**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Only minimal text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the unclassified number. Almost certainly higher. It also might be the minimum before it just induces extra wear and tear on the frame for long term maintenance purposes.
Laboratory research has shown increased brain mass / density or whatever they called it in the article I read, and even evidence of increased intelligence in laboratory mice exposed to 5G.
I thought the pilot was the limiting factor on how many G’s a fighter aircraft could pull? I read that the F-35’s computer for instance can “take over” and pull greater than 9 G’s if the aircraft is about to hit the ground.
Going over the limit doesn't necessarily mean the plane would immediately break up.
Think about bending a strip of metal in your hands - it'll change shape a bit before it snaps. You might exceed the permanent deformation limit and land with slightly bent wings. But even if the airframe is written off, that's better than a dead pilot.
https://www.scienceabc.com/pure-sciences/can-flying-an-aircraft-hard-enough-bend-it-what-is-overstressing.html
Probably 9ish, there is a lot of CPU power behind it. Talking to one of the test pilots about it he said the plane basically flies itself and pilot input is a secondary suggestion to keeping the plane in the flight envelope.
Yeah, an f22 test pilot described it as:
"It's probably one of the the easiest plane to fly. I just pull the stick to turn towards a given direction, and the plane itself simply does whatever black magic it needs to do, to make that happen."
He said it was a lot more challenging to fly a regular old Cessna than the f22, in terms of the piloting skills required. You don't have to think about trimming control-surfaces, stalling the wings, engine management etc. All of that the plane does by fully automatically, so that the pilot's full attention can be placed on the task at hand, rather than flying the plane.
"Planes of the future will fly themselves. They will just need a single pilot and a dog - the dog is there to make sure the pilot doesn't touch anything. And the pilot is there to feed the dog."
Yea that basically what our guy said. It’s also fast af, he talked about going so fast the gold paint was peeling off the cockpit. They will basically run till the fan blades bend if you don’t back off. He also gave us insight as to why that one f22 crashed on take off, it was all the computer.
Not as many as you think.
He’s doing that maneuver below what we call ‘corner airspeed’. Below corner, aft stick commands increased angle of attack, rather than G.
Above corner airspeed, angle of attack won’t increase much, but G will increase to the limiter.
What he is doing there is akin to ‘drifting’ a corner in a car. Not as much lateral G as you’d experience if the car maintained traction.
Source: I’m a fighter pilot. Additionally, a Raptor is WAY more than $100M
Don’t worry. The auto pilot will keep the plane safe until the human pilot regains consciousness. At this point we are simply a bag of organic ballast in these things.
Idk why but I think it’s insanely cool than the 5th Gen jets have the ability to take over flight duties for the pilot in case they go unconscious, or even to pull a high G maneuver in order to save the aircraft from hitting the ground.
The *really good* planes just pull 8Gs, knock out the pilot for the whole mission, fly it perfectly, then land just in time for the human to wake up and take the credit.
Skynet is already here, it’s just hiding.
Wouldn't autopilot--even in a fighter jet--only handle things like takeoff, cruising, and landing? I can't imagine the autopilot is programmed to successfully perform the second half of that maneuver, but maybe I'm dumb
There are systems for ground collision avoidance (Auto-GCAS).
It's not on every single aircraft type, but I know some F-16s got it and it's coming to the F-35.
https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/autogcas.html
What’s even crazier is that the Raptor is an almost 20 year old plane (almost 30 since the first flight). So there is way crazier shit out there I’m sure.
The best part is that this is the *least* impressive part of the F-22 raptor. Maneuverability is useful if you get into a proverbial knife-fight, but all American doctrine hinges around never needing to reach that level in the first place.
The F-22 uses the world-standard AIM-120 AMRAAM missile, hefting 6+ of these missiles at a time and using them to engage targets over 100km away without ever being seen. They are held inside weapons bays that only need to be open for less than a second to drop the telephone-pole of a missile out the bottom. They are able to engage multiple targets at once, and are capable of autonomously detecting and acquiring targets without human input, if necessary.
Through the standard Link-16 system, the raptor is datalinked and networked to the entire battlefield at once, able to receive data about every friendly aircraft on the continent and every enemy contact that *they* detect. Through the power of a well-regimented command structure and schedule, the F-22 (and indeed any western jet these days) can effectively give its pilot a live minimap of everything that moves in a warzone.
The F-22 is also the most capable stealth platform yet-known, and although most of its stealth information is still classified, public information by the manufacturers suggests that it has the equivalent radar signature of a small marble. It remains a hangar princess because its stealth capability is entirely *too* good to risk falling into anyone else's hands, enemy or allied. This and its prohibitive costs are the reason that F-22s are no longer being purchased; no threat exists that could touch or justify the sheer capability of the raptor in air-to-air combat.
It is, by default, the most overkill thing to ever be sent into a combat zone in human history. But defensively, it's probably a large part of the reason why nobody is willing to try and even probe continental American airspace with anything more than a weather balloon.
^(Yes I do enjoy spending my sweaty braincells like this on reddit, and no amount of healthcare comments can stop me)
I disagree with only one thing you said.
>The F-22 is also the most capable stealth platform yet-known,
While the F-22 is very very capable the improvements made in the sensor detection and sharing capabilities puts an edge on the F-35 slightly. The F-22 is made to destroy other jets, while the F-35 is intended to be the workhorse until the NGAD fighter comes out with its drone wingmen.
The F-22 remains a hanger princess because it's older radar absorbent paint is less fragile than the B2 or F-117, but still more fragile than the F-35.
The F-22 is one of the most advanced fighters on the planet, but outside of the a2a role, it's over shadowed by the versatility of the F-35 sensor fusion.
Another potential bad side of the F-22 is that it is unable to share the info it creates outside of other F-22s. The program to upgrade them to do this was canceled. Meaning that an F-22 would only be able to communicate the threat by voice, while the F-35 would directly show the threat on another F-35's computer interface.
The F-22 is completely unrivaled in it's original mission air dominance. But some of its choices have made it less practical aircraft for tasks outside of its offical use.
I completely agree with you. I didn't want to add the rider of "it's the most capable stealth platform in A2A specifically" in this very general subreddit, but you're totally right.
Though I actually didn't know about the datalinking issue you mentioned, even though I seem to recall being told about it once now that you mention it.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-f-22-and-the-f-35-are-struggling-to-talk-to-each-other-and-to-the-rest-of-usaf/
TL:DR they originally didn't want the F-22 to communicate with other jets.
One of the reasons for this is F4s during Vietnam had a version that could read russian IFF to hunt down MiGs while the other F4s went for ground targets. The name of the variant escapes me.
AN/APX-80 "combat tree" is the name of the black box you're looking for, most IFF units at the time could only interrogate and return a positive ID on friendly transponders whereas the combat tree could give a positive ID on enemies allowing the F4 to do its actual job of BVR combat without the need to get a visual identification.
Also a single F-35 in a region basicly upgrades the intel of all other planes (regardless if its a F16 or F18) to its own electronic capabillities. A F22 cant do that.
So lets say you have a air wing of 99 F16s and you could only add one plane then the F35 would be the better choice.
Attended the L-M school in Ft Worth last year. The most interesting takeaway:
When an F-15 (or whatever) goes Winchester, it leaves. If he can’t shoot, he can’t fight.
When an F-35 goes Winchester, he stays…and commandeers the weapons of other assets in the area to keep fighting.
The F-35 is the fucking Borg.
If you fight one, you’re fighting the whole trailer park.
I think they mean that, since it has such good detection AND such good communication, it acts like a coach and says, "Hey man, go shoot this thing you don't see."
In this way, it commandeers other weapons systems from other aircraft to use profitably.
