Which Is The Best! F-22 Raptor Vs T-50 PAK FA

Subscribe For More - MilitaryTiger

                    

SHARE this video on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google+

○○○ Stay Tuned and Enjoy ○○○

Real Dogfigt Simulation Between F 22 Raptor & 5 F 15 Eagles | U.S. Air Force

SHARE this video on FB, G+, Twitter, Instagram - https://youtu.be/u_-CLMeUBMU

Subscribe to Military Tiger~ https://www.youtube.com/c/MilitaryTiger

It was a simulated aerial combat between two heavy weight fighters of the U.S. Air Force Lockheed-Martin F-22 Raptor and Boeing F-15 Eagles to figure out the real scene of future aerial dogfight capabilities of the Raptors.

But, the result was shocking! Raptors are slightly lesser able to lock first opposite F-15 Eagles while dogfight occured. Very recent in UAE, in an aerial exercise F-22 Raptor was missile locked by the RAF Eurofighter Typhoon! 

Though limitations of the close combat the BVR capabilities of the Raptors gives it enormous advantages over enemy fighters!

                  ~Follow us on~

https://www.facebook.com/MilitaryTiger
https://www.twitter.com/Military_Tiger
https://www.instagram.com/military_tiger
https://www.pinterest.com/militarytiger/
https://www.google.com/+MilitaryTiger

Stay Tuned and Enjoy.

F-22 Raptor Flown UsingSsynthetic Bio-fuel

Just like Toyota is developing technology to face the challenges of finding renewable energy sources with its Prius, the aerospace industry is making its own efforts. These efforts are now no more limited to deliver a greener aviation industry in terms of passenger airliner. On 18th March 2011, an F-22 Raptor successfully flew at supercruise on a 50/50 fuel blend of conventional petroleum-based JP-8 and biofuel derived from camelina, a weed-like plant not used for food.

Ultimately the U.S Air Force selected theF-22 weapons system to be the biofuel blend flight test pathfinder for all fighter aircrafts and the flight was the capstone of a series of ground and flight test events conducted by the 411th Flight Test Squadron at Edwards Air Force Base.

The overall test objective on a single-seat, twin-engine fifth-generation super maneuverable fighter aircraft was to evaluate biofuel fuel blend suitability in the F-22 weapons system and testing consisted of air starts, operability, and performance at different speeds and altitudes throughout the flight envelope. It also performed several maneuvers including a supercruise at 40,000 ft., reaching speeds of 1.5 Mach.

In terms of economic benefits to reduce aviation fuel cost the overall flight was a success and another milestone was completed for the Alternative Fuels Certification Division. In support to the United States’ Air Force’s 2016 acquisition goal to cost-competitively which acquire 50 percent of the domestic aviation fuel requirement via alternative fuel blends in which the component is derived from domestic sources and produced in a manner that is ‘greener’ than fuels produced from conventional petroleum.

Studies have shown camelina-based jet fuel to reduce carbon emissions from jets by about 80%. The camelina-derived synthetic fuel falls into a class of hydroprocessed blended biofuels known as hydrotreated renewable jet fuels, or HRJs. The HRJ fuel can be derived from a variety of plant oil and animal fat feedstocks. Previously the United States Navy chose camelina as the feedstock for their first test of aviation biofuel, and successfully operated a static General Electric F414 engine, which is the engine for the Boeing F/A-18.

In February Air Force officials certified the entire C-17 Globemaster III fleet for unrestricted flight operations using the HRJ biofuel blend. We are still to see whether the U.S Air Force will implement bio-fuels in their fifth generation fighters.

Analysis: End of year surge for Chengdu J-20 fighter programme

In November and December 2014 two additional prototypes of the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation's (CAC) J-20 fifth-generation fighter emerged, advancing its development towards a possible initial operational capability (IOC) of 2017-18.

A view of the latest J-20 prototype, 2015, which made its maiden flight from the CAC airfield on 18 December. (Chinese internet).

The J-20 programme currently features six known prototypes. Two are early technology development articles (serial numbers 2001 and 2002) that emerged in 2009 and 2010, while four are modified versions closer to operational prototypes (serial numbers 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2015) that all emerged in 2014.

No prototype numbered 2014 has yet to appear and may not, given the traditional Chinese view that four is an unlucky number.

Chinese aircraft spotters responsible for early internet photos report that the latest J-20 prototype, 2015, made its maiden flight from the CAC airfield on 18 December.

hinese aircraft spotters responsible for early internet photos report that the latest prototypes, 2013 and 2015, made their maiden flights from the CAC airfield on 29 November and 18 December 2014 respectively.

