OT: F-22 Porn
- Thread starter biteyoudawg
- Start date
It is truly a sexy weapon, and there's even a law that prevents us from selling it to any other country - even England. It can actually "hover" (really a controlled stall), remain in a flat spin and keep its nose pointed at a target as the opposing plane circles around; provided it ever gets close enough to another plane to engage in an old-fashioned dog fight.
Glad that bad boy is on our side.
Glad that bad boy is on our side.
Last edited:
Max Moga flew a demo of the f-22 at NAS Meridian back in '08, and that thing flew 3 complete minimum radius turns in about a 200 yard area (18 degrees per second), came straight out of those turns into vertical. thrust vectoring n ****. did some turns and things during that flight that would seem impossible. completely stopped the damn airplane in the air with vectoring, hovering for a second. and the sound of that thing. something you don't forget
Vietnam. There were some epic dogfights documented from Vietnam.
f-4 phantoms, f-8 Crusaders, and F-100 Super sabres vs Mig 17s, 19s, and 21s.
f-4 phantoms, f-8 Crusaders, and F-100 Super sabres vs Mig 17s, 19s, and 21s.
Last edited:
They actually have F-14s we sold them in the 70s, but we haven't allowed them to buy spare parts since the Revolution.
If I remember the story right I think that we had people over there training/instructing them when the revolution happened and when our guys left, they took out specific parts of the targeting system that could only be purchased from the US, rendering the some of the planes useless. I think they still use the ones still operational.
Last edited:
There were dogfights in the gulf war, they just didn't last long and weren't many. The F-16s, F-14s, F-15s, and F-18s smashed those migs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_engagements_of_the_Gulf_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_engagements_of_the_Gulf_War
A few of my co-workers fly the F22 out of Elmendorf AK. One of them told me a story of an excercise with F15's when they first based the 22 in Anchorage. He said one F22 killed seven F15s and the 15's weren't even aware the Raptor was there. Also said it will do over mach1 without burner and aside from systems management is the easiest jet he's flown.
The entire airspace battlefield paradigm was rewritten...
...due to deployment of the F-22 and continues to be updated by the operational/tactics unit based at Nellis AFB. The Raptor's performance at low speeds and high speeds/supercruise are unmatched. Everyone ooh's and aah's about the flying performance and rightly so, but the integrated systems on board are unbelievable, too. They can be an effective "battlespace director" sort of like a mini-AWACS.
...due to deployment of the F-22 and continues to be updated by the operational/tactics unit based at Nellis AFB. The Raptor's performance at low speeds and high speeds/supercruise are unmatched. Everyone ooh's and aah's about the flying performance and rightly so, but the integrated systems on board are unbelievable, too. They can be an effective "battlespace director" sort of like a mini-AWACS.
The "Mig 28s" in Top Gun were actually US F-5 fighters. Even older than the F4s. We used F4's (F4E Wild Weasel) as anti-SAM and anti-radar platforms into the 90s, but not as a fighter since Vietnam, I believe.
I wonder how a Raptor would stack up against an F35 Lightning II?
I wonder how a Raptor would stack up against an F35 Lightning II?
The first F-4's only had missiles, not guns...
The first F-4's only had missiles, not guns and they needed guns. I believe they added the 20MM canon to the F-4s once they became operational in Vietnam. I'm not expert, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
The first F-4's only had missiles, not guns and they needed guns. I believe they added the 20MM canon to the F-4s once they became operational in Vietnam. I'm not expert, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
The days of manned fighters and bombers are numbered. UAV's are the future for combat craft. They are much cheaper (and cheaper to maintain) since they don't need all of that expensive life support gear. They don't put a human in harm's way, and they will eventually be able to out-maneuver even the best current fighters, since they don't have to worry about the pilot passing out in high G turns. They aren't as sexy as the manned fighters, but they will win.
Oh, and they won't be grounded to years at a time because they're trying to poison their pilots:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...ders-reported-f-22-oxygen-problems/57848214/1
Oh, and they won't be grounded to years at a time because they're trying to poison their pilots:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...ders-reported-f-22-oxygen-problems/57848214/1
2 things...
First, UAVs will likely take over much of the manned missions once they become autonomous enough to detect the proper targets and avoid threats adjusting on their own. The image of 12 year olds at a console with a monitor and joystick is not practical (communication with UAV can be jammed plus there is an advantage to saturating defenses with large numbers of UAVs).
Second, the "poisoning" is physiological, not mechanical. The OBOGS (and all on board systems) works as designed. The article alludes to contaminants getting into the oxygen system. That never was a problem. The backup system was installed on the insistence of the USAF.
First, UAVs will likely take over much of the manned missions once they become autonomous enough to detect the proper targets and avoid threats adjusting on their own. The image of 12 year olds at a console with a monitor and joystick is not practical (communication with UAV can be jammed plus there is an advantage to saturating defenses with large numbers of UAVs).
Second, the "poisoning" is physiological, not mechanical. The OBOGS (and all on board systems) works as designed. The article alludes to contaminants getting into the oxygen system. That never was a problem. The backup system was installed on the insistence of the USAF.
I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment on the status of UAVs, but it's a matter of "when", not "if" they are good enough. The technology is developing rapidly. That said, as an aviation enthusiast, it makes me sad.
I pointed out the F-22 oxygen system problem more out of a (bad) attempt at humor. The fact of the matter is that pilots were getting sick. Yes, a physiological condition, but that sort of makes my point, doesn't it?
I pointed out the F-22 oxygen system problem more out of a (bad) attempt at humor. The fact of the matter is that pilots were getting sick. Yes, a physiological condition, but that sort of makes my point, doesn't it?
Probably very well, I would assume. From a performance standpoint the Raptor would run circles around the F-35, just simply by having two engines and thrust vectoring. The F-22 is an air superiority fighter, whereas the F-35 is a multi-role strike fighter and has a much more modifiable airframe and enables whichever service is flying it to adapt the plane to their specific mission needs.
Last edited:
On a related note. Eglin Air Force base. Years back a friend and I had our families in Destin on vacation. We booked a tour at Eglin one morning kinda early. We went and it was absolutely awesome. Climate control hanger( the day we were there they ha a B1 bomber frozen to 40 below suspended 10 feet above the floor to later be dropped to see if anything would break), ballistics facility , military dog training , armament museum , tarmacs full of every kind of military plane you can imagine. Tours were on small buses and each tour was guided by a pilot. I have no idea if they still offer these but I can promise you if they do you warplane enthusiast would love it. It was very very impressive.
This is correct. Navy and USMC Phantoms used 20mm pods for strafing purposes. Later USAF F-4s had cannons incorporated into the airframe underneath the nose.
The Russian built Su-30 series can compare to or even exceed the Raptor in top speed and power, but does not have the radar passage capability. Nor can it acuire targets at the same distance of the APG-77 radar in the Raptor.
But in capable hands, the Su-30 series can present problems for the Navy's Super Hornet. The F-18E/F. Thankfully our pilots are some of the best trained in the world.
I fixed the last sentence for you. Also wanted to add that a major issue with the Russian products is reliability and ergonomics.
I saw some of these things in action at [redacted] a couple months ago. These things don't fly through the sky, rather they dance across it. They seem to move however the 17 they want and can go from a near standstill to supersonic in the blink of an eye (yeah, I heard them go boom). Now if they can make an unmanned version of this craft it would be unreal.