Military Review

F-22 - Answers to Questions

62
Introduction


Recently, a lot of publications on the F-22 appeared in the network and in the press, which are mainly divided into two camps. The first includes enthusiastic psalms of miracles.weaponswhich is capable of waging a battle with any enemy in numbers on the sea, land, in the air and under water. Subtle, super-maneuverable, both on a subsonic and at a supersonic speed plane, with which aircraft of the previous generation are simply not capable of fighting. The second camp combines articles and statements such as the “Reptor” - a suitcase with wings, stuffed for 200 million with all kinds of electronics, which, in principle, can fly, but he doesn’t really need it. True, it is not clear how he at the same time demonstrates all these tricks at an air show, or maybe it is not him? Maybe all this was shot in the studio by the damned Americans, like the moon landing?

Meanwhile, in the shadow of heated debate and a spray of saliva, the important fact that the Americans created a fundamentally new combat class remained unnoticed aviation techniques, which we will discuss in detail at the end. And now the promised answers to questions on F-22 aerodynamics.

• How does the F-22 maintain good stability and controllability at high angles of attack, without using such aerodynamic tricks as sagging, CIP, ledges on the leading edge of the wing and other aerodynamic elements characteristic of the 4 generation fighters?

In fact, the “Raptor” has the same whirling aerodynamics as the 4 generation fighters. The invisibility requirements imposed on her extremely severe restrictions. The edge on the lateral surface of the forward fuselage, the vortex-forming upper edge of the air intake and a small influx in the root of the wing (Fig. 1) are responsible for the formation of the vortex system. The experimental development of the upper edge of the air intake was particularly difficult. Here, several conflicting requirements came together: stealth, air intake operation, vortex rope generation, road stability, etc.

F-22 - Answers to Questions

Fig. 1. The bottom view of the elements of the vortex F-22


Figure 2, 3 shows the vortex system, which is formed by the nose section of the F-22 fuselage. The left figure shows the vortex system in a continuous flow. The vortex bundles from the upper edge of the air intake and the rib of the nose part flow along the keels from both sides, and the eddies from the influxes - the wing and the horizontal plumage. With the development of tear-off phenomena (dark area in the right figure), the flow pattern changes. Vortex harness detaches from the edge of the air intake and turns into a vortex sheet, which does not allow to develop areas of separated currents and thus maintains the effectiveness of vertical tail to angles of attack of the order of 30 degrees. At high angles of attack, the property of the wings of small elongation begins to have a positive effect, which is associated with a large angle of sweep of the leading edge. Due to the large difference in pressure, gas begins to flow from the lower surface of the wing to its upper surface through the leading edge, this forms a vortex, prevents separation from the upper surface of the wing and maintains the efficiency of the tail (fig. 4).


Fig. 2. Stabilization of track stability with the help of vortex harnesses. Angle of attack 22 hail.



Fig. 3. Suppression of stall in a corkscrew with a swirling sheet. Angle of attack 22 hail.



Fig. 4. Whirlwinds breaking from the leading edge of the wing


Of course, the classic rush of the wing would be better. After all, he solves another problem. When passing through the speed of sound, the aerodynamic focus shifts back, as a result, the margin of static stability increases and additional balancing resistance occurs. The influx at supersonic speed creates a lifting force (it is small at the subsonic), which weakens the focus shift backwards and reduces the balancing resistance (Fig. 5). The "Raptor" at the forefront of stealth. But what about additional resistance? The engine is powerful, there is a lot of fuel, so you can put up with it.




Fig. 5. The classic root of the wing and its influence on the aerodynamic characteristics


Another thing is that the Russian X-NUMX + generation fighter aircraft used the full range of aerodynamic improvements, which allows to increase the aerodynamic quality in a wide range of Mach numbers and angles of attack. This was discussed in detail in the second part of the work [4]. Almost all of them the developers of "Raptor" had to be abandoned in favor of stealth.

• Where does “Raptor” have such angular speed of roll and rotation, which it demonstrates at exhibitions, because it is typical, it seems, for airplanes of the “tailless” scheme? Maybe it is in the differential deviation of the thrust vector?

In fact, for all airplanes with a small elongation of the wing, and not just the tailless scheme, a more favorable distribution of aerodynamic loads is typical for the span than for wings with a small sweep, such as the MiG-29, F-16, F-18 . The best in this regard, the aerodynamic configuration is a "duck" with a near-front horizontal tail (GIP). It is considered as such if the main wing is located in the zone of action of the bevel of the stream from the tail. Such a scheme is also sometimes called a “biplane - tandem”. The introduction of the pioneers were the Swedes with their "Wiggen" (Fig. 6). The Israeli Lavi was built in the same way.


Fig. 6. An example of a biplan tandem aerodynamic configuration. Saab "Viggen"


The combination of a small moment of inertia about the longitudinal axis of single-engine airplanes and a large area of ​​transverse control bodies located along the entire trailing edge of the wing allows for a high rotational speed. The best among them is the Mirage-2000. In this regard, it is interesting to compare the F-15, F-16 and F-22 heel rates (Fig. 7; circles are marked with thrust vector control (UHT) turned off, with squares with UHT turned on). Since the F-15 is twin-engine and has a moderately swept wing, and the F-16 is single-engine, the Falcon should take precedence. The "Raptor" engines are located near the center of mass, the wing of small elongation, a large sweep of the leading edge and a very large tail. Theoretically, it should be somewhere in the middle.


Fig. 7. The dependence of the velocity of the angle of heel on the angle of attack


At zero angle of attack, all three fighters are approximately equal by this indicator (about 200 degrees / sec.). As the angle of attack increases, F-16 comes forward and retains its flesh advantages to 30 angles. even in the case of "Raptor" thrust vector control. And only at high angles of attack, the advantage goes to the F-22. The outsider, as expected, was F-15.

In fig. 7 shows that the F-22 heel rate without UHT is already at an angle of attack of about 20 degrees. almost equal to that of the F-15. It is known that the nozzles of the Raptor engines are locked just in time for the 20 angle of attack. To control the yaw angle and roll angle at high angles of attack is connected UHT. In this case, the nozzles are deflected in one direction, and not differentially, as strange as it may seem at first glance. At high angles of attack, as the angle of heel changes, the slip angle also changes. When rotating around the velocity vector, the nozzles deflect upward and the aircraft behaves like a rear-engined car in a steering-driven corner. The roll rate increases significantly. If it is necessary to carry out rotation around the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, then this maneuver is performed without changing the angle of attack. Previously, these maneuvers were worked out on the X-31. Rotation is performed due to the differential deviation of the tail and the deviation of the nozzle flaps, then one, then the other side.

• How does the F-22 so well manage the yaw angle when performing maneuvers at high angles of attack with slip? It seems that he freely performs a controlled flat corkscrew. The thing is raznotyag engines?

What the show on the “Raptor” show is not a flat corkscrew, but rotation around the velocity vector (fig.8) at angles of attack over 55 hail. Since the roll rate at such angles of attack is only a few degrees per second, and the precession speed is several tens of degrees / sec, it seems that the plane falls like a maple leaf, and this looks like a corkscrew, but this is not a corkscrew.


