Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

[bobbymike]

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/04/04/5th-gen-fighters-tag-team-air-force-red-flag-exercises.html

Two nearly back-to-back Red Flag exercises at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, in recent months have helped prepare airmen taking part in the drills for warfighting scenarios across the globe.

But as the Air Force continues to talk about the next high-end fight with a near-peer adversary, its most advanced fighters, the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, did not train together in either exercise.

Red Flag, established in 1975 at the end of the Vietnam War, is an integrated, multi-force training exercise within a simulated combat environment. There are three planned this year.

"We brought a notional force of F-35s into the [second] exercise, and it was really more about their sensors than it was about their stealth," said Col. Michael Mathes, commander of the 414th Combat Training Squadron. Military.com spoke with Mathes on March 23, the day Red Flag 18-2

 

[SpudmanWP]

If they really wanted to use them together, they could have put up a BACN.

 

[bring_it_on]

The AF plans to put the TACLink-16 capability on the F-22A into DevTesting in about a years time following which it will begin installing it on the fleet (2020). That should give it a level of 4th to 5th and 5th to 5th capability that has been lacking but is desired none the less. However, true 5th to 5th would have come via MADL which was approved for the f-22, by the JROC but then set aside due to cost and risk (at the time). It makes some sense to begin thinking about that in the early 2020s as well once the current set of upgrades have been implemented. The F-22, F-35 and the B-21 ideally need to be able to talk via a common discrete directional data-link without the need of a gateway.

 

[Airplane]

Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

 

[Jeb]

Wow, look at the skidmark it left. Maybe the pilot was trying to control the slide with rudder action and the flight control system was manipulating the stabs as well?

 

[litzj]

Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

probably pilot took action when he felt flame out of one the engine.

thus ht moved differentialy

 

[NeilChapman]

Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?

 

[Airplane]

Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?

Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.

But the part about the pilot not knowing the engine flamed out..... There are no indicators? Warnings? When you feel the plane sinking back to the runway, my first instinct would be to add full power. Did he just get a few feet up and not have time to react?

Ever since the YF-22 incident, the Raptor has had bad luck with runways and belly landings and runway strikes.

 

[TomcatViP]

Bumped for 1500ft and slide for 5000ft (sorry don't have the proper quotation).

 

[sferrin]

Raptor down. Suffered flameout on takeoff. Wonder why the horizontal stabs are pitched differently.

Looks like he had 4k feet of runway left. Is the gear only hydraulically operated?

Well, at least the pilot was uninjured and it will be a mere 6 years to get the AC flying again.

Yeah. Good thing we bought so many of them.

 

[fightingirish]

Up on her legs again so far...
Photo via Air Force amn/nco/snco Group on Facebook.
Link: https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/16/f-22-incident-alleged-to-be-engine-power-loss-pilot-lands-gear-up/

 

[stealthflanker]

Wish for quick recovery.

 

[Airplane]

Wish for quick recovery.

I am pretty sure in these incidents they have to gut the airframe of engines and avionics and inspect it millimeter by millimeter.

I would love to see the process by with the lower belly is repaired... you know, the skin or non-removable panels. It must be a weld and grind operation to smooth fill up the scrapes and fill gaps from sliding a mile down concrete.

Considering how long it took to repair the other Raptor, NGAD or PCA or whatever the acronym is of the day will be flying by the time this Raptor is repaired!!

 

[Foo Fighter]

Considering how many years this sort of incident has been happening, do they not design easy inspection and repair abilities into these aircraft now?

 

[Airplane]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

 

[Moose]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

Think they'll market it as "F-57" or some other clever play on 22 and 35?

 

[bobbymike]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

Think they'll market it as "F-57" or some other clever play on 22 and 35?

Called PCA-J ?

 

[NeilChapman]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)

 

[Airplane]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)

The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.

An air superiority fighter compared to what? Compared to F-15s and F-16s and SU-27s and J-10s, the F-35 is already the better platform. No mods needed. Just need to buy enough to overcome having only 4 AAMs.

