Another "praise the Raptor" article

[BigRed389]

We already have less strike/fighter aircraft on carriers than we did just 20 years ago and almost 1/5 less carriers. We need the numbers, not just a few silver bullets.

I get you, but what about a hypothetical contingency scenario.

Less a/c on deck, sure, but suppose you wanted to bring up local strike capability in a hurry.

Hypothetically speaking, easier to fly in some squadrons than try to steam in another CVBG. I'm sure in reality, operational considerations would pose challenges to integrating a squadron that hasn't trained up on workups with the CVW, as well as ramping up the demands on the deck guys.

But it gives the flexibility to get more bang for the buck on station in a hurry, and then maybe it'd pay off to be able mass the "silver bullets."

I know you can what if things to death, and it's thinking that's way off the reservation and not necessarily in line with current fiscal or oeprational reality, but just throwing that out there.

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

You scratch the PAINT on a Raptor and it's a Class A. How the happy hell do they expect these things to take cat shots and traps? The salt air? Face it mate, the Raptor belongs in an airshow, not on the boat.

I doubt cat shots and traps are that big of a deal for most of the airframe since it is rated for 22 G's. Maybe if congress had spent the money they spent soley the development of the F-35 and put that into making some airframe adjustments to the F-22 (I doubt cat shots are that big of a deal for most of the airframe since it is rated for 22 G's) specifically the gear and maybe something to combat the salt air (fresh water hose downs maybe?). Don't get me wrong, I have no desire to see the F-22 on a carrier but it may have saved a lot of money in the long run.... but hindsight is always 20/20 or at least correctable to 20/20.

 

[mmx1]

I doubt cat shots and traps are that big of a deal for most of the airframe since it is rated for 22 G's.

Different types of G's. Fore-aft vs top-bottom.

 

[HeyJoe]

Different types of G's. Fore-aft vs top-bottom.

True that and an aircraft has to have the landing gear designed to take that stress for the Cat shot and have the requisite holdback and launch bar. Not a trivial thing as the gear has to be beefed up to withstand the impact and decel of a trap. Look at USAF landing gear, it's nowhere near the robust size of Navy carrier based aircraft. Designing an aircraft to take a trap affects the design of the entire structure to take that impact and decel.

Compare size of F-16 landing gear with F/A-18 below

HJ Photos

 

[eddie]

Sizzler is a bastard....but it would take more than a dedicated next gen naval fighter to counter it.

Who is Sizzler?

 

[Flash]

Who is Sizzler?

What, not who. It is a Russian missile:

SS-N-27 Sizzler

 

[Mumbles]

What, not who. It is a Russian missile:

SS-N-27 Sizzler

Flash,
I was actually speaking of the affordable family steakhouse that gives me diarreah and makes the Golden Coral look like Morton's or Ruth's Chris:icon_tong
What is this silly little missile you speak of?

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

Different types of G's. Fore-aft vs top-bottom.

I don't know what the G's are that you pull off of a carrier but if it is less than a full afterburner in an F-22 then I think it could take the forward G's from a cat shot and if it can take the G load from decelerating from above mach (which is pretty significant) I think it could take the aft Gs from a trap. I know the points at which the forces are acting are in different places (engine mounts vs, forward gear and airframe vs tailhook/airframe), hence why I said 'most of the airframe' could handle the G's. I don't know very much about the engineering that went into the 22 but I'm sure it could be modded somehow.

 

[MasterBates]

Cat shot =/= selecting AB. If AB could give you the same accel as a Cat, we wouldn't need them.

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

True that and an aircraft has to have the landing gear designed to take that stress for the Cat shot and have the requisite holdback and launch bar. Not a trivial thing as the gear has to be beefed up to withstand the impact and decel of a trap. Look at USAF landing gear, it's nowhere near the robust size of Navy carrier based aircraft. Designing an aircraft to take a trap affects the design of the entire structure to take that impact and decel.

Good point, there wouldn't be room to store all that gear unless you took up some of the interior weapons bay for the rear gear and who knows about the front gear... the nose gear is tiny compared to the Navy's. It's obviously too late to change the overall design but it seems that it could have been a viable option to make the F-22 into a JSF type program instead of spending all that money on the development of the 35.

 

[mmx1]

Food for thought......

If the F-22 were able to equal the acceleration of a cat shot at full military power.....it wouldn't need a catapult, now would it?

Similarly for the deceleration

Edit: Dammit, beat by the Master

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

Cat shot =/= selecting AB. If AB could give you the same accel as a Cat, we wouldn't need them.

Good point but I thought you needed the ram effect of high speed to get the max effect of your after burners and that the low altitude and stopped start of a cat shot prevented you from achieving that. We didn't get into to much of the gritty details in API.

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

Similarly for the deceleration

I was only considering the excessive deceleration you'd get at very high speeds, obviously the deceleration from 300kts to 100kts is less than 1300kts to 1000kts.

(I don't know why I continue to argue for the Navalization (if that's a word) of the F-22, I have no desire to see an AF plane on a Navy ship)

 

[MasterBates]

Actually, the acceleration from 1300 to 1100 is the same as from 300 to 100 if it takes place in the same time.

 

[UpstateSouthpaw]

Actually, the acceleration from 1300 to 1100 is the same as from 300 to 100 if it takes place in the same time.

Of course, I was thinking if you pulled the power at 1300kts vs pulling the power at 300kts, the friction at 1300kts would slow you down a hell of a lot faster than the friction at 300kts at the same configuration.