What's new

F-22: America’s Big Broken Toy

They are decades ahead in aviation and there's no denying. Problem, however, is they are having trouble financing it, but China's situation is very different. Money will continued to be poured into R&D and will be increased annually due to our successful and rapidly expanding economy.
You have a point. US and to some extent EU economy is choking, and there will be cuts, delays, etc.

China will have the biggest economy in the World by ~2015, and by ~2040 - strongest army too. China will become more aggressive, but I doubt it will be worse compared to US domination. There is no more aggressive and brutal country in the last 50 years than US. As there is saying: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
 
.
Did I say that it was wrong? But let us face the truth: The J-20's basic airframe layout came from the MIG 1.42/1.44. The fly-by-wire FLCS came from US. Chinese designers were just as shocked about 'stealth' as everyone else so the J-20's incorporation of low radar observable techniques also came from US.

What techniques and how did it get to China? Please spare me the line that America got hacked. American threatened to go to war with the hackers and so far it is still business as usual here in China :lol:


And please spare me the line about how it was the Russians who 'invented stealth'. I have Ufimtsev's text book in my little library.

Don't care who invented it, it matters little.
 
.
What does this has to do with the FACT that the J-20 is a conglomeration of stolen/copied tech? Granted, Chinese engineers should rightly be given credit for their creativity in hobbling together disparate sub-systems designed for other aircrafts, but that still does not detract from the FACT that the J-20 is not as 'indigenous' as the Chinese would like everyone to believe.

So what's next? Russian T-50 is also a copy? Or the fact that all planes with Wings are copies of American aircraft?
 
.
What technique and how did it get to China? Please spare me the line that America got hacked. American threatened to go to war with the hackers and so far it is still business as usual here in China :lol:
Who said anything about 'hacking'? That is a different issue. The J-20's FBW FLCS came from US via the Israeli's Lavi. As far as those 'stealth' techniques goes, once the technique is known by its results, anyone can attempt to replicate those techniques through trials and errors. Whether the results match remains unknown.

Don't care who invented it, it matters little.
But to many, it does matter. Until their fantasies shattered by me.

---------- Post added at 01:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 AM ----------

So what's next? Russian T-50 is also a copy? Or the fact that all planes with Wings are copies of American aircraft?
Look at it this way...Many erroneously believe that the F-15 was somewhat copied from the MIG-25. The truth is that both the MIG-25 and the F-15 came from the A-5. So try not to go into the absurd.
 
. .
Who said anything about 'hacking'? That is a different issue. The J-20's FBW FLCS came from US via the Israeli's Lavi. As far as those 'stealth' techniques goes, once the technique is known by its results, anyone can attempt to replicate those techniques through trials and errors. Whether the results match remains unknown.


But to many, it does matter. Until their fantasies shattered by me.

---------- Post added at 01:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 AM ----------


Look at it this way...Many erroneously believe that the F-15 was somewhat copied from the MIG-25. The truth is that both the MIG-25 and the F-15 came from the A-5. So try not to go into the absurd.


No i am not saying that. What i meant was that if the geometry of the J-20 or any other upcoming stealth plane (like those under development in Russia, India, Korea) is similar to F-22/F117s it doesn't mean it's copied.

Every car manufacturer doesn't need to find a new way to mount the engine or figure out a newer way to steer your car other than using a steering wheel.

Porsche, Mclaren, Mercedez, Bugatti, Ferrari all use rear wings, front diffusers to enhance the aerodynamic figure of their high end vehicles.... but no one claims that it is copied.
 
.
No i am not saying that. What i meant was that if the geometry of the J-20 or any other upcoming stealth plane (like those under development in Russia, India, Korea) is similar to F-22/F117s it doesn't mean it's copied.

Every car manufacturer doesn't need to find a new way to mount the engine or figure out a newer way to steer your car other than using a steering wheel.

Porsche, Mclaren, Mercedez, Bugatti, Ferrari all use rear wings, front diffusers to enhance the aerodynamic figure of their high end vehicles.... but no one claims that it is copied.
It is the sub-systems that are copied, not the entire aircraft. However, if a design is proven to be superior to one's own attempt, then it would be foolish not to copy it in its entirety, provided one has the material and technological know-how. It would be absurd to call the F-15 a direct descendant of the Sopwith Camel, but not if it is held against the A-5. The physical similarities between them are too great. In fact, the A-5's original design did have twin vertical stabs but because it was a Navy aircraft and the Navy was uncomfortable with such a 'radical' departure from conventional, North American redesigned the A-5 to have an all-moving single vertical stab with a larger surface area. The Soviets took the A-5's original design -- who knows how -- and built the MIG-25. By the time the F-15 came around, the twin vertical stabs were not so 'radical' after all and that design became pretty much standard today.

The J-20's basic layout has too much similarities with the MIG 1.42/1.44 project. Its clean surfaces are the result of advances made since that project, of modern manufacturing, and of creative adaptation by Chinese engineers. Kudos to them.
 
.
I was asked to address these points so here we go...

Its a beautiful piece of military art, but... it was never used in actual combat,...
Dummass criticism #1. The vast majority of high end weapons out there have never seen combat but that never stopped their fanboys from making claims about them. Some of the Chinese claims made for the J-20 bordered on defying the laws of physics.


and not because US didnt want to. Its too expensive to lose and with massive shortcomings:

1. F-22 cannot communicate with other planes, at all. I dont know what brilliant US specialists were thinking, but thats just <***>.
Dummass criticism #2. This was debunked a long time ago and recently explained again why...

DailyTech - Lockheed's F-22 Raptor Communications Too Limited, Capabilities Too Advanced for Libya Conflict
The F-22 also has a very limited capability to communicate with other coalition aircraft operating in Libya by design. Radio emission from data links that would enable the Raptor to communicate with other fighters would also potentially give the position of the stealthy F-22 away.

Analyst Loren Thompson from the Lexington Institute said, "The designers of the F-22 had a dilemma, which is whether to have the connectivity that would allow versatility or to have the radio silence that would facilitate stealthiest. What they opted for was a limited set of tactical data links."
In other words, this dummass criticism is based upon ignorance and intellectual dishonesty.

An aircraft is an exercise in compromises between competing interests. For the F-22's limited communication issue, this is not so much about technical flaws or designers' stupidity but about the overriding need to maintain low EM emission of any type that the designers were compelled to subordinate communication flexibility to low EM signature.

This mean two possibilities:

- That the F-22's communication system could be 'stepped down' to allow it to communicate with older aircrafts at the expense of increased EM signature.

- That the older aircrafts' communication technology could be 'stepped up' to allow all aircrafts to communicate with each other over a much more secured system without compromising their positions, be they 'stealth' or 'non-stealth', after all, radio communication emissions are much more powerful than any radar reflections, singular or combined, coming off an aircraft.

Given the pace of upgrades of sub-systems the US continually perform on 'non-stealth' aircrafts, it would make eminent sense to 'step up' all older aircrafts to assure COMSEC advantage in combat. When Iranian and Chinese aircrafts start flaming down to Earth with their crews clueless on where the attackers are coming from, we will have the last laugh.

2. Air Force reported that the F-22 requires more than 30 hours of maintenance for every flight hour, with the total cost per flight hour of $44,000.
Dummass criticism #3. This is from ignorance of aviation maintenance and a gross misunderstanding of statistics.

For example...

Naval Aviation Aircraft Handling
1. Move Director
2. Brake Rider
3. Chock Walker
4. Safety Observer (Wing-Walker/Tail-Walker)
5. Tractor Driver
The above practice on how to ground move an aircraft from one location to another, be it on the flight line or to inside a hangar, is adopted by civilian aviation as well. In tabulating total manhours for maintenance, ALL of the above personnel would be included in a task even though none of them will have anything directly to do with the task, such as changing out a FLCC. For the F-22, since surface integrity is crucial for its low radar observability, extra care will be used in moving the aircraft or removing access panels to reduce surface damages. Once an FLCC or a hydraulic actuator is exposed, neither will be more difficult to change out than their 'non-stealth' brothers. The extra time required to exercise care in maintaining surface integrity will be added to the total manhours, giving a false impression that the F-22 is maintenance intensive in all areas.

3. F-22 suffers from 1 critical error every 1.7 hours of flight on average. Technology malfunctions so much so, that is just weird, its not North Korea we are talking about.
Dummass criticism #4. No credible sources regarding these 'critical error'.

4. Plain high-tech cover has... vulnerability to rain.
Dummass criticism #5. If the F-22 is sooooooooo vulnerable to rain, then why is it assigned to Alaska and Hawaii? Is Rachel Maddow an expert in radar absorber technology? How gullible are you people? Further, if rain does compromise 'stealth' a little, then the same rain that compromise 'stealth' also will make it equally difficult to find the 'stealth' aircraft as if there were no rain in the first place. It has to do with how centimetric and millimetric radar signals behave when encounter hydrometeors whose diameter are approximate to their carrier freq. Of course, Rachel Maddow would be too busy trying to look intelligent on TV instead of actually researching relevant materials and consulting relevant experts.

5. Cover is so light, that even small guns can penetrate it, so it cant fly low either.
Dummass criticism #6. Same for majority of fighters out there. Not even the A-10 is immune to small arms fire.

6. F-22 has the highest accident rate of any USAF fighter aircraft in service.
Dummass criticism #7. No credible source for this claim.

...Do I need to remind how much each F-22 costs? Around 350 mln. At least they look good in Holywood movies, that should count for something :azn:
Losing a war is much more expensive. But then again, covering up the losses racked up because of the F-22 is the job of the Ministry of Propaganda.
 
.
Who ever think Raptor is Craptor. I will ask them to bring there AF against F22. 100 F22 are enough to swallow their entire fighter plane..

Like Gambit said in one of its post "F22 will eat up one X20 and **** two X10". F22 is one of best machine on planet earth. J20 and Pak-FA are still in development phase, god knows how many technical fault come when they go operational.
 
. .
american tech is all stolen from germany and russia back during the cold war.
then it was improved upon.

Hope you understand difference between Stolen and Hired. When Germany collapsed USA and Russia saw opportunity to hire German engineers. They hired them and the German Engineers brought Beauty to both USA and USSR.

During World war USSR and USA continuously keep peeping under each other Payjama (trouser). When USA learnt bout mystical MiG25 they came out with F15. They were not copy of each other but adaptation based on needs.
 
.
Hope you understand difference between Stolen and Hired. When Germany collapsed USA and Russia saw opportunity to hire German engineers. They hired them and the German Engineers brought Beauty to both USA and USSR.

During World war USSR and USA continuously keep peeping under each other Payjama (trouser). When USA learnt bout mystical MiG25 they came out with F15. They were not copy of each other but adaptation based on needs.

hired my arse.

when germany was bombed back to the stone age, the americans gave the german scientists an option, u either work for us or get a bullet in ur brain.
u know the option the scientists chose.

america was behind the russians during the cold war in tech, but america caught up through massive r&d. russians crumbled trying to keep up.

america was helped by the massive immigration of jews to america frm all over the world during hitlers reign. same thing happened to russia.

america is a scavenger, it feeds off the talents of others and then occuses others of doing the same. most of the great innovations done by america are done by immigrants that went to america due to no oppotunities in their home countries. jews, chinese and indians.

but since china and india is rising, america wont get that talent anymore, now they move their to study and then come back to china to start a business. asia is where the growth is.
this trend will speed up.

america is nothing without its foreigners.
 
.
Who said anything about 'hacking'? That is a different issue. The J-20's FBW FLCS came from US via the Israeli's Lavi.

Same can be said about America's incorporation of Chinese inventions; the compass and the usage of gun powder.

As far as those 'stealth' techniques goes, once the technique is known by its results, anyone can attempt to replicate those techniques through trials and errors. Whether the results match remains unknown.

That would be a flawed concept. There is no point in trying to match the results. It makes better sense in improving upon the results. Only this way, will it enable it to surprise the opponent. Since it is "unknown" it cannot be claimed as being a copy.

But to many, it does matter. Until their fantasies shattered by me.

It doesn't stop the U.S. shattering your own fantasies. Your emotional hyperbole was understandable. Both F-22 and F-35 are technically grounded, unsafe to fly, unreliable and are not proven.
 
.
Same can be said about America's incorporation of Chinese inventions; the compass and the usage of gun powder.

.

they are testing these modules from atleast more than 2 years and j-20 which is launched few months ago,who knows what will be the future and failures will be especially when there is difference of generation b/w chinese fighters and western fighters.

and presently,you cant bring a single fighter in front of f-22.so see ur pockets then go for purchasing.

same goes for pak fa too..:D
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom