F-22

[Francois5]

Moi, j'y crois a la furtivite. Avec une certaine vision de ce qui s'est passe a droite et a gauche... Le truc actif, j'y crois moins. Merci FrenchStratege pour tes histoires a dormir debout qui embobinnent tout le monde.

[Invité ZedroS]

Tu peux détailler ta pensée François5 ?

[TMor]

En même temps, il est pas le premier à en parler... C'est pour ça qu'il embobine... :lol: Attention, si Francois5 détaille, y en a plein qui vont pleurer !!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :oops:

[Francois5]

Non, je ne vais pas detailler, j'ai signe le document confidentialite. Vous pouvez garder vos mouchoirs au sec. A une info : l'AdA a jete le TopSight de Thales, et Sagem a ete retenu, mais ils n'ont rien. Donc, les Raf aujourd'hui ont une petite serie de proto de TS, et les autres ont le casque habituel. Ca tue?

[Dada4]

c'est bien Le gerfaut qui doit équipé les Pil de Raf' non?! c'est la SAGEM ? non? c'est pas nouveau comme niouze!! :cry:

[DEFA550]

Oui, c'est bien le Gerfaut de SAGEM (derive/inspire de l'Archer fabrique par Denel). Un des avantages du Gerfaut est la detection electro-optique de la position du casque, plutot qu'une detection electro-magnetique comme sur le TopSight (ce qui est moins discret et peut causer des interferences avec l'electronique embarquee). A priori, le TopSight aurait ete rejete en raison d'un niveau de protection insuffisant en cas d'ejection. Thales a probablement oublie que c'est avant tout un equipement de securite.

[Dada4]

Le TopSight a avoir quelque chose avec le TopHawl? c'est le meme casque? ou pas!

[leclercs]

Frenchstratège c'est quel pseudo sur airdefense?

[Kovy]

Le TopSight a avoir quelque chose avec le TopHawl? c'est le meme casque? ou pas!

non, le tophowl, c'est pour les helicos.

[Kovy]

A priori, le TopSight aurait ete rejete en raison d'un niveau de protection insuffisant en cas d'ejection. Thales a probablement oublie que c'est avant tout un equipement de securite.

oui mais Thales ne fabrique pas le casque, juste le viseur. le topsight etait monté sur le gallet LA100... le nouveau casque utilisé par la marine et l'armée de l'air ! donc je pense plutot que c'est effectivement le systeme de localisation electromagnetique qui a disqualifié de topsight :(

[DEFA550]

oui mais Thales ne fabrique pas le casque, juste le viseur. le topsight etait monté sur le gallet LA100... le nouveau casque utilisé par la marine et l'armée de l'air ! donc je pense plutot que c'est effectivement le systeme de localisation electromagnetique qui a disqualifié de topsight :(

Dans ce cas ca ne m'etonne qu'a moitie. Modifier un casque (poids, fixations, equilibrage) est plus risque que d'en fabriquer un specialement. Il faut quand meme imaginer la claque que prend le pilote pendant l'ejection (acceleration de 14 G, vent relatif qui passe de 0 kts a 500 kts ou plus instantanement). Pour donner une idee, le siege accelere de 0 a 70 km/h en une demi seconde, sur une distance de 3 metres (a peu pres). C'est franchement pas une partie de plaisir...

[Francois5]

J'etais un peu hors du domaine, c'etait une nouvelle pour moi. Par contre, il est vrai que les Rafales volent et vont voler encore un moment sans casque. Ca fait mal a la situation awareness...

[DEFA550]

Par contre, il est vrai que les Rafales volent et vont voler encore un moment sans casque.

Et ils serviraient a quoi, ces casques ?

A rien tant que le MICA IR n'est pas en service.

[TMor]

TIens... Ces casques ne devaient pas arriver avec le F3 ??

[Kovy]

TIens... Ces casques ne devaient pas arriver avec le F3 ??

Si :)

Le F3 c'est pour 2008, pas avant

d'ailleurs, les casque ont été commandés si je ne m'abuse...rest plus qu'à les construire :lol:

Et ils serviraient a quoi, ces casques ?

A rien tant que le MICA IR n'est pas en service.

Ba le mica IR est en train d'entrer en service, ça tombe bien :D

sinon, c'est pas que pour faire du dogfight. Tu peut aussi designer des cibles au sol avec le casque. Le systeme peut aussi t'indiquer des cibles qui sont en dehors du champs du hud. Un HMD n'est pas uniquement un outil de designation mais aussi un systeme d'information destiné à augmenter la SA.

[Dada4]

Arff!! le F-22 juste bon pour chasser du "Cruise Missile"? et griller les radars des autres avions?

F/A-22 Secrets Revealed

Aviation Week & Space Technology

05/24/2004, page 24

David A. Fulghum

Tyndall AFB, Fla. and Marietta, Ga.

F/A-22 supporters bare secrets of the electronically sophisticated stealth design to show that it's much more than a fighter

Raptor Unwrapped

With long-term military budget cuts looming once again, the U.S. Air Force and Lockheed Martin are finally talking about some of the F/A-22 Raptor's closely held secrets that they hope will keep Congress paying for the $132-million stealth aircraft.

While these conversations, many of them informal, didn't touch on "even one-third of its classified capabilities," according to one pilot, they included the ability to hunt down and destroy cruise missiles well behind enemy lines, the introduction of a new missile that allows the head-on attack and destruction of stealthy enemy missiles, a tailless bomber derivative design, a planned electronic attack capability so powerful that it actually damages enemy electronics, and modifications that would allow the aircraft's electronic package to invade enemy computer networks.

The tone of the conversations was sharpened by a still-unreleased report about the series of air combat training engagements earlier this year between Indian air force Su-30MKs and F-15Cs from Elmendorf AFB, Alaska; the latter were equipped with the U.S.' newest long-range, high-definition radars.

Those who have read draft copies of the report say the Su-30MKs and F-15 pilots were seeing each other at the same time with their radars, but the Indian pilots were getting off the simulated first shot with their AA-10 Alamo missiles and often winning the long-range engagements. The Indian pilots also had more flight time in the previous year than the U.S. pilots, roughly 300 hr. compared with 250 hr., the pilot said.

Those factors are causing the U.S. to rethink the formula that they always will be facing less well-trained pilots and inferior weaponry. They also reinforce the argument that the U.S. needs a fighter with greater radar range (the F/A-22's is more than 100 naut. mi.), stealth (the F-15 has a huge radar cross section) and fused sensors so that pilots can easily grasp what's going on around them.

Key to the F/A-22's capabilities is a complex of passive sensors, basically for electronic surveillance, that line the outside edges of the fighter's wings and tail surfaces. They gather electronic emissions at frequencies up to 18 GHz., sort them by time and angle of arrival for location, and analyze the signature automatically for rapid identification. Electronic data are fused with detailed RCS signatures gathered by the radar for additional identification.

HOW MANY F/A-22S the Air Force eventually gets is still a crap shoot. Estimates range from a service requirement for more than 400 to pessimistic predictions of only 100-150 if the congressional budgeters, soured by the growing cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are unsympathetic.

A primary mission for the F/A-22 is slated to be cruise missile interception well behind enemy lines. "A cruise missile has stealth in only one direction--straight ahead," says Lt. Col. Mike Stapleton, operations officer for the 43rd Fighter Sqdn. The F-22s would operate in an extended picket line so they can look at cruise missiles to either side of their patrol area from a beam aspect where the missile is not low-observable. In addition, the new, 200-naut.-mi. AESA radar, in development for the E-10 surveillance aircraft, is to provide key cueing of cruise missile locations.

Tactics used by cruise missile operators are instructive. One option is to send waves of 10 missiles that would pull defenses to one side while a following wave slips through. Another is to disperse a large launch into many directions so that some actually approach the targets from behind. Those tactics have led the U.S. to plan a multi-layered defense that begins with F-22s deep in enemy territory.

While F-22s would normally operate at the 45,000-50,000-ft. level, for cruise missile defense they would drop into the middle altitudes around 25,000-30,000 ft. That would allow them the flexibility to combat both AS-4 "Kitchen" or CAS-1 "Kraken"-type, high-speed, air-launched missiles (predictable course, but little time to react) or to pick "Silkworm"-type missiles (low speed, but unpredictable course) out of ground clutter. Detailed information on missiles that leaked through the F/A-22 line would be sent by data link to second and third defensive layers comprising AESA-radar-equipped F-15s and F/A-18Es operating in less well-defended areas.

Four of the initial seven cadre pilots in the 43nd Fighter Sqdn., the Air Force's first F/A-22 squadron, came from the AESA-equipped F-15 squadrons in Alaska, where they developed concepts for airborne cruise missile defense, Stapleton says. While F/A-22 crews will train to attack cruise missiles with AIM-9s and 20-mm. cannon, the primary weapon will be the AIM-120C Amraam. A variant, the AIM-120C-6 (available by 2006), has been specialized with an improved seeker to optimize the explosive cone of destruction for small, slow targets in a head-on engagement with the F/A-22. The upgraded Amraam incorporates improved fuzing through a new quadrant target-detection device. One tactic for the F-22s will be to approach a wave of cruise missiles head-on, get in a first shot and then turn at Mach 1.7 supercruise speed for a second and third shot from behind.

F/A-22S ASSIGNED the cruise missile defense mission would carry at least six Amraams and possibly more when a compressed-carriage AIM-120 design is fielded, says J.R. McDonald, director of Lockheed Martin's F/A-22 program. The range of the F/A-22 can be extended with two 600-gal., low-observable fuel tanks carried on two inboard hard points that are plumbed to transfer fuel. However, there are a number of concepts for a larger, longer range FB-22 that could also carry a larger weapons payload. McDonald says the weapons bay on either the F/A-22 or FB-22 concepts could be enlarged to carry more missiles. Moreover, because of the improvements in stealth coatings, shaping and RCS predictability, the changes could be made while actually improving the signature of the aircraft, he says.

Some of the FB-22 derivative concepts being proposed by Lockheed Martin include both one- and two-seat options, with and without a vertical tail, McDonald said. The tailless version would be possible because the wing would be expanded and made large enough to carry sufficient flight control surfaces to provide adequate aerodynamic authority.

"We have a smorgasbord of options," McDonald said. The objective is to preserve all the attributes of the F/A-22--stealth, speed, integrated avionics--while giving up a bit of agility in order to field a stable bombing platform. The aircraft would also be designed to control a wide range of unmanned reconnaissance and strike aircraft.

Shaken by the results from exercises with well-trained Indian Su-30MK pilots, U.S. planners are reassessing the threat from top-line, non-U.S.-built fighter aircraft.Credit: USAF TSGT. MIKE AMMONS

Most intriguing about the F/A-22's future were hints from various sources that the fighter would have drastically improved electronic attack capability and would introduce computer network attack to its arsenal. Critics say some of the planning borders on the fanciful. Officials have acknowledged that the F/A-22's AESA radar has a projected capability to concentrate its transmission power onto a narrow spot--most likely the electronic radars and communication links associated with air defenses--with enough focus to jam them. The Thor jamming system is to be active in 2008. Those working on improvements say that with the addition of radar cheek arrays to the aircraft in 2010, it would be able to focus enough energy in a beam to actually damage electronic components in enemy sensors.

An associated capability is airborne computer network attack that, under project Suter, currently resides with the EC-130 Compass Call. However, the aircraft is large, slow and can't penetrate defended airspace. Futurists say a further modified F/A-22 will be able to operate over key targets and carry out computer attack or surveillance with much less power. "If you're 5 mi. from the threat, you don't need the power of Compass Call" to penetrate an enemy computer network, says one official.

[littleboy]

Une petite photo de F/A-22 avec le Typhoon en arrière plan

Et au passage voilà un peu de quoi se moquer des Américains et de leur "furtivité" si couteuse...

"Eurofighter Radars Didn't Spot F/A-22s

Aviation Week & Space Technology

Edited by David Bond

Printed headline: Eurorumor Mill

Unconfirmed reports--that is, rumors-- making the rounds in European aerospace industry circles contend that Royal Air Force Eurofighter Typhoons, temporarily operating from Nellis AFB, Nev., were able to pick up U.S. Air Force F/A-22s on their radars, stealth notwithstanding. Similar reports appeared during the 1991 Iraq war concerning the ability of British ships, using large radar arrays, to detect the F-117 and, in later conflicts, the B-2. U.S. officials confirm that the Typhoons were at Nellis to fly with the 422nd Test & Evaluation Sqdn. However, they discount that the Typhoons had seen an F/A-22 in full-configuration stealth. First, they say, the Typhoons and F/A-22s were never in the air at the same time. Second, the F/A-22s always have an enhanced signature for positive air control, except when they go to war or when the range has been cleared for F/A-22-only operations"

[P4]

en gros on se reconforte , oui j'suis le plus beau oui j'suis le plus fortt!!! allez, viens faire mumuse avec mon rafale 8)

[Dada4]

Un rapport de la RAND sur le F/A22 et le F/A18 E/F

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG276.pdf

[Kovy]

j'étais justement en train de le lire ;)

[Dada4]

Arff!!! :D je t'attends donc pour une petite synthese! NA!! :D :P

[Kiriyama]

Tu paies le premier :lol:

[Kiriyama]

Oups, je me suis gouré de post, désolé. :oops:

[peary]

Franchement je crois la furtivite pour un avion n'est pas indispensable, ou alors pour les bombardiers de penetration (f117, b2), par contre pour des chasseurs??? Une salve de missile de croisiere peut faire mieux qu'une escadrille de f 22 pour detruire les centres de commandement ainsi que les defenses AA, ensuite on peut envoyer les chasseurs non strealth pour nettoyer ce qui reste, De plus on eviterait de perdre des pilotes.

[DEFA550]

Franchement je crois la furtivite pour un avion n'est pas indispensable, ou alors pour les bombardiers de penetration (f117, b2), par contre pour des chasseurs???

Le rôle d'un chasseur est d'acquérir et maintenir la supériorité en interdisant l'espace aérien aux chasseurs et bombardiers ennemis. Ca sous-entend qu'il doit pouvoir survoler le territoire ennemi en assurant sa propre sécurité.