the F-15 is 1960s technology - F-22 Raptor is 1980s tech - will therebe a NEW air-superiority fighter?

[AirRaid[_2_]]

The F-15 Eagle was designed in the 1960s.

The Advanced Tactical Fighter, YF-23 and YF-22, were developed in the
1980s.
The F-22 Raptor is simply the production version of the YF-22.

Worse, some of the specifications and capabilities that the ATF was
supposed to have, as of the 1980s, was dropped from the YF-22 and
final F-22.

Worse still, the watered-down F-22 came into service 5-10 years later
than originally planned.

Worse yet, instead of 750+ or even 380+, the Air Force is currently
slated to get less than 200 copies.


The F-35 JSF is newer than F-22, but is really a low-end solution
optimized for ground attack and only modest (even if decent) air-to-
air capabilities.

F-22 / F-35 is another high/low mix like the F-15/F-16. But
unlike the F-15, of which there were a decent number (many hundreds),
there will be precious few F-22s. Sure the F-22 can win against 5-
to-1 odds or even 10-to-1 odds. But what about 20-to-1 odds, if the
USAF is pitted against Russia+China within the next 10-15 years?

Also I feel the F-15 was more advanced for the 1970s than the F-22 is
this decade, relatively speaking. Obviously I am not saying the F-15
is more advanced than the F-22, I am saying the F-22 is not as state-
of-the-art now as the F-15 was back then. The F-15 was a
tremendous leap beyond the F-4. Is the F-22 really that much of a
leap beyond the F-15? Maybe in sensors and low-observability
"stealth". The F-22 carries almost the same weapon systems and
weapons load as the F-15. Sure there have been some improvements to
the AMRAAM and Sidewinder, but not a revolution.

I know there will be those that disagree with me, and maybe some who
agree.

I do not believe that unmanned aircraft will take over the air-
superiority / air-supremacy / air-dominance role as quickly as some
think. Not by 2020-2030 anyway. Maybe I am wrong but I don't think
so.

The F-22 is finally in service now (as of a couple years ago). Back
in 1981 and early 1980s, the USAF came up for the requirements for the
ATF, what would, about 25 years later, be in service as the F-22.

What, if anything, is the USAF thinking about in now 2008 for the
future of the air to air mission, as it was in the early 1980s with
the ATF?

I'm thinking of not only the needs of the USAF, but services that
depend on the USAF, such as the U.S Army and U.S. Marine Corps.
The U.S. Navy seems to have given up on advanced high-end fighters.
There is no true direct replacement for the F-14 Tomcat. The Naval
ATF / F-22N was canceled over 15 years ago. I don't believe the Super
Hornet nor the F-35 are going to be able to provide air dominance.

Unless something changes, the entire U.S. armed forces will depend on,
give or take,
183 F-22 Raptors.

[Airyx]

On May 6, 5:27*pm, AirRaid > wrote:

> Also I feel the F-15 was more advanced for the 1970s than the F-22 is
> this decade, relatively speaking. *Obviously I am not saying the F-15
> is more advanced than the F-22, * I am saying the F-22 is not as state-
> of-the-art now as the F-15 was back then. * * The F-15 was a
> tremendous leap beyond the F-4. * *Is the F-22 really that much of a
> leap beyond the F-15? *Maybe in sensors and low-observability
> "stealth". * The F-22 carries almost the same weapon systems and
> weapons load as the F-15. *Sure there have been some improvements to
> the AMRAAM and Sidewinder, but not a revolution.

When the F-15 came out, a vast many people, especially the GAO and
Aviation Media, claimed that the F-15 was a waste of money because it
offered very little improvement over the F-4. Of couse they looked at
it only in terms of cost vs speed, and the number of on-board kills.
From that perspective, why spend on this money on a jet that is slower
then an F-4 and carries the same number of kills? They failed to take
into account the improvements in sensors, agility, maintainability,
and most importantly, that the design allowed for continuous
improvement as new technologies became available.

So, the F-15A really wasn't that big a leap over an F-4, but as the
APG-70 was added, new ECM, AIM-120, etc, it became a better jet then
the F-4 could ever be.

In terms of sensors, and room for future technologies, the F-22 is a
HUGE leap over anything before it. The basic airframe design may be
from the late 80's but everything else in it is quite new. Also, the
design makes it far easier to replace or add modules to provide it
with new technologies.

> I'm thinking of not only the needs of the USAF, but services that
> depend on the USAF, such as the U.S Army and U.S. Marine Corps.
> The U.S. Navy seems to have given up on advanced high-end fighters.
> There is no true direct replacement for the F-14 Tomcat. * *The Naval
> ATF / F-22N was canceled over 15 years ago. *I don't believe the Super
> Hornet nor the F-35 are going to be able to provide air dominance.

I'm not sure what you are looking for in air dominance. With the
improvements in AAMs, controlling the air comes down to these factors
in order:

1. Find enemy first
2. Shoot first
3. Be able to evade counter shot (if necessary)

#1 is achieved by having good sensors on-board your fighter, but more
importantly by having outstanding sensor fusion that takes-in data
from all sorts of off-board sensors and displays it to the pilot in a
meaningful way. This is what makes the F-22 the best, and the
technology it uses for this is modular, easy to upgrade, and
integrate, and all new. Nothing from the 1980's here.
Also invloved in #1 are stealth, and good ECM
#2 is all about the weapon, and the sensors used to guide it.
#3 is about short bursts of agility, and speed. We are unlikely to see
jets going through sustained maneuvers to gain a good firing position
(dogfights), since reliable shots can now be taken at long ranges and
from almost any aspect.

Many have said in the past that the days of the dogfight were over,
and they were proven wrong. Well, it was only a matter of time until
the technology matured.

So, to that end, the Superhornet, and F-35 will do just fine, and the
F-22 could very well be our last manned fighter. Could use a bunch
more of them though.

[Gernot Hassenpflug[_2_]]

Airyx > writes:

> On May 6, 5:27Â*pm, AirRaid > wrote:
>
>> Also I feel the F-15 was more advanced for the 1970s than the F-22 is
>> this decade, relatively speaking. /../
>
> When the F-15 came out, a vast many people, especially the GAO and
> Aviation Media, claimed that the F-15 was a waste of money because
> it offered very little improvement over the F-4. /../ They failed to
> take into account the improvements in sensors, agility,
> maintainability, and most importantly, that the design allowed for
> continuous improvement as new technologies became available.
>
> So, the F-15A really wasn't that big a leap over an F-4, but as the
> APG-70 was added, new ECM, AIM-120, etc, it became a better jet then
> the F-4 could ever be.
>
> In terms of sensors, and room for future technologies, the F-22 is a
> HUGE leap over anything before it. The basic airframe design may be
> from the late 80's but everything else in it is quite new. Also, the
> design makes it far easier to replace or add modules to provide it
> with new technologies.

Very good point.

/../

> I'm not sure what you are looking for in air dominance. With the
> improvements in AAMs, controlling the air comes down to these factors
> in order:
>
> 1. Find enemy first
> 2. Shoot first
> 3. Be able to evade counter shot (if necessary)
>
> #1 is achieved by having good sensors on-board your fighter, but more
> importantly by having outstanding sensor fusion that takes-in data
> from all sorts of off-board sensors and displays it to the pilot in a
> meaningful way. This is what makes the F-22 the best, and the
> technology it uses for this is modular, easy to upgrade, and
> integrate, and all new. Nothing from the 1980's here.
> Also invloved in #1 are stealth, and good ECM
> #2 is all about the weapon, and the sensors used to guide it.
> #3 is about short bursts of agility, and speed. We are unlikely to see
> jets going through sustained maneuvers to gain a good firing position
> (dogfights), since reliable shots can now be taken at long ranges and
> from almost any aspect.

In WWII the "Big Blue Blanket" was a means to blunt enemy attacks
before they had a chance to close to uninterceptable distances. This
despite massive improvements in sensors in the USN during the war, and
the respective lack thereof on the enemy side. Point No.1 cannot be
overstressed, and neither can its implementation: there has to be
redundancy (sensors, sensor types and aircraft numbers; and now fusion
between them to synthesize greater ability than the individuals could
have had by themselves) to do the job properly. However, "optimizing"
is going to be very harmful if it tries to cut down on "redundancy" as
"unneccessary". The reason for this is that any "optimization" by
definition ignores possible changes in the enemy capabilities and
"unexpected" (by those with no experience of hard reality; or no
imagination <g>) developments that may affect the very model on which
the operational depoloyment of aircraft and sensors is based.

> Many have said in the past that the days of the dogfight were over,
> and they were proven wrong. Well, it was only a matter of time until
> the technology matured.

The distances got bigger, but the mental game remains the same at its
core: outsmarting the other guys. Still, in practice guys (and girls)
that can transition to this much much more complex web of combat are
probably going to be both similar and slightly different from people
who excel in "dogfights". Teamwork matters too so all types have a
role, neuro-surgeon type specialist detail experts as well as those
general practitioner types with a genius for overall diagnosis.