What are you going to do to an F-35 airframe to make it an air superiority fighter? Bigger wings for a lower wing loading? That could affect roll rate. Add weight and drag. Make it longer? Then you've got a heavier aircraft with just one engine and again more drag.

It's engine is already the most powerful fighter engine in the world and it's kinematic performance could be marginally improved with another 3-5k lbs of thrust. (the 35C really could really use more thrust).

What Lockheed is talking about is an improved F-22 airframe (more durable stealth) with F-35 sensors.

That's why this is in the F-22 thread and not the F-35 thread. This is obviously an improved F-22... Which by the way if the Japanese still wanted to buy it, considering the F-35 is more advanced in many ways, there is no more need for this 20 year old export ban on the -22. That export ban was absolutly stupid. We're selling the F-35 to every country that wants it. Israel for example isn't exactly a nation that I trust with our highest tech fighter.... the F-16 found its want into the Lavi and that found its way into China. Hmmm...

 

[sferrin]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)

The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.

The F-16 is used as an air superiority aircraft all over the place and it only carries six. Six is the standard load for the Rafale, Gripen, and J-10 as well. Hell, J-10s is 4. Haven't heard of those being crippled.

 

[bob225]

I'm not sure how long the F22 will take to repair but this one was in the hanger for years!
B)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDwEtzzLIGI

 

[NeilChapman]

...

What Lockheed is talking about is an improved F-22 airframe (more durable stealth) with F-35 sensors.

...

Yes...I know.

The premise was LM is not looking to provide a few fighters to Japan. It's that LM wants Japan to pay for LM's work on PCA which, by definition, is an air superiority platform.

 

[Airplane]

This might need it's own thread. . . .

Exclusive: Lockheed Martin to propose stealthy hybrid of F-22 and F-35 for Japan
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-defence-lockheed-exclusive/exclusive-lockheed-martin-to-propose-stealthy-hybrid-of-f-22-and-f-35-for-japan-sources-idUSKBN1HR0MM

LM Exec #1

PCA is going to be win of the 2020's. We have to make this happen. What can we do to better our chances of winning this deal?

LME #2

Hmmm. Let me talk this through out loud. If there's already a 80+% solution available... it's likely... that Congress will require it to be used to save on the development cost of a new jet. At the very least, the developer of such a jet will be favored in the selection process, right?

LME#1

So. Where are you going with this?

LME#2

What if we were to develop a new jet, say an air superiority version of the F-35 with a greater depth of magazine and longer range AND - here's the kicker - get someone else to pay for it?

LME#1

What? Who's going to do that?

LME #2

The Japanese!

LME #1 and #2

(Exclamations of realization and slapping each other on the back they exit stage right)

The problem with your hypothetical argument is that the F-35 cannot be made into an air superiority version with deeper magazines.... As good as it is at being a multirole fighter, its physically stuck with AT THE MOST 6 AAMs if Lockheed and the DoD ever make that happen.

The F-16 is used as an air superiority aircraft all over the place and it only carries six. Six is the standard load for the Rafale, Gripen, and J-10 as well. Hell, J-10s is 4. Haven't heard of those being crippled.

If you want to have that discussion, then let's start a new thread. 4 AAMs is mighty pathetic for an air superiority fighter. Yes, yes, I know, I know in the last 50+ years how many times has a fighter ever fired more than 4? Everyone here should be aware of how many times missiles have been launched in combat and the missile turns into a dud and goes dumb or a rocket motor fails or fails to ignite.

With kill probability and probability of something malfunctioning, 4 is weak. And ONLY being able to carry AMRAAM internally is also weak. Being forced to carry 9Xs externally and blowing up the planes RCS and affecting its clean aerodynamics is not good at all. I know the 9X on the pylon doesn't affect drag too much, but the penalty is still there nonetheless.