Both have most of the refinements seen on aircraft 2011, which emerged in February 2014: cropped canards and vertical stabilisers, a modified air intake, modified wing leading-edge extensions, and a new electro-optical targeting system (EOTS) under the nose.

However, 2013 and 2015 lack the nose-mounted pitot tubes that featured on the earlier prototypes. In addition, number 2015 has longer and sharper-shaped rear-fuselage horizontal strakes. Although this aft surface does not appear to be movable, it may contribute to aircraft stability, as a similar - though movable - surface did for the Grumman X-29 technology demonstrator.

A detail of the strakes on the latest J-20 prototype, 2015. (Chinese internet).

Early internet-sourced images have also emerged of the J-20's retractable refuelling probe, placed on the upper starboard of the nose. The development status of an indigenous Chinese turbofan for the J-20, often referred to as the WS-15, remains unknown. There is speculation that early J-20 examples may use a version of the Russian Saturn AL-31 turbofan.

In April 2014 an Asian government source told IHS Jane's that China would have 24 J-20s by 2020, which if realised, could constitute a first operational regiment. This would indicate that IOC may occur in the 2017-18 timeframe.

Source: Janes

Whos Going To Shoot Down "Raptors"

The image in this post was taken from a U.S. Air Force F-15 Eagle from the 131st Fighter Squadron, 104th Fighter Wing, Barnes Air National Guard Base, Massachusetts, during a close range aerial combat exercise against a U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor from the 154th Wing, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii.

You can clearly see the two planes maneuvering at very close range, pulling Gs, with the F-22 releasing flares counter measures against (simulated) heat seeking air-to-air missiles.

The dogfight took place off the coast of Penang, Malaysia, Jun. 16, 2014, during “Cope Taufan 2014″ a biennial LFE (large force employment) exercise taking place June 9 to 20 designed to improve U.S. and Malaysian combined readiness.

Both aircraft are currently deployed to Royal Malaysian Air Force P.U. Butterworth, Malaysia.

(image)

The exercise, that marks the F-22’s first deployment to Southeast Asia, featured also some interesting mixed formation between U.S. planes with Royal Malaysian Air Force MIG-29N Fulcrum, Su-30 and F-18 Hornet jets.

(image)

Image credit: U.S. Air Force

It’s not clear whether the F-22 has flown DACT (Dissimilar Air Combat Training) against Malaysian Migs or Sukhois; if this is the case, it would be interesting to know which ROE (Rules Of Engagement) were applied and the outcome of the confrontations between the Russian multirole planes and the U.S. most advanced fighters.

Third Chengdu J-20 prototype flies

The third prototype of the Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter made its maiden flight successfully on Saturday 1st March. According to the witness report on Chinese social media, the J-20 prototype “2011″ took the sky at about 12:00 local time, escorted by a Chengdu J-10S two-seater fighter. The entire flight lasted about 30 minutes before the aircraft landed safely.

The “2011″ prototype was first spotted at the test airfield of the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Corporation (CAIC) preparing for its maiden flight in early 2014. A low-speed taxi test took place on 16 January, followed by a high-speed taxi test on 18 January.

J-20 prototype “2011″ in take-off during its maiden flight

The maiden flight of the first J-20 prototype “2001″ in January 2011 took the Western intelligence completely by surprise. A second prototype “2002″ then made its maiden flight in May 2012.

Compared with its two predecessors, the “2011″ prototype features a number of modifications in its aerodynamic design and systems, with the most notable being a chin-mounted electro-optical targeting system (EOTS). Other modifications include new air intakes, redesigned nose section, differently shaped leading-edge extension, redesigned frame-strengthened canopy, different gear bays, and slightly different forward canard and tail fin tips. In addition, the aircraft also wears a new light-grey colour radar-absorbing coating.

(Top) J-20 prototype “2001″ that first flew in January 2011; (Bottom) The new J-20 prototype “2011″

The latest flight test suggests that rather than serving as a technology demonstrator, the J-20 may be on its way to become the world’s third operational 5th-generation fighter, after the Boeing F-22A Raptor and the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lighting II. However, before this can happen Chengdu engineers will need to overcome a number of technical obstacles, such as the lack of indigenous turbofan jet engine and credible avionics.

Arming F-22 Raptor With AIM-120 Amraam And AIM-9X Sidewinder Missiles

Is thist new Chinese "Top Secret" stealth that will hunt U.S. Air Forces' F-22 Raptor in the sky?

Six F-22 Raptor fighter jets trailing three tankers over the Mediterranean Sea_Captured by A Photographer

Stealth planes might be invisible to radars but they can do nothing against human eye. This is what the following images prove.

Taken by Gian Luca Onnis, a (lucky) photographer and aviation enthusiast, on Jan. 25, the photographs show a flight of six F-22 Raptors trailing two KC-135 and a KC-10 tankers overflying Sardinia island, Italy, on their way back to the U.S..

The radar evading planes, returning to Holloman, New Mexico, from a deployment in South East Asia, were clearly visible because of the long white contrails they left over the Mediterranean Sea.

The six F-22 Raptors had deployed to Al Dhafra in the UAE via Moron, Spain, on Apr. 20, 2012. Whereas the six stealthy planes of the 49th Fighter Wing returned to the CONUS (Continental U.S.) six F-22 belonging to the 3rd Fighter Wing, were flying in the opposite direction (via Lajes, Azores) to replace them in the Persian Gulf area.

Noteworthy, unlike the Holloman’s F-22As the 3rd FW’s Raptors from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, in Alaska, are Block 3.1 planes capable to find and engage ground targets using the Synthetic Aperture Radar mapping and drop up to eight GBU-39 SDBs (Small Diameter Bombs) in the air-to-surface role.

China's New Stealth Fighters J-23 and J-25 Revealed

The J-20 and J-31, China's first two stealth fighter Designs, are still in the developmental stages, however secrets regarding the nation's other two fifth generation fighters, the J-23 and J-25, have been revealed on Chinese military websites(Chinese Internet).

The J-23 fighter, designed by the Shenyang Aviation Corporation, is no longer an aircraft based on Russian technology, the report said. Shenyang Aviation Corporation has instead chosen to model the J-23 based on the F-22 Raptor of the United States Air Force as it will provide the People's Liberation Army Air Force or Navy Air Force a better chance to combat American fighters in a potential or a future conflict with America(USA).

According to the leaked news report, the J-23 has a longer fuselage and two v-shape vertical tails which look very similar to the ones used by the F-22 Raptor. If China is able to introduce a 117-S thrust vector control engine from Russia or develop it by itself, the maneuverability of J-23 will also be enhanced gradually, the report said.

China's military has yet to provide details on the development of the J-23, however some political and military analysts, said that the J-23 fighter has already been used in military drills as an enemy aircraft due to its similar appearance to the F-22 Raptor.

United Kingdom: F-35 or F-22?

As the unit procurement costs of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter progressively converge with the unit costs of the F-22A Raptor, and the F-35 becomes progressively less survivable as threats evolve, it is time for the UK to cut its losses, bail out of the JSF program, and opt for the F-22A instead. A US Air Force study published in 2000 identified Britain as one of three allies who could be supplied the F-22 without any risk of technology leakage (Author).

The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter is designed to defeat threats that will have been superceded well before this aircraft enters operational service. The performance of the F-35 is suffering seriously from the conflicting design requirements that it was intended to meet. As a result, the F-35 is shaping up to be a technological failure, a delivery schedule and 'affordability' failure, and a techno-strategic failure. This will place Britain in the position of having to look at replacement options, which are extremely limited in view of developing threat capabilities. The question that must inevitably arise is: 'Should Britain Ask the United States for the F-22?'

Britain remains the largest single overseas partner in the F-35 program, and as this program unravels, Britain stands to lose much more than the other partner nations in a sunk investment not producing any direct return, and in political embarrassment. From a political perspective, America needs to start thinking about what alternatives it can offer the British as credible substitutes for the uncompetitive and technically troubled F-35. The F-16E, F/A-18E/F and F-15E/SG do not qualify as credible substitutes given the proliferation of high technology Russian designed Flanker fighters and double digit SAMs on the global stage. None of these types can survive in such an environment.

Britain’s intent to procure the expensive and underperforming F-35 for the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy has produced intensive domestic criticism, some well informed and technically correct, some less so. What is clear however is that Britain does need new technology fighters to replace a range of increasingly less viable legacy aircraft, as well as the Royal Navy’s now retired Sea Harriers.

About a decade ago the F-22A Raptor was proposed as an alternative to the domestically built Eurofighter Typhoon. Britain’s influential aerospace industry lobby killed that proposal, rubbishing the F-22 with some very dubious DERA JOUST simulations, which claimed the “Typhoon was 81 percent as good as an F-22”. Forensic analysis showed this was nonsense, an assessment since then borne out by the operational experience of the US Air Force flying the F-22 against a range of conventional fighters.

Current planning for the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy is to procure the F-35B STOVL JSF as a replacement for the RAF Harrier GR.7/9 fleet, the Jaguar GR.3, retired in 2007, and the Royal Navy Sea Harrier FA.2, retired in 2006. Cited numbers vary between 150 and 138 aircraft, although reports emerging from the UK late last year suggested a reduction to as few as 85 aircraft. This is a far cry from the euphoric speculation of early 2002, when senior RAF staff officers privately suggested to their Canberra colleagues that the RAF should be replacing its remaining Panavia Tornado GR.4s, Tornado F.3s, and earlier built Typhoons, with the F-35A JSF. Over the next two decades Britain will need to replace most if not all of its combat aircraft with credible new technology replacements. The only new fighter in the UK inventory is the Typhoon F.2, which is technologically comparable to currently built American F-15 and F/A-18E/F fighters. While more agile than these legacy US fighters, it is equally vulnerable to advanced SA-20/21/23 Surface to Air Missile systems, and new generation Su-35BM class Flanker variants. The new ramjet MBDA Meteor Air to Air Missile may eventually provide a credible capability against older Flanker variants, but will be matched over the next decade by the Russian ramjet Vympel RVV-AE-PD missile. The Typhoon has been justifiably criticised for program procurement costs which have been similar in magnitude to the vastly better F-22 Raptor.

 

The Royal Air Force will need replacements for the Tornado IDS (above) and Tornado ADV (below), capable of penetrating advanced air defences and defeating Su-35BM class fighters. The F-22A can perform both roles better than any other design planned or in service (RAF image).

  

The Typhoon F.2 is one of the most expensive fighters ever built, but lacks the stealth to penetrate modern SAM defences, and the persistence to compete with the latest Su-35BM class Flanker variants (MBDA image).

The F-35B is intended to replace the Harrier GR.9 (below) and already retired Sea Harrier FA.2 (above). With Britain's planned new carriers to be much larger than the Invincible class, and the ubiquity of modern Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance systems rendering dispersed basing almost irrelevant, there is not a compelling case for a STOVL aircraft to replace the Harrier variants (Royal Navy images).

Britain’s long term strategic needs have been the focus of much of the criticism directed at re-equipment plans for the UK fighter fleet. Sadly much of this criticism has been myopic, concentrated on short term considerations relating to Counter INsurgency Operations (COIN) in the Islamic world. In this respect Britain has suffered from the same nonsensical very short term argument seen in the United States, and Australia.

There is little doubt that over the long term Britain will need to provide some credible expeditionary capabilities to support coalition operations on the global stage. While another Falklands scenario is unlikely, given the loss of Britain’s overseas colonies, the need to intervene globally is unlikely to vanish. If future UK governments intend to contribute capabilities of any real use, they will need systems which are effective and survivable against the modern Russian high technology systems proliferating globally, and also interoperable with other coalition assets. Systems which soak up US forces as protective escorts to stay alive are more of a hindrance in a coalition campaign, than a contribution of value.

What should be of more concern to Britons are the increasingly toxic relationships between Putin’s Russia and the many former Soviet Republics, and former Warsaw Pact allies in Eastern Europe. Putin’s confrontational and coercive foreign policy and military interventions along Russia’s exposed Western and South Western borders have fuelled mistrust and resentment in nations which were already largely resentful over Soviet era misdeeds. The expansion of NATO eastward has been a by-product of this progressive breakdown – not vice versa as is often claimed. Russians feel exposed without hundreds of kilometre deep buffer territories and this perceived vulnerability with its resulting fears will not disappear any time soon.

While Putin’s Russia will never be another Soviet Union, Russia is slowly recapitalising its Cold War era military with advanced systems, and will have a genuine capability to project coercive air power against European NATO nations. If any of the myriad ongoing disputes between Russia and its now NATO aligned neighbours degrade into shooting conflicts, the Russians will be able to drop smart bombs across much of Eastern Europe, unless the US Air Force deploys most if not all of its F-22 Raptors into European NATO airfields. Moreover, as Russia builds up numbers of the SA-21, it will be able to declare and effectively enforce permanent air exclusion zones up to 200 nautical miles outside its geographical borders – a Surface-to-Air-Missile-based buffer zone that would appeal to Russian fears of being subjected to attack by cruise missiles and conventional aircraft.

European NATO nations can look forward to the prospect of Moscow not only turning off the gas supply, but also exercising military muscle in NATO’s backyard. The expectation that the Americans will permanently commit their already overcommitted future F-22 fleet to cover for European military underinvestment is clearly asking a little too much and, at best, fanciful thinking.

It is worth observing that the character of developing Russian capabilities is very different from the Cold War era Soviet model. Rather than the vast numbers of mostly unsophisticated shorter ranging dumb bomb armed tactical fighters the Soviets deployed, Russia is emulating the US model of smaller numbers of highly sophisticated high technology long range aircraft armed with precision smart weapons. Large numbers of low performance fighters, including the F-35, are virtually useless against Russia’s new generation Su-34 and Su-35BM fighters.

While the broader issues of European NATO security are bigger than Britain’s needs alone, they underscore the realities of an uncertain future in a complex multipolar world.

Technological evolution and poorly thought out specification/definition of the F-35 design has seen to it that by the time the F-35 would deploy, assuming it survives its engineering, cost and schedule problems, the F-35 will be wholly uncompetitive against the new generation of Russian designed weapons. That margin will grow as Russian and Chinese weapons evolve over the next three decades, while the overweight, underpowered, over-packed and under-stealthed F-35’s built in design limits make it increasingly outmatched.

Whether Britain wishes to conduct expeditionary warfare in coalition or unilaterally, or participate in European NATO continental defence, its Eurofighter Typhoons and planned F-35 JSFs will likely be fodder for the latest Russian weapons, unless the opposing side is an undeveloped Third World nation. The prospect of Russian contractor (i.e. mercenary) aircrew, ground-crew and missileers being deployed to Third World nations with the available cash introduces uncertainties even in the latter circumstance. It has happened before.

The wisest strategy for the United Kingdom is to negotiate access to the F-22A Raptor and bail out of the F-35 program at the earliest. An even wiser strategy is to collaborate with the Americans on the development of a navalised F/A-22N Sea Raptor, to drive down costs for the US Navy, Marine Corps and Royal Navy. The uncompetitive Typhoon can be relegated to air defence of the British Isles, and F-22A and F/A-22N used for expeditionary warfare and NATO air defence commitments on the continent.

While much has been said and written about not exporting the F-22 to US allies, what is less well known is that two studies have been done to determine exportability of the F-22.

The first of these is the public unclassified geostrategic and political assessment performed by then LtCol Matthew Molloy, USAF, who produced a 98 page study while posted to the Maxwell AFB School of Advanced Air Power Studies of the Air University, in 1999-2000. This document identifies Australia, Britain and Canada as the three US allies who can be trusted without question to operate the F-22 and protect its technology.

Less well known is a more detailed and not publicly released study performed by the US Air Force during the same period, often known as the “anti-tamper study”, which looked at risks arising from downed aircraft scenarios. The study also assessed the risks arising in exporting the aircraft to close allies, specifically Australia, which was known to have a developing strategic need for the F-22. The study concluded that it was safe to supply the very same configuration of the F-22 flown by the US Air Force to Australia, as the risks of unwanted technology disclosure were no different to those expected for the US Air Force.

Considering both the Molloy study and the “anti-tamper” study, the notion that the Americans would not export some configuration of the F-22 to the United Kingdom is difficult to accept.

The problems, which the Britons must confront at a strategic level arising from Russia’s devolving relationships with its neighbours, and the ongoing demand for global intervention forces, are problems to a greater or lesser degree shared by other leading European NATO nations. The difficulties arising from involvement in the ill considered F-35 program are also shared by a number of other European NATO nations, as well as the United Kingdom.

The unavoidable strategic reality is the European NATO nations will need a credible capability to discourage adventurous future Russian behaviour in Eastern Europe, and to make a useful difference in expeditionary warfare. None of the indigenous European fighters, or the F-35, will be particularly useful in either kind of contingency. Two to three full strength Fighter Wings comprising 50 to 70 F-22 Raptors each would provide enough deterrent capability and sustainable / survivable firepower to address Europe’s needs for decades to come.

While the NATO AWACS fleet model of a shared resource would be a politically attractive way for Europe to deploy an export configuration of the F-22, it would present practical operational problems.

The United States needs to think long and hard about how to redress Europe’s worsening strategic weakness, as it has the potential to soak up disproportionate US military resources in any serious contingency. Exporting a variant of the F-22 rather than the uncompetitive F-35 would solve much of that problem.

With the long term future of the F-22 now the subject of intensive political, public and analytical community debate in America, and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter now showing the symptoms of an incipient technological “death spiral”, the time is right for the Obama Administration and H.M. Government to jointly explore the export of F-22 Raptor variants for the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, as an “escape strategy” from the F-35 program.

There is a good precedent: when it became clear that the Nimrod AEW.3 could not be made to work in a reasonable timescale and cost, H.M. Government cut its losses, dumped the program and promptly acquired the top tier Boeing E-3D AWACS instead.

The basic strategic challenges both America and Britain face are much the same, whether we consider European NATO contingencies, or expeditionary warfare. The Alliance relationship is as close as it has ever been. All that is needed is the political courage and strategic foresight to make a break from the past, well intentioned but fundamentally flawed, choice of the F-35.