www.aviationweek.com/awst
F-22 ROAD SHOW
F-22:
AND LETHAL
Mass, speed and guile fail to score Raptor shootdowns
during Alaskan exercises
As the F-22 begins its operational life, interest has turned to as-
sessing just how well suited the stealthy Raptor is to its role as
the premier air-to-air fighter, while taking a peek at some of the
surprises for pilots and maintenance crews as they explore what
the aircraft can do. As part of the research for this series of ar-
ticles on the F-22, Michael Fabey flew in the back seat of an
F-15D while the Eagle and Raptor pilots demonstrated their air-
craft’s capabilities in the air-to-air ranges at Tyndall AFB, Fla.
(For additional details of the Raptor’s unique air-to-air capa-
bilities, see AW&ST Sept. 6, 1999, p. 84.)
DAVID A. FULGHUM and MICHAEL J. FABEY/WASHINGTON
T
he F-22 is proving it’s a dog-
fighter after all.
While it wasn’t part of a
hard-turning furball, an F-22—
with its Amraams and Side-
winders expended—slipped into visual
range behind an F-16 and undetected
made a simulated kill with its cannon
during the stealth fighter’s first large-
scale exercise and deployment outside
the continental U.S.
Those and other revelations about the
F-22’s emerging capabilities are increas-
ingly important as the first combat unit,
the U.S. Air Force’s 27th Fighter Sqdn.,
begins its initial Air Expeditionary Force
deployment this month to an undisclosed
site. And the first F-22 unit, the 94th
Fighter Sqdn., will participate in Red Flag
in February.
The gun kill is a capability Air Force
planners hope their F-22s won’t use. The
fighter is designed to destroy a foe well
beyond his visual and radar range. With-
in visual-range combat and, in particu-
lar, gun kills are anachronisms. In amass-
ing 144 kills to no losses during the first
week of the joint-service Northern Edge
exercise in Alaska last summer, only three
air-to-air “kills” were in the visual are-
na—two involving AIM-9 Sidewinders
and one the F-22’s cannon.
The 27th Fighter Sqdn. aircraft—on
deployment from Langley AFB, Va.—
didn’t get to show off their J-Turn and
Cobra maneuvers or their high-angle-
of-attack, high-off-boresight (which ac-
tually will arrive with the AIM-9X) and
unique nose-pointing capabilities. The
reason, those involved say, was because
the victims of the three encounters, fly-
ing conventional fighters, never had a
clue they were being stalked by F-22s
until they were “killed.”
Raptor pilots agree that their pre-
ferred location for the fighter while in
the battlespace is at high altitude, well
above the other fighters, where they can
adopt a fuel-efficient cruise, sweeping
both the air and ground with radar and
electronic surveillance for targets. From
a superior altitude, the F-22 used sus-
tained supercruise to range across hun-
dreds of miles of airspace before an en-
emy fighter could threaten friendly
high-value surveillance, command-and-
control and tanker aircraft.
2 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
Perhaps the most important revelation
by the 27th Fighter Sqdn. was demon-
strating the F-22’s ability to use its sen-
sors to identify and target enemy aircraft
for conventional fighters by providing in-
formation so they could engage the en-
emy sooner than they could on their own.
Because of the advanced situational
awareness they afford, F-22s would stick
around after using up their weapons to
continue providing targets and IDs to the
conventional fighters.
“We always left F-22s on station to help,
but we didn’t designate any one aircraft
to provide data,” says Lt. Col. Wade
Tolliver, the unit’s commander. “It was
critical that every F-22 out there provid-
ed all the data he had.”
With its high-resolution radar, the
F-22 can guarantee target altitudes to
within a couple of hundred feet. Its abil-
ity to identify an aircraft is “sometimes
many times quicker than the AWACS,”
he says. “It was a combination of high-
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
resolution sensors and being closer to
the targets.”
The F-22’s radar range is described
only as being more than 100 mi. Howev-
er, it’s thought to be closer to 125-150 mi.,
which is much farther than the standard
F-15’s 56-mi. radar range. New, active
electronically scanned radar technology—
optimized for digital throughput—is ex-
pected to soon push next-generation radar
ranges, in narrow beams, out to 250 mi.
or more.
The ability to close on the enemy with-
out being targeted also allowed the F-22s
to operate in threat areas where conven-
tional fighters could not survive. This
enabled the Raptor to engage targets at
a greater distance from the aircraft and
homeland they were defending.
Raptor pilots had all the available data
on the airspace fused and displayed on
An F-15E, (left), F-15C and F-22 get together
over one of Alaska’s glaciers after racking
up a combined one-day kill ratio of 83-1
during Northern Edge, the Raptor’s first
large-scale air-to-air exercise.
a single, easy-to-read screen.
“When I look down at my scope and
put my cursor over a [friendly] F-15 or
F/A-18, it tells me who they are locked
on to,” he says. For example, “I could
help them out by saying, ‘You’re double-
targeted and there’s a group over here
untargeted’ . . . to make sure we got
everybody.” F-15 targets will be latent
because of the radar sweep.
However, these messages are less and
less verbal. “When you watch [tapes of
the Alaska] exercise, it’s fairly spooky,”
says Gen. Ronald Keys, chief of Air Com-
bat Command. “There’s hardly a word
spoken among Raptor pilots.” That si-
lence also previews some of the fighter’s
possible future capabilities.
“Because of the way the aircraft was
designed, we have the capability to do
more,” Keys says. “We can put un-
manned combat aircraft systems in there
with Raptor. You’ve got three fairly low-
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
observable UCAS in the battlespace. An
air defense system pops up, and I click
on a UCAS icon and drag it over [the
emitter’s location] and click. The UCAS
throttles over and jams it, blows it up or
whatever.”
In Alaska, because the F-22 remained
far forward at high altitude, with an ad-
vanced radar it could monitor rescue mis-
sions that the AWACS 150 mi. away
could not. “We could see the helicopters
down in the valleys and protect them,”
Tolliver says.
In addition to AWACS, the F-22 also
can feed data to the RC-135 Rivet Joint
signals intelligence aircraft to improve
situational awareness of the battlespace.
“If a Rivet Joint is trying to get tri-
angulation [on a precise emitter loca-
tion], he can get more [voice] informa-
tion” from an F-22, Keys says. “If an
A
WACS sees a heavy group 40 mi. to the
north, Raptor can come up and say it’s
two F-18s, two F-15s and four F-16s.”
Moreover, Keys says, modifications are
underway to transmit additional target
parameters—such as sensitive, high-res-
olution infrared data—from the F-22
with a low-probability-of-intercept data
link.
“Getting data into an F-22 is not
hard,” Keys says. “Getting it out [while
staying low observable] is more difficult.
We bought the links, but we just don’t
have them on yet.”
The F-22’s advanced electronic sur-
veillance sensors also provided addition-
al awareness of ground activity.
“I could talk to an EA-6B Prowler elec-
tronic attack crew and tell them where a
surface-to-air missile site was active so
they would immediately know where to
point their electronic warfare sensors,”
Tolliver says. “That decreased their tar-
geting time line considerably.”
In addition, the F-22 can use its elec-
tronic surveillance capabilities to con-
duct precision bombing strikes on emit-
ters—a capability called destruction of
enemy air defenses.
“And future editions of the F-22 are
predicted to have to have their own elec-
tronic attack capability so that we’ll be
able to suppress or nonkinetically kill a
site like that,” he says.
The F-22’s operating altitude and ad-
ditional speed during the Alaska exer-
cise also garnered praise.
“We stayed high because it gives us
an extra kinetic advantage with shoot-
ing, speed and fuel consumption,” Tol-
liver says. “The Raptor typically flies way
higher than everybody else and it han-
dles like a dream at those altitudes.” Tol-
liver wouldn’t confirm the operating al-
titude, but Pentagon officials have put
it at 65,000 ft., which is at least 15,000
ft. higher than the other fighters.
“There were times we went lower,
maybe to visually identify a threat or if
we were out of Amraams and there was
a bandit sneaking in at low altitude,” he
says. “The Raptor would roll in and kill
him with a heat-seeking missile.”
The lopsided combat ratio resulted
because, “they never saw us,” Tolliver
says. “We got there without being de-
tected, and we killed them rapidly. We
didn’t do any major turning. It’s not that
the J-Turn maneuver isn’t fun, but we
didn’t get a chance to use it.”
The F-22’s Mach 1.5 supercruise ca-
pability also got a workout in Alaska.
Because only eight F-22s were ever air-
borne at once during the exercise, four
of them were constantly involved in re-
fueling from tankers flying orbits 150
mi. away. Supercruise got the fighters
there and back quickly. On station, the
fighter would conserve fuel by cruising
at high altitude.
“We also used supercruise quite a bit
because the fight was on such a large
scale,” Tolliver says. “The airspace was
roughly 120 mi. by 140 mi. We could sit
up at high altitude and save our gas and
watch. We don’t hang out at Mach 1.5.