Fig. 8. Dynamic U-Maneuver using rotation around the velocity vector


By repeating the maneuver shown in Figure 8 several times, the pilot can create the illusion of a flat spin in the viewer, which is what the Americans use at the airshow. Recall once again that the nozzle during the rotation of the "Raptor" deviate only synchronously. Theoretically, nothing prevents to deflect the nozzles differentially. There are no special mechanical connections that prevent this. However, from the point of view of the flight dynamics of the F-22, this is completely ineffective. The nozzles are placed too close to each other and to the center of gravity. In addition, the nozzles start to work only at angles of attack greater than 20 degrees., With this the maximum deflection angle is exactly 20 degrees, i.e. to reject them in different directions does not make much sense. Densely located flat supersonic design jets have a high ejection capacity; therefore, the upward deflection of both nozzles stabilizes the flow near the upper surface of the tail fuselage between the vertical tail, which contributes to the stability of the track, as well as the effectiveness of horizontal rudders.

• How does F-22 use UHT in close combat and can this “iron” win melee from the 4 generation fighter without using UHT?



Fig. 9. Comparison of the balancing scheme of the F-22 and other fighters


"Raptor" is characterized by a low load on the wing and high thrust-to-weight ratio, clean aerodynamic forms, and an internal weapons compartment. However, its wing has a high inductance, flat profiles with poor carrier properties. The fuselage is oversized in the area of ​​the center section due to the need to place four compartments of weapons.

It is known from the theory that a fighter with high suo will have an advantage at low angles of attack, and at low angles of attack - with a small suo. Consequently, the “Raptor” in battle should immediately go to the angles of the order of 20 hail. where due to the high thrust-weight ratio he must have superiority. And do it as quickly as possible, i.e. the rate of increase of the angle of attack should be as large as possible. Comparing the balancing schemes of different fighters (Fig. 9), we can conclude that the creators of F-22 also knew about this.

The "Raptor" extremely close to the center of mass located engine nozzles and a very large horizontal tail, rendered back. Such an aerodynamic scheme provides twice as much moment in angle of attack than that of the F-16 without any UHT (Fig. 10). Applying deflection nozzles only increases the advantage.


Fig. 10. The rate of change of angle of attack


Thus, "Raptor" has the opportunity, how to enter into a close maneuverable battle with an 4-generation fighter on an advantageous mode, and get out of it. Moreover, the high thrust-to-weight ratio gives him an advantage in steady turns, which he performs up to the angle of attack 16 – 22 hail. (The majority of fighters of the fourth generation to 10-12 deg.), with Mach numbers M = 0.5-0.8. In F-16, the maximum speed of the steady reversal is reached at the angle of attack near 11.

The Americans achieved a rather good result, i.e. able to give their fighter new qualities (supersonic speed and the ability to maneuver when M> 1), while providing him with an advantage in traditional modes. Another thing that was stated was completely different. They promised decisive superiority.

The situation is different with the fighters of the 4 + and 4 ++ generation. Many of them have mastered maneuvers at supercritical angles of attack and angular turning speeds up to 30 degrees / sec. It will be difficult for “Reptoru” to fight them on the established turns. The only thing that was demonstrated at the “Reptor” from the arsenal of super-maneuverability is a “temporary increase in the pitch angle” for pointing the weapon (Fig. 11). With just two missiles on board, an aircraft for 200 million dollars in melee might not be lucky.


Fig. 11. A temporary increase in the angle of attack for aiming weapons at the target



• Is the F-22 supermaneuverable, is the UHT used on the F-22 to increase maneuverability (decrease the turning radii, increase the angular speeds of the turn), and why is not the UHT applied at supersonic speed?

UHT is not used at supersonic speeds, because the fighter lacks engine thrust for this. Recall that the available overload when M> 1 drops by an order of magnitude [1]. In ballistic missiles, for example, guided nozzles are a common technical solution, but the ratio of thrust to the area of ​​the washed surface is much more.

With the F-22, the deflectable nozzles are used only at low speeds and high angles of attack, when the efficiency of aerodynamic control surfaces is not enough (Figure 12).


Fig. 12. UHT use at high angles of attack for balancing


The symmetrical deflection of both nozzles is used to control pitch and roll to enhance the effect of horizontal tail at low speeds and high angles of attack. The use of deviating nozzles increased the mass of the structure by 15 ... 25 kg, while an equivalent increase in the area of ​​the horizontal tail would increase this mass by 180 kg.

To create the effects of super-maneuverability UHT is not used. Here it is necessary to recall how the super-maneuverable aircraft of the 5 generation in the 1980-s was presented. It was believed that this would be a relatively small, inexpensive and very maneuverable aircraft (Fig.13).


Fig. 13. Picture of an AMDAC experimental aircraft with direct control of lateral aerodynamic force and supercirculation effect


UHT was to be used to create direct lateral forces, i.e. participate in conjunction with the aerodynamic controls in controlling the spatial position of the aircraft, regardless of the trajectory of movement (Fig. 14) and the trajectory, regardless of the spatial position of the aircraft (Fig. 15).

Super-maneuverability allows to reduce the overload acting on the aircraft and the pilot, as well as to expand the scope of the weapon. Especially a wide range of opportunities for designers provides an all-nozzle. Equipped with such nozzles, the plane is theoretically capable of performing highly unconventional types of maneuvers, for example, evasion from air-to-air. “Raptor” doesn’t know how to do this and will never be able to, it just doesn’t need it, it was conceived by something completely different, supersonic, subtle and just relatively manoeuvrable.


Fig. 14. Super maneuverability. Controlling the position of the aircraft on the path



Fig. 15. Super maneuverability. Trajectory control



Fig. 16. The appearance of a promising fighter, developed by the program HiMAT


Then several other trends prevailed. By the beginning of the 1980-s, the 5-generation fighter began to be represented by a large, somewhere over 35 tons, but super-maneuverable aircraft, on which UHT nozzles and a variety of aerodynamic controls were to be used (Fig. 16). To study their effectiveness, radio-controlled models were developed on the 1: 2 scale (Fig. 17).


Fig. 17. Radio-controlled model HiMAT


The next approach to the final development of the concept of the 5 fighter generation was the AFTI program, during which it was planned to build experimental aircraft using a modular principle (Fig. 18).


Fig. 18. The concept of modular comparative testing of highly maneuverable AFTII fighters


In the process of research, round and flat nozzles, different versions of controls, including a full-turn wing, were compared. The “triplane” scheme was considered mandatory for the direct control of lateral aerodynamic forces. All these innovations promised the fighter non-traditional capabilities in maneuverable combat, and the large size - a long range and significant ammunition.
The 4-35 ton aircraft equipped with 37 – 12 short, medium and long-range missiles, equipped with two engines of 14 – 20 tons with UHT, 22 – 10 control aerodynamic surfaces, and self-defense systems review. It could look something like the funny pictures of Chinese comrades (Fig. 14, 19). Now, by the way, this model is used in a computer game.


