Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

[SpudmanWP]

Since ESMs are one of the most hush-hush of capabilities, we are not likely ever to get a straight answer.

However, we can make some common sense conclusions based on available public information:
1. The ASQ-239 is decades newer than the ALR-94 and even got a hardware upgrade with Tech Refresh2 (Block 3i)
2. The APG-81 is directly connected to the ASQ-239 and acts as part of the ESM in both passive & active modes.
2. The ASQ-239 & ALR-94 cover the same bands
3. The F-35 uses 3x the parameters to ID a target vs the F-22. While the F-35 does have an IRST, a vast majority of that info will be from the ASQ-239.

 

[sferrin]

Since ESMs are one of the most hush-hush of capabilities, we are not likely ever to get a straight answer.

However, we can make some common sense conclusions based on available public information:
1. The ASQ-239 is decades newer than the ALR-94 and even got a hardware upgrade with Tech Refresh2 (Block 3i)

Age only isn't necessarily an indicator. We don't know the ASQ-239 is designed to have all the functionality of the ALR-94 for example.

2. The APG-81 is directly connected to the ASQ-239 and acts as part of the ESM in both passive & active modes.

And the APG-77, with it's larger aperture is almost certainly connected to the ALR-94 similarly. Now I'll grant the F-35 has far more processing power to maximize what it gets out of everything it hoovers up. It also brings up the question of antenna quantity, size, and location for the two systems (ALR-94 and ASQ-239). Also, wouldn't the completely different designation suggest they have different functionality?

 

[SpudmanWP]

No public info states the APG-77 is connected or functions in concert with the ALR-94.

 

[marauder2048]

No public info states the APG-77 is connected or functions in concert with the ALR-94.

ALR-94 probably helps configure the beamforming network on the AN/APG-77 to faciliate precise RF direction finding via angle of arrival. There's semi-official literature to this effect.

 

[quellish]

It also brings up the question of antenna quantity, size, and location for the two systems (ALR-94 and ASQ-239).

APG-77 and ALR-94 both have (some) internal design features (related to what is mentioned here) that are far more advanced and sensitive than what is used in the F-35, etc. For example, imagine that all of the internals, from the antenna on back to the power source, are completely RF noise free. That is a very big deal.

As far as ESM, if you consider the B-2 as the gold standard, the F-22 fits ~90% of that capability into a much smaller and more efficient package.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The AWG-9 used older computing technology than the APG-65 which was more recent tech Does that mean the APG-65 did everything the AWG-9 could do? No, for size and cost reasons. Some things it did better, but in other respects the older hardware was superior.

Simply being a newer generation product doesn't mean it is automatically better in every parameter, and computing power alone doesn't determine performance.

 

[marauder2048]

It also brings up the question of antenna quantity, size, and location for the two systems (ALR-94 and ASQ-239).

APG-77 and ALR-94 both have (some) internal design features (related to what is mentioned here) that are far more advanced and sensitive than what is used in the F-35, etc. For example, imagine that all of the internals, from the antenna on back to the power source, are completely RF noise free. That is a very big deal.

Wow..optically controlled GaA MMICs?

 

[SpudmanWP]

APG-77 and ALR-94 both have (some) internal design features (related to what is mentioned here) that are far more advanced and sensitive than what is used in the , etc. For example, imagine that all of the internals, from the antenna on back to the power source, are completely RF noise free. That is a very big deal.

So given that NG & BAE had the experience, know-how, and capability to produce "noise-free" systems... they decided to not do that F-35 10+ years after they did it in the F-22?

Sorry, not buying it.

 

[quellish]

So given that NG & BAE had the experience, know-how, and capability to produce "noise-free" systems... they decided to not do that F-35 10+ years after they did it in the F-22?

Sorry, not buying it.

Why would someone assume the requirements are the same, or even similar?

 

[Flyaway]

It also brings up the question of antenna quantity, size, and location for the two systems (ALR-94 and ASQ-239).

APG-77 and ALR-94 both have (some) internal design features (related to what is mentioned here) that are far more advanced and sensitive than what is used in the F-35, etc. For example, imagine that all of the internals, from the antenna on back to the power source, are completely RF noise free. That is a very big deal.

As far as ESM, if you consider the B-2 as the gold standard, the F-22 fits ~90% of that capability into a much smaller and more efficient package.

It should be noted that this may not apply to Israeli F-35s where they seem to use as much of their own indigenous avonics as possible.

The thing about the F-22 is it's a really good air superiority fighter and that's it, any other functionality has had to be shoehorned into it & therefore it isn't going to be as good at these tasks. Unlike the F-35 that was designed from the outset as a true multi-role aircraft.

 

[Airplane]

It also brings up the question of antenna quantity, size, and location for the two systems (ALR-94 and ASQ-239).

APG-77 and ALR-94 both have (some) internal design features (related to what is mentioned here) that are far more advanced and sensitive than what is used in the F-35, etc. For example, imagine that all of the internals, from the antenna on back to the power source, are completely RF noise free. That is a very big deal.

As far as ESM, if you consider the B-2 as the gold standard, the F-22 fits ~90% of that capability into a much smaller and more efficient package.

It should be noted that this may not apply to Israeli F-35s where they seem to use as much of their own indigenous avonics as possible.

The thing about the F-22 is it's a really good air superiority fighter and that's it, any other functionality has had to be shoehorned into it & therefore it isn't going to be as good at these tasks. Unlike the F-35 that was designed from the outset as a true multi-role aircraft.

Really? The F-22 is only good at A2A? It was designed from the outset of the program with A2G capability. Just because it lacks EOTS don't go making such wild claims. There is more to multirole life than lugging around 2x2000lb bombs.

And the F-35 was not designed to be an air superiority fighter and that role is being shoehorned into it. Funny, how when the DoD wants an air superiority fighter, it ends up being a stealthy long ranged supercruiser and not a stubby slowpoke like an F-35 with the kinematics of 40 year old legacy platforms.

The F-35 can't even fly at low altitudes without the weapons bays overheating: yes, it's a great multirole AC.

Back on point, you guys are ridiculous in your cries to not allow 1 or 2 key allies to be sold the F-22 because of all it's 25yo secret technology, but don't give a damn that a plane more advanced in probably every technical manner (except performance charts!) is being sold to countries all over the globe.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Why would someone assume the requirements are the same, or even similar?

Because the F-35 depends even more on not getting detected for it's survival since it's radar is smaller than the F-22's and the F-22 is faster.

Since you made the claim that the F-22 internals are "quieter" than the F-35s.. source?

 

[sferrin]

Back on point, you guys are ridiculous in your cries to not allow 1 or 2 key allies to be sold the F-22 because of all it's 25yo secret technology, but don't give a damn that a plane more advanced in probably every technical manner (except performance charts!) is being sold to countries all over the globe.

Go back and read the thread again.

 

[Triton]

Remember that the driver for restarted F-22 Raptor production is the United States Air Force, not Congress. I would imagine that the United States Air Force knows the capabilities of the F-22 Raptor compared to the F-35A Lightning II and the fourth-generation fighter fleet in inventory.

It seems that some of us are debating the conclusions of the report by the Secretary of the Air Force before it has even been written.

 

[Steve Pace]

The answer to all of this is "full-speed ahead" on the NGAD fighter. -SP

 

[quellish]

Because the F-35 depends even more on not getting detected for it's survival since it's radar is smaller than the F-22's and the F-22 is faster.

This is describing how the requirements differ.
The APG-77 and APG-81 are different radars for different requirements.

 

[DrRansom]

The answer to all of this is "full-speed ahead" on the NGAD fighter. -SP

YES

F-22 doesn't have the range for Pacific conflict against A2AD threat with stealth fighters. Restarting the F-22 just makes the USAF TACAIR dependent upon protecting tanker lines.

Which leads to the next question, should NGAD have a two-man strike fighter variant, to do forward drone control / EA?

 

[sferrin]

Which leads to the next question, should NGAD have a two-man strike fighter variant, to do forward drone control / EA?

No. For all the same reasons the F-22 and F-35 didn't get one - $$$$$$$$$$$

 

[DrRansom]

No. For all the same reasons the F-22 and F-35 didn't get one - $$$$$$$$$$$

What's more expensive? Adding a electronics officer or the multi-decade software development project to replicate that electronics officer? Advanced software developing is proving to be very hard and very expensive...

 

[Triton]

How does the United States Air Force deter "aggression" from the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China between now and the development of a sixth-generation fighter aircraft? Do we put more money into upgrading and extending the service life of the F-15 fleet?

What if the Philippines invites the United States Air Force back to Clark Air Base? The Philippines is allowing the United States Navy to use the facilities of Subic Bay again. What if other nations in the Pacific region currently engaged in territorial disputes with the People's Republic of China allow land basing of United States aircraft? Does the United States Air Force have a tanking problem then?

Do we presume that funding levels will remain the same with the next Presidential Administration?

 

[sferrin]

No. For all the same reasons the F-22 and F-35 didn't get one - $$$$$$$$$$$

What's more expensive? Adding a electronics officer or the multi-decade software development project to replicate that electronics officer? Advanced software developing is proving to be very hard and very expensive...

Buy more Growlers.

 

[sferrin]

How does the United States Air Force deter "aggression" from the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China between now and the development of a sixth-generation fighter aircraft? Do we put more money into upgrading and extending the service life of the F-15 fleet?

I wouldn't mind if we bought another 125 late model Eagles, if they could manage to restrain themselves to JUST what the F-15SG or SK has, without adding ninety-thousand bells and whistles. And not at the expense of the F-35. If we could build the F-35 faster I'd say do that but I think there is a place for a heavy bomb-hauler like the Strike Eagle.

 

[DrRansom]

Buy more Growlers.

For the foreseeable future? Something low-observable will have to replace the Growlers.

If NGAD will be F-111 sized, due to Pacific (and maybe even Russia) range / payload requirements, then it will have enough space to add a second officer. Not all versions have to be two-manned.

Triton - F-22 will be operating near range limits (400 ish?) in South China Sea. Doesn't have enough range to operate in Pacific theater.

 

[marauder2048]

The answer to all of this is "full-speed ahead" on the NGAD fighter. -SP

Restarting the F-22 just makes the USAF TACAIR dependent upon protecting tanker lines.

Slightly OT but I always thought IAI's proposal to develop boom tanker versions of the Gulfstream G550 bizjet was a really good idea for disaggregating tanker assets.

 

[GTX]

It should be noted that this may not apply to Israeli F-35s where they seem to use as much of their own indigenous avonics as possible.

Don't get fooled into thinking the Israeli F-35s have anything significantly different in terms of avionics to the standard F-35s. The myth of significant Israeli Defence prowess in this regard is just that, a myth.

 

[quellish]

For the foreseeable future? Something low-observable will have to replace the Growlers.

When you hear a really loud noise, do you find it with your eyes or with your ears?

 

[NeilChapman]

How does the United States Air Force deter "aggression" from the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China between now and the development of a sixth-generation fighter aircraft? Do we put more money into upgrading and extending the service life of the F-15 fleet?

What if the Philippines invites the United States Air Force back to Clark Air Base? The Philippines is allowing the United States Navy to use the facilities of Subic Bay again. What if other nations in the Pacific region currently engaged in territorial disputes with the People's Republic of China allow land basing of United States aircraft? Does the United States Air Force have a tanking problem then?

Do we presume that funding levels will remain the same with the next Presidential Administration?

From your lips...

Well...to start with, evidently you send A-10's to the PI and F-22's to Romania. I wouldn't rule out Japanese F-15's "visiting" the PI in the future either. The PI makes a hell of an aircraft carrier.

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/740671/pacaf-a-10s-hh-60s-fly-first-air-contingent-missions-in-philippines.aspx

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/us-flies-22s-romania-show-strength-russia-38650499

 

[marauder2048]

Marillyn Hewson From LM's 1st quarter earnings call

On the F-22, I know there has been some discussion about a restart on the F-22 and we just stand ready to support with whatever information we are asked to provide.
You are probably aware that the tooling does still exist, and so there will be -- as most programs, if you start one from a cold start
I am sure that they really want to understand the cost associated with a cold start.

But at the same time you wouldn't want to build the same aircraft, so you will do some upgrades to that aircraft, modernize it and some of the design --
incorporate some of the things that we have learned through F-35 and other programs that you can incorporate into that. So we will stand ready to support that.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Personally I think the USAF should be a bit more open to the idea of restarting production of an improved F-22. I have little confidence in the notion that F-XX or NGAD or whatever they are calling it now will be on-time like the USAF wants. When they can't even bring themselves to call it a fighter and resort to all sorts of technobabble I'm already a bit concerned. Considering the leadership deficit in Washington they ought to take a shot at what they could get sooner rather than later.

 

[Flyaway]

Personally I think the USAF should be a bit more open to the idea of restarting production of an improved F-22. I have little confidence in the notion that F-XX or NGAD or whatever they are calling it now will be on-time like the USAF wants. When they can't even bring themselves to call it a fighter and resort to all sorts of technobabble I'm already a bit concerned. Considering the leadership deficit in Washington they ought to take a shot at what they could get sooner rather than later.

Only if they are willing to bring foreign trusted partners who are intrested in purchasing the F-22 are a willing to share the re-start cost so that it doesn't all fall on the US taxpayer.

And now for something different the F-22 flying the Mach Loop in Wales.

https://youtu.be/oCF1trDfN0A

 

[Ian33]

Sweet Mother of Mercy!

Stunning F22 down and dirty. Beautiful. Sounds gorgeous.

 

[Steve Pace]

WOW!!!! LOVE IT!!!! -SP

 

[Jeb]

Something wicked this way comes. You never think of Raptors flying low-level.

 

[Flyaway]

What struck me was how smartly it turned that corner compared to the F-15 following it.

 

[kaiserd]

Stunning video - thanks to all involved

 

[NeilChapman]

SSSShwing-Daddy!

Sometimes you gotta feed a little speed to your steed!

 

[sferrin]

Should have done it in supercruise. (F-22 can supercruise at sea level. Obviously not at Mach 1.7+)

 

[TomS]

What struck me was how smartly it turned that corner compared to the F-15 following it.

Yeah, he looked like he was having trouble keeping up.

 

[sferrin]

What struck me was how smartly it turned that corner compared to the F-15 following it.

Yeah, he looked like he was having trouble keeping up.

With 2 600 gallon tanks under the wings that shouldn't surprise anybody.

 

[bobbymike]

Why oh why did we not build 400+ of these........................... :'(