Let's say Japan can afford to buy 120 airframes. Do they 120 airframes that can carry 4 AAMs or do they want an airframe that can carry 8? Come on, it's simple stuff here. 8 is better than 4 no matter how you want to argue it.

I don't why people want to turn this thread into a "The F-35 is better than an X-Wing" thread.

Also the J-10 if it carries only 4 AAMs (and I'm not bothering to research that) isn't our airplane I couldn't care less. If someone wants to start a thread on that, please go ahead.

4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.

Also if the F-35 is the end all and be all fighter, why is Lockheed pitching an aircraft that's the best of both? That's not what they are doing, and the USAF knows it isn't good enough which is why we're getting NGAD/PCA. And the Japanese know it which is why they want something better than the -35 and they were trying to develop their own indigenous fighter.

It's a fine multirole fighter. It'll club all the 4th gen and 4.5 gen stuff like baby seals. But it isn't a plane you want to rest your laurels on for air superiority for the next 30 years. You'll need something with more LO, and more missiles, and faster cruise. That's why Lockheed is pitching what they are pitching to Japan. Of course it will never happen, but its fun to speculate.

 

[Triton]

"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....

 

[bring_it_on]

4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.

Let’s Do More Shots


The F-35 program office is looking at adding capacity for another AIM-120 AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missile in each of the jet’s two weapons bays, increasing internal—and thus stealthy—missile loadout by 50 percent, program director Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said March 22. Speaking with reporters after his speech at a McAleese/Credit Suisse conference in Washington, D.C., Bogdan said, “There is potential … to add a third missile on each side.” The upgrade would likely be part of the Block IV program of F-35 enhancements, but “that’s something I know the services and all the partners” are interested in. Bogdan said this would not require some special version of AMRAAM, but “the same AMRAAM missiles that we carry today, just an extra one; probably on the weapons bay door.” The F-35 can carry two AMRAAMs in each bay now, or a mix of AMRAAMs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally. “There’s a lot of engineering work to go with that,” Bogdan cautioned, and he did not speculate on when such a change could be made.

As for PCA, of course it is being developed because the F-35 would not have been able to meet that mission in the 2030-2080 time-frame for which the PCA is likely going to be designed. As far as Japan is concerned, perhaps 100% of their requirement is not met by a single type? much like pretty much every air-force barring a handful? A modified F-35 could fit the bill, especially if it comes faster and cheaper than a completely new and clean sheet design.

 

[Airplane]

"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....

The entire article is a load of crap and lies about why the F-22 was cancelled.

 

[Airplane]

4 AAMs = weak stuff today. Maybe not 22 years ago, but today and tomorrow, it's weak with procuring ever and ever declining numbers of airframes.

Let’s Do More Shots


The F-35 program office is looking at adding capacity for another AIM-120 AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missile in each of the jet’s two weapons bays, increasing internal—and thus stealthy—missile loadout by 50 percent, program director Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said March 22. Speaking with reporters after his speech at a McAleese/Credit Suisse conference in Washington, D.C., Bogdan said, “There is potential … to add a third missile on each side.” The upgrade would likely be part of the Block IV program of F-35 enhancements, but “that’s something I know the services and all the partners” are interested in. Bogdan said this would not require some special version of AMRAAM, but “the same AMRAAM missiles that we carry today, just an extra one; probably on the weapons bay door.” The F-35 can carry two AMRAAMs in each bay now, or a mix of AMRAAMs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions internally. “There’s a lot of engineering work to go with that,” Bogdan cautioned, and he did not speculate on when such a change could be made.

As for PCA, of course it is being developed because the F-35 would not have been able to meet that mission in the 2030-2080 time-frame for which the PCA is likely going to be designed. As far as Japan is concerned, perhaps 100% of their requirement is not met by a single type? much like pretty much every air-force barring a handful? A modified F-35 could fit the bill, especially if it comes faster and cheaper than a completely new and clean sheet design.

Modified how? How do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of the F-35A and the best of the F-22?

Whatever you do to the F-35 is a weight adder. Make it bigger/longer for more fuel - That's a weight penalty. Give it a bigger wing? That's a weight penalty. And you're certainly not going to fit 4 AAMs per weapons bay to give it the same capacity of a F-22. The weapons bays already have a heat problem and putting more stuff in them will only make it worse... Everyone ignores the heat issues with those bays.

I don't foresee a 50,000lb thrust engine anytime soon to give it supercruise and higher altitude operations of a F-22.

So how do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of both AC? One engine can only lug so much weight around.

It's easy to answer how one would modify an F-22 to give it the best of both: add the passive sensor suite to the F-22 airframe, and done. The Japanese military is a defensive one... They don't have the same requirement to drop 2 2000lb jdams on hardened targets. And if they did they are F-35 operators and already have that capability.

 

[sferrin]

"Retired General Says F-22 Production Was Killed So That A New Bomber Could Live"
by Tyler Rogoway

April 28, 2018

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-says-f-22-production-was-killed-so-that-a-new-bomber-could-live

Retired Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz has stated in his new memoir that F-22 production was idiotically axed after building less than half the required number so that the flying force could get then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to approve building a new stealth bomber.

Air Force Magazine was first to report on the revelations from the General's new book “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” which also includes much more detail about how exactly the fight for the F-22 was lost, as well as how the battle to re-launch a Next Generation Bomber program was eventually won....

The entire article is a load of crap and lies about why the F-22 was cancelled.

Well it is Tyler Rogoway. Would you expect anything more?

 

[bobbymike]

http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2018/April%202018/Schwartz-in-Memoir-Says-F-22-was-Traded-for-B-21-Bomber.aspx

The top Air Force leadership went along with former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ termination of the F-22 fighter—after producing less than half the required number—because they believed they couldn’t win the argument and that getting approval to build a new bomber was more important.

In “Journey: Memoirs of an Air Force Chief of Staff,” now in bookstores, retired Gen. Norton Schwartz said his predecessor, retired Gen. Mike Moseley, “never gave up in his principled attempts to get those 381 F-22s,” for which Gates fired Moseley and the then-Secretary of the Air Force, Mike Wynne. Schwartz was named to replace Moseley, and Mike Donley was brought in as Wynne’s replacement.

Trading a much needed capability today for something 'maybe' 20 years from then seems shortsighted but I wasn't there so...............

 

[bring_it_on]

So how do you modify a F-35 to give it the best of both AC? One engine can only lug so much weight around.

Can you point me to where I said that a modified F-35 will somehow magically acquire the best features of the F-35 and F-22?

What I did say ,however, was that a modified F-35 could be looked at as an affordable and less risky alternative to an F-22 production/re-design or a clean sheet design as far as Japan is concerned. At the end of the day the trade space involves a combination of schedule, cost, risk, and technology development so no two solutions will be the same. There are things you can do to make the F-35 better such as expanded A2A missile carriage (from 4 to 6), introducing new weapons, perhaps a new adaptive engine, and improved sensors. From a cost perspective that will likely be cheaper to do than to develop a highly upgraded F-22, and then manufacturer it. Overall the difference could be significant when one looks at how many aircraft they can field within a finite budget.

 

[Triton]

"F-22A Production Restart Assessment: Report to Congressional Committees" United States Air Force February 2017

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4452474-F-22A-Production-Restart-Assessment.html

 

[Sundog]

What I did say ,however, was that a modified F-35 could be looked at as an affordable and less risky alternative to an F-22 production/re-design or a clean sheet design as far as Japan is concerned. At the end of the day the trade space involves a combination of schedule, cost, risk, and technology development so no two solutions will be the same. There are things you can do to make the F-35 better such as expanded A2A missile carriage (from 4 to 6), introducing new weapons, perhaps a new adaptive engine, and improved sensors. From a cost perspective that will likely be cheaper to do than to develop a highly upgraded F-22, and then manufacturer it. Overall the difference could be significant when one looks at how many aircraft they can field within a finite budget.