With our acceleration, when we saw the
threats building, because we could see
them so far out, we’d dump the nose
over, light the burners and we were right
up to fighting speed.”
During a typical day in the Alaska
“war,” 24 air-to-air fighters, including
up to eight F-22s, defended their aeri-
al assets and homeland for 2.5 hr. Air
Force F-15s and F-16s and Marine F/A-
18s simulated up to 40 MiG-29s, Su-22s,
Su-24s, Su-27s and Su-30s (which regen-
erated into 103 enemy sorties in a sin-
gle period). They carried AA-10s A to
F, Archers, AA-12 Adders and the Chi-
nese-built PL-12. These were supported
by SA-6, SA-10 and SA-20 surface to
air missiles and an EA-6B for jamming.
Each day, the red air became stronger
and carried more capability.
As a result of all the emitters in the bat-
tlespace, the F-22’s ability to map the
AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007 3
F-22 ROAD SHOW
electronic order of battle (EOB)—what’s
emitting and from where—proved criti-
cal.
“I love intel, but it’s only as good as
the last time [analysts] got a data up-
date, which could have been hours or
even a day earlier,” Tolliver says. An
F-22 “gets rid of the time delay. I can
plot an EOB in real time. I’m not say-
ing we’re better than a Rivet Joint, but
I can go places that it can’t. If he’s 150
mi. away, he’s probably not going to be
able to plot a high-fidelity threat loca-
tion as quickly as I can.”
The adversaries were wily and didn’t
want to lose.
“We had guys running in at 500 ft. off
the deck,” Tolliver says. “We had guys
flying in at 45,000-50,000 ft. doing Mach
1.6, trying to shoot me before I know
they are there. They would mass their
forces and try to win with sheer num-
bers. None of it worked.”
A tactic used by the F-22s was actu-
ally developed and practiced in small-
er scale at Langley before the exercise.
Raptors worked in pairs, integrated with
F-15Cs or F/A-18E/Fs.
“I could help target for them from be-
hind and above,” Tolliver says. “We real-
ly don’t have a name for what we were
doing other than integrated ops. I was
able to look down and smartly target F-
15s or F/A-18s to groups at ranges where
they could not yet [detect] the target.”
Yet, there are a number of F-22 ca-
pabilities that are shrouded in mystery,
including electronic attack, information
warfare and cruise missile defense.
“It’s no secret that one of our mods
is to put electronic attack on board and
then we will play a role in combating
networks,” Tolliver says. “We’re already
involved in the collection part. When we
come back from a mission, we have the
ability to download EOB data that’s
turned into intelligence pictures. This
makes us an intelligence platform do-
ing nontraditional ISR by bringing back
emitter data so that teams can go out
and conduct information operations.”
The next step will be to pass the de-
tailed information about surface-to-air
missile locations, capabilities and emis-
sion details (called parametrics).
“If I have characterized, say an SA-10,
I can send it verbally to A
WACS and they
can send it out to other platforms,” says
Maj. Shawn Anger, an F-22 instructor
with the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. at Tyndall
AFB, Fla. However, “I can’t pass the
parametrics characterization. Hopeful-
ly, we’ll be able to shoot it up the
radar”—a new capability for the radar,
which is being developed to send large,
Turn and Burn
Raptor’s gunfighting heritage
hasn’t completely disappeared
MICHAEL J. FABEY/TYNDALL AFB, FLA., and DAVID A. FULGHUM/WASHINGTON
F
ighting in—or against—the F-22
is a singular event, humbling and
frustrating to its victims, and of-
ten startling to its pilots, who de-
scribe each flight as a learning ex-
perience.
The first thing anyone learns about
the U.S. Air Force’s Raptor is that it
isn’t envisioned as a dogfighting aircraft,
mixing it up with other high-perform-
ance fighters.
Its strengths—which are being ex-
plored daily by test, training and oper-
ational units—include pervasive situa-
tional awareness of what’s in the
battlespace gathered by the aircraft’s ac-
tive electronically scanned array (AESA)
radar, electronic surveillance and in-
frared sensors. Moreover, information
is piped into the aircraft through data
links to off-board sensors and other in-
telligence sources. The range of its sen-
sors out-distance those of non-AESA
aircraft, allowing it to strike a foe that’s
still unaware of the F-22. The Raptor’s
stealth enables it to operate 150 mi.
ahead of large-sensor aircraft and well
above legacy aircraft, where it can use
its acceleration and high-resolution view
of the battlespace to greater advantage.
A newly emerging strength is the F-22’s
“mini-AWACS” capability that allows
targets to be designated for convention-
al F-15s or F-16s.
However, the question periodically
resurfaces about whether the F-22 could
hold its own during a within-visual-range
fight with a very maneuverable fourth-
generation fighter such as the Sukhoi Su-
27 and Su-30, Eurofighter or Dassault
Rafale. The answer will never be obvious
to an outsider. The Raptor’s high-angle-
of-attack capabilities are part of the for-
mula of classified tactics that are closely
held. But, roughly, its unique maneuver-
ing and nose-pointing options—plus the
high off-boresight capabilities of the
AIM-9X missile, which is to be added
about 2010—give the aircraft previously
unheard-of means of quickly shooting
down a foe.
Nonetheless, chasing an F-22 in a two-
seat F-15D—which carried reporter
Michael J. Fabey—provided perspective
about their comparative capabilities.
A recent flight started with F-15 pilot
Capt. Andy (Bishop) Jacob flying along-
side an F-22 piloted by Maj. Shawn
(Rage) Anger in the air-to-air ranges
above Tyndall AFB, Fla.
Opponents of further Raptor procure-
ments argue that going by such basic
flight physics as thrust-to-weight ratios,
rearward cockpit visibility and simple
Waiting to sortie for one of the nine major air-to-air
combats during Northern Edge, 27th FS F-22s line up
at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. The Raptor demonstrated
both performance and sensor advantages over con-
ventional fighters.
4 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
aircraft size, the F-22 ranks below the
F-15 and other earlier fighters.
Aerial engagements like the en-
counter between Anger and Jacob are
supposed to help prove the Raptor’s
case. Still, one argument offered by F-22
opponents is that the jet’s reported vic-
tories over F-15s are often scripted and
unreliable gauges of Raptor superiority.
The Raptor’s silhouette stood out
against the thick wool of clouds build-
ing nearly 18,000 ft. up. The two air-
planes lined up their noses on an imag-
inary starting line and accelerated from
250 kt. at an altitude of 13,000 ft.
Inside the F-15, Jacob’s body
slammed backward and the two fighters
stayed even for about 10 sec. The F-15
hit 450 kt. in full afterburner in level
flight after 20 sec. The F-22 hit 500 kt.
in maximum afterburner and pulled
away, ending the race. Jacob laughed.
“That’s it,” he said. “My F-15 can’t ac-
celerate any more.”
The F-15 was designed and built to be
a quick, maneuverable dogfighter. It has
Pratt & Whitney F100-P-W100 turbofan
engines powering a lightly loaded and ad-
vanced airframe. Weighing in at about
42,160 lb., the F-15 has a thrust-to-weight
ratio approaching 1.2 (when stripped and
not in a combat configuration) and a wing
loading of about 69 lb. per sq. ft. By com-
parison, the F-22 has a thrust-to-weight
ratio closer to 1 and wing loading of about
80 lb. per sq. ft. But the Raptor has two
Pratt & Whitney’s F119 low-bypass, aug-
mented 35,000-lb. class engines with two-
dimensional vectored thrust nozzles.
Jacob circled above the Raptor as
Anger put the fighter through several
maneuvers. He illustrated three key tac-
tical moves—the J-Turn, high-alpha turn
and the classic, Russian Cobra. There
are times during an air-to-air engage-
ment when any of them could be em-
ployed, but the J-Turn is used more than
the Cobra, says Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver,
commander of the 27th Fighter Sqdn.
Roughly, the J-Turn begins with the
nose of the F-22 pointed up. Then, at
high alpha (angle of attack), the rudder
is kicked and the nose swings until point-
ed downhill. F-22 pilots describe a flight
path mimicking the shape of a candy
cane. The J-Turn is a vertical maneu-
ver used to quickly reverse the aircraft’s
direction using a very small turn radius.
After a planned stall, Anger’s Raptor
pivoted through a rapid-minimum, 180-
deg. J-Turn at 250 kt. in maximum after-
burner with full aft stick. It’s also known
as the “Herbst Maneuver,” after Wolf-
gang Herbst, a German proponent of us-
ing post-stall flight in air-to-air combat.
The aircraft pulled into a 60-70-deg.
bank, nose high, with roughly a 60-deg.
angle of attack. Anger applied full stick
and pro-rudder, turning into the air-
craft’s roll. The Raptor’s nose yawed
down into the vertical.
