Page 1 of 1

F-22 Raptor .. coming to airshows near you....

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:57 pm
by Duper
ZOOM


In short, this is the planning / certification stage of the F-22's air show routine.

This bird can do some crazy stuff. It's a bit more than 5 minutes and professionally done.

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:00 pm
by Blue
Ahh, my recruiter showed me a lot of stuff about this fighter. When i go into tech school i might have the option to work with them. :D

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:23 pm
by Lothar
Best... plane... EVAR!

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:28 pm
by Flatlander
Sweet!

Re:

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 4:54 pm
by fliptw
Lothar wrote:Best... plane... EVAR!
as long as the computer's happy.

Re:

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:06 pm
by Ferno
Lothar wrote:Best... plane... EVAR!
says the dude who worked for the company that makes them. :P

Re:

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:21 pm
by Lothar
Ferno wrote:
Lothar wrote:Best... plane... EVAR!
says the dude who worked for the company that makes them. :P
I have never worked for Boeing, nor have I worked for Lockheed Martin.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 1:05 am
by Ferno
well I seem to remember either you or Drak working at Boeing at one point.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:57 am
by woodchip
Actually some would argue the P-51 Mustang was the greatest fighter ever

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 6:33 am
by CUDA
woodchip wrote:Actually some would argue the P-51 Mustang was the greatest fighter ever
and some would be wrong, the P-51 wasn't even the greatest "American" fighter of WW2

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 7:17 am
by woodchip

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:21 am
by Duper
...

I'm not awake today.....

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 1:17 pm
by Lothar
Ferno wrote:well I seem to remember either you or Drak working at Boeing at one point.
It wasn't me.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:44 pm
by snoopy
I'm not sure what working for Boeing has to do with the F-22 since they don't make the plane.... or do they make some components for it?

They also lost the contract for the JSF, so they're still the outsiders in teh defense market...

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 2:52 pm
by CDN_Merlin
I think overall the P51 wasn't the best plane. It's hard to pin point the best overall since there were so many and so many variants of each one.

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 3:06 pm
by Dakatsu
Hanglider & Bazooka ftw!

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:03 pm
by Flatlander
CDN_Merlin wrote:I think overall the P51 wasn't the best plane. It's hard to pin point the best overall since there were so many and so many variants of each one.

...and ultimately it comes down to the pilot. Anyone else been watching Dogfights on the History Channel?

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:04 pm
by woodchip
Being the best is a metter of perspective. To the European theater allied bomber pilots the Mustang was the best fighter as it could go the whole mission and not have to turn back.

Today the Raptor may be the best at what it does but ask any ground pounder what is the best plane and you will hear the A10 \"Warthog\" as being the best. No plane is designed to be the best at everything.

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:19 pm
by Lothar
snoopy wrote:I'm not sure what working for Boeing has to do with the F-22 since they don't make the plane
"Boeing, in Seattle, Wash., builds the Raptor's wings and aft-fuselage, and is responsible for avionics integration and test; 70 percent of mission software; the pilot and maintenance training systems; and the life-support and fire-protection systems."

(as it happens, Ferno is correct to identify my wife as working for Boeing. She has worked on the F22.)
they're still the outsiders in teh defense market...
The JSF is not so much an air superiority fighter as a budget fighter.

Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, Northrop, and others are active in the defense market. They all have various contracts, just not necessarily as the leading contractor for air superiority fighters.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 10:05 pm
by Duper
Yup, the F-35 is kinda like the \"Escort\" version instead of the \"Lexus\" version. ...well sorta. ;)

Some of the F-35's will have vertical thrust capacity to replace the Harriers. It pretty much has the body of the F-22 but with 1 engine. I believe the 35 will need after burners to achieve Mach speed while the F-22 does not.

There's lots of vid of both on the net. Muddle around a bit.

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:21 pm
by Nosferatu
Just have to get in this little dig. :twisted:

Wasn't the F22 the plane that had to turn back in mass as it crossed the international date line because of some software bug, making most of the avionics shut down?

Talk about a potential for a blue screen of DEATH!

Ah BTW I think its an ultra cool kick ass looking fighter. :lol:

Re:

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 11:59 pm
by Lothar
Nosferatu wrote:Wasn't the F22 the plane that had to turn back in mass as it crossed the international date line because of some software bug, making most of the avionics shut down?
They lost navigation and communication. The bug was fixed within 48 hours. As with any massive system, bugs happen...

In testing, the F-22 went 144-0 against larger numbers of F-18s and other modern fighters. They went 108-0 in Northern Edge against odds as bad as 40-8. And the F-22 works VERY well with friendly fighters -- it's like a miniature AWACS.

Definitely not an aircraft to take lightly.

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:13 am
by Nightshade
Air shows only seem good for crashing planes and killing pilots these days.

Re:

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:57 am
by CUDA
woodchip wrote:Being the best is a metter of perspective. To the European theater allied bomber pilots the Mustang was the best fighter as it could go the whole mission and not have to turn back.
just a bit of history for ya Wood don't know if your aware of this fact? the P-38 had a longer range than the P-51, also the 38 was the 1st Allied fighter to escort bombers to Berlin and back, and it did it almost a full year before the 51 even saw service in the ETO.
the 38 had many attributes that made it better than the 51.

1. longer range
2. better rate of climb, by almost 500 FPM
3. better payload by almost 1500 lbs
4. better armament 4-50's and 1 20mm nose mounted vs 6 50's wing mounted
5. higher service ceiling by almost 2000 ft
6. stall speed 59mph dirty for the 38, 110 dirty for the 51, which means the 38 could out turn a 51

so now we have a plane that could out climb the 51 out turn the 51, out range the 51 and was almost as fast

now the 51 did have some advantages over the 38
1. speed 434 vs 429 about 5 MPH
2. complexity the 38 was much more complex than the 51
3. cost. this is what really killed the 38 the 51 cost approx $52,000 ea to build while the 38 cost $110,000 ea. and the P-47 was $97,000

and this is just the comparison to the 38 I haven't even touched the 47. the 51 got a rep as a world beater because they were cheap and there were so many of them made, PLUS by the time they saw service in WW2 early 44, (while the 38 was the only US fighter in production from the start of WW2 till its end) the cream of the Luftwaffe had already been decimated, so they padded their kill tally against inexperienced pilots

Re:

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:21 am
by Duper
ThunderBunny wrote:Air shows only seem good for crashing planes and killing pilots these days.
Kinda like driving cars is onlhy good for hitting barriers and killing people. ... which happens way more often.

Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:00 pm
by Flatlander
...and the highest-scoring American ace ever, Richard Ira Bong, flew the P-38.

Re:

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 9:41 am
by Gekko71
Flatlander wrote:...and the highest-scoring American ace ever, Richard Ira Bong, flew the P-38.
Dick Bong: Brilliant pilot - very unfortunate name. :lol:

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2007 7:35 pm
by roid
:lol: oh man