Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

[Grey Havoc]

Inside an F-22 – The Unwanted Blog

 

[sferrin]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

 

[FighterJock]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

I think that the best option for the F-22 is to upgrade the whole lot of them even down to the very early production models, as far as the NGAD is concerned it is still some way off and is not even built and test flown yet. So the F-22 will be around for a few more years yet.

 

[Josh_TN]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

I think retiring the Block 20s makes sense if making that batch of parts available significantly increases the readiness of the rest of the fleet. My understanding is that F-22 available is some of the worst in the USAF and that finding parts for it's legacy systems is a primary reason for this.

EDIT: additionally I question the absolute number of F-22s that could be surged into the WestPac at one time regardless of number of available airframes, and as far as I'm concerned this is the only peer threat/theater the F-22 force should be focused on.

 

[sferrin]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

I think retiring the Block 20s makes sense if making that batch of parts available significantly increases the readiness of the rest of the fleet. My understanding is that F-22 available is some of the worst in the USAF and that finding parts for it's legacy systems is a primary reason for this.

EDIT: additionally I question the absolute number of F-22s that could be surged into the WestPac at one time regardless of number of available airframes, and as far as I'm concerned this is the only peer threat/theater the F-22 force should be focused on.

Whichever option keeps the most combat-available, I'm for. I'd prefer it were done by purchasing the appropriate spares. If that means you have to modernize the early birds, so be it. We're not in a place of being able to toss away good aircraft at this point.

 

[kitnut617]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

There's an exercise going on that involves 17 nations down under. A report from its activities says that two RAAF F-35's ""shot down"" six RSAF F-15's in one exercise operation ----- and shot them down before the F-15's even knew they were there.

 

[Josh_TN]

While the F-35 lacks the kinematics of the F-22, I think that it is more than match for most anything short of J-20s. That's why I think all F-22 combat coded units should be focused on the Pacific theater. There are I believe two squadrons in HI and two more in AK, so to some extent the force is Pacific oriented already. Where did the F-22s from the damaged base in Florida end up?

 

[FighterJock]

Where did the F-22s from the damaged base in Florida end up?

That is what I want to find out as well Josh_TN, they must have been moved to the boneyard to get used as spares or scrapped, which I do not want to see happen to them.

 

[Josh_TN]

Where did the F-22s from the damaged base in Florida end up?

That is what I want to find out as well Josh_TN, they must have been moved to the boneyard to get used as spares or scrapped, which I do not want to see happen to them.

A google search seems to indicate the F-22s from FLA were moved to Hickman and Elmendorf (temporarily) and it looks like that is where they will remain, outside non combat coded airframes in Edwards and any that get retired to Mammoth. The only other force seems to be Langley, which IMO makes sense.

 

[eagle]

There are I believe two squadrons in HI and two more in AK, so to some extent the force is Pacific oriented already. Where did the F-22s from the damaged base in Florida end up?

Thechnically there are two squadrons in Hawaii, one ANG and one active duty. But the active duty squadron is an associate unit meaning they don't have any jets of their own. So there is actually only one squadron's worth of aircraft at Hickam.

Two F-22 squadrons were based at Tyndall AFB before the hurricane. One training, one combat coded.
The training squadron relocated to Eglin AFB temporarily but will relocate to Langley AFB eventually (Not sure how far along this process is).
The combat coded 95th FS has been disbanded and its jets have been redistributed to the other squadrons to bring them up to about 24 jets each.

So in the end the F-22 force will look like this:
2 combat coded squadrons at Langley AFB
2 combat coded squadrons at Elmendorf AFB
1 combat coded squadron at Hickam AFB
1 training squadron at Langley AFB

5 squadrons @ 24 aircraft each is 120 combat coded aircraft, sounds about right.

 

[FighterJock]

Was there any reason as to why the 95th FS was disbanded? At least the 95th’s F-22 fighters were redistributed among the other squadrons.