Fig. 19. Chinese ideas about the super-maneuverable fighter



Fig. 20. Direct control of aerodynamic forces


The concept of application in those early years saw something like this. Fighters, equipped with a powerful radar, maneuvering at supersonic speeds, fire at the enemy in a volley. We didn’t particularly care about stealth; it was believed that in order to impose their initiative in battle, radar should be turned on, and there it was no longer enough to be inconspicuous. It was believed that such a fighter cruise missiles could attack from a distance of at least 25 km, and enemy fighters from a distance of 50 – 70 km. In melee combat, the super-maneuverability and the circular self-defense complex were to ensure the launch of rockets, both in the forward hemisphere and in the rear.


Fig. 21. Fighter 5-th generation in the view of the company "Rockwell", developed by the program AFTII


It gradually became clear that by moving to new technologies and removing weapons in the weapon compartments, the aircraft could be made much more compact. A greater degree of integration of the wing and fuselage allowed to increase the proportion of fuel in the mass of the aircraft, and new advances in aerodynamics - to reduce cruising fuel consumption. As a result, an airplane of dimensions from 20 to 30 t according to the “duck” scheme, with a strongly flat-bearing fuselage, was obtained. With such a scheme, it was washed to use flat nozzles, since one could count on the effect of supercirculation. An example is shown in Fig. 21, isn't it a bit like our MiG - 1.42.
And what of all this rich groundwork did Lockheed use in the F-22 project?
NOTHING. ANIMAL ACCOUNT ANYTHING. “RAPTOR” - NOT SUPERMANEUROUS.

• They write that a significant part of the thrust creates an air intake. But then how are they balanced and where are the forces applied when the flaps of the flat nozzle are deflected?

Indeed, at supersonic speeds, the air intake creates significant traction. It is not difficult to explain this by considering the design of the supersonic air intake (fig.22). Behind a direct closing shock, the current is subsonic. In the expanding part of the air intake (diffuser), the flow continues to be inhibited. Since the pressure in it is higher than in the environment, the distribution of pressure on the inner walls gives the resultant forward direction.


Fig. 22. Air intake design


For the creation of engine thrust is the law of conservation of momentum. The plane does not repel air from a jet stream, propeller or compressor, as many people think so far. Best of all, the principle of the WFD, including UHT, is described in a rather old book [2], but, according to the drivers, since then the best textbook has not been published. In general, it consists of the following. The air intake and the compressor serve to compress the air. This is necessary for its supply to the combustion chamber in an amount sufficient for burning fuel in the optimum ratio with it. The resulting combustion products rotate the gas turbine, which drives the compressor through the shaft. Next, the gases enter the nozzle. In order for the aircraft to move it is necessary that the speed of the jet outflow from the nozzle is greater than the speed of the aircraft.
To which parts of the engine are applied the thrust force is not so important, but it is convenient to trace it in the Pv diagrams (pressure - speed increment). In areas of the engine where the speed increases, a thrust force arises. It can be seen that the majority of the thrust is generated by a nozzle (fig. 23).


Fig. 23. Creating traction force in different parts of TRD


The compressor (section BC), on the contrary, creates resistance. Since, the law of conservation of momentum is a vector, the deviation of the jet allows one to obtain a thrust directed in the opposite direction. The force is applied to the walls and flaps of the nozzle. Here is a confirmation that the UHT on the F-22 is not used directly to increase maneuverability. There is nothing to balance emerging moments. On the contrary - UHT is used for balancing. On the MiG-29OVT this problem is not, because nozzle axes are spaced apart, and the nozzles themselves are all-view, the thrust vector can be directed through the center of mass. There are no problems on the duck planes. Here PGO is used for balancing.

• Why are all-angle UVT nozzles effective only at afterburner?

This, perhaps, from the field of curiosities. This, apparently, is about the MiG-29 and the UHT CLIVT system of NPO. Klimov. In this thrust vector control system, not all of the nozzle, as in the Su-30, for example, deviates, but only the flaps of the supercritical part of the nozzle. When the afterburner is turned off, the RD-33 nozzle reduces the diameter of the critical section. With this configuration, the flaps of its supersonic part simply cannot be rejected.

Recall also that UHT makes sense where there is a lack of efficiency of aerodynamic control surfaces. On such modes, flying without afterburner is unlikely to occur to anyone.

To understand that the afterburner itself is not related to the effectiveness of shock wave therapy, we must remember the principle of its operation. Afterburner is installed behind the turbine and only heats the combustion products, increasing their internal energy. Additional fuel could be burned in front of the turbine, if it could withstand and would not have to adjust the compressor. And it would be possible, theoretically, to put an electric heater. The main thing is what will be the total pressure and temperature of the gas in front of the nozzle.

• Why is a flat nozzle applied on the F-22 and a round nozzle on the F-35, what are their advantages?
The drawbacks of a flat nozzle are well known: heavy weight, loss of thrust, bending loads. In the F-35 variant for the Marine Corps, these factors are critically important, but the stealth, just fades into the background. Therefore a round nozzle is selected (fig. 24).


Fig. 24. Engine VTVP F-35


Gas dynamics know another serious drawback of flat nozzles, which complicates their use on airplanes with KVP. At the points of transition of a circular cross section into a rectangular one, strong nozzle shocks appear (Fig. 25).


Fig. 25. Nozzle shocks inside the flat nozzle


In round nozzles there may also occur nozzle jumps, but weaker ones. For the destruction of nozzle jumps in the flat nozzles can be installed longitudinal partitions, as in the F-117. On short-range take-off and landing airplanes, nozzle jumps cause strong erosion of the airfield cover.

At the same time, flat nozzles are well assembled on supersonic aircraft with flat fuselages. They can significantly reduce the bottom pressure at supersonic speeds, which can create up to 40% resistance. For the F-22 this is crucial. In addition, the flat nozzles relatively simply allow to use such aerodynamic effects as the Coanda effect (jet sticking to a near surface) and the effect of supercirculation, which significantly increase the aerodynamic quality of the aircraft. This was partially used on the YF-23.

• What is the notorious radar blocker inside the F-119, how much does it affect the loss of traction?

This device is shown in Fig. 26 and is a kind of impeller. It closes the turbine blades from the enemy’s radar station. The turbine blades are profiled and reflect the waves in all directions no worse than corner reflectors. At the same time the blades, which are visible in the photo, cover up the hot elements of the afterburner of the infrared-guided missile heads. Since the gas accelerates mainly in the nozzle, and the radar blocker is installed in front of it, in an area where the flow velocity is small, the loss of thrust is relatively small. In any case, they are smaller than the losses caused by the transition from a round nozzle to a flat one.


Fig. 26. Radar blocker


• With the F-119, it is not clear where the air from the second circuit is located. It seems to be the classical DDRDF scheme that involves taking air into the second circuit after the fan and mixing the flows of the first and second circuits behind the turbines, in front of the afterburners. And with the F-119, secondary air is used only for cooling. It turns out that it is single circuit? Or drawings published on the manufacturer's website - disinformation?
There are two TDRD schemes, with and without flow mixing. Since the main flight mode is unformed, why is it surprising that the chosen scheme without mixing the flow? The fan creates some of the thrust. Further, the air from the second circuit is discharged into the environment, but this does not make the engine single-circuit. In engines for which the afterburner mode is basic, for example, in the D-30F, the flows are mixed in front of the afterburner.

