Skip to comments.
Top USAF general explains EXACTLY how to kill an F-22
The DEW Line ^
| February 28, 2012
| Stephen Trimble
Posted on 03/02/2012 11:28:44 AM PST by EnjoyingLife
Hopefully, you will never find yourself in air-to-air combat with a Lockheed Martin F-22, particularly if you happen to be flying any other fighter besides an F-22. The Raptor still boasts a 30:1 kill ratio in mock dogfights (the only kind of dogfight, alas, the F-22 has ever known).
Notice, however, the ":1" part of the ratio expression. That's the proof: The F-22 can be shot down.
But how?
(Excerpt) Read more at flightglobal.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: f22a; raptor; stealth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: EnjoyingLife
Until Obama is out of office we should just keep quite about this plane and other important issues and items. Otherwise he will give it to Islam.
I am sure he knows about the plane but he plays so much golf he might have forgotten to do this.
2
posted on
03/02/2012 11:32:24 AM PST
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
To: EnjoyingLife
Yeah, just try and get in position to do that.
3
posted on
03/02/2012 11:32:54 AM PST
by
steve86
(I have Schizoid Personality Disorder and am exercising the privileges thereof.)
To: EnjoyingLife
Well in the training dogfight where an EA-18G Growler got a kill on an F-22 it was due to good old target fixation. The F-22 pilot got so busy trying to lock up one fast maneuvering FA-18 that he forgot to check his six. The Growler flying ECM was able to get on his tail and take him out with a gun kill. All the stealth in the world doesn’t help when you are tracked by the MK-I human eyeball.
4
posted on
03/02/2012 11:35:05 AM PST
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
To: EnjoyingLife
The Budget Cut is the most powerful weapon known to mankind. So far it is undefeated.
To: Steve Van Doorn
Remember gentlemen, ‘loose lips sink ships’ I’m so tired of every US weapons system gets ruined by the New York Times. Shut your mouths!
6
posted on
03/02/2012 11:40:21 AM PST
by
STD
(It Doesn't Take a Real Political Panjandrum to Cut Taxes & Cut Spending Stupid!)
To: EnjoyingLife
One F-22 might have a pretty good chance of shooting down another F-22?
7
posted on
03/02/2012 11:41:23 AM PST
by
smokingfrog
( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
To: EnjoyingLife
"The Raptor still boasts a 30:1 kill ratio in mock dogfights...Notice, however, the ":1" part of the ratio expression. That's the proof: The F-22 can be shot down. But how? Simple. Attack them in a ratio of 31:1. Sometimes, quantity has a quality all its own.
8
posted on
03/02/2012 11:41:50 AM PST
by
Joe 6-pack
(Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
To: EnjoyingLife
In other words, chances are slim and none! LOL! Slim does happen occasionally.
9
posted on
03/02/2012 11:45:19 AM PST
by
6ppc
(It's torch and pitchfork time)
To: Joe 6-pack
“Simple. Attack them in a ratio of 31:1. Sometimes, quantity has a quality all its own.”
That is assuming the quality of the aircrew is that of US standards. I doubt the Iranians or North Koreans would have such a “good” ratio of 30:1.
To: Joe 6-pack
Simple. Attack them in a ratio of 31:1. Sometimes, quantity has a quality all its own.
Other than just swamping them, here are some other options...
* Sneak past base security and blow them up on the ground.
* Kill the tankers and watch them run out of gas before they get home
* Spam them with cheap drones. Thanks to defense cuts they will eventually run out of ammo, spare parts, or fuel. Then they get a lot easier to kill.
* Allow Middle East locals to maintain them, every bit of equipment will be stolen within 30 minutes.
* Have Chuck Norris throw a rock at it.
11
posted on
03/02/2012 11:57:44 AM PST
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
To: EnjoyingLife
Clearly, the F-22 is head and shoulders above the rest but it can only carry so many weapons.
12
posted on
03/02/2012 12:01:49 PM PST
by
ryan71
(Dear spell check - No, I will not capitalize the "m" in moslem!)
To: EnjoyingLife
A General is saying this?
Is he going to give out the launch codes next?
13
posted on
03/02/2012 12:03:04 PM PST
by
Lx
(Do you like it, do you like it. Scott? I call it Mr. and Mrs. Tennerman chili.)
To: GonzoGOP
* Put a woman in the pilot seat
14
posted on
03/02/2012 12:03:04 PM PST
by
frithguild
(Withdraw from the 1967 Treaty on Outer Space. It bans private property and profits.)
To: Steve Van Doorn
Until Obama is out of office we should just keep quite about this plane and other important issues and items. Otherwise he will give it to Islam. He has already given them all of NASA and our latest drone technology and God only knows what other secrets he has given his brethren.
And the media continues to pretend they do not know why Israel does not want anything to do with him. Everyone knows exactly why. He has shown us directly multiple times that he is a friend to the Muslims first and foremost.
A quote in a book purportedly written by him, has him saying, "If things turn ugly, I stand with the Muslims." This is the President of the United States saying this. How much more clear can he be?
Can you imagine the firestorm if a President or even a candidate ever said something along the lines of, "If things turn ugly, I will stand with the Pope."?
15
posted on
03/02/2012 12:04:42 PM PST
by
240B
(he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
To: Steve Van Doorn
16
posted on
03/02/2012 12:05:00 PM PST
by
tayper
(Granny told me, Saying it don't make it so)
To: ryan71
In the future, I see a network of very small jet powered drones, each armed with 1 or 2 internal weapons, each with IR sensors and an AESA radar, each stealthy and able to loiter on station for many hours. They don't need to dogfight and they don't need mach 3 speed. They need to be properly positioned against the threat. They would essentially be weapons/sensor platforms, hard to detect, hard to fully eliminate and hard to avoid. And cheap.
Maybe the new Avenger but smaller?
17
posted on
03/02/2012 12:11:42 PM PST
by
ryan71
(Dear spell check - No, I will not capitalize the "m" in moslem!)
To: Lx
A General is saying this? Is he going to give out the launch codes next?
Having read the article it might be more of a "Don't get cocky" to his own guys. In the two examples give, in addition to the one I gave about the EA-18G, the common denominator is that the F-22 pilot has to get complacent and make a mistake.
It is kind of like when the best team in the NFL takes on the worst team and the coach gives his guys the any given Sunday speech. It is just to remind your guys that just because they are the best, doesn't mean they can let their guard down. Because the other guy might be darn good too and if you screw up you probably won't live long enough to realize it.
18
posted on
03/02/2012 12:12:32 PM PST
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
To: EnjoyingLife
the only kind of dogfight, alas, the F-22 has ever knownWhat a stupid and wicked thing to say. The #1 argument for having weapons like this is their deterrent effect. Our fighter fighter pilots are well-trained and expert at what they have to do, but I doubt there are many who look forward with pleasure to the prospect of aerial combat.
19
posted on
03/02/2012 12:17:49 PM PST
by
Romulus
(The Traditional Latin Mass is the real Youth Mass)
To: ryan71
They don't need to dogfight and they don't need mach 3 speed. They need to be properly positioned against the threat.
The problem is that drones don't think creatively. And human controllers on long routine patrols tend to get sloppy. Any patrol line can be penetrated by a skilled enemy if the other guy can get a good look at it. Especially if the other guy has drones too. They make way better distractions than they do guards.
In land terms think of it as posting two hundred rent a cops around some key facility. Then let a six man SEAL team study their security setup for a day or two. Any bets on the survival chances of such a facility.
Drones at their current or immediate future level of technology will serve the same purpose as landmines and barbed wire do in land combat. It isn't that they do most of the damage, it is that they channelize the attack into the killers who are waiting in ambush. You don't need as may killers, but you will still need a few, real good ones.
20
posted on
03/02/2012 12:22:07 PM PST
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson