don't think it is as simple as that. Detection is not tracking.

By the time the F-22 is detected, it may have left the area. The window for radar detection is mere seconds anyway.

The point of the F-22 is it gives the pilot first shoot capability. Even if stealth is defensive, the missile fired is not. You can't go on the offensive when there are two or three missiles headed towards you. You need to go on the defensive before you shake off those missiles. After that the F-22 may still get a second chance before you are able to close in. In case you did close in, the F-22 has a higher service ceiling and speed than most other aircraft, it will escape. If we consider the F-22's wingman, they can pass tracking duties between each other to confuse the attacked aircraft's RWR sensors. No point trying to catch aircraft that can do Mach 1.6 for 40+ minutes.

Anyway, passive tracking is not easy, fictional as far as today's technology is concerned. No point getting a rough location when the F-22 has more accurate radar info. Let's not forget there would be hundreds of other aircraft in the air to discern from, friendly and hostile.

The onboard electrical power output on the F-22 is over 150 KW of which the radar may not use more than 20KW considering it is AESA. No onboard jammer as well. There is no saying what else the F-22 carries in order to use that humongous power..

F-16 B52 pilots have claimed they cannot fight the F-15C in a BVR match, on forums, especially when the F-15C goes all guns blazing unrestricted by training rules.

Also a note, a British exchange pilot on a F-15D couldn't even generate consistent gun tracking against the F-22 after merge. All other F-22 exercises with foreign pilots and aircraft have been with a Luneberg reflector installed.

These problems can be solved by two different approaches, one is stealth and the other is long range, stand off weapons. USA has taken stealth route thru F-22 & F-35 while russia has taken second route of low observable ac with long range stand off weapons.

Both use long range stand off ALCMs. AGM-86 and KH-55 come to mind.

Russia is adopting the use of stealth when it comes to fighters too, not just US.

 

[ersakthivel]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas - IV

Any 5th gen fighter will give a large 2 or 3 meter RCS reflections to radars using long wavelength radio waves like 1 meter and more.

So in future to detect the evolving 5th gen planes longer wavelength radar waves will be used.

Once detected any 4.5 th gen plane can shoot at 5th gen planes with passive trackers like IRST even if its X band fire control radar wont pick up the 5th gen fighter. Mid course corrections can be given by Awacs using L band radars that can take the BVR close to say within 5 or six Kms of the 5th gen before the heat seeker of the missile takes over.

and if the 5th gen plane needs to shoot at 4.5th gen fighter it too needs to get closer the 4.5 th gen plane , use it radar advertise it's presence and invite a host of anti radiation missiles from the 4.5th gen fighter besides the improving IRST aided long range missile shots.

So No 5th gen fighter will leave any area undetected if suitable detection mechanisms are put up,

it will happen over the airspace over Afganisthan to Zimbabwae , not in heavily defended airspaces.

Any way this has nothing to do with ADA tejas mk-1. so lets move the discussion to relevant threads.