F-22 Raptor

Всичко за военната военната авиация по света
Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » вт окт 09, 2007 11:43 pm

Надявам се, че никой не е против съществуването на отделна тема за Ф-22?

За последно чух, че Раптора е претърпял някакъв "dual flameout" при тестове на GBU-39. Така и не разбрах какво точно е станало и продължават ли тестовете.
Между другото, как точно да се тълкува терминът "dual flameout", конкретно в тази ситуация?

----------------
Офтоп

Много бързо да попитам- ще има ли раздел "Космонавтика"?

Дано да има!
---------------

Кало
Мнения: 2192
Регистриран: пон окт 08, 2007 11:20 pm
Местоположение: София

Непрочетено мнение от Кало » вт окт 09, 2007 11:44 pm

доколкото знам, при тестването на мятане на "тънките" бомби, на сравнително малка височина, електрониката е изключила и двата двигателя, като малко след това пак ги е включила. твърди се, че пилотът даже не бил разбрал, но пък същевременно в кулата за известно време отписали самолета...
Согласно предварительной информации, причиной отключения двигателей стало выполнение маневра с нештатным триммированием на сверхмалой высоте.

Автоматика включила двигатели вновь прежде, чем пилот успел осознать случившееся. Однако информация о внезапной потере тяги на недостаточной высоте поступила в центр управления. К моменту потери контакта с самолетом он cнижался с отрицательным тангажом на очень низкой высоте.

Поначалу решили, что самолет потерян. Но приключения на этом закончились - пилоту удалось привести машину на аэродром авиабазы Эдвардс и посадить ее без приключений.

Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » вт окт 09, 2007 11:55 pm

Кало написа:твърди се, че пилотът даже не бил разбрал, но пък същевременно в кулата за известно време отписали самолета...
Да, това е най-странният момент в случката,доста объркващо. Те са разбрали от телеметрията, но ако всичко е станало толкова бързо и двигателите са си възтановили работата, то защо са го отписали? Нищо не разбирам.
Кало написа:доколкото знам, при тестването на мятане на "тънките" бомби, на сравнително малка височина, електрониката е изключила и двата двигателя
Електрониката ли ги е изключила?! Аз пък какво разбрах, че във въздухозаборниците не е постъпило достатъчно въздух.

Потребителски аватар
=RvE=Tito
Мнения: 692
Регистриран: пон окт 08, 2007 2:29 pm
Контакти:

Непрочетено мнение от =RvE=Tito » ср окт 10, 2007 9:38 am

Изглежда като софтуерен проблем на FADEC. Но умна машина- сама да задейства запалването...
"See, to me that's a stupid instrument. It tells what your angle of attack is. If you don't know you shouldn't be flying." - Chuck Yeager, from the back seat of F-15D at age 89.
=RvE=

Потребителски аватар
=RvE=Tito
Мнения: 692
Регистриран: пон окт 08, 2007 2:29 pm
Контакти:

Непрочетено мнение от =RvE=Tito » ср окт 10, 2007 9:41 am

Ето едно филмче в типичен холивудски стил, но все пак могат да се видят интересни неща:
http://www.airshowbuzz.com/videos/view.php?v=a090713b
"See, to me that's a stupid instrument. It tells what your angle of attack is. If you don't know you shouldn't be flying." - Chuck Yeager, from the back seat of F-15D at age 89.
=RvE=

Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » ср окт 10, 2007 2:13 pm

=RvE=Tito написа:Ето едно филмче в типичен холивудски стил, но все пак могат да се видят интересни неща:
http://www.airshowbuzz.com/videos/view.php?v=a090713b
Много излишен патос в това филмче, едва го изгледх. Това определено не е мой стил презентация :wink: :lol:

Между другото, на форума на Fence Check има един участник с ник dozerf22, пилот е на Ф-22 и, ако не се лъжа, се подвизава в Аляска. Постовете му са много интересни.

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » ср окт 10, 2007 6:36 pm

Blue Marble написа:За последно чух, че Раптора е претърпял някакъв "dual flameout" при тестове на GBU-39. Така и не разбрах какво точно е станало и продължават ли тестовете
Ето нещо от безспорно авторитетен източник като Flight International:

Bomb test flameout nearly crashes F-22
By Stephen Trimble

A key new weapon for the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor has started a new series of tests despite a recent in-flight crash scare.

The Boeing GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) began separation tests on the F-22 in early September after more than a year of sometimes difficult work to integrate the weapon in the weapons bay and carry out airborne captive carry tests, Maj Jack Fischer, a USAF test pilot, told the Society of Experimental Test Pilots' annual convention.