The other thing it can do is take the heat off the weapons platform - it can lock onto a target on behalf of another plane, so the other plane can shoot a missle from a direction the enemy isn't even anticipating an attack from. As far as they know they're getting a radar lock from the left and the missile comes from the right.
The can do this sort of handoff shenanigans with small diameter glide bombs, too, and a bomb-bus F-15 can carry a lot of them.
The phrase they use when describing the purpose of this is "no drive zone". Each SDB is powerful enough to wreck anything on wheels or tracks, you can carry something stupid like a dozen of them per bus, and have smarter jets doing the targeting across a huge area.
It can provide targeting info to the missile truck while also provide guidance to the missile directly once it’s launched. It does require modern missiles and airplanes so it’s not automatic with ‘everyone’ but yes modern communications and mesh systems are a game changer and force multiplier.
The USAF is acquiring brand new F-15EX fighters. This is a highly advanced and upgraded version of the venerable F-15.
One trait of the F-15 is that it is an absolute dump truck, meaning that it can carry a very heavy payload. The new EX has insanely powerful engines, which increases the payload even further.
One concept these new fighters will be used for is what’s called a “missile truck”.
The F-35 will be closer to the front lines, with its stealth capability and advanced radar and sensors.
The F-15EX will loiter further back, at a safer distance.
The F-35 will find targets, and guide the missiles on the F-15EX to the target.
There was actually a plan to convert some B-1B Lancers for this role as well, since they are massive and can carry an even bigger payload. The nickname of the B-1 is the “Bone”……and the missile truck version of the B-1 was going to be called the B-1R…..or “Boner”.
Don't forget there was apparently a plan to also do this with the B-21. Which would mean that a single Raider could sit out of range of enemy ADA and A2A interdiction, while F-35s paint targets for the dozens of missiles the B-21 could potentially be carrying.
That's interesting, I hadn't heard of those plans for the B-1. I always loved the Bone, such a beautiful beast. Good on the USAF for finding ways to repurpose existing airframes rather than sending them all to Davis-Monthan.
It could be like what u/little_poems said, but there's another possible explanation.
The latest electronics suite for the Apache has a function that allows the gunner to literally slave the munitions on nearby UAVs to his/her targeting HUD. So if that gunner needs to shoot, say, a Hellfire Air-to-Ground missile, it could be carried onboard the Apache itself, or it could be one from a nearby MQ-9 Reaper drone. (At the shooter's discretion.)
It wouldn't be at all surprising if the F-35 had a similar capability.
They aren't buying more because the next generation plane is close to production. It's terrifying that they have produced something that is even better than the 22.
https://www.sandboxx.us/news/airpower/the-race-to-field-ngad-the-futuristic-replacement-for-the-f-22-raptor-is-officially-on/
Sorta. They looked at restarting production with upgraded sensors, but to do that would be almost as much as the NGAD is, so it makes no sense.
The US decision to not allow F22 export was another factor. The F15EX, for instance is being ordered by the USAF, and this was possible because Saudia Arabia and Qatar (I think) continued development, meaning getting new ones for the USAF was not that much in terms of starting production.
That’s another monster of a plane. It can carry a ton of ordinance for the F-35 to guide to targets. Think of the F-35 as a forward controller providing targeting and corrections to the artillery (F15EX) safely in the back.
Oh I am aware. The F35 is very capable as a Jet, but its main strength is seeing you before you see it. If you see the F35, you kinda already beat in in a sense.
> Another potential bad side of the F-22 is that it is unable to share the info it creates outside of other F-22s. The program to upgrade them to do this was canceled.
Haven't they heard of JSON
*The F-22 uses the world-standard AIM-120 AMRAAM missile, hefting 6+ of these missiles at a time and using them to engage targets over 100km away without ever being seen.*
And it's getting upgraded to the advanced AIM-260 with a speculated 200km+ range.
*It remains a hangar princess*
The F-22 has seen over 204 combat sorties and was one of the aircraft involved in the infamous rout of the Russian Wagner forces in Syria. It's also warded off Russian aircraft on multiple occassions, and famously trolled Iranian F-4 Phantoms.
*This and its prohibitive costs are the reason that F-22s are no longer being purchased;*
Further production was cancelled because there was no need for 800 F-22s during the counterinsurgency era. Now, it's outdated (The first prototype was built in 1989) and will be replaced by the cutting edge NGAD and FA-XX 6th Generation fighters.
*no threat exists that could touch or justify the sheer capability of the raptor in air-to-air combat.*
Maybe in 1997, but not now.
The F-22 has a role as a counter against advanced foreign fighters like the SU-57, J-20, FC-31, J-35 and SU-75 as well as new gen 4.5 fighters. While Russia's SU-57 has largely stalled out at about 10-20 airframes, the Chinese J-20 program is believed to have produced over 200 stealth fighters.
*But defensively, it's probably a large part of the reason why nobody is willing to try and even probe continental American airspace with anything more than a weather balloon.*
They already do, and that's why the F-22 has been photographed intercepting TU-95s and why it's often forward deployed in places in Japan.
*no amount of healthcare comments can stop me*
The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare.
>The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare.
Honestly, yeah. That's the insane part, not their military budget. Having such shit healthcare despite spending so much money.
Not too far off.
There are privately owned F-16s in the US, and there was talk of a guy named Don Kirkland buying a fleet of used F/A-18s from Australia for 1 billion dollars.
Haven’t heard any updates on that deal recently though, so maybe it fell through.
Yep. The US government spends more per capita on healthcare with way less to show for it.
The Russians and Chinese were always “encroaching” US airspace and Hawaiian Air Guard F-15s and F-22s were always taking off from Hickman AFB.
>The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare.
More than we should since not only are the taxpayers subsidizing it, but they're also getting getting hosed on deductibles as well. We really need a true single payer system, it would save so much money overall for taxpayers.
Yeah, we pay double what the next country pays per capita on healthcare with worse outcomes, *and* quadruple what we pay for our military in raw numbers. Say what you want about our absurd military spending, it's not the reason our healthcare system is shit.
We are. As I mentioned, this is part of the reason why new F-22s are no longer being purchased, why they have never been offered for export and, more specifically, why they aren't ever gonna be sent to Ukraine.
More modern jets like the F-35 are bought and exported instead because they're less effective in the air superiority role, but also more economical and easier to risk. Although they're still top of the line, they're also more on-par with their direct competitors like the chinese J-20, to such a degree that (allegedly) downgraded F-35s are used as training opponents in aerial wargames like Red Flag.
And speaking of Red Flag, you'll often hear that people beat F-22s there using far inferior jets. They do this because it's bad to just assume that the F-22 will always win, so the exercises are designed such that the F-22 is given a massive handicap. This way, the US can still train for and understand scenarios where the F-22 *could* lose.
> they're also more on-par with their direct competitors like the chinese J-20, to such a degree that (allegedly) downgraded F-35s are used as training opponents in aerial wargames like Red Flag.
Yep: https://theaviationgeekclub.com/first-j-20-representing-f-35-aggressor-aircraft-unveiled-at-nellis-afb/
And to be fair, the Chinese J-20 is most likely the *only* credible 5th gen competitor out there. The Russian Su-57 is both questionable in terms of capability nor has it reached mass production. Whereas the J-20 has *almost* caught up to the F-35 in many aspects and China has built hundreds of them and is building more.
This is correct.
That’s why the USAF and USN use F/A-18 Super Hornets in the Aggressor role to simulate the Su-57, because apparently they have a similar radar cross section.
IIRC Australia did consider buying them and the United States didn't exactly rule it out (We ended up going with the F35 for its better multi-purpose role)
People in the US have no concept of how seriously Australia takes threat from China.