For the second maneuver, Anger pulled
the Raptor into a high-alpha loop,
powering again to 250 kt. He pulled 3-4g
to about 180 kt. in the pure vertical,
reaching 20-30 deg. past the vertical with
full aft stick. The AOA increased beyond
60-70-deg. alpha as the upward motion
slowed. Normally a rapid pitch rate would
stop the aircraft’s nose, but thrust vec-
toring carried the F-22’s nose back over
the top, completing the loop.
In contrast, the legendary Cobra ma-
neuver is done from the horizontal
plane, and the nose pitches up past ver-
tical and returns to the horizontal after
a pronounced deceleration.
To force an opponent to overshoot,
Anger yanked the Raptor into a dynam-
ic, nose-high attitude made possible by
brute engine power—a maneuver that
Russian Su-27 pilots introduced to air
show crowds. First, Anger slowed to 250
kt., pushed both throttles to the military
power detent, then pulled the control
stick to its full-aft position. The Raptor’s
nose pitched up to a 60-70-deg. attitude,
so the fighter’s belly remained aligned
with the flight path, creating enough
drag to immediately slow the aircraft
substantially. He then pushed the stick
full forward to snap the Raptor’s nose
back to level flight.
The Cobra is used to “gain high
ground and stop your forward travel,”
Tolliver says. “The Cobra is a great air
show maneuver, but most of us don’t
typically use it during aerial combat.”
Fighting—or even keeping up with
the Raptor—requires extremely fast as-
sessment and reactions. “Faster than re-
quired for any other aircraft I’ve flown
against,” Jacob says.
Anger and Jacob had planned to en-
gage in mock combat. However, a flash-
ing indicator light warned that some-
thing could be wrong with the F-22. But
the flight was enough to make a believ-
er of Jacob. “Maybe, with some tricks or
tactics, I can beat it,” he said. “But that
would be a one-time set of circumstances.
As for a Raptor-beating tactic—there’s
no such thing.”
C
For F-22 video, see [url=http://www.aviationweek]www.aviationweek[/url].
com/f22
HS
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007 5
F-22 ROAD SHOW
Away Game
First F-22 large-scale, air combat exercise
wins praise and triggers surprise
DAVID A. FULGHUM/WASHINGTON
I
t’s high drama. The first combat
squadron of F-22s goes on its longest
deployment—3,200 naut. mi. away—
with an immature aircraft and a new
skipper.
Despite the potential for unknown
problems and the uncertainty of be-
ing far from its maintenance base in
Langley AFB, Va., the 27th Fighter
Sqdn. was able to go to war for two
weeks with 12 F-22s. Every flying day
of the Northern Edge exercise in Alas-
ka, the truncated force was able to
launch eight aircraft for a 2.5-hr. mis-
sion, return, re-arm and then launch six
aircraft, says Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver,
who at the time of deployment had
been squadron commander for two
weeks. While no more than one-third
of the defending force, the F-22s gen-
erated 49% of the air-to-air kills.
And perhaps the most pleasing vin-
dication for the F-22 design was avoid-
ing the stealth maintenance problems
that dogged the B-2 bomber during its
early deployments. Repairing and cur-
ing the exterior finish of the B-2 re-
quired a special climate-controlled
hangar wherever it went to ensure that
it stayed low observable (LO).
“You have to maintain the signature
of any LO aircraft,” Tolliver says. “They
were able to take care of it in Alaska
with no problem. Here at Langley we
have a special facility. In Alaska we did
The U.S. Air Force’s oldest (F-117)
and newest (F-22) operational stealth
fighters fly together over a test range in
the southwest U.S. But the Raptor brings
far greater capabilities in speed, altitude and
intelligence-gathering to the fight.
our [stealth] repairs on the flight line or
in a normal hangar.”
What Tolliver didn’t discuss was the
F-22’s Signature Assessment System.
“SAS will tell you if you can ignore
the accumulated scratches and dings,”
says an official involved in the Raptor
program. “If you have sufficient LO
margin, you don’t have to make imme-
diate repairs and can simply wait until
the return to Langley. The stealth sig-
nature is still not easy to fix, but the
stealth coatings are not as fragile as they
were in earlier stealth aircraft. It isn’t
damaged by a rain storm, and it can
stand the wear and tear of combat with-
out degradation.”
“The biggest success at Northern
Edge was maintenance,” Tolliver says.
“We were tasked for 105 sorties; we
launched 102. That’s a 97% sortie gen-
eration rate. That’s incredible on an im-
mature fighter. Since we were doing
eight turn six [launching eight F-22s,
then returning and launching another
six] the whole time with 12 jets, that re-
sulted in a 21.8 utilization rate. Normal-
ized over a month, that means each
plane would fly 21.8 times.”
The squadron sent a relatively com-
pact organization to Alaska to support
the exercise.
“The deployment plan was two KC-
10s dragging 12 F-22s from Langley to
Elmendorf,” Tolliver says. “It’s an 8-hr.
6 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
flight and 3,200 naut. mi. We took all
our people with us [218 personnel] on
the two KC-10s except for the 15-mem-
ber advance team we sent about three
days earlier. They’re there early to set
up and have guys ready to catch the air-
planes when the jets land.”
To prepare for the trip, the squadron
stopped flying three days prior to pre-
pare the F-22s. Two days prior, they
readied all the cargo. One day prior, the
pilots and maintainers had a final brief-
ing and planners finalized which 12 air-
craft would be deployed.
The support package included the
equipment and spare parts to maintain
the aircraft for 45 days. In the mix were
two extra Pratt & Whitney F119 engines.
They had to take F-22-specific aircraft
support equipment with them because
none is distributed around U.S. bases,
as is done for F-15s and F-16s.
“That equated to 63 increments of
cargo [pallets carrying 170 short tons],”
Tolliver says. “That’s about five C-17
equivalents. What didn’t go by air went
by truck and then ferry to Alaska. That’s
about in line with what’s needed for
12-15 F-15Es going to a bare base.”
When the system matures, around
2010, Air Force planners hope to cut
that number. They want to deploy 24
F-22s with just seven C-17s loads—about
30% less than today. However, program
officials say that by summer 2009, they
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
want the requirement further reduced
to about 50%.
“But now, we’re still taking a lot of
extra parts and equipment because we
don’t know what’s going to break,” Tol-
liver says. “As we fly more and more, we
learn that. Once we get the F-22 fully
deployed, some of that aircraft-specif-
ic, mission-generation equipment will
be other places.”
A point of pride for the 27th was that
crews were able to generate local sor-
ties the day after they arrived in Alaska
at the end of their long flight from Vir-
ginia.
Northern Edge was a two-week, large-
force employment exercise, the F-22’s
first. More than 5,000 troops from 36
units participated. There were nine
large-force employment periods—each
about 2.5 hr. long—during the two
weeks. The F-22 flies about 1.25-1.5 hr.
without refueling, much the same as an
F-15 or F-16, so the unit was involved
in a lot of refuelings. The missions were
mostly flown over the Pacific-Alaskan
Range Complex and the Gulf of Alaska.
The range is about 120 X 140 mi.
“The airspace was awesome because
we had the surface to 60,000 ft., could
fly supersonic, chaff and flares allowed,
so everything was really good,” Tolliv-
er says. “Another big benefit was the abil-
ity to operate with joint assets. The serv-
ices are busy around the world, and
trying to get together and operate as a
joint combat unit on this scale is tough.
Taking this new fighter and integrating
it with all the proven assets ensure that
the first time we go to war is not the first
time we’ve operated together.”
Participants claim that everybody
connected with the F-22 force did bet-
ter in the exercise because of the
situational awareness that the Raptor
provides.
The Langley F-22s will have another
busy year in 2007. The 27th Fighter Sqdn.
will make its first air expeditionary force
rotation. The AEF requirement involves
a 20-month cycle subdivided into four-
month increments. They train for 16
months and then deploy four months. The
Raptor’s first AEF starts in January.
“We’re anxiously awaiting our orders
to deploy somewhere,” Tolliver says.
“We know they want us to go. The pilots
and maintainers are combat-ready. I’d
love to go into [the Iraq/Afghanistan]
theater and contribute to the war, but I
don’t know. If they want us to contribute,
we’re ready.”
Meanwhile, the 94th Fighter Sqdn.,
which is just becoming operational, will
be the first F-22 unit to participate in Red
Flag at the end of this month.
C
EDITORIALS
A
pparently the F-22 Rap-
tor, the newest aircraft in
the U.S. Air Force inven-
tory, isn’t the Cold War
anachronism its detractors
thought it would be. In fact, evi-
dence to date suggests the stealthy
fighter is worth more than skep-
tics expected.
At a current flyaway cost of $136 million, the Raptor will
never be a bargain. The procurement quantity will be an is-
sue as long as it is in production. But the aircraft’s first large-
scale deployment, and its performance in the joint-service
Northern Edge exercise in Alaska (see p. 46), show that tax-
payers are getting high value for the high cost.