Flight tests so far have produced a few in-flight problems, including one particular event that "could have been very bad", Fischer said.

In that incident, an F-22 suffered a brief, dual-engine flameout while performing a negative-g, 360 degree roll with eight SDBs loaded in the weapons bay. The flameout occurred because the aircraft entered the manoeuvre with an incorrect trim setting.

Although the engines restarted before the pilot was even aware of the problem, the momentary power loss dropped the telemetry signals to the control room on the ground.

The control staff lost contact "with the aircraft pointed down toward the water at a very low altitude", said Capt Harris Hall, a programme official. "For a time, we thought the aircraft was lost."

However, the engines were restarted almost immediately and the pilot remained in control of the aircraft, he said. The pilot landed at Edwards AFB, California, without incident. The dual-engine flameout was not discovered until flight engineers reviewed performance data from the flight.

Integrating the 250lb (113kg)-class SDB is key to making the F-22 a more effective air-to-ground weapons platform, displacing two 2,000lb Joint Direct Attack Munitions with eight, "extreme stand-off" guided bombs in the internal weapons bay, Fischer said.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... -f-22.html

Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » чет окт 25, 2007 9:48 pm

USAF искат още Раптори:

US Air Force requests funding for 20 more F-22 fighters

Интересното за мен беше този абзац:
This amounts to a small fraction of the USAF's annual $3.6 billion procurement budget for the F-22, but means the service will need to obtain support within the DoD to add roughly $3 billion more to the F-22 account in the FY2010 budget.

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » вт окт 30, 2007 3:41 am

Blue Marble написа:USAF искат още Раптори
Но за сега не им се отваря парашута:

No extra F-22s, C-17s for USAF in 2009
By Gayle S. Putrich - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Oct 29, 2007 12:28:24 EDT

The fiscal 2009 budget will not include any funds for the U.S. Air Force to buy F-22 Raptors or C-17 cargo lifters, according to a source with knowledge of internal Pentagon budget discussions.

Top service officials have long said the Air Force needs more than the 183 fifth-generation fighters that made up the “program of record” for the Lockheed Martin-built F-22. Generals have long pushed for a 381 target, using Pentagon-commissioned studies that say the service needs at least 260 as backup. But the Office of the Secretary of Defense appears to be standing firm at 183.

The current multiyear procurement agreement will remain in place, but if the contractor does not get funds in the 2009 budget to purchase long-lead items, the line will close.
.....
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/ ... rs_071026/

Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » пет ное 02, 2007 5:38 pm

Няколко цитата на Air Force Gen. T. Michael Moseley, линк към целия текст постнах тук:
Clark: Yeah, and so, if you're going in against a integrated air defense with these sophisticated surface-to-air missiles, with fighters, aren't you going to have to have bombers too? Or are these fighters equipped -

Moseley: Great question. Great question. The F-22 carries eight small-diameter bombs. The F-35 carries a mix of bombs from small diameter up to 2,000-pounder. And so, you carry that internal to maintain the signatures on the airplane. So at high speed and high altitude, you can drop a small-diameter bomb somewhere close to 70 miles. And the accuracies on the thing, which are both inertial and GPS-guided, will take you to two or three feet from the target. So to go tear up this SAM system, to tear up the target-tracking radars, the early-warning radars, the launchers, the vans, to kill the crews, go in there and strike them. And the way to do that is from these stealthy platforms, the fighters and the new bomber.
Clark: Let me see. During these House Armed Service Committee hearings, you and Secretary Wynne pointed out that the Air Force wants 381 F-22s. And so far, there's been 183 authorized. You said nobody in ACC, Air Combat Command, has changed the requirement. The chairman asked about strategy.

You have one kind of strategy when you have 381 F-22s. You have another kind of strategy when you have 183. You have one kind of strategy when you have 1,736 F-35s, and you have another one that purchase is stretched out over 25 years. So seemingly, there is a big mismatch between the strategy and the resources. And I want to ask you this question, but you can reformulate it if you like. Can you explain the difference between the two kind of strategies you were talking about there?


Moseley: Sure. Well, it's 1,763, not 35. You lost 36 airplanes in there somewhere.

Clark: Oh, I think that was just a typo.

Moseley: I see. It's okay, but I'm sensitive to that sort of thing.

Clark: Okay, didn't mean to deprive you of 30 aircraft.