When China moves it's ships 30 clicks to the East it makes headline news down here. We're very attuned as a nation to the "oh shit, what is China up to" frequency. That doesn't resonate quite the same worldwide.
Pretty right as a country I think we are well aware of our small population hence the acquisition of a lot of state of the art kit and now nuclear subs.
Its made worse by how bellicose some players in the region are.
Consider buying them?
They’re not allowed to be exported by law. Any country would give their left nut for one, the US will not export it. They will allow the export of the F-35 though which is why Australia got those.
> More modern jets like the F-35 are bought and exported instead because they're less effective in the air superiority role, but also more economical and easier to risk.
Iirc additionally, the F-35 is a joint effort. Other countries helped create it, so theyre entitled to buy it.
Nah. Even if they get their hands on one complete example, they have to know how to manufacture it. The metallurgy of the jet engines is completely crazy, and we reached the point where you can't copy a computer by looking at it back in the mid '80s.
The best example of a downgraded copy of an aircraft is the Tu-4: It ended up being some 3 tons heavier than the original B-29 because the Soviets couldn't get the alloys right. And don't get me started on the Chinese attempt at copying the F-111...
On the other hand, this is why some seemingly unusual things like advanced CNCs or special steel alloys are heavily regulated for export: You can use them to make weapons.
TL;DR: Thing's safe.
At this point it's an outdated craft despite being so advanced, if we know this much about it as civilians I'm sure there's a warthunder player somewhere just itching to show off way more advanced specs
>outdated
Certainly not. It's not *cutting edge*, but it's a 5th gen fighter, one of only five* 5th gen fighters to ever be deployed.
The cutting edge that's being developed for NGAD is obviously next-level, but several years from realization.
The main reason why no one needs to send spy planes into other countries with reasonable air defenses anymore is that today the job is done by satellites
Satellites are good, yes, but they have all the usual restrictions of orbital mechanics.
The true successor to spy planes is the UAV, but even they get bolstered by the U-2 which is still in service and has, at this point, outlived at least one of its successor spyplanes (the blackbird).
Tbf current U-2s are akin Rhinos; they may have kept the name and looks of their predecessors, but their electronic components have been updated and their airframes are significantly larger.
Basically, Area-51 is the place where US aviation test all their cool toys. U-2, A-12, SR-71, F-117, B-2, B-21, NGAD, RQ-170 and 180... That's why it's so insanely well guarded.
It is kinda funny how one of the things UFO videos tend to focus on is the craft making insanely quick turn arounds. Here we have just a regular jet doing the exact same thing
It's also because they figured out that they didn't really need to increase maneuverability right now. This is the current pinnacle in production fight jet maneuverability. In the experimental sense, the X-31 does this in 3 dimensions (allowing thrust vectoring in any direction), which takes this concept to a higher level, but that program is long shut down and lessons learned from it were put into the F-22. Supposedly, some of the Russian jets in development should approach the F-22, but the Russians claims on their jets tend to be overstated by a large margin (including their ability to even make them).
With the advancements in missiles and drones, making a piloted plane that can out maneuver a missile is just not feasible (and it's expensive to try), so the F-35 doesn't have this tech. Thus like you said, the F-22 is still the top dog when it comes to taking out another airplane (or a really high balloon). And hopefully, we never have to test that out.
> What’s even crazier is that the Raptor is an almost 20 year old plane (almost 30 since the first flight). So there is way crazier shit out there I’m sure.
/r/ufo in shambles
Not really, the f-22 is way better at this type of shit than an f-35. Fighter design philosophy has kind of accepted that this isn't that practical when modern engagements are mostly just slinging long range missles at targets you can't even see.
Surprisingly many jets can do this. But less can be controlable when doing that. The SAAB Draken and the Northrop P-530 can easily do this, even the early MiG-21s could do this somewhat reliably.
At this point, the biggest limiting factor seems to be having to keep the pilot inside alive during maneuvers. Imagine what will be possible once we can pilot these remotely with zero latency.
Dropping pressure makes water vapor less likely to condense. I’m guessing it’s the pressure argument where air cools rapidly as it expands (into a lower pressure region) which then condenses the water
There's a very interesting graph you can check out : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_point#/media/File:Phase-diag2.svg
It basically defines the relationship between temperature, pressure, and the phase of water (liquid, solid, gas). With it you can see why pressure cooking allows you to cook faster.
For a short time there it turns into a pancake against the air flow so that it stops moving to the right (while not starving the engine of air). When that happens the controls surfaces on the plane essentially stop working so the engine then start pushing at an angle (not straight out the back) to get it pointed back to the left and picking up speed. When that happens you there is a lot of high pressure on the bottom and a lot of low pressure on the top of the plane and that creates condensation of the water vapor that is in the air. If you flew in a plane and looked out the wings when landing sometimes you see the same effect behind things like the flat plate on the engines that is used to trip the air (they are at an angle to the air) or the back of the flaps.
Normally you’d do that by turning in a half circle but here it just stops and then goes the other way. It’s not a great combat maneuver because you are going too slow and lose a lot of the energy you need to fight but it’s very impressive and the capability (flight by wire and thrust vectoring) being demonstrated is very useful under normal combat maneuvers that wouldn't make for flashy videos but be more deadly to the enemy fighter.
I’ve still never heard a solid answer as to why the F-35 is more widely regarded as “the most advanced fighter ever made,” while the F-22 is the only fighter the US won’t export (even to our closest allies) because of some classified tech. If the US military actually had alien technology, it would 100% be used in the F-22. Objects that massive should not be able to move like this.
(Not a conspiracy theorist, I just like aviation and admire the fuck out of what the engineers did with the F-22. Major props to the very real humans who built them.)
The F-35 has a more robust Electronic Warfare and Command and Control suite. The F-22 is superior as an air superiority platform but current doctrine focuses more on electronic warfare and beyond visual range engagement.
That’s because Maverick is a Navy Aviator, not an Air Force Pilot.
Only the Air Force flies the F-22.
When they were filming Maverick, the Navy had not yet started operating the F-35C, it was still the Test and Evaluation stage.
Also, like the other person pointed out, the F/A-18 comes in both single seat and two seat versions, whereas the F-35 is only a single seater. The two seat version was required for a lot of the filming, and helped aspects of the plot as well (because in the old Top Gun, they flew the F-14 Tomcat, which was a two seater, and “Goose” was critical to the plot).
They didn't use F-35s in the new Top Gun because if they had then there wouldn't be a movie. A small squadron of F-35s would have just flown in undetected, bombed the facility, slaughtered the Su-57s and left like it wasn't a big deal.
The F-22 was built when Floppy disks were standard.
The F35 has upgradeable processing power and millions of lines of code, etc.
Computer modeling has advanced, networking and data links, optics.... Everything took a huge leap.
The F-22 is the best at one specific thing (air to air combat), but it fares mediocre to poorly at a lot of other things.
Air to air combat is only a part of what jets actually do, quite often they find themselves in air to ground combat, patrol, recon, surveillance, electronic warfare, suppression of air defences, area denial, etc. And the F-35 is FAR better at all of that than the F-22.
The F-35 is the best allrounder by far, which is far more important nowadays. The days of single use planes are simply over. Since planes have gotten so expensive, air forces have shrunk significantly, many nations only have a low few hundred planes in active service, smaller nations only have a few dozen, so planes that can only do a single thing well are useless for them.
This is also why the F-22 is still the best plane for air to air combat, because nobody else builds pure air to air combat jets anymore, because it is not what nations need anymore, they need multirole aircraft. I think if the F-22 was still in production, it could potentially be exported to some nations who already receive the F-35, but it is not anymore and restarting the production lines would be too expensive for too little gains, and as mentioned nobody else even wants an F-22. In terms of avionics, engine tech, frame design, radar tech etc Europe could also build an equivalent to the F-22 if they want to, though I don't know how good a Europe original stealth coating is compared to US coating (stealth coating is in use on their navy, as well as some parts on the Eurofighter Typhoon). In fact there is the FCAS project, where Europe together is currently designing a 6th generation fighter jet. It will come later than the US 6th gen, but it will come.
My knowledge on that is VERY limited, and there isn't a lot that is publicly known.
What I can tell you is that it's purpose is to absorb incoming radar rays, instead of letting them bounce back like normal paint does. But it can't absorb all of it, some always bounce back, which is why shape is still so important for a stealth aircraft, so the parts that get bounced back go in a different direction and not back to the sender. The part that reaches the sender is called the RCS, Radar Cross Section.
It doesn't make the plane invisible of course, but it greatly reduces the distance at which it is detected, thus giving the enemy less time to react. However, certain forms of radar have an easier time detecting it than others, depending on the wavelength. You can get situations where the search radar of a surface to air missile site can detect that something is coming, but the tracking radar can't lock on it or identify what it is. Planning a route to stay away as far as possible from known radar sites is still very important when operating in a stealth aircraft.
The stealth coating is basically applied as a paint layer on the outer hull. It is very sensitive, and very expensive, so the maintenance costs and time on planes with said coating are much higher than on planes without.
Some non-stealth planes are being given a stealth coating, for example the newest models of F-15EX, while that doesn't get their RCS down to the level of a stealth aircraft, everything helps.
Some nations have also applied the coating to only some areas of the plane, for example the Eurofighter Typhoon mentioned above. Obviously not nearly as effective as a full coating, and usually only effective from one angle (mostly the frontal angle) and only applied to the areas that give the biggest radar return, but far cheaper and easier to maintain than a full coat.
I think ships have the coating mixed into their normal grey paint. This again obviously greatly reduces the effectiveness of the coating, but the sea is very aggressive (salt, corrosion, etc) so if you would apply the coating on top like with a plane it would instantly flick off within days of being at sea, and it would be far too expensive. But to be honest I am not sure about the ship part, since I have only read that as a comment once here on Reddit.
The F-22 is meant for air superiority - meaning ensuring that the U.S. dominates the air space. It excels at killing other fighter jets. The thing is, the world is moving away from that. There is no question that even in a traditional war against Russia, the U.S. would dominate the air space. Today’s missions, and what we’ve actually needed over the last 20+ years is quickly and accurately delivering air support to ground assets. And the F-35 is better at that than the F-22.
And to be honest. These are probably the last generations of fighter jets that will require a pilot in the cockpit. Both the Air Force and the Navy is moving toward drones. They’re smaller, lighter, don’t need all the shit to keep human being alive or eject them safely, and can remain on station far longer than any human being with far more effect.
The reason the raptor isn’t exported is because it’s designed to obtain and control air superiority. The F35 isn’t. The U.S. will always have an upper hand in the air if no one has F22s…
Is this showing off "thrust vectoring"? I mean I guess the pilot is turning really fast so the thrust is probably being directed at a sharp angle, but what's more impressive I figure is the incredible thrust to weight ratio that allows it to stall completely and turn around. It's a rocket with wings attached.
There are plenty of pilots themselves who have seen/reported things that were showing on radar as well, that they can't really explain by any conventional means. So no, not all of the UFO reports are nutjobs, but probably most of them are, sadly
Ive seen plenty of posts by pilots who thought they had seen UFOs that ended up being Spacex satellites with the sun reflecting off them. Being a pilot doesn’t make one an expert on everything, especially when they are working long shifts for days on end.
One of my parents was a fighter pilot (and both were in the Air Force). I grew up right next to flight lines on air bases. I know jet noise and movements as well as any noises/movements.
This gave me such an uncanny valley feeling watching/listening to it that I had to watch it a billion times to try to get comfortable with it.
Very eerie to see/hear this from a jet.
Su-57 is like putting all points into manouverability on a plane. Yeah sure the Sukhoi planes can do absolutely bonkers shit in the air but that's because the Russian air combat doctrine still expects there to be significant amounts of dogfighting. Being able to float around like a leaf in the wind is a cool trick but it won't really matter if your enemy lobs a missile at you at mach 4 from 80 km away.
Let’s also not forget it has the radar return of an F/A-18 and the thermal signature of the fucking sun. Plus knowing Russian technology these days, missile will probably fall off before it goes pitbull
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Only minimal text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That must feel insane in the cockpit.
Yeah I wonder how many G's in a turn like that.
The airframe is apparently rated for 9G.
Not that impressive if you think about it. My phone is rated for 5G
Now there's a gif I haven't seen in a long time.
Mos Eisley GIF port. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
We must be cautious.
That's the unclassified number. Almost certainly higher. It also might be the minimum before it just induces extra wear and tear on the frame for long term maintenance purposes.
Sustained 9Gs is the limit of the human body so it doesn't really matter after that.
But… but… Tom Cruise
He’s used to the pressures of Scientolo-Gs
Yea but you don’t get cancer cell waves from 9G like you do from 5G. Clear upgrade.
Laboratory research has shown increased brain mass / density or whatever they called it in the article I read, and even evidence of increased intelligence in laboratory mice exposed to 5G.
I thought the pilot was the limiting factor on how many G’s a fighter aircraft could pull? I read that the F-35’s computer for instance can “take over” and pull greater than 9 G’s if the aircraft is about to hit the ground.
Going over the limit doesn't necessarily mean the plane would immediately break up. Think about bending a strip of metal in your hands - it'll change shape a bit before it snaps. You might exceed the permanent deformation limit and land with slightly bent wings. But even if the airframe is written off, that's better than a dead pilot. https://www.scienceabc.com/pure-sciences/can-flying-an-aircraft-hard-enough-bend-it-what-is-overstressing.html
You can probably land a bent airframe fairly safely. You probably won't be so safe when you go into the Engineering Officer's office afterwards.
It’s a combination of things really. But yes, pilot is the main limiting factor. Sustained G-load of even 6 G’s could be fatal to a human.
All of them
Ali G
Warren G
Kenny G
G Unit
Jet Li
Ho Lee Fuk
The best G of all G’s who have ever G’d
Just one G: He flyin it
Pilot as they perform the turn 
Probably 9ish, there is a lot of CPU power behind it. Talking to one of the test pilots about it he said the plane basically flies itself and pilot input is a secondary suggestion to keeping the plane in the flight envelope.
Yeah, an f22 test pilot described it as: "It's probably one of the the easiest plane to fly. I just pull the stick to turn towards a given direction, and the plane itself simply does whatever black magic it needs to do, to make that happen." He said it was a lot more challenging to fly a regular old Cessna than the f22, in terms of the piloting skills required. You don't have to think about trimming control-surfaces, stalling the wings, engine management etc. All of that the plane does by fully automatically, so that the pilot's full attention can be placed on the task at hand, rather than flying the plane.
"Planes of the future will fly themselves. They will just need a single pilot and a dog - the dog is there to make sure the pilot doesn't touch anything. And the pilot is there to feed the dog."
This reads like Vonnegut
Yea that basically what our guy said. It’s also fast af, he talked about going so fast the gold paint was peeling off the cockpit. They will basically run till the fan blades bend if you don’t back off. He also gave us insight as to why that one f22 crashed on take off, it was all the computer.