Yes, based on Japan's own studies for the F-3, where they found the ability to loiter more important than supersonic persistence, I was thinking a land based version of the F-35C may be ideal for them. Install the adaptive engine, modify the weapons bays for primarily A2A weaponry, and replace the naval landing gear and tail hook with those from the A model, and remove the wing folds.

 

[Airplane]

What I did say ,however, was that a modified F-35 could be looked at as an affordable and less risky alternative to an F-22 production/re-design or a clean sheet design as far as Japan is concerned. At the end of the day the trade space involves a combination of schedule, cost, risk, and technology development so no two solutions will be the same. There are things you can do to make the F-35 better such as expanded A2A missile carriage (from 4 to 6), introducing new weapons, perhaps a new adaptive engine, and improved sensors. From a cost perspective that will likely be cheaper to do than to develop a highly upgraded F-22, and then manufacturer it. Overall the difference could be significant when one looks at how many aircraft they can field within a finite budget.

Yes, based on Japan's own studies for the F-3, where they found the ability to loiter more important than supersonic persistence, I was thinking a land based version of the F-35C may be ideal for them. Install the adaptive engine, modify the weapons bays for primarily A2A weaponry, and replace the naval landing gear and tail hook with those from the A model, and remove the wing folds.

The 35 is not suitable for the air superiority role which is why the Japanese were pursuing an indigenous 22 clone. Furthermore, supercruise and loiter time are not polar opposites, one or the other. Both require more fuel than 4th gen and teen series aircraft.

There is a reason why some people in the usaf still want to restart 22 production and it isn't for its airshow maneuvers.

The 35C is an even bigger slushdog than the A and B. It will remain so until a yet to be built 50k lb thrust engine is fitted to it. Keep in mind you're talking about and aircraft that weighs on par with a beagle and has less thrust. I don't know this, but I suspect in ACM that stubby pilots have to light burners often.

The weapons bays have serious heat issues and altitude and speed restrictions.... An aardvark could outrun it in the weeds when stubby is carrying mud movers internally. So yeah, great idea: lets put more rocket fuel and warheads in those shake and bake ovens. Stubby pilots DO train for down in the weeds strike missions. That should say something about stubby because raptor pilots DO NOT need to train for that mission profile on strike ops.

The 35, in any form, is wholly unsuitable for air superiority going forward 10 and 20 years out. That's why there is a PCA or NGAD or whatever its called and why Lockheed isn't ramping up 35 production on orders from the DoD to replace ever fighter in inventory.

 

[Sundog]

The 35 is not suitable for the air superiority role which is why the Japanese were pursuing an indigenous 22 clone. Furthermore, supercruise and loiter time are not polar opposites, one or the other. Both require more fuel than 4th gen and teen series aircraft.

There is a reason why some people in the usaf still want to restart 22 production and it isn't for its airshow maneuvers.

The 35C is an even bigger slushdog than the A and B. It will remain so until a yet to be built 50k lb thrust engine is fitted to it. Keep in mind you're talking about and aircraft that weighs on par with a beagle and has less thrust. I don't know this, but I suspect in ACM that stubby pilots have to light burners often.

The weapons bays have serious heat issues and altitude and speed restrictions.... An aardvark could outrun it in the weeds when stubby is carrying mud movers internally. So yeah, great idea: lets put more rocket fuel and warheads in those shake and bake ovens. Stubby pilots DO train for down in the weeds strike missions. That should say something about stubby because raptor pilots DO NOT need to train for that mission profile on strike ops.

The 35, in any form, is wholly unsuitable for air superiority going forward 10 and 20 years out. That's why there is a PCA or NGAD or whatever its called and why Lockheed isn't ramping up 35 production on orders from the DoD to replace ever fighter in inventory.

