Powerslide
Posts: 580
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:24 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Nov 02, 2012 3:34 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 96):
it was never ment to be an air dominance fighter,

See I don't buy that. It may not turn as quick as the F-22 but besides that I don't see why it can't dominate the sky vs. other 4.5gen aircraft. Its avionics and systems are far superior, not to mention all the goodies it has that are still classified. The public doesn't, or need, to know all the capabilities about this aircraft.
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 694
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Nov 02, 2012 4:13 pm

No way Romney would get that production line restarted. We have no money to do so, the USAF would rather replace other, older aircraft that need to be retired, and we should already be looking at the next generation of fighter aircraft, if there even will be a next generation.

F-22 is nice, but at this point in time, you really don't need more nor can we afford it.

Besides, Romney is all talk, and he will say whatever the audience he is speaking to wants to hear. You really have no clue what that guy's position is or is not.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Nov 02, 2012 5:56 pm

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 100):
See I don't buy that.

Well, that is what is being said by the pilots... and maybe that is just a line being fed as dis-information, but IMO worst case scenario is that it can match a most current fighters in a turning fight. I have read it has a lot more power in acceleration.
 
FSXJunkie
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 2:30 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Nov 02, 2012 7:54 pm

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 100):
See I don't buy that. It may not turn as quick as the F-22 but besides that I don't see why it can't dominate the sky vs. other 4.5gen aircraft. Its avionics and systems are far superior, not to mention all the goodies it has that are still classified. The public doesn't, or need, to know all the capabilities about this aircraft.

The F-35 is slower than the F-22, Mach ~1.5+ vs. Mach 2.[Classified]

Zoom and Boom always beats Turn and Burn, the thing about the F-35 is that it's a jack of all trades and a master of none and it won't be as capable in any single mission/role than a more specialist airframe.

In an aerial superiority role the F-35 will be up against Mach 2 MiG's and Suhkoi's, the stealth advantage will be marginalized as OpFor fighters will be able to close distance faster than the F-35 can effectively evade. It may take a couple air battles for OpFor to refine tactics, but the F-35's will show their inferiorities in spades.
 
Powerslide
Posts: 580
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 2:24 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:28 pm

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
The F-35 is slower than the F-22, Mach ~1.5 vs. Mach 2.[Classified]

This means nothing in the real world. When was the last time a fighter needed to break Mach 1 in areal combat?

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
Zoom and Boom always beats Turn and Burn,

That is what the F35 has over its predecessors and Russian adversaries. Stealth and an avionics package that can't be matched.

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
it won't be as capable in any single mission/role than a more specialist airframe.

Who says it won't be as capable in A/A or A/G? The F-15 was also criticized being it ever saw duty - now everyone thinks its the greatest thing since sliced bread. Its the circle of life... there will always be more armchair quarterbacks than real QBs. After the cancellation of the F-22 the F-35 is the saving grace for the US Military.

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
In an aerial superiority role the F-35 will be up against Mach 2 MiG's and Suhkoi's, the stealth advantage will be marginalized as OpFor fighters will be able to close distance faster than the F-35 can effectively evade. It may take a couple air battles for OpFor to refine tactics, but the F-35's will show their inferiorities in spades.

This is assuming MiG or Suhkoi operators can get their shit together and have serviceable, combat ready and flying units. Not just airshow squadrons. I also question the flight hours of non-NATO country pilots. Seat time is everything and the US and its allies fly more than anyone. The only thing the F35 will show is its ass-end to her ignorant critics and everyone else in the "media".

[Edited 2012-11-02 16:29:34]
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:40 am

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
The F-35 is slower than the F-22, Mach ~1.5+ vs. Mach 2.[Classified]

When was the last time a fully combat loaded fighter reached top speed and was able to use that speed?

The amount of time the worldwide fleet of F-15's spent anywhere near its top speed is about as long as a typical movie, FYI. And that's with close to 40 years of service. Ditto the F-16, F/A-18, F-14... need I go on?

No combat jet fighter (save for F-35 and F-22 so far) has been able to hit anywhere near the top rated speed combat loaded. Too much parasitic drag emanating from externally mounted weapons, fuel tanks and pods to do that. In fact, many fighters are technically subsonic fighters with weapons.

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
Zoom and Boom always beats Turn and Burn, the thing about the F-35 is that it's a jack of all trades and a master of none and it won't be as capable in any single mission/role than a more specialist airframe.

We have been moving to multipurpose airframes for decades. The F-16 and the F/A-18 are very successful examples.

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
In an aerial superiority role the F-35 will be up against Mach 2 MiG's and Suhkoi's, the stealth advantage will be marginalized as OpFor fighters will be able to close distance faster than the F-35 can effectively evade. It may take a couple air battles for OpFor to refine tactics, but the F-35's will show their inferiorities in spades.

If they can see F-35 in the first place before F-35's take the first shot... against a non-stealthy opponent, F-35 will see the opposing aircraft well over a 100 miles away. At best opposing fighters will start detecting F-35 with their sensors much, much, closer in, and they would already be fired upon by F-35's putting them on the defensive. AIM-120 has one of the largest no-escape zones of any BVR missile available, and F-35 will take advantage of that to significantly cut into the ability of a enemy aircraft to effectively respond.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1106
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:30 am

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
In an aerial superiority role the F-35 will be up against Mach 2 MiG's and Suhkoi's, the stealth advantage will be marginalized as OpFor fighters will be able to close distance faster than the F-35 can effectively evade. It may take a couple air battles for OpFor to refine tactics, but the F-35's will show their inferiorities in spades.