Moseley: The 381 number on the F-22 comes from the presentation of forces in a theater on a global scale. We have 10 air expeditionary forces that we have in our rotation model. Each of those 10 AEFs has a slice of capability that is deployable. Our numbers take us to 10 squadrons of F-22s, one per AEF. But it also takes us to bedding the airplanes down in sufficient numbers adjacent to sufficient ranges to be able to train the pilots and the crews on the airplane.

We have operating locations at Langley in Virginia, which we've got the over-water ranges over the Atlantic. We have an operating location at Elmendorf, which we have the red flag ranges up in Alaska. We have the next operating location at Holloman in Alamogordo, New Mexico, so we have all of the MacGregor and New Mexico ranges. And then, we have a squadron in Hawaii.

So that gives us ideally 10 squadrons, three in each of the big wings and one in Hawaii. So that's 240 combat-coded airplanes, which makes the 381 number, because you need the additional numbers for the training base, the schoolhouse, and you need about 10 percent or so for tests in continuing the upgrades on the airplane. So that's the number.

So there's several factors to this. You need the ability to generate numbers of sorties at any location. Right now, because of the 183 number, which is a budget number, we have seven squadrons - two, two, two, and one - of 18 aircraft each. The difference in an 18 and a 24 possessed squadron is not just six airplanes. It is a much bigger capability to generate sorties and present forces. Our classic squadron size in a fighter squadron is 24. So that's where the 381number comes from.

And also, at each of these locations, the three squadrons gives you three squadrons worth of leadership - squadron commander, operations officer, maintenance officer, senior NCOs, flag commanders. Each one of those is a deployable package.

So you need the 10 deployable packages with 10 sets of leadership, but you need them at a location that you can train composite force training with the Army, down at Fort. Bliss with the Navy, at Oceania off the East Coast and Alaska with the Army. So you need the complexities o the overlays of the basin, and the size of the units to be able to give you the leadership team, to be able to give you access to the joint training opportunities to be able to give you the deployability, to give you the depth and the sortie generation capability. That's the 381 number.

When you have 183, you have a different reality. Your strategy may be the same. CINCPAC, PACCOM, EUCOM, CENTCOM may have the same tasking for you, but you don't have the overall capacity to deploy and generate forces with 183 total versus 381. But it's really about combat-coded airplanes.
The same with the F-35. We have a number of 1,763. We are just now getting the airplane. We have the first a-model flying. Somewhere over the next year, our A-model and the Marines B-model, we will have those flying. And we will be able to get better and better information about the airplane. We're looking to begin to take deliveries of the airplane in larger numbers by 2010.

The challenge in this case is not necessarily on the 1,763 number. It's on the delivery rates up front. The desire is to get the delivery rates up to a higher number so we can divest ourselves of the F-16s faster, so you don't have to go spend billions of dollars on service life extensions on the F-16. So the connective tissue to your questions is smaller numbers of the fifth-generation systems, create less capability forward, less ability to provide the capacity to the theater commanders, less sortie generation rate, less training capability, less squadron leadership deployable, which all equates to then having to make choices on where do you put the limited asset, and then what do you do to make up the rest of the capacity. I mean, that's the challenge that the senior airman in theater has, which we call the combined force air component commander, the CFACC.

So there is a difference between 381 and 183 that is not just a numeric math problem; it's a real operational delta, which is a different challenge than the F-35. The F-35 challenge right now is to get the delivery rates up at a higher delivery schedule for both the early versions - the A model, the B model - for the Air Force and the Marines so we can flesh out the fourth-generation systems and not have to continue to spend money on those. So again, long answer to a short question, but this is a complicated sets of thoughts relative to those numbers.


Moss
Мнения: 1328
Регистриран: пон окт 08, 2007 5:24 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Moss » съб ное 03, 2007 5:33 pm

Two-thirds of F-22 Raptor fleet suffering from corrosion

http://www.f-16.net/news_article2579.html
Империализмът буквално загнива...

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » ср ное 07, 2007 8:38 pm

Нищо, че загнива.
Това не им пречи да въоръжават все повече ескадрили с ръждивите им изтребители...

3rd Wing activates second F-22 squadron
by Staff Sgt. Francesca Popp
3rd Wing Public Affairs

11/1/2007 - ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, Alaska (AFPN) -- The 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base activated the 525th Fighter Squadron during a ceremony at the base Oct. 29.
The second active-duty F-22 Raptor squadron took its place in wing history nearly three months after the aircraft officially landed on base. Lt. Col. Chuck Corcoran assumed command of the squadron with its initial cadre of five pilots and four support staff.

Colonel Corcoran said he is honored to lead the squadron.