After that exercise, the F-22’s advantages of speed, alti-
tude and stealth are undeniable. The Raptor flew 10,000
ft. higher than its “opponents,” and it used its supercruise
capability to dash back and forth across a huge battle space.
Even when the F-22 moved within visual range to “kill”
an F-16 with its cannon—a weapon it may never use in com-
bat—the “enemy” never knew it was there.
Raptor pilots never had a chance to show off their J-turns,
high-alpha loops and high off-boresight capabilities. But nev-
er mind. Virtually no one believes the F-22’s primary role will
be mano-a-mano aerial combat against previous-generation
fighters. Far more important, the aircraft showed some of its
value in intelligence-gathering and surveillance, which kept
it over the battlefield long after it had fired its weapons.
Loitering at high altitude, F-22s
were able to identify targets ac-
curately enough to satisfy the
rules of engagement and pass
them along to conventional fight-
er aircraft for precise, long-range
kills. The F-22 can perform some
surveillance/target identification
and signals intelligence missions
of AWACS and Rivet Joint aircraft, respectively. But un-
like those aircraft, which must stay 150 naut. mi. or more
away from many hostile forces, the stealthy F-22 can fly over
targets with impunity. It can build a fresh, up-to-the-
moment electronic order of battle—the type and location
of enemy emitters, in the air and on the ground—as
it enters an area.
In the future, F-22s will analyze and pinpoint the low-
power wireless communications networks that insurgents
use to organize and trigger weapons remotely. Using low-
probability-of-intercept data links, F-22s will send informa-
tion they collect to other aircraft and intelligence networks.
This auspicious beginning shows the F-22 has much to
offer in today’s warfare against insurgents and less-than-
superpower forces, not just the future high-tech conflicts it
was designed to deter. We’re looking forward to learning
more about this versatile aircraft and the roles it can play
in transforming more of the last superpower’s combat edge,
from the realm of explosives to the world of electronics and
networks.
c
No Cold War Vestige,
F-22 Is Proving
Its Net-Centric Mettle
Posted from Aviation Week, January 8, 2007, copyright by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. with all rights reserved.
This reprint implies no endorsement, either tacit or expressed, of any company, product, service or investment opportunity.
#1-19375571 Managed by Reprint Management Services, 717.399.1900. To request a quote online, visit [url=http://www.reprintbuyer.com]www.reprintbuyer.com[/url].
You can define a 5TH Generation FighterTM –
but can you find it?
The F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II bring stealth to the fight. Each brings low observable
design, concealed weapons, sensor fusion, revolutionary technologies – all the features that separate
5TH Generation Fighters from all others. Game-changing capabilities for an unfair fight. Virtually
impossible to detect. F-22 and F-35. 5TH Generation capability only from Lockheed Martin.
[url=http://www.lockheedmartin.com]www.lockheedmartin.com[/url]
[/url]
F-22 ROAD SHOW
F-22:
AND LETHAL
Mass, speed and guile fail to score Raptor shootdowns
during Alaskan exercises
As the F-22 begins its operational life, interest has turned to as-
sessing just how well suited the stealthy Raptor is to its role as
the premier air-to-air fighter, while taking a peek at some of the
surprises for pilots and maintenance crews as they explore what
the aircraft can do. As part of the research for this series of ar-
ticles on the F-22, Michael Fabey flew in the back seat of an
F-15D while the Eagle and Raptor pilots demonstrated their air-
craft’s capabilities in the air-to-air ranges at Tyndall AFB, Fla.
(For additional details of the Raptor’s unique air-to-air capa-
bilities, see AW&ST Sept. 6, 1999, p. 84.)
DAVID A. FULGHUM and MICHAEL J. FABEY/WASHINGTON
T
he F-22 is proving it’s a dog-
fighter after all.
While it wasn’t part of a
hard-turning furball, an F-22—
with its Amraams and Side-
winders expended—slipped into visual
range behind an F-16 and undetected
made a simulated kill with its cannon
during the stealth fighter’s first large-
scale exercise and deployment outside
the continental U.S.
Those and other revelations about the
F-22’s emerging capabilities are increas-
ingly important as the first combat unit,
the U.S. Air Force’s 27th Fighter Sqdn.,
begins its initial Air Expeditionary Force
deployment this month to an undisclosed
site. And the first F-22 unit, the 94th
Fighter Sqdn., will participate in Red Flag
in February.
The gun kill is a capability Air Force
planners hope their F-22s won’t use. The
fighter is designed to destroy a foe well
beyond his visual and radar range. With-
in visual-range combat and, in particu-
lar, gun kills are anachronisms. In amass-
ing 144 kills to no losses during the first
week of the joint-service Northern Edge
exercise in Alaska last summer, only three
air-to-air “kills” were in the visual are-
na—two involving AIM-9 Sidewinders
and one the F-22’s cannon.
The 27th Fighter Sqdn. aircraft—on
deployment from Langley AFB, Va.—
didn’t get to show off their J-Turn and
Cobra maneuvers or their high-angle-
of-attack, high-off-boresight (which ac-
tually will arrive with the AIM-9X) and
unique nose-pointing capabilities. The
reason, those involved say, was because
the victims of the three encounters, fly-
ing conventional fighters, never had a
clue they were being stalked by F-22s
until they were “killed.”
Raptor pilots agree that their pre-
ferred location for the fighter while in
the battlespace is at high altitude, well
above the other fighters, where they can
adopt a fuel-efficient cruise, sweeping
both the air and ground with radar and
electronic surveillance for targets. From
a superior altitude, the F-22 used sus-
tained supercruise to range across hun-
dreds of miles of airspace before an en-
emy fighter could threaten friendly
high-value surveillance, command-and-
control and tanker aircraft.
2 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
Perhaps the most important revelation
by the 27th Fighter Sqdn. was demon-
strating the F-22’s ability to use its sen-
sors to identify and target enemy aircraft
for conventional fighters by providing in-
formation so they could engage the en-
emy sooner than they could on their own.
Because of the advanced situational
awareness they afford, F-22s would stick
around after using up their weapons to
continue providing targets and IDs to the
conventional fighters.
“We always left F-22s on station to help,
but we didn’t designate any one aircraft
to provide data,” says Lt. Col. Wade
Tolliver, the unit’s commander. “It was
critical that every F-22 out there provid-
ed all the data he had.”
With its high-resolution radar, the
F-22 can guarantee target altitudes to
within a couple of hundred feet. Its abil-
ity to identify an aircraft is “sometimes
many times quicker than the AWACS,”
he says. “It was a combination of high-
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
resolution sensors and being closer to
the targets.”
The F-22’s radar range is described
only as being more than 100 mi. Howev-
er, it’s thought to be closer to 125-150 mi.,
which is much farther than the standard
F-15’s 56-mi. radar range. New, active
electronically scanned radar technology—
optimized for digital throughput—is ex-
pected to soon push next-generation radar
ranges, in narrow beams, out to 250 mi.
or more.
The ability to close on the enemy with-
out being targeted also allowed the F-22s
to operate in threat areas where conven-
tional fighters could not survive. This
enabled the Raptor to engage targets at
a greater distance from the aircraft and
homeland they were defending.
Raptor pilots had all the available data
on the airspace fused and displayed on
An F-15E, (left), F-15C and F-22 get together
over one of Alaska’s glaciers after racking
up a combined one-day kill ratio of 83-1
during Northern Edge, the Raptor’s first
large-scale air-to-air exercise.
a single, easy-to-read screen.
“When I look down at my scope and
put my cursor over a [friendly] F-15 or
F/A-18, it tells me who they are locked
on to,” he says. For example, “I could
help them out by saying, ‘You’re double-
targeted and there’s a group over here
untargeted’ . . . to make sure we got
everybody.” F-15 targets will be latent
because of the radar sweep.
However, these messages are less and
less verbal. “When you watch [tapes of
the Alaska] exercise, it’s fairly spooky,”
says Gen. Ronald Keys, chief of Air Com-
bat Command. “There’s hardly a word
spoken among Raptor pilots.” That si-
lence also previews some of the fighter’s
possible future capabilities.
“Because of the way the aircraft was
designed, we have the capability to do
more,” Keys says. “We can put un-
manned combat aircraft systems in there
with Raptor. You’ve got three fairly low-
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
observable UCAS in the battlespace. An
air defense system pops up, and I click
on a UCAS icon and drag it over [the
emitter’s location] and click. The UCAS
throttles over and jams it, blows it up or
whatever.”
In Alaska, because the F-22 remained
far forward at high altitude, with an ad-
vanced radar it could monitor rescue mis-
sions that the AWACS 150 mi. away
could not. “We could see the helicopters
down in the valleys and protect them,”
Tolliver says.
In addition to AWACS, the F-22 also
can feed data to the RC-135 Rivet Joint
signals intelligence aircraft to improve
situational awareness of the battlespace.