Again, the F-35 has had plenty of cost issues (like almost every major program seems to anymore) but this is just kind of silly. I love hearing about these hypothetical mobbing tactics that will be used to overwhelm the F-35 or F-22 but they are really just fantasy land. A few points specific to this.

1. None of the 4.5 generation fighters are really going to operate for any appreciable length of time at speeds faster than the F-35. The speeds you quote are on full afterburner power and can be sustained for just a few minutes.

2. I am not really sure that you want to go chasing full bore after a group of F-35's with legacy fighters. They will be able to engage you before you can effectively engage them. You are not likely going to be able to swamp them nor close the distance all that much before you have to evade weapons yourself. Unless you are in a suicide attack mode and everyone is headed in full tilt regardless of if they are being engaged it is a lot harder to close the range than you seem to think.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:37 am

Quoting FSXJunkie (Reply 103):
Zoom and Boom always beats Turn and Burn,

That is funny, because the F-35s acceleration is actually one of its stronger points. Also, not dragged down by external stores, it will do things only a clean 4.5 gen fighter could consider doing.

So, I will see an opponent first, get a shot off first, if need be, get the hell out of Dodge faster... must be a lemon.


I look forward to the results of F-22 vs F-35 training encounters. I bet you will see the F-22 kill ratio take a bit of a hit.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:22 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 106):
Again, the F-35 has had plenty of cost issues (like almost every major program seems to anymore) but this is just kind of silly. I love hearing about these hypothetical mobbing tactics that will be used to overwhelm the F-35 or F-22 but they are really just fantasy land. A few points specific to this.

1. None of the 4.5 generation fighters are really going to operate for any appreciable length of time at speeds faster than the F-35. The speeds you quote are on full afterburner power and can be sustained for just a few minutes.

2. I am not really sure that you want to go chasing full bore after a group of F-35's with legacy fighters. They will be able to engage you before you can effectively engage them. You are not likely going to be able to swamp them nor close the distance all that much before you have to evade weapons yourself. Unless you are in a suicide attack mode and everyone is headed in full tilt regardless of if they are being engaged it is a lot harder to close the range than you seem to think.

Indeed, mission planners will think ahead and plan accordingly to counter such mobbing tactics.

The strength of the F-35 isn’t the one airplane and what it can do. The strength of the F-35 is the group of airplanes and what they can do together. There is a sensor fusion that takes all the eyes and ears of the airplane and converges them all onto the display on the dash. Not only is the information displayed in your cockpit, but you can also transfer it to the F-35 next to you using data links, rather than radio communication. It creates a flying network out in the battle space, with every F-35 taking in information provided by other F-35's and its own sensors and merging them into a unified picture. Not only will every F-35 be able to see the entire battlefield, but each F-35 will also be able to see the state of each other's aircraft, from what weapons he actually has, and the amount of fuel he has left in real time.

With every F-35 pilot being able to maintain a strong sense of situational awareness, they can concentrate on performing their mission rather than having to be on the constant look out, and they can make better decisions with the more information they have on hand. Not only that, F-35 pilots don't have to fly in close formation and flying on the defensive because of the better sensors and the sensor fusion present. They can fly much further away from each other, which has the side effect of allowing a smaller number of F-35's to cover more space with their sensors.
 
kurtverbose
Posts: 482
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 9:33 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 8:27 am

Article in flightglobal about re-starting production: -

US lawmakers want cost data for building 194 more F-22s

I think it makes sense. They don't have enough to replace their existing inventory so are reliant on the F-35. A new fighter would cost billions more and take at least 15 years.

I just think they should invest a little more and use the F-35 engines(which is a derivative of the F-22 engine anyway), radar updates, and also an air to ground capability.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:50 am

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 109):

I think it makes sense. They don't have enough to replace their existing inventory so are reliant on the F-35. A new fighter would cost billions more and take at least 15 years

I don't think it does. The cost benefit is just not there, particularly given how cheap the F-35s will be by 2020. The money would be better spent maturing 6th gen technology.

Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 109):

I just think they should invest a little more and use the F-35 engines(which is a derivative of the F-22 engine anyway), radar updates, and also an air to ground capability.

Those changes add significant time to any new production, setting aside the fact that none of the original computer components exist anymore anyway. The F135 also wouldn't work in the F-22 without major redesign and given the alterations made it would not be an optimal engine probably reducing supercruise ability.
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 694
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:51 pm

Quoting Ozair (Reply 110):

Agree. The money spent trying to adapt the F135 to the F-22 would be prohibitive, and any restart in F-22 production will require the money to come from somewhere, most likely the recently started 6th gen fighter project. As much as the F-22 is the best fighter out there, a lot of its guts are outdated and would require a lot of money to upgrade, test, evaluate, and field. By the time that is done, you are looking at likely prototypes of the 6th gen fighter undergoing testing.
 
Sooner787
Posts: 1989
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:31 pm

There was another thread discussing the possibility of the USAF ordering a few dozen
more F-15's or F-16's to fill the "fighter gap" until the F35's arrive in large numbers.

I'm sure that off the shelf purchases would be way cheaper that trying to restart
the F-22 line from scratch.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4570
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:48 pm

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 111):
you are looking at likely prototypes of the 6th gen fighter undergoing testing.