> So, to that end, the Superhornet, and F-35 will do just fine, and the
> F-22 could very well be our last manned fighter. Could use a bunch
> more of them though.

Exactly.
--
BOFH excuse #139:

UBNC (user brain not connected)

[[email protected]]

On May 6, 6:27*pm, AirRaid > wrote:
> The F-15 Eagle was designed in the 1960s.
>
> The Advanced Tactical Fighter, *YF-23 and YF-22, were developed in the
> 1980s.
> The F-22 Raptor is simply the production version of the YF-22.
>
> Worse, some of the specifications and capabilities that the ATF was
> supposed to have, as of the 1980s, was dropped from the YF-22 *and
> final F-22.
>
> Worse still, *the watered-down F-22 came into service 5-10 years later
> than originally planned.
>
> Worse yet, instead of 750+ or even 380+, the Air Force is currently
> slated to get less than 200 copies.
>
> The F-35 JSF *is newer than F-22, but is really a low-end solution
> optimized for ground attack and only modest (even if decent) *air-to-
> air capabilities.
>
> F-22 / F-35 *is another high/low mix like the F-15/F-16. * * But
> unlike the F-15, of which there were a decent number (many hundreds),
> there will be precious few F-22s. * Sure the F-22 can *win against 5-
> to-1 odds or even 10-to-1 odds. But what about 20-to-1 odds, if the
> USAF is pitted against Russia+China within the next 10-15 years?
>
> Also I feel the F-15 was more advanced for the 1970s than the F-22 is
> this decade, relatively speaking. *Obviously I am not saying the F-15
> is more advanced than the F-22, * I am saying the F-22 is not as state-
> of-the-art now as the F-15 was back then. * * The F-15 was a
> tremendous leap beyond the F-4. * *Is the F-22 really that much of a
> leap beyond the F-15? *Maybe in sensors and low-observability
> "stealth". * The F-22 carries almost the same weapon systems and
> weapons load as the F-15. *Sure there have been some improvements to
> the AMRAAM and Sidewinder, but not a revolution.
>
> I know there will be those that disagree with me, and maybe some who
> agree.
>
> I do not believe that unmanned aircraft will take over the air-
> superiority / air-supremacy / air-dominance role * as quickly as some
> think. *Not by 2020-2030 anyway. Maybe I am wrong but I don't think
> so.
>
> The F-22 is finally in service now (as of a couple years ago). * *Back
> in 1981 and early 1980s, the USAF came up for the requirements for the
> ATF, what would, about 25 years later, be in service as the F-22.
>
> What, if anything, is the USAF thinking about in now 2008 for the
> future of the air to air mission, as it was in the early 1980s with
> the ATF?
>
> I'm thinking of not only the needs of the USAF, but services that
> depend on the USAF, such as the U.S Army and U.S. Marine Corps.
> The U.S. Navy seems to have given up on advanced high-end fighters.
> There is no true direct replacement for the F-14 Tomcat. * *The Naval
> ATF / F-22N was canceled over 15 years ago.

Well, the navy dead-ended themselves with fighter aircraft
and movies of fighter aircraft. The idiots have been told since
like 1950, that the two mix like nuclear reactors and machine
guns.
Which is really where the cruise missiles, GPS, and internet came
from
for the idiots.
And the air force hasn't invested in anything other than stealth
technology, since the wanks first saw the Blackbird. So their
aircraft isn't really an aircraft development program,
it's a leen on your grandchildren's homes.








*I don't believe the Super
> Hornet nor the F-35 are going to be able to provide air dominance.
>
> Unless something changes, the entire U.S. armed forces will depend on,
> give or take,
> 183 F-22 Raptors.

[J a c k]

wrote:



> So their aircraft isn't really an aircraft development program,
> it's a leen on your grandchildren's homes.


There'll be mighty lean times trying to pay off that lien.


Jack

[hcobb]

AirRaid wrote:
> The U.S. Navy seems to have given up on advanced high-end fighters.
> There is no true direct replacement for the F-14 Tomcat. The Naval
> ATF / F-22N was canceled over 15 years ago. I don't believe the Super
> Hornet nor the F-35 are going to be able to provide air dominance.

How can the United States Navy expect to win the war, when it has no
fighter that can match the performance of the main enemy fighter?

Won't the Japanese Zero sweep the USN's aircraft from the skies? ;-)

-HJC