• Findings. F-22 as a new class of combat aircraft.

IN THE FIRST DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE ESSENCE OF THE Fighter OF THE FIFTH GENERATION, THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT REMAINED IN THE SHADOW - AMERICANS CREATED A NEW CLASS OF AVIATION TECHNIQUE. By analogy with the main battle a tank F-22 could be called the main combat aircraft. This is the first combat aircraft, which can almost equally play the role of both an interceptor and a front-line bomber. World aviation has been going to this event for 40 years. How did you manage to achieve this and why didn’t it happen earlier?

The first attempt to create a universal aircraft ended with the appearance of the first-class F-111 bomber, which has not been surpassed in the United States so far. Then they tried to create a multi-purpose vehicle based on the F-15 fighter. The resulting F-15E acquired the ability to attack ground targets, while maintaining high potential in aerial combat. He had no direct analogs for a long time, perhaps, right up until the advent of the Su-27MKI. However, low wing loading and moderate sweep of the leading edge lead to unacceptable shaking when flying at low altitude. As a result, the F-15E impact capabilities are considered mediocre.

At the beginning of the 1980-ies began to take shape a new look of the strike aircraft. This was supposed to be a plane capable of making a supersonic throw to escape from the strike of fighters, maneuverable enough to carry out an antimissile maneuver without a bomb load. The fact is that the experience of the war in the Middle East has shown that fighter-bombers up to 80% of losses are borne at the exit from the attack. Thus, the bomber requires a large wing and high thrust-to-weight ratio. This, in turn, allowed the bomber to be designed as an efficient vehicle, i.e. the mass of the bomb load and fuel can be a significant part of the mass of the aircraft. Increases the range.

But, how in the case of a large wing to deal with the increased turbulence of the atmosphere when flying at extremely low altitudes? The easiest way is done with the help of [PGO] in the “duck” scheme. Automatic control system fends off vibrations. Later solutions were found for the normal aerodynamic configuration. A wing with a large sweep leading edge is itself resistant to vertical gusts of wind.


Fig. 27. C-37


So, if from all that said in this paragraph to withdraw the bomb load, what will happen? That's right, the interceptor, besides with a very large radius of action and ammunition. Realizing this, Israel began to design "Lavi", which they called the strike aircraft with a high level of maneuverability. In the USSR, at the same time, the C-37 (the first with this name) was developed with even higher data, which was considered as a substitute for attack aircraft, fighter-bomber and front-line fighter.

F-22 represents a real breakthrough in this direction. AFAR works equally well for both ground and air targets. Internal compartments contain bombs and air-to-air missiles. Remember how many years wrote that it was not possible to bring the breed of universal pilots? And do not! It is enough that bombers and interceptors with an identical glider and flight data will go on the attack. And let some pilots be masters of close maneuvering combat, and the latter will only be trained, dropping bombs, to break away from the enemy at supersonic speed. And this will be a big step forward.

Strange people are these Americans. Declared the creation of a single aircraft for different types of troops F-35 and got a car with a total design no more than 35%. They created an aircraft that, on the basis of a single glider and equipment, for the first time in the world actually replaces a front interceptor and a front bomber and are silent. The unified glider was: MiG-25P and MiG-25РБ, but a single plane was definitely the first time. Fully work out on the exercises tactics of applying F-22 in the version of the fighter and bomber in the same line and keep quiet. Strange, however.


Literature
1. P.V. Bulat On the problem of launching rockets from compartments at supersonic speeds.
2. Theory of jet engines. Ed. Dr. techn. Sciences S.M. Shlyakhtenko, M., “Mechanical Engineering”, 1975, 568 p.
Author:
Originator:
http://otvaga2004.ru/
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 12 September 2013 08: 23 New
    0
    If the raptor wants real over-maneuverability, then let him learn from our SU-35S!
    1. Parabelum
      Parabelum 12 September 2013 09: 29 New
      28
      He does not want over-maneuverability, he wants to be less visible and more seeing. Which is fully consistent with the American concept of air combat.
      1. tronin.maxim
        tronin.maxim 12 September 2013 10: 03 New
        +2
        Quote: Parabelum
        conducting air combat.

        Conducting ranged combat, in close combat, all its uniqueness loses its meaning.
        1. Geisenberg
          Geisenberg 12 September 2013 16: 25 New
          +6
          Quote: tronin.maxim
          Quote: Parabelum
          conducting air combat.

          Conducting ranged combat, in close combat, all its uniqueness loses its meaning.


          In general, the whole American concept of war tends to shoot at a defenseless enemy from a long distance. The raptor fits perfectly. Apparently for the uncompromising Rubilov in the "from hand to hand" style, their gut is thin. Actually, and what else to expect from a nation created from European garbage.

          PS: Good article, it was very interesting to read.
          1. luiswoo
            luiswoo 12 September 2013 18: 50 New
            10
            Quote: Geisenberg
            In general, the whole American concept of war tends to shoot at a defenseless enemy from a long distance. The raptor fits perfectly. Apparently for the uncompromising Rubilov in the "from hand to hand" style, their gut is thin.

            This concept appeared a little earlier than the USA. The first example of the concept is a stone thrown into the opponent’s skull because of the unwillingness to check the sharpness of the teeth and the strength of the limbs thereof.
          2. Joker
            Joker 12 September 2013 21: 02 New
            0
            Actually, and what else to expect from a nation created from European garbage.

            Uh-huh, the computer you are sitting at has also done this garbage like so much else in your house. And from our "smart" you probably only light bulbs.
            1. poquello
              poquello 13 September 2013 01: 25 New
              +4
              Quote: Joker
              Actually, and what else to expect from a nation created from European garbage.

              Uh-huh, the computer you are sitting at has also done this garbage like so much else in your house. And from our "smart" you probably only light bulbs.


              Yes, we know, we know.
              The Americans made everything out of nothing, and so the human race came about.
          3. palerich
            palerich 17 September 2013 00: 39 New
            -1
            The article is great. At least a little fresh air for patients with "Great Russian chauvinism"
          4. Witold
            Witold 24 October 2013 00: 36 New
            -3
            In your opinion, should the planes come together in hand-to-hand combat?
      2. Nukem999
        Nukem999 12 September 2013 16: 29 New
        +5

        ..super maneuverability
        1. DAOSS
          DAOSS 14 September 2013 02: 52 New
          +1
          Like it or not, but the car is cool, no matter how much it is not obsessed at the site, but all the same, the plane is beautiful, maneuverable and effective!
          One hope that is against Us will be ineffective.
      3. Matio
        Matio 12 September 2013 19: 56 New
        +1
        correctly!
      4. cdrt
        cdrt 12 September 2013 23: 34 New
        +1
        Hmm ... reprinted an article that appeared on Courage a couple of weeks ago. :-))

        Well, the author seems to be at a level much more professional than the local commentators (apart from of course a few respected professionals here) shows that they are fine with maneuverability. Although it may be lower than that of the T-50.
        On the other hand, Americans from the 60s joke that those who can’t make powerful engines bother with aerodynamics laughing

        Well ... F-22 is super-maneuverable, evidence in the internet, and below in the comments.
        And ... created and launched in a series of years like that 15-20 years ago. Oh serial production is completed. We are only testing the T-50, maybe by 16-17 we will begin mass production.
        In other words, 20 years of our backlog from the USA. The rest, however, are even more behind (already 10-15 years from us).
        1. Just
          Just 15 September 2013 05: 48 New
          -3
          Very good very funny. In the 21st century, the United States made an aircraft capable of doing the same thing as Soviet aircraft did. Those. they were only now able to make an aircraft capable of flying like our aircraft, created 20 years ago.
          So who is behind someone?
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Vashestambid3
      Vashestambid3 13 September 2013 00: 01 New
      +1
      Good Useful Article with facts, to the Author + and the Air Force Cross for especially outstanding heroism !! smile
      1. El-bog
        El-bog 13 September 2013 09: 07 New
        +1
        I just want to write to you - Heil Hitler!
    4. palerich
      palerich 17 September 2013 00: 35 New
      +1
      It is better to learn to write without errors.
  2. xetai9977
    xetai9977 12 September 2013 08: 28 New
    33
    Dislike for the United States should not mean moaning all American technology. F-22 is a real breakthrough technique. Naturally, like every first-born, it has weaknesses. But 187 of them were built, which means they met the expectations of customers. Underestimation of other people's equipment never led to good.
    1. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 12 September 2013 16: 29 New
      +1
      Quote: xetai9977
      Dislike for the United States should not mean moaning all American technology. F-22 is a real breakthrough technique. Naturally, like every first-born, it has weaknesses. But 187 of them were built, which means they met the expectations of customers. Underestimation of other people's equipment never led to good.


      Revaluation leads to a loss of initiative. You don’t need to worship someone else’s technique in the same way, you have to beat it to the best of your ability ... The f117 Serbs were shot down, the Raptor did not go far.
      1. Nukem999
        Nukem999 12 September 2013 16: 34 New
        0
        What are you saying? F22 and F35 are two 5th generation in the world that are in production
        1. 0255
          0255 12 September 2013 17: 23 New
          +7
          F-22 was discontinued, and F-35 can not bring to mind. While the old F-15s, F-16s and F / A-18s are fighting for democracy.
          1. Nukem999
            Nukem999 12 September 2013 17: 47 New
            0
            f22 has already been produced 187. 100 f35 .T50 and is a prototype.
          2. Nukem999
            Nukem999 12 September 2013 17: 50 New
            +1
            and don't forget yf23
            1. Nukem999
              Nukem999 12 September 2013 17: 53 New
              -1
              ...................
          3. xetai9977
            xetai9977 12 September 2013 18: 10 New
            +7
            The F-22 was removed from production not because the car was bad, but because the program was completed. And why does every good assessment of a really good technique provoke an inadequate reaction among some colleagues, which is reflected in comments like “don't bow to the West”? Technique is technology, where does the West or East? So why drive a Mercedes or a Chevrolet? Western after all!
            1. Nukem999
              Nukem999 12 September 2013 18: 37 New
              +1
              they don’t need a lot of them because there is no competition
            2. Vashestambid2
              Vashestambid2 12 September 2013 19: 31 New
              +4
              Good Article, with Facts and Drawings. smile To the author plus + and the Air Force Cross Medal for particularly outstanding heroism !!
              ( laughing Hooray patriots who have just hatched from an egg do not approve of such articles laughing )
      2. Witold
        Witold 12 September 2013 21: 22 New
        0
        You don’t have to worship someone else’s technique in the same way, you have to beat it as far as you can.

        ..
        If you beat someone else’s equipment, so first break your computer.
        1. mehmeh
          mehmeh 7 December 2014 17: 27 New
          +1
          What do you have? I have never seen an Israeli computer in my life) be proud of something there
          God let you breathe
          Do you think they grabbed him by the beard
          Warriors Mlyn
          Although you are good people. big brother will throw you. yes already threw ..
  3. Straus_zloy
    Straus_zloy 12 September 2013 08: 30 New
    +2
    The article is very old, written before the advent of T-50 and to identify current problems f-22
    1. TRAFFIC
      TRAFFIC 12 September 2013 09: 40 New
      0
      What problems?
      1. pri3rak
        pri3rak 12 September 2013 10: 08 New
        +4
        Are you blacklisted on google?
        1. TRAFFIC
          TRAFFIC 12 September 2013 11: 43 New
          -1
          No, but has your time stopped? And probably the problem is not solved yes?
      2. Straus_zloy
        Straus_zloy 12 September 2013 11: 47 New
        +2
        http://topwar.ru/21126-problemy-istrebitelya-f-22-raptor-chast-i-ekonomika.html

        http://topwar.ru/21368-problemy-istrebitelya-f-22-rapror-chast-ii-tehnika-i-voor

        uzhenie.html

        http://army-news.ru/2011/09/istrebitel-f-22-raptor/



        In May 2012, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta signed a decree imposing significant restrictions on the flight of F-22 Raptor fighters. The reason for this was an unsuccessful search for the cause of failures of the on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS), complaints of pilots about suffocation and unpleasant odors in the cockpit. According to the decree, F-22 is no longer entitled to make long flights, and is always obliged to be within the reach of runways so that, if necessary, pilots can make an emergency landing. At the same time, according to Defense News, flights of aircraft based in Alaska are completely prohibited, since the bases located there are difficult for emergency landing.


        December 20 2004 of the year F-22A (ser. Number 00-4014) crashed during take-off from the Nellis air base, the pilot ejected.
        February 11 2007 12 F-22 fighters were unable to fly from the USA to Japan due to problems with navigation software (presumably due to the intersection of the date line in the middle of the Pacific Ocean)
        25 March 2009 year F-22A (ser. Number 91-4008) crashed in the Mojave desert of California, near the Edwards air base, during a test flight, 49-year-old pilot David Cooley died.
        On November 16 of November 2010, the F-22A Block 30 (ser. Number 06-4125) crashed 160 kilometers from Anchorage during a pair training flight in 19: 40 local time. The pilot - Jeffrey Haney - died. The cause of the accident was the pilot's mistake.
        On November 15 2012, the F-22 crashed on a highway in the United States. The accident occurred in the state of Florida near the US Air Force Tyndall. The pilot of the plane managed to eject.
        On December 7 2012 during the memorial ceremony marking the 71 anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor during landing, the F-22 Raptor fighter was damaged. Aircraft repair is valued at 1,8 million dollars.
        1. TRAFFIC
          TRAFFIC 12 September 2013 12: 58 New
          +3
          4/4/2013 - Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va. - The Air Force's F-22 Raptor has resumed normal flight operations after modifications were completed across the fleet to aircrew life-support equipment, including the upper pressure garment and related hoses, valves and connectors.