What makes anyone think that any 6th gen fighter would fair better than the F-22 did? What has magically changed which wouldn't also see the 6th gen fighter program production figures frozen at a ridiculously low figure and the toolings stored?

Just modernise the F-22, if that's the problem, and restart its production.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:41 pm

Quoting Sooner787 (Reply 112):
I'm sure that off the shelf purchases would be way cheaper that trying to restart
the F-22 line from scratch.

Cheaper, yes, but for types that will be retired in the next 10-15 years... pretty expensive to just send to the bone yard with the rest of the fleet.

Restarting the F-22 would cost more, but it is a superior jet, and considering the F-22 is supposed to have a 40 year life, anything purchased now would have to be relevant for those years. Eventually (and fairly soon) the remaining F-15s will be retired and nothing to replace it (the F-22 has already replaced a portion of the F-15 fleet). Yes the F-35 can suppliment the F-22 the same as F-15 does now, but in 20 years when there are alot more stealth jets kicking around, the F-35 will need something more specialized like the F-22.

If the USAF wants to buy something for short term use, F/A-18E/Fs would be a better buy, then transfer/sell them to the USN when done with them. Airforce use will minimize wearing out the Super Hornet, and the USN will get a deal on a jet they will be keeping in service into the 2030s.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:42 pm

Quoting moo (Reply 113):
What makes anyone think that any 6th gen fighter would fair better than the F-22 did? What has magically changed which wouldn't also see the 6th gen fighter program production figures frozen at a ridiculously low figure and the toolings stored?

That is the very real and present risk and certainly come 2030 there will be arguments that the F-35 variant of the day will be cheaper to acquire and almost as capable as the 6th gen, just as we see people trying to make the same argument re F-35 and F-15/16/18 today. The real difference may be the technology that a 6th gen brings, such as DEW, and the ability of that airframe to function for the next 40 years.

It is also worth looking at the issue from an overall capability standpoint. The US is the only nation in the world with operational 5th gen aircraft and by 2025 will have over 1,000 in service. By 2025 Russia and China will likely have a combined fleet of 5th gen aircraft optimistically totalling 200 and at best 250. By 2035, the US will have 2,000 5th gen fighter aircraft, as well as 60 to 80 5th gen long range strike bombers. It is unlikely that China and Russia combined will have more than 700 5th gen aircraft by that time and likely less. I also can't see any other nations developing and introducing into service a 5th gen aircraft before 2030. The above numbers could of course be greater if tensions between Russia/China and the US increase but that only increases the numbers on both sides and the ratios probably stay broadly similar.

So in the context of above, the US probably doesn't need a new fighter jet until the 2030s anyway. They will be able to maintain a capability overmatch until at least that point.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 114):
Eventually (and fairly soon) the remaining F-15s will be retired and nothing to replace it

Pretty sure the US now intends to operate some F-15Cs all the way into the 2030s.

Quoting moo (Reply 113):
Just modernise the F-22, if that's the problem, and restart its production.
Quoting Oroka (Reply 114):
If the USAF wants to buy something for short term use, F/A-18E/Fs would be a better buy, then transfer/sell them to the USN when done with them. Airforce use will minimize wearing out the Super Hornet, and the USN will get a deal on a jet they will be keeping in service into the 2030s.

Depending upon what the result of the study will be, and in all likelihood it will be similar to what was previously assessed in a RAND report I have posted on airliners previously,

Quote:
In 2010, a RAND study commissioned by air force placed the cost at $17 billion (2008 dollars) for 75 more aircraft.

.

If an interim solution is required, an out of left field option may be to Super the existing F-35 similar to what happened to the Hornet but with the focus on A2A. Increase the airframe size 35%, increase the thrust, radar size and the internal weapons load for A2A weapons. With an active production line and using parts from the same technology and supplier base a new airframe could be built and put into service for a similar cost to an F-22 restart. After all, the current F-35 program has done all the hard work. An upsized F-35 would re-use all the sensor fusion, radar, stealth coatings etc already developed and focus on improved supersonic performance and range.

The most difficult issue would be the engine and total thrust. You will probably need to move to dual engines but for that you cut down the F135, retain the core and move to a lesser BPR fan. With a 35% increase in airframe size you gain the internal volume necessary to place two smaller diameter fan engines and increase the fuel load with lower BPR engines.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 114):
If the USAF wants to buy something for short term use, F/A-18E/Fs would be a better buy, then transfer/sell them to the USN when done with them. Airforce use will minimize wearing out the Super Hornet, and the USN will get a deal on a jet they will be keeping in service into the 2030s.

Disagree, a better option for the USAF would be simply to invest more in more F-35A. The cost is now broadly similar, the USAF will already have the infrastructure to support the jet and the F-35A exceeds the SH in every metric.
 
CX747
Posts: 5848
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 12:49 am

Never trade iron on the ramp for promises of tomorrow. Restart the line and get that platform's number up to what it should have been. Move all the F-15Cs to the ANG and give them the top radar. That would be a start to having a fleet with some depth again. Plenty of AD F-22 units to do air-air & air-ground with a robust F-15C ANG fleet that can fill in and reduce wear and tear when possible. F-35s can keep rolling off the line and replacing F-16s and A-10s. Allowing a younger ANG fleet of technology potent F-16s.

It's like somebody gives a damn again...
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:30 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 116):
Restart the line and get that platform's number up to what it should have been.

Good luck getting the subcontractors to restart production of systems they've discontinued years ago and have thrown out their tooling. And some of these systems are critical, such as avionics.

By the time you have either reverse engineered and restarted production, or redesigned the systems involved, it's going to cost just as much to design and build a whole new fighter...
 
Oykie
Topic Author
Posts: 1697
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 4:59 am

According to Flightglobal, US lawmakers have asked for cost data on 194 more F-22 jets and cost of revival the F-22.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-lawmakers-want-cost-data-for-building-194-more-f-424404/
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 5:08 am

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 117):

By the time you have either reverse engineered and restarted production, or redesigned the systems involved, it's going to cost just as much to design and build a whole new fighter...

As the F-22As in service also need an avionics up-date to avoid obsolescence, this might not be a big problem, as you would mostly looking at mechanical parts that need to be re-started in production.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 7:11 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 119):
As the F-22As in service also need an avionics up-date to avoid obsolescence, this might not be a big problem, as you would mostly looking at mechanical parts that need to be re-started in production.

Avionics updates are not cheap nor easy. The F-22 would need a whole new avionics system either borrowed from another platform, or develop new directly for it. Adding to the issues is that the F-22 extensively uses Ada as the primary programing language for all systems onboard. The number of platforms using Ada as the primary programing language is extremely limited, and so is the number of people that can program in Ada.

Adding to the mess is that every other combat system onboard the F-22 would need to be redesigned or reprogrammed; the level of integration of the radar and ESM and it's capabilities and the onboard avionics is significantly deeper and higher than in previous aircraft.

Right now, minor updates and capability enhancements are costing a lot of money and headaches; take Increment 3.2B. That software update alone is costing $6.9 billion dollars just to add new software to allow the radar to be used in synthetic aperture mode, carry SDB, and replace the existing missiles with AIM-9X and AIM-120D, plus a host of other additional capabilities.

And don't forget, the USAF would also probably want to redesign various components and systems of the F-22 to take advantage of newer technology to improve reliability, durability, and serviceability; that would also cost money.

And all of this money for what, to add some more F-22's to the USAF when the F-22 is going to be replaced by a whole new design that's going to replace it in 14 years? I bet the USAF would rather take the money to restart F-22 production, and put it towards more F-35's in the interim, and towards a 6th generation replacement.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 7:20 am

As I said, the Avioncs of the existing fleet are already a pita. If you could replace them with something F-35 based, the extra costs for building more airframes would not be that huge, but imho the wise move would be to retire the F-22 fleet in favour of a quicker F-35 purchase. F-35 has made any other fighter type in the US inventory obsolete.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:34 pm

Couldnt a F-22B be a F-22 airframe with F-35 derived avionics? Spend the money now, the F-35 software under development can be made with the new F-22 in mind for a common system, when the F-22A is ready for heavy upgrades, the development will be done as part of the F-22B project. Can it be done? I bet if Lockheed thought that was the only way to get a follow on F-22 order, they would find a way, and relatively affordable.

Devloping the F-35 in a way making it incompatible with the F-22 was stupid.
 
bmacleod
Posts: 2871
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 3:10 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:10 pm

Possibility if Hillary wins and GOP holds on to Congress a deal could be made - GOP will agree to pass her budget/bills whatever in exchange to limited production of F-22s.

Still unlikely as more drones seem more likely.
"What good are wings without the courage to fly?" - Atticus
 
morrisond
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:36 pm

The 2030 Gen Fighter (Call it Gen 5.5) should be based on the F-22 instead of going Clean sheet. There is no way a clean sheet new airframe will be ready in 14 years. However they should build some X-Planes to investigate 6th gen Technology (probably directed energy weapons and defense). They will need ten years to figure that stuff out and test it - 6th Gen in the fleet and operational is more like 2040. 2030 is a pipe dream.

Do an upgrade on the F-22 like they did when they went from F-15 A/B/C/D to the E.

New avionics, 20% more Dry thrust. Improved Stealth. F-35 Based Avionics. But no inherent new capabilities just be better at what is theoretically possible now and make it all work! Fix all the problems in the A models.

They could be building them within 6-8 years and in the inventory by 2025 as the sharp end of the sword.

And BTW when they build 6th Gen - build 20-30 A models fly them for 5 years or so - get the bugs out then build the B models in bulk that are the good ones...
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 2:14 am

Quoting morrisond (Reply 124):
The 2030 Gen Fighter (Call it Gen 5.5) should be based on the F-22 instead of going Clean sheet. There is no way a clean sheet new airframe will be ready in 14 years.

It can be. DARPA's already doing design studies right now, and there are studies to lead to an acquisition program in fiscal year 2018.

Some of the components and technology are already under development under other programs; for example, a 6th generation replacement is expected to use the Adaptive Versatile Engine Technology (ADVENT) engine to power the aircraft, and contracts for development have been awarded long ago. Development of a directed energy weapon is also already under contract as well.
 
morrisond
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:30 am

There is no way they would make 2030 with a fully sorted Sixth gen and directed energy weapons. It took them until just last year to get the Raptor to be able to fire the Aim 9x - 24 years after Lockheed won the ATF contest.

They need to build some x- planes once they have the lasers of appropriate size (which I believe still don't exist yet) and fly them around for 5-10 years and get the kinks out then design 6th gen.

They need an interim Gen 5.5 based on the F22.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:03 am

Quoting morrisond (Reply 126):
There is no way they would make 2030 with a fully sorted Sixth gen and directed energy weapons. It took them until just last year to get the Raptor to be able to fire the Aim 9x - 24 years after Lockheed won the ATF contest.

A lot of the sub-systems for a 6th generation fighter are already under development right now. DARPA and the USAF Research Lab are already quietly well ahead on many of the design aspects, and a 6th generation fighter would use a lot of highly evolved systems, unlike the F-22 and F-35 which had all new systems designed from scratch.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 126):
They need an interim Gen 5.5 based on the F22.

No they don't, and the USAF doesn't appear to want more F-22's in this budgetary environment. They rather prefer to make sure they get enough F-35's to meet their needs, and then purchase a brand new 6th generation aircraft.

The USAF wants to create a 6th generation fighter that would eat the F-22 for lunch in 20 years and they don't have the money to cover development of a 6th generation fighter AND a redesign and restart of production of the F-22. Not to mention, it was discovered a few years back that not all of the tooling that was used to build the F-22 was properly stored:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...are-why-not-build-more-f-22s-13858

Quote:
In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue remains unresolved. The bottom line is that even if the Air Force wanted to, it may not be physically possible to restart the line—at least not without a huge additional investment in time and money.

Even if they DID manage to find or rebuild all of the tooling, it would probably take years until a factory could be made ready to build more F-22's... getting a factory set up, people hired and trained, sub-contractors lined up and tooled up, long term lead items ordered and secured is not a quick or easy process. If the process started today, it would be at least 2024 until the factory could start making new F-22's, excluding any time spent on redesign, testing, and verification, which could also add years.

To add more software to the F-22 so it can get to Increment 3.2B from 3.1 is expected to take close to 4 years; a whole new avionics system would very likely take even longer, perhaps 6 or 8 years or more of development and testing.

And by then, a 6th generation replacement for the F-22 based upon current timelines would be just around the corner in a few years!
 
PITingres
Posts: 1126
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 1:24 pm

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 120):
The number of platforms using Ada as the primary programing language is extremely limited, and so is the number of people that can program in Ada.

Ada is mildly quirky (vaguely PL/I-ish), but it's not that hard. I can't imagine this being a limiting factor. You might have to factor in a few month's delay to get some people up to speed on it, but I'm going to claim that Ada is a lot easier to become proficient in than say C++. The latter is a human engineering disaster.

Now, whether the flight hardware can be spun back up in a timely manner -- I have no idea.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
bilgerat
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:43 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 2:34 pm

I didn't read the entire thread so apologies if this information has been posted already.

I read the other day there are two major practical problems when it comes to restarting F-22 production:

i) Apparently at least some of the toolings and such like have gone missing, despite the efforts made to properly store them. I read the USAF needs to do major repairs on two Raptors and when they opened up the container where the required toolings were supposed to be stored they found it to be empty. This apparently has also happened when they've gone looking for other stuff too.

ii) The Raptor's avionics architecture is obsolete and many of the components used are no longer manufactured. New build Raptors would therefore require a new and updated avionics architecture which would add hugely to the costs and development time before production could be restarted. I read it is hoped the F-22 could perhaps piggy back on the F-35's planned avionics upgrade in the next decade.


The avionics issue is the biggest one I think, and the reality is by the time the development work has been done and the aircraft is ready to go back into production (and no doubt a lot of money has been spent) everyone will be looking towards a "6th gen" platform.
 
CX747
Posts: 5848
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:00 pm

There will always be issues with restarting a production line. Those problems just become to do lists if $$$ is applied. IF the government wants to make more Raptors....then by God that production line will start turning them out.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sun Apr 24, 2016 2:53 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 130):
There will always be issues with restarting a production line. Those problems just become to do lists if $$$ is applied. IF the government wants to make more Raptors....then by God that production line will start turning them out.

Of course anything can be solved by throwing more money and more time at a problem. The question then becomes 'is it worth it?'

There's not much of a value proposition if the end result would mean that for a production run of say, 180 aircraft, each new production F-22 would have an average cost of $500 million dollars... I could probably buy 5 or 6 F-35A's for the cost of just 1 new F-22. And if that is the case, the generals will all say 'buy more F-35's please.'
 
sonic67
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sun Apr 24, 2016 4:13 am

The F35 is not a air superiority fighter and would not have a chance against a modern Russian fighter such as the Mig 29 or SU 27. The comparison is not relavent.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/27/world/us-russia-bombers-intentions/
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...mocks-america-response-jets-flyby/
http://www.defensetech.org/2015/08/1...-su-27-top-american-f-35/?mobile=1
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:22 am

Quoting sonic67 (Reply 132):
The F35 is not a air superiority fighter and would not have a chance against a modern Russian fighter such as the Mig 29 or SU 27. The comparison is not relavent.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/27/world/us-russia-bombers-intentions/
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...mocks-america-response-jets-flyby/
http://www.defensetech.org/2015/08/1...ile=1

Your first and second articles have no reference to the F-35 at ALL (so why the heck are you posting them to support your assertion?), and your second references a researcher from a think tank that provides 'progressive defence policies', and upon examination of the person's qualifications, has no qualifications to speak of (nor a pilot, is an engineer, a historian, or has served), and continuously references debunked articles, such as the F-35 can't dogfight (hint: it can per this pilot and this pilot here ,here, and here

So what does your sources have to do with the price of tea in China?
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sun Apr 24, 2016 1:51 pm

Why cant the F-22 be the 6th gen fighter? Infact, why does there need to be a '6th gen' at all? Why cant it be incremental updates like the C-130 or B-52? The only real reason 5th gen needs a new airframe is stealth. Why not make a F-22B that is designed for major updates and hardware swaps? There is nothing in the mushy 6th gen specs that cant be rolled into an existing 5th gen airframe.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3744
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Sun Apr 24, 2016 5:08 pm

While you guys are working up a lather bashing opinions, remember this : the comments by the Department of Defense, Air Force, Navy etc. are all just hot air in a continual battle with Congress which is duty bound to produce more hot air.. The result will probably be nothing (as is so often the case). or if they do something it will be too late and horrendously expensive.

Personally I still believe that no more than 50% of the F-35 wish amount will ever be funded and built.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:35 am

Quoting Oroka (Reply 134):
There is nothing in the mushy 6th gen specs that cant be rolled into an existing 5th gen airframe.

By the time one does all of the changes to the design of the F-22, one really doesn't come out ahead compared to a clean sheet replacement.

Remember that things like the engines and avionics comprise close to 3/4 of the cost of a fighter jet; designing a whole new airframe is a much cheaper affair. And a clean sheet replacement allows the USAF to tweak various aspects of the design much more easily to reflect operational experience. For example, the USAF may want larger internal weapons capability in a F-22 replacement, or more internal fuel. Or, the USAF would want something like the F-35's DAS sensors embedded in the skin; easier to do with a new design than to modify an existing design.

Remember, the F-22 has a lot of design compromises to achieve various performance aspects; for example, the supercruise requirement meant that the F-22 actually has a shorter range than the F-35 while smaller internal volume for weapons while having a similar fuel volume. The USAF may in the end may want to swing the design the other way, for example eliminate the supercruise capability to achieve more range and payload. This appears to be what the USAF is wanting as the USAF is pushing development of variable cycle engines in part to achieve better performance and efficiency, and such engines are going to be F135 sized, not F119 sized.
 
sonic67
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:43 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:39 am

This is why the US needs to restart F22 production.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...mocks-america-response-jets-flyby/

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 133):

So you are saying that the F-35 can go head to head with a Russian Mig or any other supiority fighter? If you are willing to say this as a F-35 pilot that it can survive a true dogfight and not just a simulation that is good enough for me.

The reason I posted the other two articles is to show that the Russians are not afraid of the United States air power and are trying to provoke hostility.

"Pointblank" It easy to desmiss some by saying they are not qualified but this form is just for discussion not to make policy.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:42 am

Quoting sonic67 (Reply 137):
This is why the US needs to restart F22 production.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...lyby/

Do you think the US military cares? Nope. The US military as an entire entity can completely out muscle the Russians in practically every metric available. The US has over 330 stealth fighters in its inventory; the Russians only have 5. The USN has 54 SSN's; the Russians only have 18 older submarines and 21 conventional submarines.

Quoting sonic67 (Reply 137):
So you are saying that the F-35 can go head to head with a Russian Mig or any other supiority fighter? If you are willing to say this as a F-35 pilot that it can survive a true dogfight and not just a simulation that is good enough for me.

Two pilots that I've linked to, one actually flying a F-35, the other that's flying F/A-18's and has flown F-16's, have said in the right hands, the F-35 is an extremely capable fighter.

Quoting sonic67 (Reply 137):
"Pointblank" It easy to desmiss some by saying they are not qualified but this form is just for discussion not to make policy.

If you are going to make a statement, and use a source to back up that statement, that source better be credible. The person that you reference should have actual knowledge on the topic at hand, and have the qualifications to demonstrate that they do have the knowledge. As the second pilot notes with some humour:

Quote:
It’s hard not to laugh when another “definitive” article comes out declaring not only is the F-35 a lame duck WVR, but it’s also dead in the water BVR. Holy crap.

There are two groups of people that know the true capabilities of the F-35: those that have the clearance necessary to read about it, and the people who built it (who have the same clearance)…. And probably the Chinese, but that’s another story. Anyone else that makes claims to know what the capabilities of this aircraft are and how they compare to threat aircraft (also classified, by the way), are just wrong and have traveled so far out of their lane it’s not even funny. They just don’t know what they don’t know.

I’m sorry, but you don’t have a right or need to know. The military keeps these things classified for a very good reason – to save American lives. Sensors, capabilities, tactics, and the like are not going to be released to journalists unless someone does so illegally. And even then, it’s like a dog watching TV. They’re not going to understand what they’re even looking at (as we’ve seen in these “expert interpretations” of a leaked FOUO test report).

Why is this important? Because any unclassified source that claims to know how an F-35 will do in a BVR engagement is flat-out wrong. Anything beyond that is pure speculation based on marketing brochures that are worth less in the real world than the paper they’re printed on. Sorry.

As I mentioned earlier, this is the first aircraft to be developed, tested, and flown in the “instant gratification” age. No other aircraft has had its dirty laundry aired in real time quite like this one. And a lot of people have worn out their “Jump to Conclusions Mat” as a result – without any valid information to back it up.

