Wargames with the F-22
Moderator: maddog986
- Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39325
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
Wargames with the F-22
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
RE: Wargames with the F-22
Hmm, I wonder which potential near-future conflict would let F-22's face up to F-16's .... [;)]
Iran maybe ? [;)]
Ok, before this turns political : doing sims like this is only a good idea if you're willing to accept actions and results which are not according to the book. The most famous historical example of this is the pre-Midway wargame held by the IJN in which the USN sank a Japanese carrier. The result was promptly dismissed as impossible.
I'm afraid the US military in general is falling for the same trap - not too long ago, but before 9/11 IIRC, there was this wargame/excercise where suicide missions with speedboats full of explosives against a US carrier in the Med were disallowed by the judges ...
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
- Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39325
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Wargames with the F-22
As far as I could see, they were accepting the actual results in this case. What I found interesting strictly from a wargaming perspective was that the F-22 appears to be able to kill F-16s and F-15s at a 30:1 ratio. That's remarkable as a generational leap in fighter performance. Iran does not have F-16s, though they might have some old F-14s that can maybe still fly.
But let's not turn this into a discussion of politics or current events, I'd like to focus strictly on military wargaming and the performance of the F-22. Thanks.
Regards,
- Erik
But let's not turn this into a discussion of politics or current events, I'd like to focus strictly on military wargaming and the performance of the F-22. Thanks.
Regards,
- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Netherlands
RE: Wargames with the F-22
Good read indeed.
Quote:
"Brenton says the fights are complex and dangerous. "I equate them to solving a 1000-mph, three-dimensional chess game where the loser dies," he says. "The radio chatter can become so confusing that it's like blaring rock music in your ears at full volume. You have to act fast, think continuously, pull upwards of 9 g's over and over, monitor your fuel state, track your weapons status, make adjustments to the jets' internal systems, avoid the ground, stay in formation with your wingmen, operate your fire-control radar, scan the airspace visually for threats, decipher your blaring radar-warning-receiver signals and ensure that you kill all the bad guys. Then you must dodge the SAMs, engage a ground target with live bombs successfully, turn around and fight your way back out through the regenerated Red Air one more time before heading home."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4311433.html?page=2
I think I'd last, oh maybe FIVE seconds.
A 30-1 kill ratio? Crikey.
"...the Air Force cite a 30:1 kill ratio between Raptors and their prey. That doesn't equate to one F-22 taking on dozens of enemies; the figure means that for every Raptor shot down, 30 opposing airplanes are expected to be killed. "The F-22 was not built to fight a fair fight," Brenton says."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4311433.html?page=1
Quote:
"Brenton says the fights are complex and dangerous. "I equate them to solving a 1000-mph, three-dimensional chess game where the loser dies," he says. "The radio chatter can become so confusing that it's like blaring rock music in your ears at full volume. You have to act fast, think continuously, pull upwards of 9 g's over and over, monitor your fuel state, track your weapons status, make adjustments to the jets' internal systems, avoid the ground, stay in formation with your wingmen, operate your fire-control radar, scan the airspace visually for threats, decipher your blaring radar-warning-receiver signals and ensure that you kill all the bad guys. Then you must dodge the SAMs, engage a ground target with live bombs successfully, turn around and fight your way back out through the regenerated Red Air one more time before heading home."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4311433.html?page=2
I think I'd last, oh maybe FIVE seconds.
A 30-1 kill ratio? Crikey.
"...the Air Force cite a 30:1 kill ratio between Raptors and their prey. That doesn't equate to one F-22 taking on dozens of enemies; the figure means that for every Raptor shot down, 30 opposing airplanes are expected to be killed. "The F-22 was not built to fight a fair fight," Brenton says."
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4311433.html?page=1
- Prince of Eckmühl
- Posts: 2459
- Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:37 pm
- Location: Texas
RE: Wargames with the F-22
This could be great for the USA arms industry.
Flood the market with older products, like the F-16 and F-17.
Then stock the USAF with F-22 (to shoot them all down). [;)]
PoE (aka ivanmoe)
Flood the market with older products, like the F-16 and F-17.
Then stock the USAF with F-22 (to shoot them all down). [;)]
PoE (aka ivanmoe)
Government is the opiate of the masses.
RE: Wargames with the F-22
Scary stuff[:D]. I didn't even know that they have fianally finished F-22[:D].
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Netherlands
RE: Wargames with the F-22
They're awesome indeed. And we (as in Holland) are to order a few dozen of them too, hurray for that. Can't wait to see it actually fly here. I still remember the day when we first saw the F-16 take off from our local military airbase (which the Germans build by the way, it's still being used) It was an awesome sight, the F-16 was painted in striking red/blue/white, the colours of the US flag, but the same colours as our flag has. It went straight up into the sky, I was used to the thunderous roar of the F-104, the F-16 was much quiter. I do wonder how much noise this succesor will make.
RE: Wargames with the F-22
ORIGINAL: sterckxe
Hmm, I wonder which potential near-future conflict would let F-22's face up to F-16's .... [;)]
Iran maybe ? [;)]
I want a Falcon 4.0 successor, covering middle east theatre with a hypothetic Western/Iran campaign. [:D]
- Jeffrey H.
- Posts: 3154
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 6:39 pm
- Location: San Diego, Ca.
RE: Wargames with the F-22
I scanned the article and I still have the same question on my mind, Why ? Why is it so much better ? Why is it so easily defeating it's adversaries ?
I mean, we've heard this sort of thing many many times from Battleships vs. Carries to guns vs. missles and usually these turn out to be less than true.
The US Air Force and so some similar extent the US government have way too much at stake in this aircraft to be completely unbiased.
I mean, we've heard this sort of thing many many times from Battleships vs. Carries to guns vs. missles and usually these turn out to be less than true.
The US Air Force and so some similar extent the US government have way too much at stake in this aircraft to be completely unbiased.
History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.
Ron Swanson
Ron Swanson
- JudgeDredd
- Posts: 8356
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 7:28 pm
- Location: Scotland
RE: Wargames with the F-22
I expect it's "trumpet blowing" tbh.
I think suspect the 30:1 ratio is pie in the sky and number shouting. It smacks of "publicity stunt"
I think suspect the 30:1 ratio is pie in the sky and number shouting. It smacks of "publicity stunt"
Alba gu' brath
- Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39325
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Wargames with the F-22
I thought it was fairly clear. It has Stealth technology that means the F-15/16 can't detect it before it detects them with its more advanced radar. It also has excellent target tracking/lock-on systems and with its higher "military" speed and overall performance it should have an easier time keeping the older fighters at arm's length where it can pick them off at will.
Honestly, given what I know about the F-22, I figured 10:1 vs. the F-15/16 but I knew it would be a good ratio. As high as 30:1 did surprise me.
Honestly, given what I know about the F-22, I figured 10:1 vs. the F-15/16 but I knew it would be a good ratio. As high as 30:1 did surprise me.
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
-
- Posts: 269
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Mansfield, Texas
RE: Wargames with the F-22
They're awesome indeed. And we (as in Holland) are to order a few dozen of them too, hurray for that.
As far as I know the F-22 is still banned from export so I don't think Holland can purchase them. Perhaps you are thinking of the F-35?
- RyanCrierie
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
- Contact:
RE: Wargames with the F-22
I'm afraid the US military in general is falling for the same trap - not too long ago, but before 9/11 IIRC, there was this wargame/excercise where suicide missions with speedboats full of explosives against a US carrier in the Med were disallowed by the judges ...
GARRGH! Not that freaking lie again.
On another board, we had a discussion concerning the Millennium Excercise 2002 (you know, the one messed up by Van Riper).
The enemy can't materialize forces out of thin air, but what you account a marginal or non-capability the enemy may be able to put to effective use in a way you don't expect.
