Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

That was what I was thinking too Scorpion82, about the four fuel tank configuration only for ferry flights.
 
paralay said:
At normal weight, the following tanks remain filled:
Two wings A-2R|L – 1140.6 kg x 2,
Sizes: A-3R/L - 234.9 kg / 2 and F-2 - 2160.2 kg

Total: 2281.2 + 469,8 + 2160,2 = 4911.2 kg (52.4%)
Click to expand...
VTOLicious said:
Here is my summary, based on the F-22A sheet posted previously. In addition, the capacities of F-35A/C for comparison...
Click to expand...
Something to note is that the production F-22 has certain fuel tanks deactivated to save costs during EMD, with the aircraft having provisions for fin and saddle tanks (the saddle tanks may be A-3L and A-3R). The 20,649 lbs (9,366 kg) internal fuel figure likely includes these deactivated tanks, as well as some quantity of unusable fuel in the system. Currently, usable fuel is around 18,000 lbs (8,165 kg).
 
Wait, so this thing can pull 9 gs with full fuel load and weapons? That’s crazy; it certainly doesn’t look light weight when it maneuvers, but still impressive!
 
helmutkohl said:
So I'm driving on my base and happened to see an F-22 parked, so I took a picture for y'all.
I checked it with security and they seemed to be fine with the photo.

View attachment 752924
Click to expand...

I've been closer at an airshow and taken more-detailed photos.

Hill AFB Utah 28 June 2014:

IMG_2963.JPG

IMG_2954.JPG

IMG_2980.JPG

IMG_2981.JPG

IMG_2965.JPG

IMG_2964.JPG

IMG_2952.JPG


At the 26 June 2016 airshow they covered the nozzle area better:

DSCN3011.JPG
 
zebra159357 said:
It's funny how TheDrive is able to write up an entire article that's based on a single sentence made by Frank Kendall :). Peak journalism..
Click to expand...
In fairness journalists don't have any classified clearance, so they mostly write articles based on the same facts that are available to Joe Public plus a bit of educated speculation.
 
Forest Green said:
In fairness journalists don't have any classified clearance, so they mostly write articles based on the same facts that are available to Joe Public plus a bit of educated speculation.
Click to expand...

Journalists are paid to research and uncover information. Getting access to information is part of their job.

Or at least it used to be.
 
quellish said:
Getting access to information is part of their job.
Click to expand...

In military issues that can be a bit problematic as a lot of the interesting information comes with some sort of security classification so it has varying levels difficulty in being accessed.
 
NMaude said:
In military issues that can be a bit problematic as a lot of the interesting information comes with some sort of security classification so it has varying levels difficulty in being accessed.
Click to expand...

This forum is full of interesting information from unclassified sources.

In my own experience I rarely run into actual classification issues and I have no real difficulty accessing public information. To keep things on topic, regarding the F-22 upgrades such as the Low Drag Tank and Pylon and the new IRST pod, I have been able to find extensive, detailed public information on both. For example, the IRST pod absolutely receives fuel for cooling. This came from open, public records accessible to anyone. There is plenty of interesting information out there for anyone to access - if they take the "difficulty" to actually look.
 
_Del_ said:
Wouldn't it be easier to wait for you to do the dirty work and just read it on twz later?
Click to expand...

It will only appear there if I post it where they can steal it.
So, not posting as much as I used to. Nobody wins!

But if we wait long enough their investors will shut them down like almost every other website or magazine they've bought. Everybody wins!
 
quellish said:
It will only appear there if I post it where they can steal it.
So, not posting as much as I used to. Nobody wins!

But if we wait long enough their investors will shut them down like almost every other website or magazine they've bought. Everybody wins!
Click to expand...
Secret Projects Forum playing the long game, 19 years and counting :)
 
paralay said:
What is the reason for this and is there a source of information?
Click to expand...
During EMD in the 1990s, the F-22 fuel quantity was reduced with certain fuel tanks deactivated to lower development costs. Jay Miller's book on the F-22 alludes to this when describing the production aircraft's fuel system on page 111, stating that provisions for fin and saddle tanks exists. Current usable fuel quantity is about 18,000 lbs. I believe the technical director for the ATF, Rick Abell, mentioned this as well.

quellish said:
This forum is full of interesting information from unclassified sources.

In my own experience I rarely run into actual classification issues and I have no real difficulty accessing public information.
Click to expand...
Something something something *classification by compilation*
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
During EMD in the 1990s, the F-22 fuel quantity was reduced with certain fuel tanks deactivated to lower development costs. Jay Miller's book on the F-22 alludes to this when describing the production aircraft's fuel system on page 111, stating that provisions for fin and saddle tanks exists. Current usable fuel quantity is about 18,000 lbs. I believe the technical director for the ATF, Rick Abell, mentioned this as well.


Something something something *classification by compilation*
Click to expand...

Nevertheless wonder why that TO is mentioning a higher fuel load of 20650 lb? Do you include such information in a TO? Arguably the 4 tanks are in there as well.
 
Scorpion82 said:
Nevertheless wonder why that TO is mentioning a higher fuel load of 20650 lb? Do you include such information in a TO? Arguably the 4 tanks are in there as well.
Click to expand...

All aircraft have a certain quantity of unusable fuel as well, and the F-22 might have a bit more of it since it does use fuel as a heat sink. I'm not sure if the T.O. includes the deactivated fuel tanks from EMD, although that is possible since the listed quantity is quite a bit higher than the usable fuel quantity. As you mentioned, the T.O. also includes four external fuel tanks that aren't used operationally. Also keep in mind that T.O. gets continually updated, and we don't have the most recent version of it.
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
Also keep in mind that T.O. gets continually updated, and we don't have the most recent version of it.
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that. For a long time that TO was in the public domain (for obvious reasons). After a negative news story was published about it years ago the Air Force removed it from public availability.

I requested a copy through FOIA. The Air Force response was shockingly inconsistent with statue. I appealed. They stopped processing the appeal, again in a manned inconsistent with statute. This matter is now in the hands of other branches of government.

I do have it on good authority - because the same TO is available from DoD components that are not the Air Force - that the F-22 section has not been updated since 2006, which should be the version you are looking at. I suspect it is using the older pre-operational fuel values.
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
That drawing is not accurate, the F119 is smaller than the F135 but not by that much, and per publicly available USAF technical orders, the F119 is 196 inches (4,978 mm) in length with the rectangular nozzle flaps fully open, so the scaling is quite a bit off.
Click to expand...

I scaled this drawing (from @paralay ?) to an inlet diameter of 914 mm (36")... The result is 5188 mm overall length. This seems to be consistent with the given length when the nozzle flaps are fully open (4978 mm). Feedback welcome!
P&W_F119_dimensions_001.png
 
Last edited:
VTOLicious said:
I scaled this drawing (from @paralay ?) to an inlet diameter of 914 mm (36")... The result is 5188 mm overall length. This seems to be consistent with the given length when the nozzle flaps are fully open (4978 mm). Feedback welcome!
View attachment 753432
Click to expand...
The drawing appears to be somewhat distorted in terms of proportions. Try measuring from this image.

BC7148F8-2311-4892-BAB7-A3ED0E1ADC52.jpeg

If you want to measure from the original photo (too large to upload here), see this link.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/comments/4kkd04/pratt_whitney_f119_after_burning_turbo_fan_os
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/comments/4kkd04/pratt_whitney_f119_after_burning_turbo_fan_os/
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
During EMD in the 1990s, the F-22 fuel quantity was reduced with certain fuel tanks deactivated to lower development costs. Jay Miller's book on the F-22 alludes to this when describing the production aircraft's fuel system on page 111, stating that provisions for fin and saddle tanks exists. Current usable fuel quantity is about 18,000 lbs. I believe the technical director for the ATF, Rick Abell, mentioned this as well.


Something something something *classification by compilation*
Click to expand...
I've speculated before that perhaps an improved "F-22C" could have followed the F-22A into production and increased the fuel capacity by reintroducing those deleted fuel tanks into the design. Very similar to how the F-15C/D gave about another 2,000lb of internal fuel over the original F-15A/B.