“If a Rivet Joint is trying to get tri-
angulation [on a precise emitter loca-
tion], he can get more [voice] informa-
tion” from an F-22, Keys says. “If an
A
WACS sees a heavy group 40 mi. to the
north, Raptor can come up and say it’s
two F-18s, two F-15s and four F-16s.”
Moreover, Keys says, modifications are
underway to transmit additional target
parameters—such as sensitive, high-res-
olution infrared data—from the F-22
with a low-probability-of-intercept data
link.
“Getting data into an F-22 is not
hard,” Keys says. “Getting it out [while
staying low observable] is more difficult.
We bought the links, but we just don’t
have them on yet.”
The F-22’s advanced electronic sur-
veillance sensors also provided addition-
al awareness of ground activity.
“I could talk to an EA-6B Prowler elec-
tronic attack crew and tell them where a
surface-to-air missile site was active so
they would immediately know where to
point their electronic warfare sensors,”
Tolliver says. “That decreased their tar-
geting time line considerably.”
In addition, the F-22 can use its elec-
tronic surveillance capabilities to con-
duct precision bombing strikes on emit-
ters—a capability called destruction of
enemy air defenses.
“And future editions of the F-22 are
predicted to have to have their own elec-
tronic attack capability so that we’ll be
able to suppress or nonkinetically kill a
site like that,” he says.
The F-22’s operating altitude and ad-
ditional speed during the Alaska exer-
cise also garnered praise.
“We stayed high because it gives us
an extra kinetic advantage with shoot-
ing, speed and fuel consumption,” Tol-
liver says. “The Raptor typically flies way
higher than everybody else and it han-
dles like a dream at those altitudes.” Tol-
liver wouldn’t confirm the operating al-
titude, but Pentagon officials have put
it at 65,000 ft., which is at least 15,000
ft. higher than the other fighters.
“There were times we went lower,
maybe to visually identify a threat or if
we were out of Amraams and there was
a bandit sneaking in at low altitude,” he
says. “The Raptor would roll in and kill
him with a heat-seeking missile.”
The lopsided combat ratio resulted
because, “they never saw us,” Tolliver
says. “We got there without being de-
tected, and we killed them rapidly. We
didn’t do any major turning. It’s not that
the J-Turn maneuver isn’t fun, but we
didn’t get a chance to use it.”
The F-22’s Mach 1.5 supercruise ca-
pability also got a workout in Alaska.
Because only eight F-22s were ever air-
borne at once during the exercise, four
of them were constantly involved in re-
fueling from tankers flying orbits 150
mi. away. Supercruise got the fighters
there and back quickly. On station, the
fighter would conserve fuel by cruising
at high altitude.
“We also used supercruise quite a bit
because the fight was on such a large
scale,” Tolliver says. “The airspace was
roughly 120 mi. by 140 mi. We could sit
up at high altitude and save our gas and
watch. We don’t hang out at Mach 1.5.
With our acceleration, when we saw the
threats building, because we could see
them so far out, we’d dump the nose
over, light the burners and we were right
up to fighting speed.”
During a typical day in the Alaska
“war,” 24 air-to-air fighters, including
up to eight F-22s, defended their aeri-
al assets and homeland for 2.5 hr. Air
Force F-15s and F-16s and Marine F/A-
18s simulated up to 40 MiG-29s, Su-22s,
Su-24s, Su-27s and Su-30s (which regen-
erated into 103 enemy sorties in a sin-
gle period). They carried AA-10s A to
F, Archers, AA-12 Adders and the Chi-
nese-built PL-12. These were supported
by SA-6, SA-10 and SA-20 surface to
air missiles and an EA-6B for jamming.
Each day, the red air became stronger
and carried more capability.
As a result of all the emitters in the bat-
tlespace, the F-22’s ability to map the
AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007 3
F-22 ROAD SHOW
electronic order of battle (EOB)—what’s
emitting and from where—proved criti-
cal.
“I love intel, but it’s only as good as
the last time [analysts] got a data up-
date, which could have been hours or
even a day earlier,” Tolliver says. An
F-22 “gets rid of the time delay. I can
plot an EOB in real time. I’m not say-
ing we’re better than a Rivet Joint, but
I can go places that it can’t. If he’s 150
mi. away, he’s probably not going to be
able to plot a high-fidelity threat loca-
tion as quickly as I can.”
The adversaries were wily and didn’t
want to lose.
“We had guys running in at 500 ft. off
the deck,” Tolliver says. “We had guys
flying in at 45,000-50,000 ft. doing Mach
1.6, trying to shoot me before I know
they are there. They would mass their
forces and try to win with sheer num-
bers. None of it worked.”
A tactic used by the F-22s was actu-
ally developed and practiced in small-
er scale at Langley before the exercise.
Raptors worked in pairs, integrated with
F-15Cs or F/A-18E/Fs.
“I could help target for them from be-
hind and above,” Tolliver says. “We real-
ly don’t have a name for what we were
doing other than integrated ops. I was
able to look down and smartly target F-
15s or F/A-18s to groups at ranges where
they could not yet [detect] the target.”
Yet, there are a number of F-22 ca-
pabilities that are shrouded in mystery,
including electronic attack, information
warfare and cruise missile defense.
“It’s no secret that one of our mods
is to put electronic attack on board and
then we will play a role in combating
networks,” Tolliver says. “We’re already
involved in the collection part. When we
come back from a mission, we have the
ability to download EOB data that’s
turned into intelligence pictures. This
makes us an intelligence platform do-
ing nontraditional ISR by bringing back
emitter data so that teams can go out
and conduct information operations.”
The next step will be to pass the de-
tailed information about surface-to-air
missile locations, capabilities and emis-
sion details (called parametrics).
“If I have characterized, say an SA-10,
I can send it verbally to A
WACS and they
can send it out to other platforms,” says
Maj. Shawn Anger, an F-22 instructor
with the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. at Tyndall
AFB, Fla. However, “I can’t pass the
parametrics characterization. Hopeful-
ly, we’ll be able to shoot it up the
radar”—a new capability for the radar,
which is being developed to send large,
Turn and Burn
Raptor’s gunfighting heritage
hasn’t completely disappeared
MICHAEL J. FABEY/TYNDALL AFB, FLA., and DAVID A. FULGHUM/WASHINGTON
F
ighting in—or against—the F-22
is a singular event, humbling and
frustrating to its victims, and of-
ten startling to its pilots, who de-
scribe each flight as a learning ex-
perience.
The first thing anyone learns about
the U.S. Air Force’s Raptor is that it
isn’t envisioned as a dogfighting aircraft,
mixing it up with other high-perform-
ance fighters.
Its strengths—which are being ex-
plored daily by test, training and oper-
ational units—include pervasive situa-
tional awareness of what’s in the
battlespace gathered by the aircraft’s ac-
tive electronically scanned array (AESA)
radar, electronic surveillance and in-
frared sensors. Moreover, information
is piped into the aircraft through data
links to off-board sensors and other in-
telligence sources. The range of its sen-
sors out-distance those of non-AESA
aircraft, allowing it to strike a foe that’s
still unaware of the F-22. The Raptor’s
stealth enables it to operate 150 mi.
ahead of large-sensor aircraft and well
above legacy aircraft, where it can use
its acceleration and high-resolution view
of the battlespace to greater advantage.
A newly emerging strength is the F-22’s
“mini-AWACS” capability that allows
targets to be designated for convention-
al F-15s or F-16s.
However, the question periodically
resurfaces about whether the F-22 could
hold its own during a within-visual-range
fight with a very maneuverable fourth-
generation fighter such as the Sukhoi Su-
27 and Su-30, Eurofighter or Dassault
Rafale. The answer will never be obvious
to an outsider. The Raptor’s high-angle-
of-attack capabilities are part of the for-
mula of classified tactics that are closely
held. But, roughly, its unique maneuver-
ing and nose-pointing options—plus the
high off-boresight capabilities of the
AIM-9X missile, which is to be added
about 2010—give the aircraft previously
unheard-of means of quickly shooting
down a foe.
Nonetheless, chasing an F-22 in a two-
seat F-15D—which carried reporter
Michael J. Fabey—provided perspective
about their comparative capabilities.
A recent flight started with F-15 pilot
Capt. Andy (Bishop) Jacob flying along-
side an F-22 piloted by Maj. Shawn
(Rage) Anger in the air-to-air ranges
above Tyndall AFB, Fla.
Opponents of further Raptor procure-
ments argue that going by such basic
flight physics as thrust-to-weight ratios,
rearward cockpit visibility and simple
Waiting to sortie for one of the nine major air-to-air
combats during Northern Edge, 27th FS F-22s line up
at Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. The Raptor demonstrated
both performance and sensor advantages over con-
ventional fighters.
4 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
aircraft size, the F-22 ranks below the
F-15 and other earlier fighters.
Aerial engagements like the en-
counter between Anger and Jacob are
supposed to help prove the Raptor’s
case. Still, one argument offered by F-22
opponents is that the jet’s reported vic-
tories over F-15s are often scripted and
unreliable gauges of Raptor superiority.
The Raptor’s silhouette stood out
against the thick wool of clouds build-
ing nearly 18,000 ft. up. The two air-
planes lined up their noses on an imag-
inary starting line and accelerated from
250 kt. at an altitude of 13,000 ft.
Inside the F-15, Jacob’s body
slammed backward and the two fighters
stayed even for about 10 sec. The F-15
hit 450 kt. in full afterburner in level
flight after 20 sec. The F-22 hit 500 kt.
in maximum afterburner and pulled
away, ending the race. Jacob laughed.
“That’s it,” he said. “My F-15 can’t ac-
celerate any more.”
The F-15 was designed and built to be
a quick, maneuverable dogfighter. It has
Pratt & Whitney F100-P-W100 turbofan
engines powering a lightly loaded and ad-
vanced airframe. Weighing in at about
42,160 lb., the F-15 has a thrust-to-weight
ratio approaching 1.2 (when stripped and
not in a combat configuration) and a wing
loading of about 69 lb. per sq. ft. By com-
parison, the F-22 has a thrust-to-weight
ratio closer to 1 and wing loading of about
80 lb. per sq. ft. But the Raptor has two
Pratt & Whitney’s F119 low-bypass, aug-
mented 35,000-lb. class engines with two-
dimensional vectored thrust nozzles.
Jacob circled above the Raptor as
Anger put the fighter through several
maneuvers. He illustrated three key tac-
tical moves—the J-Turn, high-alpha turn
and the classic, Russian Cobra. There
are times during an air-to-air engage-
ment when any of them could be em-
ployed, but the J-Turn is used more than
the Cobra, says Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver,
commander of the 27th Fighter Sqdn.
Roughly, the J-Turn begins with the
nose of the F-22 pointed up. Then, at
high alpha (angle of attack), the rudder
is kicked and the nose swings until point-
ed downhill. F-22 pilots describe a flight
path mimicking the shape of a candy
cane. The J-Turn is a vertical maneu-
ver used to quickly reverse the aircraft’s
direction using a very small turn radius.
After a planned stall, Anger’s Raptor
pivoted through a rapid-minimum, 180-
deg. J-Turn at 250 kt. in maximum after-
burner with full aft stick. It’s also known
as the “Herbst Maneuver,” after Wolf-
gang Herbst, a German proponent of us-
ing post-stall flight in air-to-air combat.
The aircraft pulled into a 60-70-deg.
bank, nose high, with roughly a 60-deg.
angle of attack. Anger applied full stick
and pro-rudder, turning into the air-
craft’s roll. The Raptor’s nose yawed
down into the vertical.
For the second maneuver, Anger pulled
the Raptor into a high-alpha loop,
powering again to 250 kt. He pulled 3-4g
to about 180 kt. in the pure vertical,
reaching 20-30 deg. past the vertical with
full aft stick. The AOA increased beyond
60-70-deg. alpha as the upward motion
slowed. Normally a rapid pitch rate would
stop the aircraft’s nose, but thrust vec-
toring carried the F-22’s nose back over
the top, completing the loop.
In contrast, the legendary Cobra ma-
neuver is done from the horizontal
plane, and the nose pitches up past ver-
tical and returns to the horizontal after
a pronounced deceleration.
To force an opponent to overshoot,
Anger yanked the Raptor into a dynam-
ic, nose-high attitude made possible by
brute engine power—a maneuver that
Russian Su-27 pilots introduced to air
show crowds. First, Anger slowed to 250
kt., pushed both throttles to the military
power detent, then pulled the control
stick to its full-aft position. The Raptor’s
nose pitched up to a 60-70-deg. attitude,
so the fighter’s belly remained aligned
with the flight path, creating enough
drag to immediately slow the aircraft
substantially. He then pushed the stick
full forward to snap the Raptor’s nose
back to level flight.
The Cobra is used to “gain high
ground and stop your forward travel,”
Tolliver says. “The Cobra is a great air
show maneuver, but most of us don’t
typically use it during aerial combat.”
Fighting—or even keeping up with
the Raptor—requires extremely fast as-
sessment and reactions. “Faster than re-
quired for any other aircraft I’ve flown
against,” Jacob says.
Anger and Jacob had planned to en-
gage in mock combat. However, a flash-
ing indicator light warned that some-
thing could be wrong with the F-22. But
the flight was enough to make a believ-
er of Jacob. “Maybe, with some tricks or
tactics, I can beat it,” he said. “But that
would be a one-time set of circumstances.
As for a Raptor-beating tactic—there’s
no such thing.”
C
For F-22 video, see [url=http://www.aviationweek]www.aviationweek[/url].
com/f22
HS
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007 5
F-22 ROAD SHOW
Away Game
First F-22 large-scale, air combat exercise
wins praise and triggers surprise
DAVID A. FULGHUM/WASHINGTON
I
t’s high drama. The first combat
squadron of F-22s goes on its longest
deployment—3,200 naut. mi. away—
with an immature aircraft and a new
skipper.
Despite the potential for unknown
problems and the uncertainty of be-
ing far from its maintenance base in
Langley AFB, Va., the 27th Fighter
Sqdn. was able to go to war for two
weeks with 12 F-22s. Every flying day
of the Northern Edge exercise in Alas-
ka, the truncated force was able to
launch eight aircraft for a 2.5-hr. mis-
sion, return, re-arm and then launch six
aircraft, says Lt. Col. Wade Tolliver,
who at the time of deployment had
been squadron commander for two
weeks. While no more than one-third
of the defending force, the F-22s gen-
erated 49% of the air-to-air kills.
And perhaps the most pleasing vin-
dication for the F-22 design was avoid-
ing the stealth maintenance problems
that dogged the B-2 bomber during its
early deployments. Repairing and cur-
ing the exterior finish of the B-2 re-
quired a special climate-controlled
hangar wherever it went to ensure that
it stayed low observable (LO).
“You have to maintain the signature
of any LO aircraft,” Tolliver says. “They
were able to take care of it in Alaska
with no problem. Here at Langley we
have a special facility. In Alaska we did
The U.S. Air Force’s oldest (F-117)
and newest (F-22) operational stealth
fighters fly together over a test range in
the southwest U.S. But the Raptor brings
far greater capabilities in speed, altitude and
intelligence-gathering to the fight.
our [stealth] repairs on the flight line or
in a normal hangar.”
What Tolliver didn’t discuss was the
F-22’s Signature Assessment System.
“SAS will tell you if you can ignore
the accumulated scratches and dings,”
says an official involved in the Raptor
program. “If you have sufficient LO
margin, you don’t have to make imme-
diate repairs and can simply wait until
the return to Langley. The stealth sig-
nature is still not easy to fix, but the
stealth coatings are not as fragile as they
were in earlier stealth aircraft. It isn’t
damaged by a rain storm, and it can
stand the wear and tear of combat with-
out degradation.”
“The biggest success at Northern
Edge was maintenance,” Tolliver says.
“We were tasked for 105 sorties; we
launched 102. That’s a 97% sortie gen-
eration rate. That’s incredible on an im-
mature fighter. Since we were doing
eight turn six [launching eight F-22s,
then returning and launching another
six] the whole time with 12 jets, that re-
sulted in a 21.8 utilization rate. Normal-
ized over a month, that means each
plane would fly 21.8 times.”
The squadron sent a relatively com-
pact organization to Alaska to support
the exercise.
“The deployment plan was two KC-
10s dragging 12 F-22s from Langley to
Elmendorf,” Tolliver says. “It’s an 8-hr.
6 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/JANUARY 8, 2007
flight and 3,200 naut. mi. We took all
our people with us [218 personnel] on
the two KC-10s except for the 15-mem-
ber advance team we sent about three
days earlier. They’re there early to set
up and have guys ready to catch the air-
planes when the jets land.”
To prepare for the trip, the squadron
stopped flying three days prior to pre-
pare the F-22s. Two days prior, they
readied all the cargo. One day prior, the
pilots and maintainers had a final brief-
ing and planners finalized which 12 air-
craft would be deployed.
The support package included the
equipment and spare parts to maintain
the aircraft for 45 days. In the mix were
two extra Pratt & Whitney F119 engines.
They had to take F-22-specific aircraft
support equipment with them because
none is distributed around U.S. bases,
as is done for F-15s and F-16s.
“That equated to 63 increments of
cargo [pallets carrying 170 short tons],”
Tolliver says. “That’s about five C-17
equivalents. What didn’t go by air went
by truck and then ferry to Alaska. That’s
about in line with what’s needed for
12-15 F-15Es going to a bare base.”
When the system matures, around
2010, Air Force planners hope to cut
that number. They want to deploy 24
F-22s with just seven C-17s loads—about
30% less than today. However, program
officials say that by summer 2009, they
[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/awst]www.aviationweek.com/awst[/url]
want the requirement further reduced
to about 50%.
“But now, we’re still taking a lot of
extra parts and equipment because we
don’t know what’s going to break,” Tol-
liver says. “As we fly more and more, we
learn that. Once we get the F-22 fully
deployed, some of that aircraft-specif-
ic, mission-generation equipment will
be other places.”
A point of pride for the 27th was that
crews were able to generate local sor-
ties the day after they arrived in Alaska
at the end of their long flight from Vir-
ginia.
Northern Edge was a two-week, large-
force employment exercise, the F-22’s
first. More than 5,000 troops from 36
units participated. There were nine
large-force employment periods—each
about 2.5 hr. long—during the two
weeks. The F-22 flies about 1.25-1.5 hr.
without refueling, much the same as an
F-15 or F-16, so the unit was involved
in a lot of refuelings. The missions were
mostly flown over the Pacific-Alaskan
Range Complex and the Gulf of Alaska.
The range is about 120 X 140 mi.
“The airspace was awesome because
we had the surface to 60,000 ft., could
fly supersonic, chaff and flares allowed,
so everything was really good,” Tolliv-
er says. “Another big benefit was the abil-
ity to operate with joint assets. The serv-
ices are busy around the world, and
trying to get together and operate as a
joint combat unit on this scale is tough.
Taking this new fighter and integrating
it with all the proven assets ensure that
the first time we go to war is not the first
time we’ve operated together.”
Participants claim that everybody
connected with the F-22 force did bet-
ter in the exercise because of the
situational awareness that the Raptor
provides.
The Langley F-22s will have another
busy year in 2007. The 27th Fighter Sqdn.
will make its first air expeditionary force
rotation. The AEF requirement involves
a 20-month cycle subdivided into four-
month increments. They train for 16
months and then deploy four months. The
Raptor’s first AEF starts in January.
“We’re anxiously awaiting our orders
to deploy somewhere,” Tolliver says.
“We know they want us to go. The pilots
and maintainers are combat-ready. I’d
love to go into [the Iraq/Afghanistan]
theater and contribute to the war, but I
don’t know. If they want us to contribute,
we’re ready.”
Meanwhile, the 94th Fighter Sqdn.,
which is just becoming operational, will
be the first F-22 unit to participate in Red
Flag at the end of this month.
C
EDITORIALS
A
pparently the F-22 Rap-
tor, the newest aircraft in
the U.S. Air Force inven-
tory, isn’t the Cold War
anachronism its detractors
thought it would be. In fact, evi-
dence to date suggests the stealthy
fighter is worth more than skep-
tics expected.
At a current flyaway cost of $136 million, the Raptor will
never be a bargain. The procurement quantity will be an is-
sue as long as it is in production. But the aircraft’s first large-
scale deployment, and its performance in the joint-service
Northern Edge exercise in Alaska (see p. 46), show that tax-
payers are getting high value for the high cost.
After that exercise, the F-22’s advantages of speed, alti-
tude and stealth are undeniable. The Raptor flew 10,000
ft. higher than its “opponents,” and it used its supercruise
capability to dash back and forth across a huge battle space.
Even when the F-22 moved within visual range to “kill”
an F-16 with its cannon—a weapon it may never use in com-
bat—the “enemy” never knew it was there.
Raptor pilots never had a chance to show off their J-turns,
high-alpha loops and high off-boresight capabilities. But nev-
er mind. Virtually no one believes the F-22’s primary role will
be mano-a-mano aerial combat against previous-generation
fighters. Far more important, the aircraft showed some of its
value in intelligence-gathering and surveillance, which kept
it over the battlefield long after it had fired its weapons.
Loitering at high altitude, F-22s
were able to identify targets ac-
curately enough to satisfy the
rules of engagement and pass
them along to conventional fight-
er aircraft for precise, long-range
kills. The F-22 can perform some
surveillance/target identification
and signals intelligence missions
of AWACS and Rivet Joint aircraft, respectively. But un-
like those aircraft, which must stay 150 naut. mi. or more
away from many hostile forces, the stealthy F-22 can fly over
targets with impunity. It can build a fresh, up-to-the-
moment electronic order of battle—the type and location
of enemy emitters, in the air and on the ground—as
it enters an area.
In the future, F-22s will analyze and pinpoint the low-
power wireless communications networks that insurgents
use to organize and trigger weapons remotely. Using low-
probability-of-intercept data links, F-22s will send informa-
tion they collect to other aircraft and intelligence networks.
This auspicious beginning shows the F-22 has much to
offer in today’s warfare against insurgents and less-than-
superpower forces, not just the future high-tech conflicts it
was designed to deter. We’re looking forward to learning
more about this versatile aircraft and the roles it can play
in transforming more of the last superpower’s combat edge,
from the realm of explosives to the world of electronics and
networks.
c
No Cold War Vestige,
F-22 Is Proving
Its Net-Centric Mettle
Posted from Aviation Week, January 8, 2007, copyright by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. with all rights reserved.
This reprint implies no endorsement, either tacit or expressed, of any company, product, service or investment opportunity.
#1-19375571 Managed by Reprint Management Services, 717.399.1900. To request a quote online, visit [url=http://www.reprintbuyer.com]www.reprintbuyer.com[/url].
You can define a 5TH Generation FighterTM –
but can you find it?
The F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II bring stealth to the fight. Each brings low observable
design, concealed weapons, sensor fusion, revolutionary technologies – all the features that separate
5TH Generation Fighters from all others. Game-changing capabilities for an unfair fight. Virtually
impossible to detect. F-22 and F-35. 5TH Generation capability only from Lockheed Martin.
[url=http://www.lockheedmartin.com]www.lockheedmartin.com[/url]
[/url]
Рис. 1. Гипотетическая зона действия самолета Е-3 в двух плоскостях с секторами разных режимов работы: 1 - импульсно-доплеровский режим с определением высоты воздушных целей; 2 - импульсно-доплеровский режим повышенной дальности обнаружения без определения высоты целей; 3 - режим надгоризонтного поиска; 4 - режим обнаружения надводных целей; 5 - пеленгование источников помех 10-см диапазона волн; 6 - совмещение импульсно-доплеровского режима с определением высоты целей и режима обнаружения надводных целей
Добавлено спустя 1 минуту 51 секунду:
Для красоты вот решил приаттачить
drug
Активный участник
- Сообщения
- 1.419
- Адрес
- Новосибирск
На самом деле и это тоже неверно.GOLEM написал(а):
Самолет с секторной БРЛС может обнаружить цели только в ППС. Какая это система предупреждения, если она смотрит только в одну сторону? Это как охранять склад только с севера. Кому это надо?Вы четко выразили мысль, что Ф-22 может быть глазами группы самолетов, идущих в радиомолчании. Здесь я с Вами согласен на 100%. Это уже достойное дело, не каждый самолет сможет делать это с теми же параметрами. Но зачем упоминать АВАКС, который решает намного больше других задач, чем просто обнаружение?
Добавлено спустя 6 минут 39 секунд:
rosen
лучше в текстовый файл скопировать и выложить, намного удобнее будет. Все не прочитал, но
говорит, что Малозаметность Раптора позволяет ему действовать впереди самолета с большим радаром на 150 морских миль и заметно выше самолетов предыдущих поколений, что позволяем ему использовать его ускорение и высокое разрешение при обзоре района боевых действий для получения дополнительного преимущества.
Т.е. Ф-22 действует с поддержкой АВАКСа. И не нужно читать по английски, что бы увидеть, что mini-AWACS взято в кавычки - т.е. это более чем условное понятие.
Позвольте не согласитьсяdrug написал(а):
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed/B ... -22_Raptor
Пардон, что даю ссылку на тетю Вику
Добавлено спустя 13 минут 46 секунд:
Пока да, никто же этого не отрицает. Но, с учетом развития перспективных АСП (типа КС-172 и т.д.), Раптору все больше придется брать на себя роль самолета дальнего обнаружения, ИМХО.drug написал(а):
Вот поэтому, я не считаю зазорным наименование "мини-АВАКС", обратно же, ИМХО.
drug
Активный участник
- Сообщения
- 1.419
- Адрес
- Новосибирск
В википедии нет ссылок что такое станция предупреждения об облучении (СПО)? Рекомендую.GOLEM написал(а):
И да - если бы СПО не была круговой, я бы тогда вообще бы посмеялся. И также советую продумать тот факт, как может СПО, обнаружив атакующего противника в ЗПС (кстати, странно, что такой супер самолет опасается атаки со всех ракурсов - наверное, он не такой все-таки супер и сами конструкторы это признают?), так вот, обнаружив атаку в ЗПС передать целеуказания для секторной БРЛС может иметь смысл только для того, чтобы у пилота эти данные отобразились - т.к. БРЛС у раптора имеет зону обзора 120 градусов - по 60 градусов от оси самолета. ВСЕ. Поэтому повторюсь, что раптор имеет секторную БРЛС и использоваться в качестве мини-авакса не может. И уж тем более не может рассматриваться в качестве самолета ДРЛО. И брать то он на себя такую возможность может, да только не вытянет. Это самолет, предназначенный для других целей.
GOLEM, если честно, Вы злоупотребляете и также не воспринимаете информацию и даже не читаете ссылки, что приводите. То предлагали сойтись на "глазах стаи", теперь опять говорите о роли самолета дальнего обнаружения. Почему то все защитники Ф-22 как мини-авакса однообразны. Наверное, потому что нет никаких причин для Ф-22 быть мини-аваксом?
Я прекрасно знаю, что такое СПО, "Береза" - та вообще меня часто выручает в баталияхdrug написал(а):
Но, уверен, Вам, по роду службы, прекрасно знакома и другая аббревиатура - РТР, которая больше подходит для названия сего изделия
Источник: FIGHTER EW.
Date: 7/1/2000; Publication: Journal of Electronic Defense; Author: Sweetman, Bill
А довернуть в сторону угрозы - взападло? :grin:drug написал(а):
drug написал(а):
Ринат
Военный лётчик
- Сообщения
- 8.466
- Адрес
- Санкт-Петербург
GOLEM написал(а):
Конечно западло.
Как только он пойдет в разворот - это уже не Раптор-стелс, а Раптор-мишень. :study:
drug
Активный участник
- Сообщения
- 1.419
- Адрес
- Новосибирск
Возможно она Вас часто выручает в баталиях. Но я не вижу, чтобы Вы различали СПО и БРЛС. Зачем ставят БРЛС, если достаточно поставить СПО? Или все-таки не достаточно СПО?GOLEM написал(а):
По-моему это элементарно, что станция предупреждения об облучении сигнализирует об облучении самолета. Что означает, что если Ф-22 не облучается, то СПО молчит. Отсюда вытекает, что для того, чтобы пройти незамеченным мимо Ф-22 даже в 20 км достаточно не облучать его и не попадать в зону действия БРЛС. Что мешает подобраться к Ф-22 с ракурса 270 градусов и на дистанции, резко снижающей возможности Ф-22 захватить его и расстрелять? АВАКС не даст это сделать. А Ф-22? Поможет ему СПО в этом случае?
Реально несерьезные оппоненты. Каждый придумывает какую-то свою "фишку" у Ф-22, кто малозаметность, которая аваксу как собаке пятая нога, кто LPI, который тоже бесполезен для АВАКСа, кто-то вообще тупо ссылки и цитаты приводит, откопанные где-то в сети, теперь СПО оказывается превращает Ф-22 во всеракурсный обнаружитель... Ну почему нельзя проанализировать, что вы все пишите? Я тоже наверняка где-то ошибаюсь, но я же не пишу ахинею...
Простите GOLEM, но после Вашего аргумента о СПО я тоже не могу воспринимать Вас серьезно (в этой теме), к сожалению.
Добавлено спустя 1 минуту 36 секунд:
Ну вообще не серьезно. А если целей две и с противоположных ракурсов? В какую сторону и как часто Вы будете поворачивать? Будет ли это Вам "взападло"?GOLEM написал(а):
alrick
Вам определение термина "МЕМУАРЫ" дать или наслово поверите, что это жанр "ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННОЙ" литературы.
А то я могу ВАМ вопрос задать того же типа - "а Джон Роналд Руэл Толкиен пишет в своих романах НЕПРАВДУ?"
Добавлено спустя 1 минуту 42 секунды:
rosen
Любезнейший, Вы не те слова "капсом" написали... бо ключевое слово здесь "МЕМУАРЫ".alrick написал(а):
Вам определение термина "МЕМУАРЫ" дать или наслово поверите, что это жанр "ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННОЙ" литературы.
А то я могу ВАМ вопрос задать того же типа - "а Джон Роналд Руэл Толкиен пишет в своих романах НЕПРАВДУ?"
Добавлено спустя 1 минуту 42 секунды:
rosen
Камрад, будьте добры, отредактируйте своё сообщение, бо палец устаёт уже его прокручивать.rosen написал(а):
ой, не прав Вы.drug написал(а):
прочтите материал внимательне:
In Alaska, because the F-22 remained
far forward at high altitude, with an ad-
vanced radar it could monitor rescue mis-
sions that the AWACS 150 mi. away
could not. “We could see the helicopters
down in the valleys and protect them,”
Tolliver says.
In addition to AWACS, the F-22 also
can feed data to the RC-135 Rivet Joint
signals intelligence aircraft to improve
situational awareness of the battlespace.
“If a Rivet Joint is trying to get tri-
angulation [on a precise emitter loca-
tion], he can get more [voice] informa-
tion” from an F-22, Keys says. “If an
AWACS sees a heavy group 40 mi. to the
north, Raptor can come up and say it’s
two F-18s, two F-15s and four F-16s.”
Moreover, Keys says, modifications are
underway to transmit additional target
parameters—such as sensitive, high-res-
olution infrared data—from the F-22
with a low-probability-of-intercept data
link.
drug написал(а):
Вот так...нашел первую русскоязычную ссылку по изделию - и тут же был обвинен в некомпетентности. Моя бочина - нужно было на буржуйском привести, глядишь - остался бы солидным оппонентомdrug написал(а):
Я, чтоль, AN/ALR-94 СПОм обозвал?
Вообще-то правильно называть EWS (Electronic Warfare System) либо MIRFS (Multi-function Integrated Radio Frequency System).Меня можно всерьез не воспринимать (не специалист, любитель я), но приводимые ссылки - ИМХО, да
Добавлено спустя 2 минуты 21 секунду:
Я их прекрасно различаю и понимаю их назначение, ибо, если бы не - гореть бы мне костром постоянно (хоть и понарошку)drug написал(а):
Добавлено спустя 5 минут 9 секунд:
Сначала обнаружить нужно...drug написал(а):
Как? Даст форсаж и уйдет с отстрелом ЛТЦ и ДО?drug написал(а):
См. пожалуйста, посты про "длинную руку"
Volgar-Astra
Активный участник
- Сообщения
- 1.568
- Адрес
- Ахтубинск
Правильно, все современные самолёты имеют отличный СОК (систему объективного контроля). Например записываются сотни параметров работы БРЛС - все параметры обнаруженных в разных режимах целей: амплитуды отражённых от них сигналов на разных дальностях, спектр этих сигналов и т.д. Так же станции РЭБ (РТР) - СОК записывает структуру, спектры и частоты принятых сигналов и ещё много чего! Если в отношении своих целей это изучать мало кому интересно, то в отношении например Раптора или Еврофайтера было бы интересно... Всё упирается в людей, чтобы это хоть кому-то было нужно и интересно! (с этим в России есть проблемы)drug написал(а):
Ну да, ну да...Ринат написал(а):
А по вводным камрада Drug'а - атакуют таки в ЗПС, где ЭПР, кагбе, не самая маленькая, даже больше, чем с ракурсов 2/4, 3/4, 4/4 (без разницы по высоте имел в виду, если что - а то, ведь, опять получу обвинения в невежестве)
Так чего? Доверну - и тут уже непонятно, кто есть охотник, а кто, как бы - дичь
Добавлено спустя 2 минуты 42 секунды:
Нам бы Ваши проблемы, Марьиванна (с)Volgar-Astra написал(а):
Нагонют по налету и по новой матчасти - усё будет ок...шаги к этому есть, ИМХО (если правильно понял Ваш пост)
:OK-)
Докладываю:drug написал(а):
Доворачиваю носом к более опасной цели (используя данные VSD, уменьшаю для более опасной цели ЭПР, вторая - работает вдогон), с набором высоты (пологим, чтобы пузо не подставлять - тем самым, увеличивая дальность полета своих УРВВ, уменьшая дальность применения УРВВ цели, которая оказалась у меня в ЗПС) выхожу на дистанцию пуска имеющихся в наличии АСП (если есть возможность - достигаю "no escape zone" (расход - 1 ракета), если нет - произвожу пуск 2-х ракет с небольшим временным интервалом), уничтожаю более опасную цель, после чего, энергичным разворотом, выхожу "в лоб" второй цели. Произвожу пуск в режиме ДВБ, по характерном изменении метки на экране БРЛС удостоверяюсь о поражении второй цели, после чего - продолжаю выполнение основного задания.
Расход АСП: 2-4 ракеты
Курсант GOLEM доклад закончил.
Добавлено спустя 1 минуту 14 секунд:
Говорят, 0/4 (в жопу), для Раптора - самый опасный :think:Anduriel написал(а):
Добавлено спустя 43 минуты 42 секунды:
Короче - с Днем Победы!
Подискутируем потом...
:OK-)