 

[mkellytx]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

@sferrin viscerally, emotionally I'm right there with you about no upgrade/retire, but my experience in another life with a high demand/low density assets taught me that the sacrifice of a few non-conforming airframes can benefit the surviving fleet for a short while. It's quite tough to come down on one side without full knowledge of how much effort is required to go from block 20. Admittedly, I haven't followed the Raptor very closely since I left ED and no longer know folks who work on the airframe. All that said, it may well be one of those budget dances to get money over and above what the old law authorized. Wouldn't be the first time...

 

[sferrin]

Congress should stop the Air Force from retiring F-22s - Breaking Defense

As China looms, the Heritage Foundation's JV Venable argues for saving 33 F-22s from the chopping block.

breakingdefense.com

Retiring ANY F-22s is idiotic. We need every last one of them. Even after NGAD is in production we'll still need them. Gonna keep flying F-15Cs? An all-NGAD force will never happen for the same reason an all F-22 force didn't. (Before someone says, "but the F-35. . ." the F-35 is the F-16 replacement, not the F-15.

@sferrin viscerally, emotionally I'm right there with you about no upgrade/retire, but my experience in another life with a high demand/low density assets taught me that the sacrifice of a few non-conforming airframes can benefit the surviving fleet for a short while. It's quite tough to come down on one side without full knowledge of how much effort is required to go from block 20. Admittedly, I haven't followed the Raptor very closely since I left ED and no longer know folks who work on the airframe. All that said, it may well be one of those budget dances to get money over and above what the old law authorized. Wouldn't be the first time...

And I get that. I just wish they'd stop blowing money on pie-in-the-sky and use it for important stuff. But then that would take effective leaders in Washington and we know THAT'S never gonna happen.

 

[X-39]

WOW

Digital Twin Helps Pratt Expand F119 Performance For F-22​

Steve Trimble October 03, 2022

Thanks to a newly created “digital twin” of the Pratt & Whitney F119 turbofan, a future software update for the Lockheed Martin F-22 will expand the kinematic performance in certain regions of the twin-engine stealth fighter’s flight envelope.

As digital engineering tools proliferate through the aerospace supply chain, operators and OEMs have touted benefits such as streamlining maintenance activity and refining the data used to inform new engines and aircraft as they are being designed.

But the pending F-22 upgrade may show that creating and analyzing digital copies of physical parts can yield unexpected performance improvements at the midlife stage in the operational career of a combat aircraft.

Specifically, Pratt executives started collecting data on the usage history of individual F119s in 2018. As terabytes of data from real flights were analyzed, Pratt found that operators used the engine differently than the F119’s designers had assumed when calculating how long the parts could last until they needed to be replaced. In some areas of the engine, such as the core and low-pressure module, real flight hour data showed that the parts could last up to 20% longer than the company had predicted. The front fan also was more robust than expected, but not by the same margin.

Knowing that the engine’s parts could last longer than expected, Pratt gave the U.S. Air Force options. They could continue running the engines as they have been doing, and capture more than $800 million in cost savings over the aircraft’s lifetime by deferring the replacement of certain parts. Alternatively, the Air Force could use some of that additional strength in the part and extract more engine performance.

“You realize you have margin that you could potentially spend without a negative detriment, then that opens up the ability to expand the capability of the engine,” Scott Ackroyd, the F119 chief engineer from Pratt & Whitney, tells Aviation Week in an interview.

As an engine produces additional thrust or acceleration, the parts are sometimes exposed to higher temperatures. Since the data from Pratt’s digital twin of the F119 shows that the parts are more robust than intended, operators can expose those components to hotter temperatures without paying more for maintenance later. In this sense, the operator trades more performance in some areas of the flight envelope for long-term cost savings from operating normally and deferring maintenance.

Pratt’s software engineers revised the software code for the F119’s digital electronic engine control (DEEC), a computer that schedules and maintains the operating point of an engine by regulating conditions such as rotor speed and nozzle throat area.

“We changed the order of how we control the parameters inside the envelope to provide more capability and kinematics and certain regions,” Ackroyd says.

Using agile software development methods, Pratt delivered the DEEC software update in nine months, including regression testing and 100 hr. of engine testing in a wind tunnel. Pratt has now turned the new software over to Lockheed, which plans to include the engine performance upgrade in a future update of the F-22’s operational flight program.

Pratt cannot disclose the details of the performance improvement, citing Air Force security restrictions. The maximum continuous thrust rating of about 35,000 lb. for the F119 will not change after the software update, but kinematic performance—meaning, velocity and acceleration—will be improved in certain areas. The Air Force wants to improve performance in a specific area of the existing flight envelope for the F-22, and the tweaks made to the F119 control software enabled Pratt to make that change.

“We were lucky that they lined up exactly where they wanted,” Ackroyd says.

The use of digital twins may spread beyond the F119, but there are limits. For example, Pratt introduced a DEEC in a fighter engine with the F100-PW-229, but the decades-old processor would have to be upgraded to run the algorithms that deliver the improved performance in the F119. Pratt also is working to perform the same usage life analysis on the F135 engine that powers the Lockheed Martin F-35, which would be based on creating a digital twin of existing engines now in service.

Digital Twin Helps Pratt Expand F119 Performance For F-22 | Aviation Week Network

A program aimed at identifying cost savings inadvertently led to a major performance improvement for the Lockheed Martin stealth fighter.

aviationweek.com

 

[bobbymike]

An Air Force F-22 Raptor unit just fired off a record number of air-to-air missiles

F-22s usually only carry eight missiles for air-to-air missiles. These fighter squadrons pushed the fighter jet far beyond that.

taskandpurpose.com

This reads like they were all put on one aircraft

 

[TomS]

An Air Force F-22 Raptor unit just fired off a record number of air-to-air missiles

F-22s usually only carry eight missiles for air-to-air missiles. These fighter squadrons pushed the fighter jet far beyond that.

taskandpurpose.com

This reads like they were all put on one aircraft

It reads wrong. This is a record for most missiles expended during a WSEP exercise. Which is 2 weeks long. So basically, it's saying they managed to generate enough sorties to fire approximately two AAMs every day of the exercise.

Here is the original press release:

94th FS and 94th FGS makes history at WSEP 22-12

The 94th Fighter Squadron and 94th Fighter Generation Squadron assigned to the 1st Fighter Wing, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, broke the record for the most air-to-air missiles loaded and

www.acc.af.mil

Compare with this 10-day WSEP last year where an F-16 squadron and an F-22 squadron combined to fire 12 missiles over 166 sorties.

53rd Wing WSEP enhances air superiority and tests multi-platform interoperability

The 53rd Weapons Evaluation Group at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida recently hosted the Weapons System Evaluation Program-East November 8-19, 2021. WSEP is a formal evaluation of a squadron's ability

www.shaw.af.mil

This writeup and the articles spawned by it are a triumph of the PAO's (Edit: and reporters') complete lack of understanding of the aircraft they are writing about. Like this bit:

"They also demonstrated a high-level of proficiency while shooting the F-22's six-barrel, 20mm Gatling gun, and the M61A2 Vulcan at the Advanced Gunnery Target System."

Ohh, the 6-barrel, 20mm Gatling gun AND the M61A2? Really?

 

[Manuducati]

Disclaimer: the following is pure lucubration.

In theory, by using a couple Boeing Enclosed Weapons Pods (or similar), one Raptor could be armed with 14 AMRAAM (six internally plus four per pod). Now replace each AIM-120 by two CUDA type missiles in tandem, and you have your 28 missiles (and the side bays still available for lunch packets). Could be useful against drone swarms.

 

[sferrin]

Disclaimer: the following is pure lucubration.

In theory, by using a couple Boeing Enclosed Weapons Pods (or similar), one Raptor could be armed with 14 AMRAAM (six internally plus four per pod). Now replace each AIM-120 by two CUDA type missiles in tandem, and you have your 28 missiles (and the side bays still available for lunch packets). Could be useful against drone swarms.

Not when each member of the swarm is only 1/10th to 1/100th the cost of a CUDA.

 

[Manuducati]

Disclaimer: the following is pure lucubration.

In theory, by using a couple Boeing Enclosed Weapons Pods (or similar), one Raptor could be armed with 14 AMRAAM (six internally plus four per pod). Now replace each AIM-120 by two CUDA type missiles in tandem, and you have your 28 missiles (and the side bays still available for lunch packets). Could be useful against drone swarms.

Not when each member of the swarm is only 1/10th to 1/100th the cost of a CUDA.

True but... dropping a LGBU on a pick-up truck, a JDAM on a cave entrance, shooting a Maverick at a T-55, a Hellfire at a machine-gun nest, a HIMARS rocket at a pontoon bridge, a Harpoon at a patrol boat, or an AMRAAM at a houthi drone is considered cost-effective?

My previous post was only about the 28 missiles possibility, not really its operationnal usefulness.
(By the way there was a smiley at the end of it, but it seems the forum only publishes the ones from the toolbar and rejects those from the keyboard). Not to be taken too seriously.

 

[Forest Green]

True but... dropping a LGBU on a pick-up truck, a JDAM on a cave entrance, shooting a Maverick at a T-55, a Hellfire at a machine-gun nest, a HIMARS rocket at a pontoon bridge, a Harpoon at a patrol boat, or an AMRAAM at a houthi drone is considered cost-effective?

My previous post was only about the 28 missiles possibility, not really its operationnal usefulness.
(By the way there was a smiley at the end of it, but it seems the forum only publishes the ones from the toolbar and rejects those from the keyboard).

A GBU-12 costs $20k, which is probably less than a new pickup. Similarly an AGM-65 is considerably less than a T-55. Other costs mentioned are justified by the fun factor.

 

[Josh_TN]

It's perfectly acceptable to simply outspend your enemy to victory, given severe economic overmatch. I think it wasn't too infrequent for Army units to use $80,000 Javelins against sniper positions in Afghanistan, just because that was the long range weapon they had and its cheaper then the sunk cost of losing soldiers. In a peer competition you would have to find fairly break even ways of countering opponent weapons systems.

That said not all UAVs are created equal; certainly most any MALE type model is pricy enough to justify an AAM. You also have to factor in what you're going to lose by not engaging it.

 

[TomS]

A GBU-12 costs $20k, which is probably less than a new pickup. Similarly an AGM-65 is considerably less than a T-55. Other costs mentioned are justified by the fun factor.

This is really the wrong calculus, though. It assumes that the budget of attacker and defender are symmetrical and that the cost of a weapon is equal to its value. A better question to ask whether to cost of the missile is less than the cost (financial or intangible) of the possible consequences if the target isn't shot down.

 

[sferrin]

A GBU-12 costs $20k, which is probably less than a new pickup. Similarly an AGM-65 is considerably less than a T-55. Other costs mentioned are justified by the fun factor.

This is really the wrong calculus, though. It assumes that the budget of attacker and defender are symmetrical and that the cost of a weapon is equal to its value. A better question to ask whether to cost of the missile is less than the cost (financial or intangible) of the possible consequences if the target isn't shot down.

Which is why ABMs are worth almost any cost.

 

[donnage99]

Disclaimer: the following is pure lucubration.

In theory, by using a couple Boeing Enclosed Weapons Pods (or similar), one Raptor could be armed with 14 AMRAAM (six internally plus four per pod). Now replace each AIM-120 by two CUDA type missiles in tandem, and you have your 28 missiles (and the side bays still available for lunch packets). Could be useful against drone swarms.

the enclosed weapon pods were made for leading edge alignment with the super hornet. That doesn't translate immediately to f-22. I think dedicated weapon pods were studied for f-22.

 

[TomS]

Disclaimer: the following is pure lucubration.

In theory, by using a couple Boeing Enclosed Weapons Pods (or similar), one Raptor could be armed with 14 AMRAAM (six internally plus four per pod). Now replace each AIM-120 by two CUDA type missiles in tandem, and you have your 28 missiles (and the side bays still available for lunch packets). Could be useful against drone swarms.

the enclosed weapon pods were made for leading edge alignment with the super hornet. That doesn't translate immediately to f-22. I think dedicated weapon pods were studied for f-22.

Mainly for FB-22, I think. Never saw any sign of what the A/A capacity of the wing weapon bays would be.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/lockheed-martin-fb-22.1971/

 

[aonestudio]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq2cTx-uGgA

 

[aonestudio]

F-22As bring air dominance to Kadena in preparation for phased F-15C/D withdrawal

F-22A Raptors assigned to the 3rd Wing at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, started to arrive here on Nov. 4, 2022, in preparation of the phased withdrawal of Kadena’s fleet of F-15C/D

www.kadena.af.mil

F-22 Raptors begin rotating into Okinawa to replace Kadena’s aging F-15 fleet

www.stripes.com

F-22 Raptors begin rotating into Okinawa to replace Kadena’s aging F-15 fleet
November 4, 2022

CAMP FOSTER, Okinawa – The first F-22A Raptors roared into Kadena Air Base on Friday, kicking off a two-year plan to replace the installation’s aging F-15 fighters with a superior rotational force.

The 18th Wing declined to say how many Raptors arrived from the 3rd Wing at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, but Japan's Ministry of Defense said "around a dozen" would be touching down at the base in southern Japan in the "coming few weeks," a spokesman told Stars and Stripes in an email Friday.

Some government officials in Japan speak to the media on condition of anonymity as a requirement of their positions.

"These aircraft will work in conjunction with local Kadena-based assets to maintain steady-state fighter capabilities and enhance U.S. operational readiness to defend Japan while ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific," the wing said in a statement Friday evening.

The plan calls for the Air Force to perform a "phased withdrawal" of the base's two aging F-15C/D squadrons over the next two years by replacing them – at least initially – with F-22 fifth-generation stealth fighters on six-month rotational deployments.

There will be no gaps in fighter coverage, the 18th Wing wrote in a statement Friday to Stars and Stripes. As more Raptors arrive, more F-15s will depart.

It's unclear if the rotational presence will be temporary or an interim measure until a new generation of fighters is positioned permanently on Okinawa, Ralph Cossa, president emeritus of the Pacific Forum think tank in Hawaii, told Stars and Stripes in an email Oct. 28.

Critics have said the move sends the wrong message to China and U.S. allies in the region.

Prominent Republican lawmakers wrote a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Tuesday asking to be briefed about the plan. They included Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida; Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, the top Republican on the Armed Services personnel subcommittee; Sen. Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, the former ambassador to Japan; and Rep. Mike McCaul of Texas, the top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee.

"We believe that DOD’s plans to replace permanently-based fighters with rotational forces will lead to a tangible reduction in American forward combat power in the Indo-Pacific, lowering the bar for aggression and demonstrating a continuing mismatch between the Biden Administration’s talking points on the Indo-Pacific and America’s actual commitments in the region," the letter said.

 

[X-39]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lltMfkj1yPU

 

[GTX]

View: https://youtu.be/WFGaakr7N1s

 

[Foo Fighter]

Overly loud and excessive verbiage. Why take so long for a simple explanation. Are all these people on/need Ritelin?

 

[sferrin]

Overly loud and excessive verbiage. Why take so long for a simple explanation. Are all these people on/need Ritelin?

Have you ever had the misfortune of going to their site? Par for the course.

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

DIU Opens Second Path For F-22 HMD Search | Aviation Week Network

A second path has been launched to address the lack of a helmet-mounted displayon the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor fleet.

aviationweek.com

EDIT: The AWS&T article is behind a paywall, here’s another source.

DIU Seeks Proposals for F-22 Aircraft Helmet Display Prototyping Project - ExecutiveBiz

DIU Seeks Proposals for F-22 Aircraft Helmet Display Prototyping Project

blog.executivebiz.com

 

[TomcatViP]

1500ft takeoff run. Supersonic (could) by the end of the rwy. Wow!

 

[aonestudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1598663272214970370

View: https://twitter.com/INDOPACOM/status/1598663272214970370

https://twitter.com/x/status/1598300883376254977

View: https://twitter.com/INDOPACOM/status/1598300883376254977

 

[icyplanetnhc (Steve)]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lltMfkj1yPU

Some interesting performance numbers. At Mach 2.0 and 40,000 ft ISA, the F-22 is only using 36% afterburner throttle. Based on the acceleration numbers, it also accelerates nearly twice as fast at supersonic speeds than in the transonic regime. It appears that the F-22’s balance of thrust and aerodynamics really is optimized for supersonic performance.

The total temperature limit of 467 F (242 C) is also interesting, and would correspond to the characteristics of the BMI composites used on the wing leading edges and other components. Although the thermal and aerodynamic limit may suggest Mach 2.4+, the envelope chart indicates that operationally, the limits are Mach 2.0 and 60,000 ft likely due to maintenance and pilot emergency considerations, despite the immense excess thrust available.

 

[FighterJock]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lltMfkj1yPU

Some interesting performance numbers. At Mach 2.0 and 40,000 ft ISA, the F-22 is only using 36% afterburner throttle. Based on the acceleration numbers, it also accelerates nearly twice as fast at supersonic speeds than in the transonic regime. It appears that the F-22’s balance of thrust and aerodynamics really is optimized for supersonic performance.

The total temperature limit of 467 F (242 C) is also interesting, and would correspond to the characteristics of the BMI composites used on the wing leading edges and other components. Although the thermal and aerodynamic limit may suggest Mach 2.4+, the envelope chart indicates that operationally, the limits are Mach 2.0 and 60,000 ft likely due to maintenance and pilot emergency considerations, despite the immense excess thrust available.

Certainly news to me, I had always wondered what the max speed of the F-22 was.

 

[Josh_TN]

Presumably full thrust is still used for acceleration even if not maintained for cruise. I’ve heard anecdotally that while you can get to supercruise with dry thrust it is actually less fuel efficient due to the time needed to build up speed.

 

[sferrin]

1500ft takeoff run. Supersonic (could) by the end of the rwy. Wow!

Where did you get that?

 

[TomcatViP]

First 5 minutes of the presentation

Post #1749

 

[sferrin]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lltMfkj1yPU

Some interesting performance numbers. At Mach 2.0 and 40,000 ft ISA, the F-22 is only using 36% afterburner throttle. Based on the acceleration numbers, it also accelerates nearly twice as fast at supersonic speeds than in the transonic regime. It appears that the F-22’s balance of thrust and aerodynamics really is optimized for supersonic performance.

The total temperature limit of 467 F (242 C) is also interesting, and would correspond to the characteristics of the BMI composites used on the wing leading edges and other components. Although the thermal and aerodynamic limit may suggest Mach 2.4+, the envelope chart indicates that operationally, the limits are Mach 2.0 and 60,000 ft likely due to maintenance and pilot emergency considerations, despite the immense excess thrust available.

Back in the day (early 00's) one of those cable shows (Wings, History Channel, TLC) had a docmentary on the F-22. In it they interviewed Paul Metz, who was the Chief Test Pilot on the F-22A. When asked how fast it was he said, "it's fast. I mean it's really fast. The top speed is classified but it'll do 1600 miles per hour."