The Japanese originally wanted the F-22, they don't now. As an Aeronautical Engineer, I'm quite familiar with the differences between supercruise, which the Japanese don't want, and loiter, which they do want. You shouldn't confuse the mission the USAF flies versus the mission the JASDF needs fulfilled. The mission profile defines the aircraft, not the other way around. It doesn't matter how sh!t hot the F-22 is, if it doesn't meet the JASDF mission requirements. The USAF wants a fast reacting aircraft that can dominate the skies over enemy territory. The JASDF wants a stealthy missileer that can loiter along a defensive line and pick off targets as they show up with very long range AAMs.

Since the JASDF doesn't have a need for supercruise, the wing and the powerplants in the F-22 are the completely wrong design for what they are seeking. I was trying to offer them the lower cost solution for their requirements, but LM could offer an F-22 with higher aspect ratio wings and powerplants optimized more for loiter. However, I think that would cost substantially more than a modified F-35C.

 

[marauder2048]

The Japanese are paying a premium for every Japanese-assembled F-35 none of which have any meaningful
Japanese content; under the JSF partnering scheme, the probability of Japanese manufacturers winning any substantial
workshare on a "best-value" basis is remote.

That would extend to any F-35 derivative. But a F-22 derivative (even with some F-35 subsystems) would be an entirely different matter.

 

[marauder2048]

[he JASDF wants a stealthy missileer that can loiter along a defensive line and pick off targets as they show up with very long range AAMs.

Since the JASDF doesn't have a need for supercruise, the wing and the powerplants in the F-22 are the completely wrong design for what they are seeking.

That doesn't seem to be what's being described here:

The Defense Ministry has compiled a design concept of new fighter jets that will replace the Air Self-Defense Forces’ F-2 fighter jets, planning for
the succeeding jets to be able to carry and launch drones to detect distant enemy planes and also to share radar information with the drones,
The Yomiuri Shimbun has learned.

The new planes will be large stealth fighters, exceeding the capability of the cutting-edge F-35A fighter jets introduced by the ASDF.
The Defense Ministry will examine how to develop the new jets, such as joint development with the United States, in a bid to deal with China’s
modernizing air force.

In March, the ministry notified the governments of the United States and Britain of part of the design concept of the F-2 successor, such as its
performance requirements. Other than carrying small drones, the ministry considers that the new jets will have the capacity to internally carry
eight air-to-air missiles, doubling the load of the F-35A. Its maximum speed will be Mach 2, almost equal to that of the F-2, and key features
will be designed to be similar or superior to the F-35A, such as its radars’ detection range, stealth technology and cruising distance. Regarding
carrying air-to-ship missiles, the ministry assumes they will be carried externally depending on their missions.

As Japan’s neighboring countries have been enhancing their level of stealth technology, which guards against radar detection, the ministry has
recognized the need to handle the situation by having the new jets carry drones.

China announced deployment of its domestically developed cutting-edge Chengdu J-20 stealth fighters in February. High stealth technology
used by other countries’ aircraft means an overwhelming disadvantage in combat for Japanese aircraft as it will become difficult to detect other
planes until they approach very close to the Japanese planes. For this reason, the ministry came up with the idea of carrying drones to detect
enemy planes from a long distance. The ministry plans to develop the drones along with the new fighter jets.

Doubling the number of air-to-air missiles the plane can carry compared to the F-35A is also a part of the idea to counter China’s moves.

F-35A jets are state-of-the-art aircraft, jointly developed by nine countries, including the United States and Britain. Their deployment to
Misawa Air Base in Aomori Prefecture started in January. While the F-35A is highly capable, it is said to be able to internally carry only
four air-to-air missile because it is somewhat smaller than other jets.

The F-2 fighter jet was jointly developed by Japan and the United States based on U.S. F-16 jets, and they have been manufactured by
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. The jets have high offensive capability against ships to suit Japan’s security environment as a nation surrounded by the sea.
The ASDF introduced F-2 jets in 2000 and the fighters are expected to retire from around 2030. The ASDF currently deploys about 90 F-2 jets.

In total, Japan has about 300 fighters, excluding the aging F-4 jets, while China has about 800 jets with similar capabilities.

To avoid being overwhelmed by the number of Chinese fighter jets, the ministry decided to fill the gap by strengthening the fighting
capability of each fighter jet, such as making the F-2 successor larger and increasing its missile load.

The ministry has examined three options regarding the method of developing an F-2 successor — domestic development, joint development with
other countries, or improving existing foreign-made fighter jets.

The government is likely to abandon the idea of domestic development due to the estimated cost of ¥1 trillion to ¥2 trillion.

Lockheed Martin Corp. of the United States has unofficially approached the ministry about joint development of the F-2 successor based
on the high-performance F-22 and F-35 stealth fighter jets.

The government plans to compile the next Medium Term Defense Program that covers fiscal 2019 to 2023 at the end of this year,
and is likely to decide how to develop the new fighter jets during these years under the new program

 

[Triton]

Working primarily with RAND's conclusions from 2011, the Air Force crafted the following cost estimates and assumptions for what it would take to restart F-22 production and produce 194 additional Raptors:

• Total non-recurring start-up costs over a five year period totaling $9.869 billion in 2016 dollars, equal to more than $10 billion in 2018 dollars at the time of writing.
  
• This included approximately $228 million to refurbish production tooling, $1.218 billion to re-qualify sources of components and raw materials, $5.768 billion to redesign four subsystems, and $1.156 billion in other associated “restart costs,” along with $1.498 billion in “additional government costs.”
  
• Two of the four subsystems needing "redesign" would be the AN/APG-77 low probability intercept (LPI) radar and the F119 engine, neither of which are still in production.
  
• The other two were the aircraft’s software package and an unspecified fourth system, acting as a placeholder to hedge against the Air Force discovering that other systems needed replacement during the restart process.
  
• The aircraft’s electronic warfare, communication, navigation, and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) systems were among those that might also need replacement or substitution with another system.
  
• While the 2011 RAND study estimated an average unit cost of $266 million, this was based on a total purchase of just 75 aircraft.
  
• The Air Force estimated that the initial unit cost for an order of 194 aircraft would be approximately $216 million. This would drop to around $206 million by the time the last one rolled off the production line.
  
• The unit price would begin to largely level out after the service had purchased the first 100 aircraft.
  
• The total procurement cost would be between $40 and $42 billion, with the entire program costing a little more than $50.3 billion.

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20633/exclusive-heres-the-f-22-production-restart-study-the-usaf-has-kept-secret-for-over-a-year

 

[bring_it_on]

^ We would be down $10-15 Billion even before we see a single F-22A (accounting for overruns). This comes to about 100-150 F-35As ( 4-6 squadrons). Also, note that NGAD funding over the FYDP minus that for the AETP is roughly $10 Billion which would have likely taken a hit if the USAF committed to the F-22 re-start. All in, from a USAFs perspective it probably makes more sense to pump that $10-15 Billion into the NGAD/PCA over the next 5-10 years and get a NG Adaptive Engine, and de-risk/mature other technologies in order to hopefully cut down on the TMRR--EMD time for the PCA. Till then, the F-35A buy along with the legacy upgrade program can keep or grow the squadron strength. The existing F-22 fleet too needs quite a bit of hardware upgrade over the next half a decade to a decade so that will eat up some of the funds as well.

Japan probably has to now decide whether it wants to spend $55 Billion to buy a fleet of modernized F-22As or go all in on a clean sheet. Interesting choice but and I'm sure they will look at other alternatives very closely. This is serious money even if spread over 10-15 years given their budget and lack of economic growth.

TOKYO -- U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin has approached Japan with plans for a next-generation fighter jet based on its elite F-22 stealth fighter, demonstrating both Washington's trust in Tokyo as a defense partner and its eagerness to balance the scales on trade with expensive equipment.