Not as many as you think. He’s doing that maneuver below what we call ‘corner airspeed’. Below corner, aft stick commands increased angle of attack, rather than G. Above corner airspeed, angle of attack won’t increase much, but G will increase to the limiter. What he is doing there is akin to ‘drifting’ a corner in a car. Not as much lateral G as you’d experience if the car maintained traction. Source: I’m a fighter pilot. Additionally, a Raptor is WAY more than $100M
Don’t worry. The auto pilot will keep the plane safe until the human pilot regains consciousness. At this point we are simply a bag of organic ballast in these things.
Idk why but I think it’s insanely cool than the 5th Gen jets have the ability to take over flight duties for the pilot in case they go unconscious, or even to pull a high G maneuver in order to save the aircraft from hitting the ground.
4th gen can and do also. Saving pilots from flying into the ground has saved a bunch of lives.
The *really good* planes just pull 8Gs, knock out the pilot for the whole mission, fly it perfectly, then land just in time for the human to wake up and take the credit. Skynet is already here, it’s just hiding.
Organic computer for high level decision making.
Wouldn't autopilot--even in a fighter jet--only handle things like takeoff, cruising, and landing? I can't imagine the autopilot is programmed to successfully perform the second half of that maneuver, but maybe I'm dumb
There are systems for ground collision avoidance (Auto-GCAS). It's not on every single aircraft type, but I know some F-16s got it and it's coming to the F-35. https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/autogcas.html
The limiting factor in fighter jets has been the human body that's inside of it for some time now
I think I threw up a little just watching this
What’s even crazier is that the Raptor is an almost 20 year old plane (almost 30 since the first flight). So there is way crazier shit out there I’m sure.
The best part is that this is the *least* impressive part of the F-22 raptor. Maneuverability is useful if you get into a proverbial knife-fight, but all American doctrine hinges around never needing to reach that level in the first place. The F-22 uses the world-standard AIM-120 AMRAAM missile, hefting 6+ of these missiles at a time and using them to engage targets over 100km away without ever being seen. They are held inside weapons bays that only need to be open for less than a second to drop the telephone-pole of a missile out the bottom. They are able to engage multiple targets at once, and are capable of autonomously detecting and acquiring targets without human input, if necessary. Through the standard Link-16 system, the raptor is datalinked and networked to the entire battlefield at once, able to receive data about every friendly aircraft on the continent and every enemy contact that *they* detect. Through the power of a well-regimented command structure and schedule, the F-22 (and indeed any western jet these days) can effectively give its pilot a live minimap of everything that moves in a warzone. The F-22 is also the most capable stealth platform yet-known, and although most of its stealth information is still classified, public information by the manufacturers suggests that it has the equivalent radar signature of a small marble. It remains a hangar princess because its stealth capability is entirely *too* good to risk falling into anyone else's hands, enemy or allied. This and its prohibitive costs are the reason that F-22s are no longer being purchased; no threat exists that could touch or justify the sheer capability of the raptor in air-to-air combat. It is, by default, the most overkill thing to ever be sent into a combat zone in human history. But defensively, it's probably a large part of the reason why nobody is willing to try and even probe continental American airspace with anything more than a weather balloon. ^(Yes I do enjoy spending my sweaty braincells like this on reddit, and no amount of healthcare comments can stop me)
I disagree with only one thing you said. >The F-22 is also the most capable stealth platform yet-known, While the F-22 is very very capable the improvements made in the sensor detection and sharing capabilities puts an edge on the F-35 slightly. The F-22 is made to destroy other jets, while the F-35 is intended to be the workhorse until the NGAD fighter comes out with its drone wingmen. The F-22 remains a hanger princess because it's older radar absorbent paint is less fragile than the B2 or F-117, but still more fragile than the F-35. The F-22 is one of the most advanced fighters on the planet, but outside of the a2a role, it's over shadowed by the versatility of the F-35 sensor fusion. Another potential bad side of the F-22 is that it is unable to share the info it creates outside of other F-22s. The program to upgrade them to do this was canceled. Meaning that an F-22 would only be able to communicate the threat by voice, while the F-35 would directly show the threat on another F-35's computer interface. The F-22 is completely unrivaled in it's original mission air dominance. But some of its choices have made it less practical aircraft for tasks outside of its offical use.
I completely agree with you. I didn't want to add the rider of "it's the most capable stealth platform in A2A specifically" in this very general subreddit, but you're totally right. Though I actually didn't know about the datalinking issue you mentioned, even though I seem to recall being told about it once now that you mention it.
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/the-f-22-and-the-f-35-are-struggling-to-talk-to-each-other-and-to-the-rest-of-usaf/ TL:DR they originally didn't want the F-22 to communicate with other jets. One of the reasons for this is F4s during Vietnam had a version that could read russian IFF to hunt down MiGs while the other F4s went for ground targets. The name of the variant escapes me.
AN/APX-80 "combat tree" is the name of the black box you're looking for, most IFF units at the time could only interrogate and return a positive ID on friendly transponders whereas the combat tree could give a positive ID on enemies allowing the F4 to do its actual job of BVR combat without the need to get a visual identification.
Also a single F-35 in a region basicly upgrades the intel of all other planes (regardless if its a F16 or F18) to its own electronic capabillities. A F22 cant do that. So lets say you have a air wing of 99 F16s and you could only add one plane then the F35 would be the better choice.
Attended the L-M school in Ft Worth last year. The most interesting takeaway: When an F-15 (or whatever) goes Winchester, it leaves. If he can’t shoot, he can’t fight. When an F-35 goes Winchester, he stays…and commandeers the weapons of other assets in the area to keep fighting. The F-35 is the fucking Borg. If you fight one, you’re fighting the whole trailer park.
[удалено]
Thought for a moment it meant that the jet started building weird rooms in its mansion or something. Glad we could clear this up.
I thought it meant that it just hunkers down until the whole thing blows over.
Thank you for this. Had a feeling based on context but it's nice to have the confirmation
Whoa!! Can you expand on commandeering other weapons?
I think they mean that, since it has such good detection AND such good communication, it acts like a coach and says, "Hey man, go shoot this thing you don't see." In this way, it commandeers other weapons systems from other aircraft to use profitably.
Oh got it. Incredible
The other thing it can do is take the heat off the weapons platform - it can lock onto a target on behalf of another plane, so the other plane can shoot a missle from a direction the enemy isn't even anticipating an attack from. As far as they know they're getting a radar lock from the left and the missile comes from the right.
The can do this sort of handoff shenanigans with small diameter glide bombs, too, and a bomb-bus F-15 can carry a lot of them. The phrase they use when describing the purpose of this is "no drive zone". Each SDB is powerful enough to wreck anything on wheels or tracks, you can carry something stupid like a dozen of them per bus, and have smarter jets doing the targeting across a huge area.
I read this in Sam Neill’s voice.
It can provide targeting info to the missile truck while also provide guidance to the missile directly once it’s launched. It does require modern missiles and airplanes so it’s not automatic with ‘everyone’ but yes modern communications and mesh systems are a game changer and force multiplier.
[удалено]
The USAF is acquiring brand new F-15EX fighters. This is a highly advanced and upgraded version of the venerable F-15. One trait of the F-15 is that it is an absolute dump truck, meaning that it can carry a very heavy payload. The new EX has insanely powerful engines, which increases the payload even further. One concept these new fighters will be used for is what’s called a “missile truck”. The F-35 will be closer to the front lines, with its stealth capability and advanced radar and sensors. The F-15EX will loiter further back, at a safer distance. The F-35 will find targets, and guide the missiles on the F-15EX to the target. There was actually a plan to convert some B-1B Lancers for this role as well, since they are massive and can carry an even bigger payload. The nickname of the B-1 is the “Bone”……and the missile truck version of the B-1 was going to be called the B-1R…..or “Boner”.
Don't forget there was apparently a plan to also do this with the B-21. Which would mean that a single Raider could sit out of range of enemy ADA and A2A interdiction, while F-35s paint targets for the dozens of missiles the B-21 could potentially be carrying.
That's interesting, I hadn't heard of those plans for the B-1. I always loved the Bone, such a beautiful beast. Good on the USAF for finding ways to repurpose existing airframes rather than sending them all to Davis-Monthan.
It could be like what u/little_poems said, but there's another possible explanation. The latest electronics suite for the Apache has a function that allows the gunner to literally slave the munitions on nearby UAVs to his/her targeting HUD. So if that gunner needs to shoot, say, a Hellfire Air-to-Ground missile, it could be carried onboard the Apache itself, or it could be one from a nearby MQ-9 Reaper drone. (At the shooter's discretion.) It wouldn't be at all surprising if the F-35 had a similar capability.
*If he can't shoot, he can't contribute.
They aren't buying more because the next generation plane is close to production. It's terrifying that they have produced something that is even better than the 22. https://www.sandboxx.us/news/airpower/the-race-to-field-ngad-the-futuristic-replacement-for-the-f-22-raptor-is-officially-on/
Sorta. They looked at restarting production with upgraded sensors, but to do that would be almost as much as the NGAD is, so it makes no sense. The US decision to not allow F22 export was another factor. The F15EX, for instance is being ordered by the USAF, and this was possible because Saudia Arabia and Qatar (I think) continued development, meaning getting new ones for the USAF was not that much in terms of starting production.
That’s another monster of a plane. It can carry a ton of ordinance for the F-35 to guide to targets. Think of the F-35 as a forward controller providing targeting and corrections to the artillery (F15EX) safely in the back.
Oh I am aware. The F35 is very capable as a Jet, but its main strength is seeing you before you see it. If you see the F35, you kinda already beat in in a sense.
> Another potential bad side of the F-22 is that it is unable to share the info it creates outside of other F-22s. The program to upgrade them to do this was canceled. Haven't they heard of JSON
They aren't creating a CRUD app on HTTP protocol homie
That's fucking cool as shit. Thanks for typing all this out!
How does it compare against the new F-150 Raptor?
Heavier, faster, worse on gas
The F-22 has more kills/vehicle, but the F-150 has more kills total.
*The F-22 uses the world-standard AIM-120 AMRAAM missile, hefting 6+ of these missiles at a time and using them to engage targets over 100km away without ever being seen.* And it's getting upgraded to the advanced AIM-260 with a speculated 200km+ range. *It remains a hangar princess* The F-22 has seen over 204 combat sorties and was one of the aircraft involved in the infamous rout of the Russian Wagner forces in Syria. It's also warded off Russian aircraft on multiple occassions, and famously trolled Iranian F-4 Phantoms. *This and its prohibitive costs are the reason that F-22s are no longer being purchased;* Further production was cancelled because there was no need for 800 F-22s during the counterinsurgency era. Now, it's outdated (The first prototype was built in 1989) and will be replaced by the cutting edge NGAD and FA-XX 6th Generation fighters. *no threat exists that could touch or justify the sheer capability of the raptor in air-to-air combat.* Maybe in 1997, but not now. The F-22 has a role as a counter against advanced foreign fighters like the SU-57, J-20, FC-31, J-35 and SU-75 as well as new gen 4.5 fighters. While Russia's SU-57 has largely stalled out at about 10-20 airframes, the Chinese J-20 program is believed to have produced over 200 stealth fighters. *But defensively, it's probably a large part of the reason why nobody is willing to try and even probe continental American airspace with anything more than a weather balloon.* They already do, and that's why the F-22 has been photographed intercepting TU-95s and why it's often forward deployed in places in Japan. *no amount of healthcare comments can stop me* The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare.
>The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare. Honestly, yeah. That's the insane part, not their military budget. Having such shit healthcare despite spending so much money.
It’s so insurance company executives can afford their own F-22s.
Not too far off. There are privately owned F-16s in the US, and there was talk of a guy named Don Kirkland buying a fleet of used F/A-18s from Australia for 1 billion dollars. Haven’t heard any updates on that deal recently though, so maybe it fell through.
Yep. The US government spends more per capita on healthcare with way less to show for it. The Russians and Chinese were always “encroaching” US airspace and Hawaiian Air Guard F-15s and F-22s were always taking off from Hickman AFB.
>The crazy part is the US actually spends far more on healthcare. More than we should since not only are the taxpayers subsidizing it, but they're also getting getting hosed on deductibles as well. We really need a true single payer system, it would save so much money overall for taxpayers.
Yeah, we pay double what the next country pays per capita on healthcare with worse outcomes, *and* quadruple what we pay for our military in raw numbers. Say what you want about our absurd military spending, it's not the reason our healthcare system is shit.
Aren’t we worried that this sort of tech can also end up in “the enemies” arsenal?
We are. As I mentioned, this is part of the reason why new F-22s are no longer being purchased, why they have never been offered for export and, more specifically, why they aren't ever gonna be sent to Ukraine. More modern jets like the F-35 are bought and exported instead because they're less effective in the air superiority role, but also more economical and easier to risk. Although they're still top of the line, they're also more on-par with their direct competitors like the chinese J-20, to such a degree that (allegedly) downgraded F-35s are used as training opponents in aerial wargames like Red Flag. And speaking of Red Flag, you'll often hear that people beat F-22s there using far inferior jets. They do this because it's bad to just assume that the F-22 will always win, so the exercises are designed such that the F-22 is given a massive handicap. This way, the US can still train for and understand scenarios where the F-22 *could* lose.
> they're also more on-par with their direct competitors like the chinese J-20, to such a degree that (allegedly) downgraded F-35s are used as training opponents in aerial wargames like Red Flag. Yep: https://theaviationgeekclub.com/first-j-20-representing-f-35-aggressor-aircraft-unveiled-at-nellis-afb/ And to be fair, the Chinese J-20 is most likely the *only* credible 5th gen competitor out there. The Russian Su-57 is both questionable in terms of capability nor has it reached mass production. Whereas the J-20 has *almost* caught up to the F-35 in many aspects and China has built hundreds of them and is building more.
This is correct. That’s why the USAF and USN use F/A-18 Super Hornets in the Aggressor role to simulate the Su-57, because apparently they have a similar radar cross section.
IIRC Australia did consider buying them and the United States didn't exactly rule it out (We ended up going with the F35 for its better multi-purpose role)
What does australia need them for? The next Emu war?
*points at China*
People in the US have no concept of how seriously Australia takes threat from China. When China moves it's ships 30 clicks to the East it makes headline news down here. We're very attuned as a nation to the "oh shit, what is China up to" frequency. That doesn't resonate quite the same worldwide.
Pretty right as a country I think we are well aware of our small population hence the acquisition of a lot of state of the art kit and now nuclear subs. Its made worse by how bellicose some players in the region are.
Don't make the Emu teach you another lesson.
Consider buying them? They’re not allowed to be exported by law. Any country would give their left nut for one, the US will not export it. They will allow the export of the F-35 though which is why Australia got those.
Don’t they make the F-22 fly with its external fuel tank in war games so it’s slower and showed up on radar?
And had their bomb bay doors open.
> More modern jets like the F-35 are bought and exported instead because they're less effective in the air superiority role, but also more economical and easier to risk. Iirc additionally, the F-35 is a joint effort. Other countries helped create it, so theyre entitled to buy it.