"I've been reading up on the history of the squadron. It's awesome and deep with tradition," the Chillicothe, Ohio, native said. "There are a lot of firsts. It was primarily in Europe until this point. It has performed brilliantly in numerous airplanes over the years and through numerous conflicts. There's no match for the air dominance mission anywhere in the world.

"It's great to know we get the opportunity to stand up the squadron here and be a part of a rich history the squadron has and add to it," he said.

The 525th FS's legacy began in February 1942 as the 309th Bombardment Squadron (Light) to support allied forces in the European theater of operations during World War II. Nearly 18 months after activation, the unit saw its first combat in Sicily. In August 1943, the 309th BS was redesignated as the 525th Fighter-Bomber Squadron.

Since then, the 525th has received several designations: fighter squadron from 1944-1950, fighter-bomber squadron again from 1950-1954, fighter-interceptor squadron from 1954-1969 and tactical fighter squadron from 1969 until being inactivated in 1992.

The squadron moved around Europe in its early days, but ended up calling Bitburg Air Base, Germany, home for 35 years.

Several former unit members attended the ceremony, one of whom is today's Pacific Air Forces commander, Gen. Paul Hester. Thirty years ago, the then captain was an F-15 Eagle instructor and flight examiner with the 525th Tactical Fighter Squadron at Bitburg.

The general noted that event adds to the importance of the Air Force's 60th anniversary and it portrays Heritage to Horizons.

"From the '70s to the '80s, now to the '90s and 2000s, it's four generations of Airmen doing the same thing, a part of the same team and wearing the squadron patch," General Hester said.

No matter what the number designator of the fighter squadrons -- the 525th, the 90th and the 302nd -- all have the same mission: to provide air dominance.

"Our job is to clear the skies of enemy aircraft, as well as take out any surface-to-air missiles that would deny us access to enemy airspace," Colonel Corcoran said. "The overarching reason for that is to gain control of the skies. That's what the F-22 was built to do and it's our mission here at Elmendorf.

The colonel said that as he leads the 525th into the next chapter of its history his vision for the squadron is to accomplish the mission they're tasked with.

"I want to do it at the level the 525th has historically done it ... perfectly. I think it will be pretty easy to execute that, because we have the world's best equipment with the F-22 and the world's best people," he said. "My job is going to be pretty easy taking care of those people, so they can accomplish the mission with that awesome equipment. My vision is to provide them what they need so they can be trained and equipped to do what they have to do if they're called on to do it."

With the unfurling of the 525th Tactical Fighter Squadron flag, the 525th became active again after 15 years. The 525th Fighter Squadron will have 26 people and 20 aircraft assigned when it becomes fully operational by the end of 2008.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123074194

Изображение
100th F-22 delivered
Bulldogs take on Raptors: 3rd Wing activates second F-22 squadron
F-22 Raptors fly in formation. (U.S. Air Force photo/Staff Sgt. Samuel Rogers)

Потребителски аватар
Blue Marble
Мнения: 110
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 11:16 pm

Непрочетено мнение от Blue Marble » нед ное 11, 2007 1:06 pm

U.S. senators demand Pentagon release F-22 reports

WASHINGTON, Nov 9 (Reuters) - Six U.S. senators on Friday demanded Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England release three government-funded reports that call for additional purchases of Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) F-22 "Raptor" fighter jets beyond the currently planned level of 183.

The senators said they were concerned by the recent grounding of the Air Force's 700-plus fleet of Boeing Co (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) F-15s, India's recent decision to join Russia's effort to develop a new fighter jet, and the Air Force's statements that it really needs 381 F-22s, although it can only afford 183.

"We continue to be perplexed by the Department of Defense's insistence that only 183 F-22As should be procured," the senators wrote in the letter, which was obtained by Reuters.

They asked England to let Congress examine in full three separate reports that reportedly concluded that a far greater number of F-22s was needed, and to make public the reports' conclusions about the minimum number of F-22s needed.

In addition, they asked for a detailed Pentagon briefing before Jan. 15, 2008 on the number of tactical aircraft required to execute U.S. military strategy through 2020.

"We also request that during this briefing, the Department of Defense articulate why Raptor procurement should be limited to 183," said the letter, which was signed by six senators, including Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a Georgia Republican, and Sen. James Imhofe, an Oklahoma Republican.

Loren Thompson, defense analyst with the Virginia-based Lexington Institute, last week accused the Pentagon of willfully ignoring expert studies which concluded that it needs around 250 of the next-generation fighter jets, substantially more than the 183 the government plans to order.
"The Pentagon paid for studies that showed more F-22s were needed, but when it got that answer it decided to hide the studies and not share them with Congress," Thompson told Reuters. "Now Congress wants to know why the program is being cut to 183 planes, less than half the Air Force requirement."