The advanced aircraft would enter service around 2030, when Japan is set to start retiring its fleet of F-2 fighters. It would combine elements of the F-22 and Lockheed's smart F-35 stealth fighter. Developing a new fighter typically takes more than 10 years.

The Japanese government has pegged the total cost of its next-generation fighter project at around 6 trillion yen ($55 billion). This includes 1.5 trillion yen for development and another 1.5 trillion yen for acquiring around 100 of the jets, in addition to costs such as maintenance and decommissioning.

Tokyo will decide as early as this year whether to accept Lockheed's offer so that the government can draw up a medium-term defense plan that would begin in fiscal 2019.

The inclusion of F-22 technology in the new jet is of particular significance to Japan. When Tokyo sought to purchase a fleet of F-22s a decade ago, U.S. lawmakers barred the Japanese government from doing so due to concerns about sending information on sensitive military technology abroad. The fighters are no longer in production.


https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-Relations/F-22-technology-offered-to-Japan-for-next-generation-fighter

 

[sferrin]

Working primarily with RAND's conclusions from 2011, the Air Force crafted the following cost estimates and assumptions for what it would take to restart F-22 production and produce 194 additional Raptors:

• Total non-recurring start-up costs over a five year period totaling $9.869 billion in 2016 dollars, equal to more than $10 billion in 2018 dollars at the time of writing.
  
• This included approximately $228 million to refurbish production tooling, $1.218 billion to re-qualify sources of components and raw materials, $5.768 billion to redesign four subsystems, and $1.156 billion in other associated “restart costs,” along with $1.498 billion in “additional government costs.”
  
• Two of the four subsystems needing "redesign" would be the AN/APG-77 low probability intercept (LPI) radar and the F119 engine, neither of which are still in production.
  
• The other two were the aircraft’s software package and an unspecified fourth system, acting as a placeholder to hedge against the Air Force discovering that other systems needed replacement during the restart process.
  
• The aircraft’s electronic warfare, communication, navigation, and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) systems were among those that might also need replacement or substitution with another system.
  
• While the 2011 RAND study estimated an average unit cost of $266 million, this was based on a total purchase of just 75 aircraft.
  
• The Air Force estimated that the initial unit cost for an order of 194 aircraft would be approximately $216 million. This would drop to around $206 million by the time the last one rolled off the production line.
  
• The unit price would begin to largely level out after the service had purchased the first 100 aircraft.
  
• The total procurement cost would be between $40 and $42 billion, with the entire program costing a little more than $50.3 billion.

Source:
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20633/exclusive-heres-the-f-22-production-restart-study-the-usaf-has-kept-secret-for-over-a-year

I refuse to click on Rogeway click-bait. And there's nothing "secret" about the study. Everybody's known they were doing it and what the rather predictable result would be (too expensive). This was published months ago. Apparently it took the author that long to figure it out.

 

[totoro]

I have a question concerning F-22's empty weight. It is often cited by various parties to be 19.7 tons.

But looking into the past, weight was much less. There is YF-22, weighing just under 15 tons. And while It was a demonstrator, it was still probably wise to keep it close to final configuration weight. Demonstrating something for one weight and then making another plane that weighs 33% more just doesn't seem wise. X-35 demonstator weighed 12 tons, and final F-35A weighs 13.15 tons. An increase, but not that much of an increase.

And then there is this article: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-22-weight-increase-agreed-26820/
which states F-22 (not YF-22) weighed 13,980 kg in 1992 at preliminary design review, and its weight increased to 14,365 kg in 1995, at critical design review. Usually, after a critical design review there is very little changes to the design...

While some may say that the weight did not include various radar absorbent materials, I find that implausible, as not only are they supposed to be part of the plane's structure, but also if RAM is such a huge factor in plane's weight, it would have been part of the calculation to begin with, as such huge differences cause major changes in performance.


So questions are:

How and why did F-22 get from 14,365 kg to 19,700 kg?

And when did that change happen?