F-22s in Middle East losing their stealth coating

Aviation Week is reporting that F-22s flying over Syria are losing their stealth coatings. The Air Force says that environmental conditions in the region are to blame. Rain, sand dust and other environmental conditions are causing the RAM coating to ripple and peel, and even return to its liquid state. In 2009, complaints arose that the RAM would peel off after contact with fuel or lubricating oil. There was also an undisclosed problem with the weapons system that was causing problems with the stealth that was fixed by base assigned airmen.

Lockheed has come up with a new coating that will be applied as each aircraft goes through maintenance, but the process to replace the current coating will take at least three years to cycle through the entire fleet. In the meantime it will require frequent reapplication of the RAM coating to each aircraft.

The U.S. Air Force (USAF) F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, which are taking part in military operation in Syria, have started to lose their radar-absorbing coating.

As reported by Aviation Week in fact the radar-absorbing coating, that hides the Raptor from radars, warped and started to peel off. According to the USAF one of the reasons of this problem are climatic conditions affecting the area of operations.

A claim confirmed by John Cottam, head of the F-22 program of Lockheed Martin, who noted that external factors, such as rain and sand dust, not only wrinkle and peel off the coating but also turn it into its original liquid state.

theaviationgeekclub.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58
Is this warranty work? Or would that put the price per over the $150,000,000?

a reply to: seasonal

At this point, probably not. It would go under upgrades and modernization work.

I feel wierd...

Like, we wouldn't ever hear about disclosures on advance military platforms in the 50s.

I mean, is this ok? Or am I just running off old hardware in regards to military secrets.

For the record, I don't know how secretive a spray on radar absorbtion is.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Another #load of money down the drain...

Seems to me that that coating should have been tough enough to weather those conditions. Is it hard to refinish the aircraft at the airbase?

a reply to: Arnie123

Knowing that there are problems with the coating isn't a secret, it's knowing what's in the coating that's the big secret.

a reply to: rickymouse

It's a lot easier to do at home, but it can be done at the forward air base.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Three years? Good grief. How many are in service? I'm thinking I looked this up before and I was surprised by the number. Something like 150+ right?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Arnie123

Knowing that there are problems with the coating isn't a secret, it's knowing what's in the coating that's the big secret.

I'll bet dollar to donuts that enough of that finish has sloughed off the F-22s that some of it is already in Russian hands.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Ah ok, so its like something anybody can eventually think of, "hey! What if...spray on stealth?" But actually finding the correct composition is the hard part. We ain't talking flex seal huh?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Yeah I know right? The best part is now that Trump is Prez, we'll be getting more hopefully soon!!

Assuming they can fit it into an increased budget and competing programs.

originally posted by: Arnie123
I feel wierd...

Like, we wouldn't ever hear about disclosures on advance military platforms in the 50s.

I mean, is this ok? Or am I just running off old hardware in regards to military secrets.

For the record, I don't know how secretive a spray on radar absorbtion is.

I feel your weirdness ... I remember our own co' s describing how best to avoid a smart bomb ... on TV .

F=22 is amazing , and maintenance is part of the program , still - I 'm not sure why ' we ' should hear about it .

Thanks OP.

a reply to: theantediluvian

There were 195 built, 8 were test articles, the other 187 were combat coded. One YF-22 crashed at Edwards, one EMD aircraft crashed, two combat coded aircraft have crashed, and one early production aircraft crashed, for a total of five lost airframes. One EMD airframe is on display at the Air Force Museum.

a reply to: Aliensun

Which won't make much difference. The coating is breaking down as it peels, which means it will possibly give them what's in it, but not how it's put together.

a reply to: Arnie123

The rumor for years was that the early F-117 RAM coating was developed almost by accident using almost nothing but household products.

They're already requiring a study to give the cost of restarting production, but I wouldn't hold my breath. You're going to be looking at $400M+ per airframe at least. That's getting into B-21 price range, for an aircraft that's less capable than it will be.

a reply to: Zaphod58

So to buy 10 would be 2 billion. I wouldn't mind if they were actually killing the bad guys.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Something needs doing. Our current aircraft are literally falling out of the skies, and parts are beyond scarce. They're retiring some to get parts for others, and stripping their hangar queens.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Trump said he's gonna work on that. Let's hope he stays true to his word.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Something needs doing. Our current aircraft are literally falling out of the skies, and parts are beyond scarce. They're retiring some to get parts for others, and stripping their hangar queens.

Spot on .
I live near the ' boneyard ' at DM Tucson ... lots of planes seem to be losing more parts than usual . Esp . 135s and 130s .
Couldn't help but notice . More activity at the boneyard , for sure .