That is indeed so, however that doesn't really touch on what Riper was doing. As an example, one of the actions carried out by the "American" forces was a series of pre-emptive strikes on missile batteries along the coast in question followed by surveillance of those sites to make sure they had been destroyed. Riper simply ignored that and carried on using the batteries as if nothing had happened. Another example is that he "created" a fleet of mosquito missile craft by fitting P-15 Styx missiles onto Boston Whalers and then using them over a hundred miles from the coast (he wasn't even transiting them from coastal harbors and anchorages - he just positioned them in an ideal spot and stated they were opening fire. Using our chess analogy, he wasn't just putting a queen on the board every time he felt like it, he was putting that queen straight into a checkmate position).
Future simulations and exercises need to allow the side with a potential guerilla complement the freest hand in utilizing that force.
They will; the current ones do and the previous ones did. The way these things are handled was that every one of the exercises is preceeded by a lengthy Red Team session in which crazy and/or unconventional ideas were put forward. The ones that survived the peer review session were then incorporated into a game/exercise for evaluation to determine their effects and tactical utility. For example, the "Boston Whaler with a P-15" idea would have been tossed out because a Boston Whaler is too small (both in dimensions and weight) and lacks the seakeeping ability. However, the discussion might well have lead to the idea of using fishing boats as missile carriers and the tactical implications that would lead to. (For example, what would such craft need to carry out their missions).
However, exercises/games aren't slugging matches, they're designed to teach and educate. The opposition in those games do have a free (ish) hand; however each game is set within a series of specific scenarios so that the appropriate lessons can be absorbed, the lessons learned and then incorporated into future game/exercises so that they can be tested out. Going back to our fishing boat idea, it may well have been decided that the fishing craft would have to get in reasonably close because they wouldn't have the search radar for long-range fire. This would create a need for combatants to shadow such craft and hose them down (with something more lethal than water) if they tried to unmaskweapons. Dare one say LCS?
What we don't need is some egotistical moron screwing up the whole process by grandstanding. By suddenly inventing an entire fleet of mosquito missile craft operating in deep water, Riper prevented any reasonable evaluation of ideas that might work (again, our fishing boat misile carriers). That potentially at least, laid the fleet open to attacks that might, had Riper not messed everything up, been predicted and evaluated.
You know we debated that at work. The rocket scientists (we have the real thing here) claimed that the bits of the boston whaler would be blown up, the weapons people thought that the bits would be blown down into the seabed and I argued the whole thing would just roll over and go down. We never really reached a conclusion. However, we did think that if the rocket was fired and failed to release, the Boston Whaler would break the world water speed record. Whether it would do so as a unitary whole or in pieces........
That assumes the Boston Whaler makes it out of the harbor. My google-fu was strong today, so I came up with ~2300kg for a P-15. The Boston Whalers produced today range at the top end from 28 to 32 feet long and have rated load limits of 4500 lbs +/-. In addition to Achmed and Mohammed, there is the weight of the launching cradle to take up any residue of the rating's factor of safety. As a bonus, the missile weighs about what the boat does empty.
It'll be a race between the wakes of the other boats and the slightest beam sea for which causes the mosquito boat to flip over first. When it's spotted, the first thing seen is a 19' long missile, mounted centrline of the boat. A few 50 BMG rounds, and there goes a lot of fuel and explosive.
If someone manages to fire it, I'd vote for the weapons folks. The backblast will thoroughly crisp the boat and drive it to the seabed.
As a WAG, something around 60' and 15 tons would be the minimum needed to semi-safely launch the beast. Add 20% if the missile should be concealed during transport.
- RyanCrierie
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 7:15 am
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Netherlands
RE: Wargames with the F-22
You're right. I was mistaken. I was under the impression that two fighters were developed simultaneously and only one was being produced. But as I see it now two complete new fighter systems are being developed and produced. Isn't that a bit... say, expensive?
Quick google search:
Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II
JSF is a joint, multinational acquisition program for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and eight cooperative international partners (that's us) . Expected to be the largest military aircraft procurement ever, the stealth, supersonic F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) will replace a wide range of aging fighter and strike aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and allied defense forces worldwide.
from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm
so how does the F-35 compare to the F-22?
quote from the same site:
"Plans call for the F-35 to be the world's premier strike aircraft through 2040. It will provide air- to-air capability second only to the F-22 air superiority fighter. The plane will allow the Air Force forces to field an almost all-stealth fighter force by 2025. The Navy and Marine variants will be the first deployment of an "all-aspect" stealth airplane."
So we get the second best available aircraft eh? Ah well, as long as we can shoot the bad guys out of the air.
Do you think the next best airplane will be man flown?
Quick google search:
Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II
JSF is a joint, multinational acquisition program for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and eight cooperative international partners (that's us) . Expected to be the largest military aircraft procurement ever, the stealth, supersonic F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) will replace a wide range of aging fighter and strike aircraft for the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and allied defense forces worldwide.
from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm
so how does the F-35 compare to the F-22?
quote from the same site:
"Plans call for the F-35 to be the world's premier strike aircraft through 2040. It will provide air- to-air capability second only to the F-22 air superiority fighter. The plane will allow the Air Force forces to field an almost all-stealth fighter force by 2025. The Navy and Marine variants will be the first deployment of an "all-aspect" stealth airplane."
So we get the second best available aircraft eh? Ah well, as long as we can shoot the bad guys out of the air.
Do you think the next best airplane will be man flown?
- Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39325
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Wargames with the F-22
As far as I know, a good analogy is that the F-35 is to the F-22 what the F-16/18 are to the F-15. So the F-22 is the ultimate air superiority fighter, but the F-35 will still be highly superior to anything of the previous generation and less expensive than the F-22.
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:44 am
- Location: on the pond
RE: Wargames with the F-22
Don't know about the 30:1 kill ratio but if anyone has every watched an F-22 demonstration at an air show, it is unbeliveable.I expect it's "trumpet blowing" tbh.
The vectored thrust allowed it to "turn on a dime" and face 180 degrees from direction of flight.
The F-22 is generations ahead of anything in service now or in the near future.
Bank on it.
RE: Wargames with the F-22
(I know this is a little bit out of subject) The article talks about really intense and hard training. And apparently my imagination about the nature of modern air-combat is totally false. I always thought that much of the job of a pilot is selecting the target and weapon, and letting micro-chips do their work. I though that the outcome of any dog-fight is 99% pre-determined even before actual fight, based on the model of the airplanes and the range of the missles they carry. ok, may be I need to read on this more... [8|]
This is Great War, everybody dies!
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Netherlands
RE: Wargames with the F-22
ORIGINAL: Lord_Stanley
Don't know about the 30:1 kill ratio but if anyone has every watched an F-22 demonstration at an air show, it is unbeliveable.I expect it's "trumpet blowing" tbh.
The vectored thrust allowed it to "turn on a dime" and face 180 degrees from direction of flight.
The F-22 is generations ahead of anything in service now or in the near future.
Bank on it.
Yeah I saw it a few times on Discovery [:D] looked awesome. But manoeuvres like these makes you wonder, how does the human body endure such forces?
RE: Wargames with the F-22
ORIGINAL: Joshuatree
You're right. I was mistaken. I was under the impression that two fighters were developed simultaneously and only one was being produced. But as I see it now two complete new fighter systems are being developed and produced. Isn't that a bit... say, expensive?
Different planes for different roles. The F-22, though, is horrendously expensive, so much so that prohibiting their export is hardly necessary.. nobody else could afford them. I don't know the numbers, but I suspect even the USAF isn't getting anywhere as many as they would like in an ideal world?
I'd like to see some stats of the F-22 v. the Typhoon in simulated dogfights. Still a long way from parity, but it would fare rather better than the F-15s and F-16s I suspect. I bloody well hope so, anyway.