Shame there is no information about what distance those were taken from and also, when was afterburner used and when not (clever people may get the difference).
Another nice information would be performance of "stealth" raptor from big range (either IR, performance against low / high frequency radars and passive kolchuga radar vs AESA). Anyway those wont be public for some time or person who get caught leaking this won't be seen again. :)
F-22 exhaust nozzles do a pretty decent job of hiding its thermal signature, but the body is just as hot as the rest of modern planes. Rafale has a lower signature.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Wow I suspected the F-22 to have a much lower IR signature than that, the leading edges and most of the fuselage on the F-22 have a low IR signature but those engines are seriously hot. At one point the ladder scale topped +50 for the F-22 with AB!! without AB and from a head on aspect the F-22 is still an eye opening +15. The Viper without AB is +30. The Eurofighter is +20.
Unless that ladder scale is fake the F-22's IR signature is not as low as some people like to beleive. Great video.
@HarryHiII The ladder on the left of the screen shows the elevation angle of the camera if I'm not mistaken. There should also be another at the bottom of the screen showing the rotation (azimuth) of the camera.
I do agree with you though that the F-22's IR signature is not as low as some people would like to believe.
Interesting, the F-22's IR signature seems significantly smaller than the other aircraft when not in A/B but as expected in A/B it lights up like heck.
The 22 is cold outside of AB use. It supercruises, so afterburn isn't needed at all. Plus this camera is much closer than one in a fighter trying to track the F-22 would be.
The F-22 achieves performance similar to that every other fighter in this video without afterburn. It also doesn't seem to reflect its own heat signal like the Typhoon appears to do (EF wings specifically). Also, even though it's twice as powerful than the other fighters, the AB signal is not noticeably higher.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@KARASAWA40 The F-22 may well appear to be able to perform similar to every other aircraft without reheat, however having seen it display at Fairford and Farnborough, it does use reheat, you just can't see it quite as well as you would on an F-16 or Eurofighter. Also the Typhoon was displaying with a full weapons load, the F-22 wasn't.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Air shows are the worse kind of evidence for determining a plane's performance. It's nothing like air combat. In combat, the F-22 would be at 40,000 feet at M 1.5 with out AB, not at 2,000 feet at 100 knots performing post stall backflips.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@KARASAWA40 If you believe that the F-22 can match the best performance of other new generation fighters like the Rafale or Typhoon without using afterburner then you are very much mistaken.
" doesn't seem to reflect its own heat signal like the Typhoon "
At 1:55 the F-22's engine is clearly reflected by it's tail.
At 1:02 the Typhoon's wing appears reflective but the footage is also overexposed to the point that the background is lighter, and even the turbulence over the wing is visible.
It's essentially fact. On dry thrust the F-22 is at M1.8, the EF requires AB to do the same, it's limited to M1.3 dry (with weapons?). The F-22 performs at BVR on mil power, other planes use AB to climb/accel/maneuver. You've got a point on overexposure, but the F-22's reflection on its tail is hardly the same as the [possibly misleading] EF-2000 shot. Watching other videos, I don't see the F-22's ploom being much larger.
@KARASAWA40 In dry power the Typhoon can reach Mach 1.5 while carrying a comparable weapons load of 6-8 AAM's, but can easily exceed Mach 2 with reheat, and can reach M1.8 even while carrying a pair of 1000L tanks under wing.
The F-22 can supercruise at a higher speed but it still requires the use of reheat to achieve comparable performance to the Typhoon and other modern fighters in reheat, that's the point I was making.
M 1.5 is a "hinted at upper limit", not confirmed, and probably doesn't involve weapons. Performance is a broad term. The F-22 on mil power probably can't out turn the EF in AB at sea level in a minimum speed turn, but at higher speed/altitude, the F-22's mil power gives it agility and acceleration equivalent to that of other fighters. The latter is more important. The F-22 can comfortably spend the entire engagement near M 2, just about every other planes requires afterburn to do that.
Try to look up Eurofighter's presentation to the RNAF (it's available online), or look at the performance figures stated on the Eurofighter section of the EADS website for 'BVR mission'. -
"Even without afterburner, the aircraft has the capability to maintain an average speed of approximately mach 1.5 continuously (supercruise)."
Note that Mach 1.5 is stated as being the AVERAGE and not the MAXIMUM speed which the Typhoon can supercruise at !
@KARASAWA40 What in the world makes you think that the F-22 can out-perform the EF in AB, let alone in mil-power ?
The F-22 has the capability to spend the duration of an engagement >M 1.5 (dependent on the altitude and how it's loaded) but to reach Mach 2 still requires the use of AB which limits it's endurance to a short dash.
Well, it can potentially reach M2 on dry thrust. There is no info to disprove that. All that was released was that the plane achiever M1.8 on mil power. It was not said that M 1.8 is the max, it may or may not be. In any case, M 1.8 is still pretty fast.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@tippership I think your confusing different statements that have been made over the years regarding the performance of the F-22.
It's been said that the F-22 can reach Mach 1.5 at 80% mil power, and the published flight envelope shows it can reach up to M1.75 in mil power, but it can only reach this speed at one particular altitude which makes it quite a marginal capability anyway.
@tippership Still, it is not ,,undetectable" even when afterburned was not used at the begining of the video raptor was extremly easy to spot with naked eye (I believe all planes would be). And if you can spot it, AA missile can (thus range of detection may warry). It is said that Raptor can not be populary ,,locked on" by any plane, but that is ofc bullshit, there are even photos from USAF pilots of FA/18 that ,,locked on" raptor.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@KARASAWA40 Why is the reflection on the F-22's tail any different ?
IMO the F-22 appeared to produce a larger AB plume than the other fighters on display although none of the other fighters on display where of a similar size or produce as much thrust. I would guess that the F-22 probably has a greatly reduced signature over the similarly sized F-15 or Flanker, and that would have made for an interesting comparison.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
" even though it's twice as powerful than the other fighters, the AB signal is not noticeably higher. "
Try watching the full displays filmed by FLIR at Farnborough before drawing any conclusion based on this footage alone. Under similar conditions the AB plume produced by the F-22 was noticeably larger than that of the EF, although probably of comparable size relative to it's larger airframe. -
Shame there is no information about what distance those were taken from and also, when was afterburner used and when not (clever people may get the difference).
Another nice information would be performance of "stealth" raptor from big range (either IR, performance against low / high frequency radars and passive kolchuga radar vs AESA). Anyway those wont be public for some time or person who get caught leaking this won't be seen again. :)
thomaspruzina 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
F-22 exhaust nozzles do a pretty decent job of hiding its thermal signature, but the body is just as hot as the rest of modern planes. Rafale has a lower signature.
stalkingalizee 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wow I suspected the F-22 to have a much lower IR signature than that, the leading edges and most of the fuselage on the F-22 have a low IR signature but those engines are seriously hot. At one point the ladder scale topped +50 for the F-22 with AB!! without AB and from a head on aspect the F-22 is still an eye opening +15. The Viper without AB is +30. The Eurofighter is +20.
Unless that ladder scale is fake the F-22's IR signature is not as low as some people like to beleive. Great video.
HarryHiII 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HarryHiII The ladder on the left of the screen shows the elevation angle of the camera if I'm not mistaken. There should also be another at the bottom of the screen showing the rotation (azimuth) of the camera.
I do agree with you though that the F-22's IR signature is not as low as some people would like to believe.
MrAlisalami 1 year ago
Comment removed
HarryHiII 1 year ago
Interesting, the F-22's IR signature seems significantly smaller than the other aircraft when not in A/B but as expected in A/B it lights up like heck.
SvenPhantom 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
IR low-visibility of F22 - myth busted ?
Bukuzoid 1 year ago
@Bukuzoid
nope
tdmtu1500ag 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Bukuzoid more like the IR invisibility myth
saintkatanalegacy 1 year ago
The 22 is cold outside of AB use. It supercruises, so afterburn isn't needed at all. Plus this camera is much closer than one in a fighter trying to track the F-22 would be.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@KARASAWA40 it's not cold. it's *marginally* less hot.
code123ns 1 year ago
Cold is relative. A red star is cold, yet many millions of degrees hotter than a plane.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@KARASAWA40 yes, it might relatively cold compared with a star, but it is not relatevily cold compared to other aircraft
code123ns 1 year ago
The F-22 achieves performance similar to that every other fighter in this video without afterburn. It also doesn't seem to reflect its own heat signal like the Typhoon appears to do (EF wings specifically). Also, even though it's twice as powerful than the other fighters, the AB signal is not noticeably higher.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@KARASAWA40 The F-22 may well appear to be able to perform similar to every other aircraft without reheat, however having seen it display at Fairford and Farnborough, it does use reheat, you just can't see it quite as well as you would on an F-16 or Eurofighter. Also the Typhoon was displaying with a full weapons load, the F-22 wasn't.
Timo3531 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Air shows are the worse kind of evidence for determining a plane's performance. It's nothing like air combat. In combat, the F-22 would be at 40,000 feet at M 1.5 with out AB, not at 2,000 feet at 100 knots performing post stall backflips.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
@KARASAWA40 Agree with you there!
Timo3531 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@KARASAWA40 If you believe that the F-22 can match the best performance of other new generation fighters like the Rafale or Typhoon without using afterburner then you are very much mistaken.
" doesn't seem to reflect its own heat signal like the Typhoon "
At 1:55 the F-22's engine is clearly reflected by it's tail.
At 1:02 the Typhoon's wing appears reflective but the footage is also overexposed to the point that the background is lighter, and even the turbulence over the wing is visible.
MrAlisalami 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's essentially fact. On dry thrust the F-22 is at M1.8, the EF requires AB to do the same, it's limited to M1.3 dry (with weapons?). The F-22 performs at BVR on mil power, other planes use AB to climb/accel/maneuver. You've got a point on overexposure, but the F-22's reflection on its tail is hardly the same as the [possibly misleading] EF-2000 shot. Watching other videos, I don't see the F-22's ploom being much larger.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KARASAWA40 In dry power the Typhoon can reach Mach 1.5 while carrying a comparable weapons load of 6-8 AAM's, but can easily exceed Mach 2 with reheat, and can reach M1.8 even while carrying a pair of 1000L tanks under wing.
The F-22 can supercruise at a higher speed but it still requires the use of reheat to achieve comparable performance to the Typhoon and other modern fighters in reheat, that's the point I was making.
MrAlisalami 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
M 1.5 is a "hinted at upper limit", not confirmed, and probably doesn't involve weapons. Performance is a broad term. The F-22 on mil power probably can't out turn the EF in AB at sea level in a minimum speed turn, but at higher speed/altitude, the F-22's mil power gives it agility and acceleration equivalent to that of other fighters. The latter is more important. The F-22 can comfortably spend the entire engagement near M 2, just about every other planes requires afterburn to do that.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KARASAWA40
Try to look up Eurofighter's presentation to the RNAF (it's available online), or look at the performance figures stated on the Eurofighter section of the EADS website for 'BVR mission'. -
"Even without afterburner, the aircraft has the capability to maintain an average speed of approximately mach 1.5 continuously (supercruise)."
Note that Mach 1.5 is stated as being the AVERAGE and not the MAXIMUM speed which the Typhoon can supercruise at !
MrPikon 1 year ago
Links?
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KARASAWA40 What in the world makes you think that the F-22 can out-perform the EF in AB, let alone in mil-power ?
The F-22 has the capability to spend the duration of an engagement >M 1.5 (dependent on the altitude and how it's loaded) but to reach Mach 2 still requires the use of AB which limits it's endurance to a short dash.
MrPikon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Well, it can potentially reach M2 on dry thrust. There is no info to disprove that. All that was released was that the plane achiever M1.8 on mil power. It was not said that M 1.8 is the max, it may or may not be. In any case, M 1.8 is still pretty fast.
KARASAWA40 1 year ago
@KARASAWA40
...
i can tell you this much.
When the Raptor supercruises at M 1.8- it is NOT using 100% dry thrust ;)
you'll have to figure out what that means from there..... that is all.
tippership 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@tippership I think your confusing different statements that have been made over the years regarding the performance of the F-22.
It's been said that the F-22 can reach Mach 1.5 at 80% mil power, and the published flight envelope shows it can reach up to M1.75 in mil power, but it can only reach this speed at one particular altitude which makes it quite a marginal capability anyway.
MrPikon 1 year ago
@MrPikon ...What i said came not from "statements"- but from pilots. That is all.
tippership 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@tippership Still, it is not ,,undetectable" even when afterburned was not used at the begining of the video raptor was extremly easy to spot with naked eye (I believe all planes would be). And if you can spot it, AA missile can (thus range of detection may warry). It is said that Raptor can not be populary ,,locked on" by any plane, but that is ofc bullshit, there are even photos from USAF pilots of FA/18 that ,,locked on" raptor.
thomaspruzina 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@KARASAWA40 Why is the reflection on the F-22's tail any different ?
IMO the F-22 appeared to produce a larger AB plume than the other fighters on display although none of the other fighters on display where of a similar size or produce as much thrust. I would guess that the F-22 probably has a greatly reduced signature over the similarly sized F-15 or Flanker, and that would have made for an interesting comparison.
MrAlisalami 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
" even though it's twice as powerful than the other fighters, the AB signal is not noticeably higher. "
Try watching the full displays filmed by FLIR at Farnborough before drawing any conclusion based on this footage alone. Under similar conditions the AB plume produced by the F-22 was noticeably larger than that of the EF, although probably of comparable size relative to it's larger airframe. -
img150 . imagevenue . com / img . php ? image=14642_FLIR_F_22_EFT_122_155lo . jpg
MrAlisalami 1 year ago