The Air Force says it needs 381 radar-evading F-22s to equip each of 10 air wings with a squadron of 24 fighters, plus some for testing, attrition and training.

The senators raised concerns about Russian work on a radar-evading next-generation fighter jet known as the Sukhoi T-50, citing media reports that it was being developed to directly confront the F-22.

India's participation in the project was "especially disconcerting," the letter said, given how well Indian Air Force fights performed during recent joint military exercises with U.S. forces, and "the propensity of of the Russian Government to sell advanced weapons to our potential adversaries."

It also cited media reports that China reportedly was also working on a similar twin-engine stealthy fighter jet.

The Air Force initially planned to buy 750 F-22s when the program first began in the 1980s, but that number has been whittled lower due to rising costs, budget pressures and competition from other weapons programs.

Sources familiar with the studies in question have said they cite a need for at least 40 additional F-22s, including one prepared by Virginia-based consulting group Whitney, Bradley & Brown, and first reported by Reuters in July 2006.


(Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Brian Moss)

ИЗТОЧНИК

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » съб яну 26, 2008 8:40 pm

Нещо от преди месец...

Изображение

Изображение
Anyone who fights for the future, lives in it today

Сашо
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 1751
Регистриран: ср окт 03, 2007 12:42 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Сашо » съб яну 26, 2008 8:44 pm

Е, тгокога ги чаках тия снимки. Допреди няколок дни на един американски форум се твърдеше, че има такива снимки, но е нямало разрешения да пущат по побличния интернет.
Интересното - Рапторът, в тази мисия с голяма продължителност, самолет от 90-та ескадри (получила първ машини преди 3 месеца) е с подркилни резервоари.

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » съб яну 26, 2008 9:58 pm

На Раптора краченцатa са му къси. Ориентировъчно (и по официалните документи) има към 2,5 пъти по-малък боен радиус от F-15 (750 срещу 2000 km.). И както се оказва сега самолета лети доста често с баки.
А интересно, че преди 5 - 6 години имаха проблеми с якостта на крилото и имаха проблеми с поставянето на подвески.

Иначе, да! 90-та ескадрила получава първите си машини на 9 август, а прехвата на снимката е от 27 ноември. Ето така се усвоява нова техника!
Anyone who fights for the future, lives in it today

борден
Мнения: 1422
Регистриран: съб окт 06, 2007 10:26 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от борден » съб яну 26, 2008 10:10 pm

Floyd написа:На Раптора краченцатa са му къси. Ориентировъчно (и по официалните документи) има към 2,5 пъти по-малка продължителност на полета от F-15 (750 срещу 2000 km.).
Ако това е вярно - да не съм чул някой да казва, че МиГ-29 е самолет за завоюване на превъзходство във въздуха над близката приводна!

Потребителски аватар
Байко
Мнения: 395
Регистриран: вт окт 09, 2007 7:40 pm

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Байко » нед яну 27, 2008 10:47 pm

Вярно е, а на F-35 са му още по-къси :lol: :lol: :lol:(краченцата де)
... И днес, когато бурята бушува
над дългата и пуста полоса,
тя пее песента на Вевесаря
със вятъра отишъл на война.
Изображение

Потребителски аватар
Airbuster
Мнения: 882
Регистриран: чет окт 18, 2007 8:14 am
Местоположение: Back in BG
Контакти:

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Airbuster » пон яну 28, 2008 12:56 am

На Ф-35 си е доста добър бойният радиус, като за лек изтребител (1100км), но според мен за изтребител от класа на Раптора с тия 750 км. си е чиста излагация. Хамериканците едва ли ги бърка много де, те си имат доволно количество летящи цистерни.

Потребителски аватар
Грозев
[Site Admin]
Мнения: 10218
Регистриран: пет окт 05, 2007 8:18 pm
Местоположение: София

Re: F-22 Raptor

Непрочетено мнение от Грозев » пон яну 28, 2008 5:58 pm

борден написа:Ако това е вярно...
Може и да не е съвсем вярно.
Някой характеристики на F-22 се оказа, че са по-добри от официално заявените. Например максималната скорост на безфорсажен режим и оперативния таван.

Иначе това с цистерните е хем така, хем не. От една страна Рапторите са бързи и могат да се разхождат често до цистерните в тила, но от друга страна тази малка продължителност на полета си е фактор, а баките те правят по голяма цел на радарния екран.
Anyone who fights for the future, lives in it today

Отговори