In the academic world, other debaters will eat you alive for using sources with limited or no credibility. If the pilots and generals all have confidence in the F-35 as a combat aircraft, I'm happy. It seems every random blogger / journalist
/ defence 'researcher' has suddenly become a military aviation expert overnight. I'm sorry, but what are their qualifications? Do they have access to the classified data? Do they have the education or background knowledge to support their argument? If not, they are making arguments that have no basis on any valid information, and that's a logical fallacy (I believe it's called Arguing from Ignorance).
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:10 am

F-35 will also win against F-22, as the avionics are better. The best idea would be to retire the F-22 quickly and use the money to buy more F-35s, which gives you a more coherent fleet and more capably fighters.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:18 am

Another article on the potential, possibly deal breaking hurdles a F-22 restart would have to overcome:

http://www.defenseone.com/technology...-22s-heres-what-would-take/127729/

Basically, 3 main points:
1. Money. USAF isn't exactly swimming in cash, and the USAF currently riding a bow wave of aircraft that need replacement in a few years time, everything from fighters, tankers, bombers, and ICBM security helicopters. Restarting F-22 would mean taking money away from replacing aircraft that are at the end of their design lives. Remember a RAND study way back when that said that to build an additional 75 new jets would cost $17 billion. Adjust for inflation and boost production to 194 Raptors, and the total price tag likely approaches $30 billion.

2. Reengineering the aircraft to replace out of production or long obsolete systems. Such an effort could take 5 years easy, and if more systems need to be replaced to take advantage of newer technology, could take even longer.

3. No factory. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Pratt have all moved on with the spaces used to build F-22's, and so have the many smaller suppliers. Boeing's Seattle's facility that built the wings and aft fuselage is now building 787's. Pratt no longer builds new F119 engines, and the only place that works on them is at Tinker Air Force Base. The final assembly building at Air Force Plant 6 in Marietta, Georgia is now building C-130J's, F-35 centre wings, and overhauling C-5's. You also need to train a new workforce, and all learning-curve efficiencies will have to start from the beginning.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:49 pm

After the F-35 drama, I dont see anyone having the stomach to green light yet another fighter program. The F-22 restart could be used like a F/A-18EF trick... looks almost the same, but really its a new jet. The F-22 is new enough that not everything needs to be new, but simplying calling it a production restart with some modernizing is alot easier on the ears.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:00 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 141):
After the F-35 drama, I dont see anyone having the stomach to green light yet another fighter program. The F-22 restart could be used like a F/A-18EF trick... looks almost the same, but really its a new jet. The F-22 is new enough that not everything needs to be new, but simplying calling it a production restart with some modernizing is alot easier on the ears.

The F/A-18E/F trick only worked because there was still a production line for classic Hornets when the project was started but that doesn't exist for the F-22. The addition of a production line start-up, combined with the airframe modernization required, doesn’t make a lot of fiscal sense.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 139):
F-35 will also win against F-22, as the avionics are better. The best idea would be to retire the F-22 quickly and use the money to buy more F-35s, which gives you a more coherent fleet and more capably fighters.

The F-22 has a place in the force structure but given its limited multi-role capabilities that place is restricted to a few select mission types. It makes no sense to buy more F-22s at the expense of F-35s but I don't think that is the intention here. Additional F-22s would prevent funding the upgrade of F-15s and instead retiring the F-15s.

Quoting kanban (Reply 135):
Personally I still believe that no more than 50% of the F-35 wish amount will ever be funded and built.

Are yes, that famous F-35 death spiral argument. There are absolutely no indications that the US will back away from any of the planned total for all three variants but if for some reason they do, it won’t be for another airframe but as a result of wholesale force reductions.

Meanwhile LRIP 11 long lead items have been funded and constitutes 92 F-35 aircraft (80 F-35A, 8 F-35B and 4 F-35C) while the program met its delivery goals of 36 jets in 2014 and 45 jets in 2015 with 53 jets planned for 2016.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:36 am

Quoting Oroka (Reply 141):
After the F-35 drama, I dont see anyone having the stomach to green light yet another fighter program. The F-22 restart could be used like a F/A-18EF trick... looks almost the same, but really its a new jet. The F-22 is new enough that not everything needs to be new, but simplying calling it a production restart with some modernizing is alot easier on the ears.

The F/A-18 E/F didn't do much in terms of innovation; the aircraft when it initially came out flew with what was a direct copy of the original F/A-18C/D's avionics systems.

What the USN did later in conjunction with Boeing was to introduce avionics upgrade spirals, where the avionics were upgraded and enhanced over time as production continued. A late production Super Hornet has very little in common in terms of avionics compared to the first ones off the line. In effect, what Boeing and USN did was to trick Congress into redesigning the avionics on the Super Hornet by initially passing the aircraft off as a minor variant, when in the end, it's an all new aircraft, save for some sections of the front fuselage.
 
Oroka
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:37 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:52 am

Quoting Ozair (Reply 142):
The F/A-18E/F trick only worked because there was still a production line for classic Hornets when the project was started but that doesn't exist for the F-22. The addition of a production line start-up, combined with the airframe modernization required, doesn’t make a lot of fiscal sense.

Still cheaper than starting a new program. The F-22 will be needing some upgrades in the next 10-15 years, sooner if you want proper integration with the F-35. A upgrade program rolled in with a line restart would be cheaper than designing a new fighter from scratch (you have to build a new line), and if anyone goes asking for money for a F-36 in the next decade, they will get a swift kick in the rear. The F-22 will have to be updated one way or another... why do upgrades AND design a new fighter? The F-22 is still the premier fighter... why plan its obsolescence?

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 143):
In effect, what Boeing and USN did was to trick Congress into redesigning the avionics on the Super Hornet by initially passing the aircraft off as a minor variant, when in the end, it's an all new aircraft, save for some sections of the front fuselage.

And that is exactly why a F-22B is alot more likely than a 6th gen fighter in the next 20 years. Roll it as a upgrade of the F-22, build some more while your at it to better utilize the money being spent. What a bargain! No new fighters! Use what we have more effectively! Easy sell. Remember the F/A-22... simple name change to make it sound more versatile... image and perception is everything when dealing with politicians and public.

We know restarting the F-22 line will be expensive, but it will still be cheaper than a new build. Then the discussion of possibly offering it for sale to allies? Sell some to the Australians and Japanese, im sure Israel will take some too, that will decrease the costs for the USAF. More F-22s flying around, even if it is in friendly airforces, is better than 186.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 5:07 am

Quoting Ozair (Reply 142):
It makes no sense to buy more F-22s at the expense of F-35s but I don't think that is the intention here. Additional F-22s would prevent funding the upgrade of F-15s and instead retiring the F-15s.

It would make sense to buy more F-35 to retire the F-22 and the F-15.
 
Ozair
Posts: 1758
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:04 am

Quoting Oroka (Reply 144):
Still cheaper than starting a new program. The F-22 will be needing some upgrades in the next 10-15 years, sooner if you want proper integration with the F-35. A upgrade program rolled in with a line restart would be cheaper than designing a new fighter from scratch (you have to build a new line),

While I agree it would be cheaper the issue becomes the viability of the platform, with upgrades, to last the next 40 years. As per my post in reply #115, the US does not have a pressing need for more F-22s today but it will have a pressing need for that capability overmatch by 2035. The F-22 is not that aircraft, a future 6th gen jet is. If that is true, then why throw more money at a jet that will probably be at par in 2035 instead of a jet that will maintain the capability advantage the US currently has.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 144):
Then the discussion of possibly offering it for sale to allies? Sell some to the Australians and Japanese, im sure Israel will take some too, that will decrease the costs for the USAF. More F-22s flying around, even if it is in friendly airforces, is better than 186.

How long would it take for the F-22 to be modernized and aircraft rolling off the restarted production? 5 years would be optimistic, more likely 7 if they started today and that is to IOC of new jets post testing. That becomes 8 or 9 years until an export customer gets their hands on them.

The US already offered Australia F-22s in the late 90s at which point the Australian DoD politely stated no as they identified they could never meet the sustainment costs. Japan may see a need but they probably see more value in pushing forward with their domestic aspirations. Israel already has overmatch and will maintain that as long as no gulf states go 5th gen. Even if Japan and Israel did take some, we are talking probably less than 60 between them, hardly enough to justify nearly 1 billion cost of redesigning the aircraft with export in mind.

Quote:

Analysts say the bill for removing highly classified equipment could be close to $1 billion,
http://www.reuters.com/article/lockh...ed-f22-japan-idUSN0530055420090605

Quoting seahawk (Reply 145):
It would make sense to buy more F-35 to retire the F-22 and the F-15.

The F-22 still has that high and fast missile launch advantage, something neither the F-35 nor F-15 are particularly good at. There are enough F-22 airframes in service that they can value add for many years to come. The USAF F-15E fleet is just over 200 airframes and they maintain and sustain that number so keeping the 180 odd F-22 airframes in service shouldn't be an issue from a planning or budgetary point of view.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:03 am

Quoting Ozair (Reply 146):

The F-22 still has that high and fast missile launch advantage, something neither the F-35 nor F-15 are particularly good at. There are enough F-22 airframes in service that they can value add for many years to come. The USAF F-15E fleet is just over 200 airframes and they maintain and sustain that number so keeping the 180 odd F-22 airframes in service shouldn't be an issue from a planning or budgetary point of view.

No, as the whole avionics structure of the F-22 is a "one of a kind" solution, while the F-15E share a lot with the Golden Eagles and even the SH. The software work alone on the F-22 is prohibitively expensive. On the other hand if you would look at the F-22 and make a F-22B from it, including a twin seater F-22E as a F-15E replacement,~ 200 frames + 190 frames new F-22B (as Golden Eagle replacements) + using the avionics to up-grade the existing fleet, you might even look at a practical solution.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2901
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:11 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 147):
including a twin seater F-22E as a F-15E replacement

Not going to happen. Look at where the bulk head is for the sections Lockheed Martin Marietta built and where Lockheed Martin Ft. Worth built:


That bulk head cannot be moved. So any additional seats would have to be FORWARD of that point, and the fuel tank and bulk head aren't going anywhere. This has an impact on weight and balance of the aircraft, so a redesign of the tail surfaces to balance the weight needs to occur. And this all needs to be tested; it is a total recertification of the aircraft's flight envelope from the ground up, plus whole new testing done in regards to structural loads and fatigue life; you can't just add a couple hundred pounds of weight to the front without causing some sort of structural issue elsewhere. You are adding at least 2 years of testing alone, in addition to the time to redesign the structures involved.

Such an exercise to add a second seat to the F-22 would make such a variant prohibitively expensive, for what is already an extremely expensive aircraft.

[Edited 2016-04-26 01:15:31]
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 5714
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: F-22 Raptor Revival?

Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:50 am

The F-22 is already prohibitively expensive. Re-opening the line is a folly unless you can meet another requirement with this. And the only idea I can come up with is the twin seat F-15 replacement, although I think the superior avionics of the F-35 make a twin seat plane obsolete and F-15E should be replaced by F-35s.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos