The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft,

"The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft," according to an Air Force release that calls it "an exponential leap in warfighting capabilities.".........So the Airforce really thinks there is nothing out there that can match this?Is this true?

I don't know much to be honest about the Raptor other then thrust vectoring,supercruise,stealth and advanced avionics.Does this actually hold the title of worlds best?

www.christiantoday.com...

Only if your trying to sell it/make someone afraid of it







No reason to quote the post immediately before yours, mate.

[edit on 16-7-2008 by Jbird]

Damn straight it does!!!!


God knows whats really under the skin of the raptor. but I'll make a prediction that like all of americas contenders in the fighter aircraft department, no matter how great russia says their crap is, will get defeated in combat by superior american designed craft.

Ever notice the disproportionant losses non american IE soviet crap take when going up against american fighter craft.

not talking about the european craft since I don't think any have tangled in direct conflict with modern US fighters in a long time. but even all of germany's and GB fighters are inferior to the US designed ones. just my opinion. I'm sure someone will come up with some link claiming the tornado or saab is better than it's equivelent in a US design.

The F-22 is absolutely amazing, I honestly can't see it being out performed by any jet even in concept in current times. In 10-20 years that will change, but the USAF has the sleekest, sexiest, quickest fighter in the air, God and a few lucky pilots only know what that thing can really do. Absolutely amazing engineering. I'm sure 1 F-22 could take on 4+ MiGs because of it's long range missile systems and quick maneuvering capability. It's weird that even with the little we know of it's capabilities we are still amazed...like I said, we probably don't know the half of it.

Originally posted by alienstar
So the Airforce really thinks there is nothing out there that can match this?Is this true?

It had better be true. The Raptor was desinged as an "air superiority fighter" whihc means it was desinged to be able to defeat anything that flies. BTW isnt this known as the lighting 2 now?

Raptors a cool name but the lightening lineage is pretty friggen sweet too. I wouldn't mind if they named it the lightening II!!!!

And shazam is right. air superiority fighter means SUPERIORITY= Superior, meaning it's better than anything else that flys. and that goes for you to mr. Hummingbird (an amazing flying machine in it's self, but not the raptor) and you too mr, hawk, eagle, falcon,owl, egret. man is the superior flying species now. suck it birds . laugh at us back when we were strapping wings to our arms trying to fly. who's laughing now. tell us all you avians, ever been into space? nope but us humans have. ha ha.

OK my nonsense rant at innocent birds is over.

Well, simply to make a point:

www.globalsecurity.org...

Beat the piss out of the F-22. Most of the actual performance statistics are classified. The given values are rough estimates - though eyewitness reports (and that of the test pilots, themselves) put the actual performance well above what is printed on paper.

The F-22 is good for airshows, though. The thrust-vectoring does help out at sub-500 knots.

I won't get any further into the debate about the F-22. Simply to say that it's not half as good as it's claimed to be. There are already a couple other threads in relation to this.

Can't be matched by known fighters? Possibly, but depends on scenario.

Can't be matched by projected fighters? Rubbish. Like any weapon system, something better will come along, either in the form of a new airframe, or in improved force level support, weapons or tactics. The question is when, not if.

Picture from a slideshow of the Raptor if anyone cares.

news.yahoo.com...

news.yahoo.com...

Originally posted by Shazam The Unbowed

It had better be true. The Raptor was desinged as an "air superiority fighter" whihc means it was desinged to be able to defeat anything that flies. BTW isnt this known as the lighting 2 now?

The F-35 is the Lightning II, the F-22 is the Raptor.

The F-35 Lightning II is arguably a lesser single engine version of the F-22 - The experts will ridicule me for saying that but the laymen will get it and that's the point.

[edit on 7/14/2008 by bios]

The YF-23 is inferior.
There is a thread on this.

According to Red Flag, the Raptor is, in the extreme, superior to all other combat aircraft.

Please perform research on the subject, even if it is only looking at other threads on this website before exclaiming an opinion.

The Raptor has been proven.

Actually I think the YF-23 was stealthier, faster, a little more maneuverable, and had better milage. but it didn't have as great a weapons capacity or something so they went with the f-22. the yf-23 would have made a really badass plane.

I do think NASA was using it for something though lately. But only to test some stuff. In fact I'm not even sure it was NASA but some US agency made use of the few prototypes that were made.

Originally posted by alienstar
"The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft," according to an Air Force release that calls it "an exponential leap in warfighting capabilities.".........

Pride comes before the fall...



They'd do well to remember what happened in the air wars of Korea and Vietnam as a result of arrogance.

Originally posted by Iblis
The YF-23 is inferior.
There is a thread on this.

According to Red Flag, the Raptor is, in the extreme, superior to all other combat aircraft.

Please perform research on the subject, even if it is only looking at other threads on this website before exclaiming an opinion.

The Raptor has been proven.

Who mentioned the YF-23 Black Widow?
Who are you saying needs to perform research before "exclaiming" an opinion?

Yes, the results of Red Flag demostrated that the F-22 was not only a formidable opponent to the "agressors" who never, ever saw it coming - but also the amount of data/intel the F-22 could pass along to other entities of the warfighting machine was found to be unprecidented.

But all of those incredible benefits the F-22 has, the YF-23 would have had also because they can all be attributed to; 1) stealthiness, 2) sensory abilities / target acquisition and 3) weapon systems.

The YF-23 was faster & stealthier than the Raptor, and the YF-23's sensory systems / target acquisition and weapon systems would have been virtually the same ones used now in the Raptor.

The only difference that is a "for sure" that the F-22 excels above what the YF-23 would have been capable of is maneuverability, as the YF-23 did not have vectored thrust.

The YF-23 prototypes were taken back to the Northrop factory a couple of years ago at the request of DARPA & the USAF. This was when the Next Generation Bomber for 2018 was first being discussed.

Northrop now apparently has a black project on-going involving the NGB but most of the educated guesses are that it's a subsonic or low supersonic platform appearing in much the same configuration as the X-47 UCAS-D (with the exception that it would be manned, unlike the X-47). But it would be a cool thing if "they" had us fooled and there was a bomber version of the YF-23 being developed.

Now THAT would truly be leg-wetting excitement for many enthusiasts!




[edit on 7/15/2008 by bios]

Any plane is only as good as its Pilot. Its even possible to bring down stealth fighters with an educated guess, and some ancient Russian radar

I have to disagree, Sniper... If you pit a flight of MiG-29s with combat vet, 5000 hour pilots vs a butterball in an F-22, the Lieutenant will shoot them down.

Originally posted by HatTrick
I have to disagree, Sniper... If you pit a flight of MiG-29s with combat vet, 5000 hour pilots vs a butterball in an F-22, the Lieutenant will shoot them down.

20 year old MiG-29s or MiG-35 equivalents?


Would make quite a difference.

Either, I think. We're talking stealth vs no stealth which also implies BVR engagements. Now, if something happens and it becomes a knife fight, then even the 29 has a chance.

reply to post by bios


Was there not a unkown issue with the YF-23 during high speed low pass that it suddenly, and unexpected smashed the belly into the ground??

Think I saw a video of that, don't know where, but I think that was the turning point that turned it in the favour of the YF-22.



Reguarding this "our plane is best" fight here, ok, the F-22 has it's good point's like the Eurofighter, this is primary a long range interceptor.

reguarding manuverbility, even with it's thrust vector engine, it will have some serious problems in a Gun vs Gun dogfight with several planes.

F-22 vs Raphale = F-22 easy win, both long range and close combat.

F-22 vs Eurofighter = slightly in Eurofigher favour on long range, Close range is close to even.

F-22 vs JAS 39 Grippen N = Long range = favour og F-22, close combat close even match.

F-22 vs MIG29 OVT - Long range = favour of the F-22, close combat, close to evenly matched, but I belive that the MIG29 OVT will come up on top this only due to previuos planes made by composite in the US army, have a tendancy to break appart, F117 has done this on 3-4 occations, but most likly, the wing design will be the turning point in favour of the MIG29.

F-22 vs SU-37 (Flanker F) - Long range, close win for the F-22, close combat = total win of the SU-37, this due to the front carnards, that gives the SU-37 both lower speed for takeoff and turning, higher angle of attack, and let's not forget the wing's on this plane, this plane only need as little as 60 km/h to turn it's general direction while flying.

Both the MIG29 and SU-37 have actually the same design on the wing, the wing has been developet first, during extensive testing, actually, no other wing has been tested as thoroughly as the original design wing for the MIG29/SU-27 series, ans the wing was also the fitst thing that was designed, all the other parts was added later.


Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link


[edit on 16-7-2008 by Jbird]

Originally posted by Phoebus

Was there not a unkown issue with the YF-23 during high speed low pass that it suddenly, and unexpected smashed the belly into the ground??

Think I saw a video of that, don't know where, but I think that was the turning point that turned it in the favour of the YF-22.

I think the crash you are thinking of is the following that involved the F-22.

Commanders of units flying the F/A-22 Raptor called for a safety stand down of the fleet following a crash 20 December 2004 at Nellis Air Force Base, NV. The pilot ejected safely and suffered no serious injuries. The aircraft, assigned to the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron at Nellis, crashed on takeoff and exploded. The $133.3-million aircraft, assigned to the 422nd Test and Evaluation Squadron at Nellis, was destroyed when it crashed. Additional damage was limited to an arresting cable, runway guide sign, runway light, and the runway itself.

The video of this crash as most often seen is a low angle from the rear as the elevators of the 22 flap up and down and it proceeds to belly flow onto runway again. The cause of the malfunction of the flight-control system was caused by a brief power interruption to the aircraft's three rate-sensor assemblies, which caused them to fail. The assemblies measure angular acceleration in all three axes: pitch, roll, and yaw. With three failed assemblies, the F-22 is not able to fly.