          F-22 crews have also resumed their aerospace control alert mission in Alaska after the Automatic Back-up Oxygen System was installed in Elmendorf-based aircraft.
          http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123343030
          As you can see, the restrictions have been removed, moreover, they were caused by a problem with the suit and the OBOGS system, what does they have to do with the article? And about the accidents, how many aircraft models that did not crash? At the moment, this is the T-50, F-35 and with a stretch of the Su-34, as far as I remember there is only one test they wrote off.
          1. TRAFFIC
            TRAFFIC 12 September 2013 13: 04 New
            +2
            Well, I also forgot the Chinese fifth generation, so far, too, everyone is flying. smile
        2. 0255
          0255 12 September 2013 17: 39 New
          +1
          In May 2012, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta signed a decree imposing significant restrictions on the flight of F-22 Raptor fighters. The reason for this was an unsuccessful search for the cause of failures of the on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS), complaints of pilots about suffocation and unpleasant odors in the cockpit. According to the decree, F-22 is no longer entitled to make long flights, and is always obliged to be within the reach of runways so that, if necessary, pilots can make an emergency landing. At the same time, according to Defense News, flights of aircraft based in Alaska are completely prohibited, since the bases located there are difficult for emergency landing.

          It's cool - until 2012, Lockheed Martin couldn’t figure out how to make an oxygen supply system for their F-22. Despite the fact that the prototype first flew in 1990. Okay, problems with the latest electronics, but bringing to mind the oxygen supply system for 22 years from the first flight says a lot.
          Look and read how Rafal did Raptor:
          http://topwar.ru/30138-zagnat-hischnika-k-pozoru-f-22-raptor.html
          Well, the Americans will tell us that the F-22 is absolutely impossible to shoot down?
        3. Vashestambid2
          Vashestambid2 12 September 2013 19: 37 New
          -1
          Straus_zloy before identifying current problems f-22

          A good example of a patriot ur just hatched from an egg !! smile
  4. Ev58
    Ev58 12 September 2013 08: 57 New
    +9
    An informative and interesting article. The idea that the resources for obtaining a significant advantage in the technical parameters of an aircraft developed on the basis of widespread, long-known technologies and design solutions are not exhausted. It seems to me that a major breakthrough can only be a breakthrough in the creation of aircraft using fundamentally different types of energy and displacement in space. Mankind is limited by the available knowledge, known and created technologies, as well as production capabilities. Moving the zone of strategic interests into space does not solve this issue, which is also limited by the scope of research, technology and production.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 12 September 2013 23: 46 New
      0
      The idea that the resources for obtaining a significant advantage in the technical parameters of an aircraft developed on the basis of widespread, well-known technologies and design solutions are currently running out


      So actually TRTS (Theory of Development of Technical Systems), shows that on the face are all the signs of reaching the limit of development of EXISTING technologies. The cost of each new generation of aircraft is growing by an order of magnitude, development time is also high, and specifications are growing by tens of percent. The next generation will cost even more.
      On the face of the border. Either fundamental physics will give something new, or development will stop - sailing ships can be an example. Clippers were the pinnacle, and then this class of ships no longer developed.
  5. Eugeniy_369
    Eugeniy_369 12 September 2013 09: 21 New
    +2
    Quote: xetai9977
    Dislike for the United States should not mean moaning all American technology. F-22 is a real breakthrough technique. Naturally, like every first-born, it has weaknesses. But 187 of them were built, which means they met the expectations of customers. Underestimation of other people's equipment never led to good.

    That's right. Moreover, I think that Raptor was developed under a different concept of air combat.
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    If the raptor wants real over-maneuverability, then let him learn from our SU-35S!

    So then it is, but how many such aircraft do we have? "It is planned that by the end of 2015 the army will receive 48 such aircraft."
    1. pri3rak
      pri3rak 12 September 2013 10: 09 New
      0
      Quote: Eugeniy_369
      So then it is, but how many such aircraft do we have? "It is planned that by the end of 2015 the army will receive 48 such aircraft


      Over time, it will become more.
  6. report4
    report4 12 September 2013 10: 00 New
    0
    Do you have any recordings from these same air shows where f-22 performs these maneuvers? Could add to the article.
    IMHO, the article is some kind of compilation from junk, when there was still an opinion that this suitcase would normally fly and fight, and not stand in the hangars of the western hemisphere.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 12 September 2013 10: 43 New
      0
      Quote: report4
      Do you have any recordings from these same air shows where f-22 performs these maneuvers? Could add to the article.
      IMHO

      What for? Any inquisitive can easily find them on the net ...
      1. Genry
        Genry 12 September 2013 12: 13 New
        0
        Quote: Nayhas
        What for? Any inquisitive can easily find them on the net ...

        Why write an article if you are too lazy to add video material? We ourselves, on the Internet, can replace this semi-finished product with bits of information.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 12 September 2013 13: 28 New
          +1
          Quote: Genry
          Why write an article if you are too lazy to add video material?

          The article is not about what he can, but how it happens. The mechanics of the process, there are only pictures and diagrams with graphs.
  7. Eugeniy_369
    Eugeniy_369 12 September 2013 10: 17 New
    0
    Quote: pri3rak
    Over time, it will become more.

    I want to believe. Only mattresses already have two hundred raptors.
  8. Nayhas
    Nayhas 12 September 2013 10: 42 New
    +3
    It would be possible to put 100 pluses ... The article is very interesting, unfortunately far from accessible to everyone for understanding ...
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    If the raptor wants real over-maneuverability, then let him learn from our SU-35S!
  9. nightingale
    nightingale 12 September 2013 11: 12 New
    +2
    Amer does not reveal the milestones of the raptor's secrets on sparks; they are more exploring the capabilities of our aircraft than showing their own.
  10. Alexey
    Alexey 12 September 2013 11: 20 New
    +5
    Thank you for the article. I learned a lot of interesting details.
  11. Firstvanguard
    Firstvanguard 12 September 2013 12: 08 New
    +2
    MEGAPLYUS good Truly sensible material.
  12. Algor73
    Algor73 12 September 2013 12: 17 New
    +2
    You can repeat the word "candy" a hundred times, but that won't make it sweeter in your mouth. The Americans have taken a step forward, they are strictly following the plan for creating a new look for the sun - versatility, stealth, efficiency, that is, the first to see, bite and fade away. F-22 has already gone a stage, with a huge potential of developments. The T-50 is just learning how to fly, it is not known how much it will cost and what will be new and significant in it. Hurry, he would come and come no worse than the F-22. But it is clear that over-maneuverability, alas, is no longer a trump card.
  13. yanus
    yanus 12 September 2013 12: 44 New
    +5
    Funny article. 90% of the article on aerodynamics and engine performance, but the conclusion is that the F22 is equally good as a fighter and a bomber fool Where there is a causal relationship is clear only to the author.
    By the way, the F22 initially had a very mediocre ability to work on ground targets. A bunch of years passed and this was officially recognized and they are trying to refine it to the possibility of independently searching for ground targets.
  14. de bouillon
    de bouillon 12 September 2013 13: 03 New
    +1
    Quote: Straus_zloy
    http://topwar.ru/21126-problemy-istrebitelya-f-22-raptor-chast-i-ekonomika.html

    http://topwar.ru/21368-problemy-istrebitelya-f-22-rapror-chast-ii-tehnika-i-voor


    uzhenie.html

    http://army-news.ru/2011/09/istrebitel-f-22-raptor/



    In May 2012, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta signed a decree imposing significant restrictions on the flight of F-22 Raptor fighters. The reason for this was an unsuccessful search for the cause of failures of the on-board oxygen generation system (OBOGS), complaints of pilots about suffocation and unpleasant odors in the cockpit. According to the decree, F-22 is no longer entitled to make long flights, and is always obliged to be within the reach of runways so that, if necessary, pilots can make an emergency landing. At the same time, according to Defense News, flights of aircraft based in Alaska are completely prohibited, since the bases located there are difficult for emergency landing.


    December 20 2004 of the year F-22A (ser. Number 00-4014) crashed during take-off from the Nellis air base, the pilot ejected.
    February 11 2007 12 F-22 fighters were unable to fly from the USA to Japan due to problems with navigation software (presumably due to the intersection of the date line in the middle of the Pacific Ocean)
    25 March 2009 year F-22A (ser. Number 91-4008) crashed in the Mojave desert of California, near the Edwards air base, during a test flight, 49-year-old pilot David Cooley died.
    On November 16 of November 2010, the F-22A Block 30 (ser. Number 06-4125) crashed 160 kilometers from Anchorage during a pair training flight in 19: 40 local time. The pilot - Jeffrey Haney - died. The cause of the accident was the pilot's mistake.
    On November 15 2012, the F-22 crashed on a highway in the United States. The accident occurred in the state of Florida near the US Air Force Tyndall. The pilot of the plane managed to eject.
    On December 7 2012 during the memorial ceremony marking the 71 anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor during landing, the F-22 Raptor fighter was damaged. Aircraft repair is valued at 1,8 million dollars.


    so it happens with all planes

    the T-50 project generally conceals a veil of secrecy. Therefore, we know nothing about PACF except for photos and videos.
  15. Fitter65
    Fitter65 12 September 2013 13: 15 New
    +3
    An example of the aerodynamic configuration of a biplane-tandem. Saab "Wiggen"
    Honestly, I thought that such an aerodynamic design is called “DUCK.” And the tandem biplane is a bit different and it was different at the dawn of aviation.
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 12 September 2013 13: 56 New
      +1
      You're wrong. A duck is when the PGO is in front. At Wiggen, on the other hand, is precisely the second carrier (biplane) wing. And since they are spaced not only in height but also in length, then the tandem scheme. According to a similar scheme, the Sh-Tandem attack aircraft was designed and built.
      1. Fitter65
        Fitter65 12 September 2013 15: 30 New
        +1
        In all catalogs, the SAAB-37 Wiggen aircraft goes like a duck weaving plane. And in front of it is actually a PGO, and not a supporting wing. In all aviation magazines, the front surfaces of this aircraft are referred to and refer to the PGO. The Sh-tandem example is not much from that opera. Although MPM.
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 12 September 2013 16: 25 New
          +1
          Wiggen has a wing in front with aerodynamic rudders mounted on the trailing edge. And this wing creates up to 30% of lift. Due to this, the displacement of the center of pressure relative to the center of mass of the aircraft does not cause such an imbalance as in the usual scheme. This reduces the control load and improves the maneuverability of the aircraft. (True, the flip side of the coin of this arrangement is an increase in aerodynamic drag and the possibility of “shading” in certain flight modes.)
  16. Taoist
    Taoist 12 September 2013 13: 51 New
    +2
    It was nice to read. Unlike the usual "blah blah" network with arguments like "I think so." Competent and information-rich article. True, I do not quite understand the logic from which it follows that:

    "IN THE DUST OF DISCUSSION ON THE FAT OF THE FATHER OF THE FIFTH GENERATION IN THE SHADOW, THE IMPORTANT FACT REMAINS - THE AMERICANS CREATED A NEW CLASS OF AVIATION TECHNIQUE. By analogy with the main battle tank, the F-22 could be called the main combat aircraft. This is the first combat aircraft, which is almost equally capable of playing the role of an interceptor and a front bomber. World aviation went to this event 40 years. How did you manage to achieve this and why did it not work out earlier?"

    The possibility of hitting ground targets does not yet make a bomber out of an airplane, nor does the ability to conduct a BVB make it a fighter. Multipurpose machines were created earlier and even more so now. In contrast to the tank, which generally decides a relatively small range of tasks, the situation in aviation is municipally different.
    Yes, the 22 has a fairly wide functionality, but it (like any multifunctional machine) will yield in combat effectiveness to "specialized" machines. From an economic point of view, too.
  17. Yankuz
    Yankuz 12 September 2013 14: 34 New
    +1
    The F22 radar blocker attracted attention. I immediately thought about our PAK T50 - why didn’t the Sukhoi designer provide anything like this in the engine design, do they seem to seriously "glow" on radars?
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 12 September 2013 14: 40 New
      0
      as far as I am aware of the structural protection of the compressor from "radar exposure" on the PAK FA is also available.
  18. assaker
    assaker 12 September 2013 15: 01 New
    +2
    The topic is well disclosed, but minus because there are few comparative points with our aircraft, and the answers essentially do not make it possible to understand the advantageous qualities of the f22 on, modern aircraft armed with the Russian Federation
    1. cherkas.oe
      cherkas.oe 12 September 2013 21: 52 New
      +2
      Quote: assaker
      The topic is well disclosed, but minus because there are few comparative points with our aircraft, and the answers essentially do not make it possible to understand the advantageous qualities of the f22 on, modern aircraft armed with the Russian Federation

      This material is six years old, hence your questions. hi
  19. USNik
    USNik 12 September 2013 15: 05 New
    0
    Here comrades already wrote that the bomber from xRaptor like a hammer from a microscope. A few hundred kilogram SDBs (small diameter bombs) will not be able to destroy either the fortified structure, the bridge, or work out over the areas. He also has no Air-to-Earth missiles, they’ve been trying to do something for a dozen years, they don’t get inside, the compartment is small, and in addition it turns out that he receives target signals from other sources through the stump deck ... As a fighter and interceptor, he is good, there is no dispute, but there is no need to make him a multi-purpose wunderwaffe. PS: plus article, I read a lot of interesting and looked.
  20. Black
    Black 12 September 2013 15: 07 New
    +3
    ARTICLE ACADEMIC TAKI. THANK.
  21. vadim dok
    vadim dok 12 September 2013 19: 22 New
    +3
    A very well-balanced competent article! A lot of useful information. Laptop -Very good car that meets ALL the requirements of the military.
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm 12 September 2013 23: 27 New
      0
      Quote: vadim dok
      A very well-balanced competent article! A lot of useful information. Laptop -Very good car that meets ALL the requirements of the military.

      And so they urgently began to develop the F-35
  22. Orty
    Orty 12 September 2013 19: 25 New
    +3
    Thank you very interesting article! From myself, I would like to note to everyone, both fans and opponents of the Raptor, that not so much airplanes are fighting as air forces. Those. two organized structures with their strengths and weaknesses, so that even if the F-22 is not a wunder-waffe but in competent hands and under competent command, it will still be a much more dangerous opponent for our Air Force and Air Defense than F-15,16,18 . Presenting such a conflict for a second, I would prefer a preemptive strike at the airfields where it is based, which would immediately and fairly reduce the number of these aircraft. And as soon as the T-50 would go into production.
    1. tomev
      tomev 12 September 2013 19: 38 New
      +1
      strike on satellites and avaxs I think it will be more effective
  23. Odysseus
    Odysseus 12 September 2013 22: 22 New
    +1
    The article is interesting, especially since the topic of the aerodynamics and capabilities of the Raptor in the BVB is discussed much less frequently than the notorious EPR.
    But the article has a drawback that commentators have already pointed out — it’s completely unclear why the author declared the Reptor a universal aircraft, moreover, even a front-line bomber. Yes, the Reptor can potentially work on the ground, but despite all the improvements he still doesn’t do it very well. Essentially, this is a clean fighter.
  24. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 12 September 2013 22: 28 New
    0
    Quote: Orty
    he will still be a much more dangerous opponent for our Air Force and Air Defense than the F-15,16,18.

    I hope that ours is not in vain positioning the possibility of detecting unobtrusive targets with high probability.
    Quote: tomev
    strike on satellites and avaxs I think it will be more effective

    I agree that the destruction of the targeting system in any way will have an effect.
  25. Rainman_1
    Rainman_1 12 September 2013 22: 33 New
    0
    And if you compare the T-50 and f-22 ???
    1. alone
      alone 12 September 2013 22: 39 New
      +1
      to compare, you must first take it into service. and to take into service you need to make sure that there are no omissions. and so that there are no omissions .... you can go on and on. in the end you need to invest good money.
  26. mirag2
    mirag2 13 September 2013 08: 19 New
    +1
    One hundred pluses of the article. INTERESTING !!!
  27. Larus
    Larus 13 September 2013 11: 35 New
    +1
    If it were such a super duper, then we would have seen it for a long time in all the messes (advanced advertising) created by ami. However, for some reason their old airplanes are engaged in this, and F 22 sits at the base and wins only on paper.
    1. clidon
      clidon 13 September 2013 17: 29 New
      0
      This is primarily a fighter for gaining superiority in the air. In this format, there is simply nowhere to use it.
  28. Serg 122
    Serg 122 14 September 2013 02: 08 New
    +1
    This is primarily a fighter for gaining superiority in the air. In this format, there is simply nowhere to use it.
    wassat
    Yeah, and he has no opponents either. Super plane! Winning without taking off !!!
    laughing
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 September 2013 08: 58 New
      0
      And who is the opponent? From the moment of achieving operational readiness, there was only one conflict - the Libyan conflict in which there were no air battles, as it were.
      We have our own recognized Su-27 super-plane. Not a single confirmed air battle. Or the best anti-aircraft systems S-200 and S-300. Not a single downed plane. Although not. Ukrainian S-200 managed to fill up the Tu-154 with passengers.
  29. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 14 September 2013 19: 27 New
    0
    Article "+++", conclusions SUPPORT! good

    For an aircraft developed since the mid-90s, it turned out to be extremely LUCKY !! hi

    The FIRST to be always DIFFICULT, but to REACH is even DIFFICULT !!! what
  30. NEXUS
    NEXUS 15 September 2013 03: 54 New
    +4
    Good night gentlemen and comrades ... the article is interesting ... but, reading it and the comments to it, I caught myself thinking: the fifth-generation fighter is a passed stage, which Russia just overslept ... why passed? Yes, because technology do not stand still and at this point in time, work is probably ongoing on the 6 generation fighter both in Russia and in the west ... the t-50, when it goes into the series, is obviously out of date and will require an early modernization ... by my frustration, I admit that, despite the errors and failures in the refinement of f35 and f22, amers do not spare I don’t have time or money and I think they will bring the matter to a good car ... and what does Russia have at the given time? two cars are in the testing phase ... of course the t-50 needs to be developed and launched into series, but I’m sure that now, it’s "click" on work on the 6 generation fighter ... or rather, yesterday ... there is a lag and it must be reduced ... we must not forget that Europe and China are already stepping on their heels and they will not wait for Russia to give birth new car ...
  31. Just
    Just 15 September 2013 05: 46 New
    -1
    Quote: cdrt
    In other words, 20 years of our backlog from the USA.


    F-22 can only that (in terms of maneuvering) that our aircraft did already 15-20 years ago. So it’s more correct to talk about the United States lagging behind us.
  32. sasharos
    sasharos 17 September 2013 05: 39 New
    0
    This guy has excellent REO and minimal visibility of the front hemisphere, he does not need the maneuverability that he, by the way, possesses, the most important thing: the possibility of the first salvo, and unexpected !!! And for ground targets, his task is to destroy air defense systems before they find him, like with the S-300 his chances are 50/50, and the S-400 can only count on Russian negligence ... They conducted exercises from Japan, one of the tasks is just decapitate air defense, raptor-strike aircraft of the first wave, though not everyone flew from Alaska to Japan ...
  33. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 27 October 2013 10: 31 New
    0
    A “Reptor” is a suitcase with wings, stuffed for 200 million with all kinds of electronics, which, in principle, can fly, but he doesn’t really need it. True, it is not clear how he at the same time demonstrates all these tricks at an air show, or maybe it is not him? Maybe all this was shot in the studio by the damned Americans, like the moon landing?
    Meanwhile, in the shadow of heated debates and sprays of saliva, the important fact that the Americans created a fundamentally new class of combat aircraft, which we will discuss in detail at the end, went unnoticed. And now the promised answers to questions on the aerogasdynamics of the F-22.

    Air shows are very different from real combat, and pilots and planes are not at all the ones in the series.
    And the entire suitcase of electronics can damage the Chinese part for 2 dollars.
    Stealth is also a very arbitrary thing, depending not so much on the plane as on the locator.
    With the filing of the KGB, who slipped the Yankees at the beginning of the 80's of Ufimtsev, stealth was created
    At the beginning of the 1980-s, work on the Ufa’s "stealth" in the USSR was stopped. The offended designer left for the USA, where he realized at the expense of the Americans his “senseless" ideas, as time has proved,.
    The United States showed the world a miracle of military technology, similar to a bat or an alien ship. Two modifications of the "stealth" were made: the F-117 fighter-bomber and the B-2 heavy strategic bomber, which were used in the war against Iraq. F-22 stealth fighter came into operation a little later. The entire stealth technology was designed for the enemy to use centimeter-range locators, for which American "invisible" planes really become invisible
    However, in Russia, and even the air defense forces (air defense) of other countries today have meter-range locators, for which it does not matter "stealth" this or an ordinary plane.
    The news of the invisibility of the "stealth" for only one type of locator caused a real scandal in the US government. After all, billions were spent on the development of invisible aircraft, but it turned out that the effectiveness of new aircraft in battle can be inferior even to old cars.