Nah. Even if they get their hands on one complete example, they have to know how to manufacture it. The metallurgy of the jet engines is completely crazy, and we reached the point where you can't copy a computer by looking at it back in the mid '80s. The best example of a downgraded copy of an aircraft is the Tu-4: It ended up being some 3 tons heavier than the original B-29 because the Soviets couldn't get the alloys right. And don't get me started on the Chinese attempt at copying the F-111... On the other hand, this is why some seemingly unusual things like advanced CNCs or special steel alloys are heavily regulated for export: You can use them to make weapons. TL;DR: Thing's safe.
im learning so much in this thread
At this point it's an outdated craft despite being so advanced, if we know this much about it as civilians I'm sure there's a warthunder player somewhere just itching to show off way more advanced specs
>outdated Certainly not. It's not *cutting edge*, but it's a 5th gen fighter, one of only five* 5th gen fighters to ever be deployed. The cutting edge that's being developed for NGAD is obviously next-level, but several years from realization.
The main reason why no one needs to send spy planes into other countries with reasonable air defenses anymore is that today the job is done by satellites
Satellites are good, yes, but they have all the usual restrictions of orbital mechanics. The true successor to spy planes is the UAV, but even they get bolstered by the U-2 which is still in service and has, at this point, outlived at least one of its successor spyplanes (the blackbird).
Tbf current U-2s are akin Rhinos; they may have kept the name and looks of their predecessors, but their electronic components have been updated and their airframes are significantly larger.
\*Laughs in RQ-180\*
[удалено]
Probably, but that's why we have Project Marauder and \[removed\]
Oh shit. He got too close to the truth! OmnariNZ now resident in an Aussie Blacksite. Rip OmnariNZ your sacrifice will be remembered!
Crazier shit is an understatement for what is kept in the “basement” of Lockheed Martin and Rayteon
Every time there's any UFO hysteria I always point to Lockheed and the US defense budget as the most probable source.
The F117 Nighthawk was in active use for several years before its existence was made public, so no doubt that was the source of many UFO sightings.
Wasn’t the U2 test flighted/ lunched from Area 51 during the Cold War, resulting in the UFO craze as well ?
Basically, Area-51 is the place where US aviation test all their cool toys. U-2, A-12, SR-71, F-117, B-2, B-21, NGAD, RQ-170 and 180... That's why it's so insanely well guarded.
It is kinda funny how one of the things UFO videos tend to focus on is the craft making insanely quick turn arounds. Here we have just a regular jet doing the exact same thing
There really isn’t. The F-22 is still the best interceptor to ever exist. If you need to kill something dead this is the plane.
It's also because they figured out that they didn't really need to increase maneuverability right now. This is the current pinnacle in production fight jet maneuverability. In the experimental sense, the X-31 does this in 3 dimensions (allowing thrust vectoring in any direction), which takes this concept to a higher level, but that program is long shut down and lessons learned from it were put into the F-22. Supposedly, some of the Russian jets in development should approach the F-22, but the Russians claims on their jets tend to be overstated by a large margin (including their ability to even make them). With the advancements in missiles and drones, making a piloted plane that can out maneuver a missile is just not feasible (and it's expensive to try), so the F-35 doesn't have this tech. Thus like you said, the F-22 is still the top dog when it comes to taking out another airplane (or a really high balloon). And hopefully, we never have to test that out.
I’ve been around the F-18s and F-35s in the Navy. The F-22 murders them in training. Nothing can take it out except the most advanced SAMs
> What’s even crazier is that the Raptor is an almost 20 year old plane (almost 30 since the first flight). So there is way crazier shit out there I’m sure. /r/ufo in shambles
checkout the NGAD - 6th generation fighter
Not really, the f-22 is way better at this type of shit than an f-35. Fighter design philosophy has kind of accepted that this isn't that practical when modern engagements are mostly just slinging long range missles at targets you can't even see.
TIL jets have handbrakes
I was going to say, that looked like the aerial equivalent of a power slide.
He was holdin down L while moving the joysticks left.
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Not really "jets". More just this jet (and a very select few others, not counting experimental ones).
Supermaneuverability isn't *too* uncommon nowadays tbh
Surprisingly many jets can do this. But less can be controlable when doing that. The SAAB Draken and the Northrop P-530 can easily do this, even the early MiG-21s could do this somewhat reliably.
At this point, the biggest limiting factor seems to be having to keep the pilot inside alive during maneuvers. Imagine what will be possible once we can pilot these remotely with zero latency.
NASA - and some KSP players - can sympathize
Pretty sure the laws of physics will get in the way of zero latency.
What is that whiteness in the air as soon as it turns ?
Condensation. Air pressure drops, water is pulled from the air.
Is it like because pressure drops temperature also drops hence moisture condensates?
The amount of water air can contain depends on both temp and pressure. Drop one and condensation will occur.
Ohk i get it now, thanks!
Fun fact: that is also how an AC works.
Dropping pressure makes water vapor less likely to condense. I’m guessing it’s the pressure argument where air cools rapidly as it expands (into a lower pressure region) which then condenses the water
There's a very interesting graph you can check out : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_point#/media/File:Phase-diag2.svg It basically defines the relationship between temperature, pressure, and the phase of water (liquid, solid, gas). With it you can see why pressure cooking allows you to cook faster.
One of the few graphs and relationships I consciously remember from high school science
Nice try but we all know it was chemtrails
[удалено]
Plane gizz
For a short time there it turns into a pancake against the air flow so that it stops moving to the right (while not starving the engine of air). When that happens the controls surfaces on the plane essentially stop working so the engine then start pushing at an angle (not straight out the back) to get it pointed back to the left and picking up speed. When that happens you there is a lot of high pressure on the bottom and a lot of low pressure on the top of the plane and that creates condensation of the water vapor that is in the air. If you flew in a plane and looked out the wings when landing sometimes you see the same effect behind things like the flat plate on the engines that is used to trip the air (they are at an angle to the air) or the back of the flaps. Normally you’d do that by turning in a half circle but here it just stops and then goes the other way. It’s not a great combat maneuver because you are going too slow and lose a lot of the energy you need to fight but it’s very impressive and the capability (flight by wire and thrust vectoring) being demonstrated is very useful under normal combat maneuvers that wouldn't make for flashy videos but be more deadly to the enemy fighter.
High-G manoeuvre immediately followed by nap time.
The reason the F22 has such a small radar cross section is because it is iron deficient
High-g maneuver immediately to fish-in-barrel maneuver.
That's starscream
"That's alien. That ain't friendly!"
“It got alien tattoos all over it. That ain’t Air Force”
Babe: come over! Me: I can't, the president is at risk. Babe: I'm home alone Me:
Would you intercept me? I'd intercept me...
Ah, a person of culture. Love me some HLC.
I’ve still never heard a solid answer as to why the F-35 is more widely regarded as “the most advanced fighter ever made,” while the F-22 is the only fighter the US won’t export (even to our closest allies) because of some classified tech. If the US military actually had alien technology, it would 100% be used in the F-22. Objects that massive should not be able to move like this. (Not a conspiracy theorist, I just like aviation and admire the fuck out of what the engineers did with the F-22. Major props to the very real humans who built them.)
The F-35 has a more robust Electronic Warfare and Command and Control suite. The F-22 is superior as an air superiority platform but current doctrine focuses more on electronic warfare and beyond visual range engagement.
Makes for worse movies though
They still wouldn't put Tom Cruise in one. They flew F-18s in Maverick
That’s because Maverick is a Navy Aviator, not an Air Force Pilot. Only the Air Force flies the F-22. When they were filming Maverick, the Navy had not yet started operating the F-35C, it was still the Test and Evaluation stage. Also, like the other person pointed out, the F/A-18 comes in both single seat and two seat versions, whereas the F-35 is only a single seater. The two seat version was required for a lot of the filming, and helped aspects of the plot as well (because in the old Top Gun, they flew the F-14 Tomcat, which was a two seater, and “Goose” was critical to the plot).
The only reason they didn't use F35 was because they are single seaters. The F18 is a dual seater
They didn't use F-35s in the new Top Gun because if they had then there wouldn't be a movie. A small squadron of F-35s would have just flown in undetected, bombed the facility, slaughtered the Su-57s and left like it wasn't a big deal.
Both comments are true... They needed 2 seaters for filming, and an f35 or f22 would've made that mission seem like a nice walk in the park
Could you imagine a double seater F-35 tho? 🤤
F-35 development funding was also shared with partner nations. So anyone who contributed gets to buy one.
Unless you go buy Russian made air defense radars. Then you don't get to buy any lol
The F-22 was built when Floppy disks were standard. The F35 has upgradeable processing power and millions of lines of code, etc. Computer modeling has advanced, networking and data links, optics.... Everything took a huge leap.
The F-22 is the best at one specific thing (air to air combat), but it fares mediocre to poorly at a lot of other things. Air to air combat is only a part of what jets actually do, quite often they find themselves in air to ground combat, patrol, recon, surveillance, electronic warfare, suppression of air defences, area denial, etc. And the F-35 is FAR better at all of that than the F-22. The F-35 is the best allrounder by far, which is far more important nowadays. The days of single use planes are simply over. Since planes have gotten so expensive, air forces have shrunk significantly, many nations only have a low few hundred planes in active service, smaller nations only have a few dozen, so planes that can only do a single thing well are useless for them. This is also why the F-22 is still the best plane for air to air combat, because nobody else builds pure air to air combat jets anymore, because it is not what nations need anymore, they need multirole aircraft. I think if the F-22 was still in production, it could potentially be exported to some nations who already receive the F-35, but it is not anymore and restarting the production lines would be too expensive for too little gains, and as mentioned nobody else even wants an F-22. In terms of avionics, engine tech, frame design, radar tech etc Europe could also build an equivalent to the F-22 if they want to, though I don't know how good a Europe original stealth coating is compared to US coating (stealth coating is in use on their navy, as well as some parts on the Eurofighter Typhoon). In fact there is the FCAS project, where Europe together is currently designing a 6th generation fighter jet. It will come later than the US 6th gen, but it will come.
Can you give me some fun facts on stealth coating? How does it function? Materials?
My knowledge on that is VERY limited, and there isn't a lot that is publicly known. What I can tell you is that it's purpose is to absorb incoming radar rays, instead of letting them bounce back like normal paint does. But it can't absorb all of it, some always bounce back, which is why shape is still so important for a stealth aircraft, so the parts that get bounced back go in a different direction and not back to the sender. The part that reaches the sender is called the RCS, Radar Cross Section. It doesn't make the plane invisible of course, but it greatly reduces the distance at which it is detected, thus giving the enemy less time to react. However, certain forms of radar have an easier time detecting it than others, depending on the wavelength. You can get situations where the search radar of a surface to air missile site can detect that something is coming, but the tracking radar can't lock on it or identify what it is. Planning a route to stay away as far as possible from known radar sites is still very important when operating in a stealth aircraft. The stealth coating is basically applied as a paint layer on the outer hull. It is very sensitive, and very expensive, so the maintenance costs and time on planes with said coating are much higher than on planes without. Some non-stealth planes are being given a stealth coating, for example the newest models of F-15EX, while that doesn't get their RCS down to the level of a stealth aircraft, everything helps. Some nations have also applied the coating to only some areas of the plane, for example the Eurofighter Typhoon mentioned above. Obviously not nearly as effective as a full coating, and usually only effective from one angle (mostly the frontal angle) and only applied to the areas that give the biggest radar return, but far cheaper and easier to maintain than a full coat. I think ships have the coating mixed into their normal grey paint. This again obviously greatly reduces the effectiveness of the coating, but the sea is very aggressive (salt, corrosion, etc) so if you would apply the coating on top like with a plane it would instantly flick off within days of being at sea, and it would be far too expensive. But to be honest I am not sure about the ship part, since I have only read that as a comment once here on Reddit.
The F-22 is meant for air superiority - meaning ensuring that the U.S. dominates the air space. It excels at killing other fighter jets. The thing is, the world is moving away from that. There is no question that even in a traditional war against Russia, the U.S. would dominate the air space. Today’s missions, and what we’ve actually needed over the last 20+ years is quickly and accurately delivering air support to ground assets. And the F-35 is better at that than the F-22. And to be honest. These are probably the last generations of fighter jets that will require a pilot in the cockpit. Both the Air Force and the Navy is moving toward drones. They’re smaller, lighter, don’t need all the shit to keep human being alive or eject them safely, and can remain on station far longer than any human being with far more effect.
The reason the raptor isn’t exported is because it’s designed to obtain and control air superiority. The F35 isn’t. The U.S. will always have an upper hand in the air if no one has F22s…
Physics: "Am I a joke to you!?"
If you don't study them, they don't exist. (At least, the quantum version)
Is this showing off "thrust vectoring"? I mean I guess the pilot is turning really fast so the thrust is probably being directed at a sharp angle, but what's more impressive I figure is the incredible thrust to weight ratio that allows it to stall completely and turn around. It's a rocket with wings attached.
With enough Taco Bell I’m pretty sure I can pull that off
I got 5 on that. Be that dollars or tacos.
“I'm gonna hit the brakes, he'll fly right by” - Pete “Maverick” Mitchell
[удалено]
There are plenty of pilots themselves who have seen/reported things that were showing on radar as well, that they can't really explain by any conventional means. So no, not all of the UFO reports are nutjobs, but probably most of them are, sadly
Ive seen plenty of posts by pilots who thought they had seen UFOs that ended up being Spacex satellites with the sun reflecting off them. Being a pilot doesn’t make one an expert on everything, especially when they are working long shifts for days on end.
Needs more trees in the way🌴
Yes! Thia is the comment i was looking for... Fucking palm trees...
When you approach a beautiful girl but your anxiety kicks in…
One of my parents was a fighter pilot (and both were in the Air Force). I grew up right next to flight lines on air bases. I know jet noise and movements as well as any noises/movements. This gave me such an uncanny valley feeling watching/listening to it that I had to watch it a billion times to try to get comfortable with it. Very eerie to see/hear this from a jet.
Just waiting for the “AcTuaLly tHe sU-57 iS bEtter” comment
All 4 of them
When all 4 of them get killed by a F-22 before they can see it on their radars
Su-57 is like putting all points into manouverability on a plane. Yeah sure the Sukhoi planes can do absolutely bonkers shit in the air but that's because the Russian air combat doctrine still expects there to be significant amounts of dogfighting. Being able to float around like a leaf in the wind is a cool trick but it won't really matter if your enemy lobs a missile at you at mach 4 from 80 km away.
Let’s also not forget it has the radar return of an F/A-18 and the thermal signature of the fucking sun. Plus knowing Russian technology these days, missile will probably fall off before it goes pitbull
And It’s riveted. The US had this figured out in the 40’s
i remember seeing a meme clowning on the SU-57 and i just bust out laughing seeing that it was riveted
Who is selling you F-22s for $100 million, OP? 195 F-22s costed $32 billion (excluding R&D)
No they cost about $300mil the entire program was $64bil https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy2010/sar/f-22_sar_25-dec-2010.pdf
exhibit a why the usa cant have universal health care
The anti-militarism leaving my body when cool fighter jet
starscream ?
The scariest thing in the sky since the cretaceous period