Ah, what could have been.
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
The drawing appears to be somewhat distorted in terms of proportions. Try measuring from this image.

View attachment 753434

If you want to measure from the original photo (too large to upload here), see this link.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/comments/4kkd04/pratt_whitney_f119_after_burning_turbo_fan_os
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/MachinePorn/comments/4kkd04/pratt_whitney_f119_after_burning_turbo_fan_os/
Click to expand...
F119 engine serial number E730175 at Nellis AFB. (you can see E175 written in Sharpie on the middle support ring near the centerline, standard F119 shop procedure for quick engine SN identification).

The F135 is significantly larger than the F119 in both diameter, length, and weight. The difference is quite evident if you put them side by side. The spare F119 engine shown in the photo is sitting on a standard USAF 3000E Trailer with 48" wide rail spacing. The F135 has a unique transportation trailer of similar design, but with 60" wide rail spacing and a wider track to keep the system from becoming too top heavy during movement and shipment.

Edit: Small correction - the F119 shown in the photo is not on the 3000E transportation trail, but is mounted on the F-22 engine installation trailer for the display, supporting the engine from underneath vs. by the engine mounts using the Engine Shipping System on the 3000E trailer. But the installation trailer also has the 48” rail spacing.
 
Last edited:
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
It's a decent approximation, although it's visually apparent that the drawing has been horizontally "stretched" a bit, so your diameter should be larger.
Click to expand...
I disagree, I think it is quite accurate... Of course it may be off a lil bit, but it is rather the photo which is distorted.
P&W_F119_dimensions_003.png
 
Scorpion82 said:
Fuel for cooling an IRST sensor?
Click to expand...
Sure. In subsonic flight, your wing tanks tend to cold soak to -40 (or whatever the temperatures aloft are). Pumping that will increase the heat again, but it still gives you a good 75+deg of temperature delta between fuel and IRST electronics to play with.
 
icyplanetnhc (Steve) said:
You may be able to get more accurate dimensions and measurements with this T.O.

Click to expand...

The drawings in this T.O. are also a little bit distorted. However, I have taken the front view shown on page 6-35 and scaled it to the 71" given.

P&W_F119_dimensions_004e.png

The inner-circle shown in the front view (marked red) measures 38.5" and corresponds approximately to the outside diameter of the inlet shown in the side view.
The outer-circle shown in the front view measures 41" and is the maximum diameter. I think this includes the ring of the inlet guide vane assembly or any other circular part of the housing (maybe not shown in the side view).

However, given the comparison with the photo previously provided and this front view, I think the scale of the side view is correct, or at least not far off. Consequently I still believe the actual inlet diameter is about 36".

Note: There is no circle with a diameter of 36" in the original front view of the T.O. It looks like this:

P&W_F119_dimensions_004.png
 
NMaude said:
In military issues that can be a bit problematic as a lot of the interesting information comes with some sort of security classification so it has varying levels difficulty in being accessed.
Click to expand...
I used to be neighbors with a senior military editor at Aviation Week, and he and I would have sidewalk conversations about this or that. He told me once that it wasn't so much about classification levels as it was about figuring out how to phrase a question based in informed speculation so that a source could answer it without explicitly violating restrictions.
 
Jeb said:
I used to be neighbors with a senior military editor at Aviation Week, and he and I would have sidewalk conversations about this or that. He told me once that it wasn't so much about classification levels as it was about figuring out how to phrase a question based in informed speculation so that a source could answer it without explicitly violating restrictions.
Click to expand...
I am reminded of an anecdote that The Chieftain said about his time in the sandbox.

This was at some general "wishlist" session where troops can ask for things to make their jobs easier.

One of the spooky types came to him and said, "you need to ask for thus-and-so capability" to be able to do something that Chieftain needed to do but didn't know a program to do that existed.

Chieftain: "We can do that?!?"
Spooky type: *smug grin*

IIRC he got read in to be able to use the results of the program.

This came up in reference to some troops in WW2 wishing they had a way to see through smoke.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom