What's new

PAK FA vs F22 Raptor : A Detailed Analasis

Your right go for another world record.
The India Air Force lost its 5th Mig-29 jet this year on Thursday. Around 10-12 laborers and a tractor driver had a narrow escape when the aircraft fell down.
Cute cartoon Another Mig-29 Crash... - India Daily

The following extract is from an article about the F-22 Raptor in wikipedia:

Accidents

In April 1992 the first YF-22 crashed while landing at Edwards Air Force Base, California. The test pilot Tom Morgenfeld escaped without injury. The cause of the crash was found to be a flight control software error that failed to prevent a pilot-induced oscillation.

The first crash of a production F-22 occurred during takeoff at Nellis Air Force Base on 20 December 2004, in which the pilot ejected safely prior to impact. The crash investigation revealed that a brief interruption in power during an engine shutdown prior to flight caused a malfunction in the flight-control system; consequently, the aircraft design was corrected to avoid the problem. All USAF F-22s were grounded for two weeks after the crash, but resumed operations after a review was completed.

On 10 April 2006, a pilot was stuck inside the cockpit of aircraft 03-041 for five hours when the canopy jammed.

On 25 March 2009 an F-22 crashed 35 miles northeast of Edwards Air Force Base during a test flight, resulting in the death of Lockheed test pilot David P. Cooley. The aircraft was from the 411th Flight Test Squadron. The Washington Post reported that the crash happened during a bombing test. An Air Force Materiel Command investigation found that Cooley momentarily lost consciousness during a high-G maneuver then ejected after finding himself too low to recover. Cooley was killed by blunt-force trauma during ejection because of the F-22's speed and the windblast. The investigation found no problems with the design or airworthiness of the F-22.

Moreover, the F-22s are newer than the MiG-29s. Anyway, why are you deviating from the topic? This thread is comparing the capabilities of the F-22 and PAK FA. Like I said before, please post in the concerned thread.
 
Last edited:
I admit that that Rachel's report may not be very reliable. But if you atleast had the patience to "glance" through my posts, you would have seen that my coments were not on the basis of that video (I did however post a link to the video because the report seemed to check out with many other reports). Despite citing many articles from different websites, both you and gambit are still stubbornly holding on to your precious F-22 while it is clear that you guys have not even read my posts properly. Can you guys atleast give 1 valid article to prove your point instead of just blabbering on? If what you say can be proved by valid sources, then I will accept it.

First lets address the 'maintenance intensive' issue you raised, 30 hours for every hour of flight if I recall? The Raptor has consistently maintained a sortie rate of 97% in every exercise it has participated in, it even made a long trip from Langley to Al Dhafra AFB in the middle east to participate in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course - is it possible to maintain a sortie rate of 97% or make a long journey to the middle east if the Raptor requires 30 hrs of maintenance for every hour of flight?

Unlike conventional aircraft's like Hornet or F-16, a large portion of the maintenance effort is focussed on low observable maintainability. This involves identifying and fixing any signature discrepancies identified by the SAS (Signature Assessment System). Signature discrepancies can be a result of damage to the aircraft's surface or structure that may compromises the aircraft's LO. The most time consuming aspect of repairs is the extended periods of time it takes to cure materials required to restore LO. As the F-22 approaches the 100,000 fleet flight hour milestone significant progress has been made using new and more portable curing techniques, on the flip side it does require skilled crew and expensive tools but that is the price you pay for the RCS of an insect and nascent technology.

To conclude, surface damage is a rare but when it does occur the F-22 will take longer to fix than most 4th generation aircrafts but it is no where close to the ridiculous figure quoted by Madcow.
 
First lets address the 'maintenance intensive' issue you raised, 30 hours for every hour of flight if I recall? The Raptor has consistently maintained a sortie rate of 97% in every exercise it has participated in, it even made a long trip from Langley to Al Dhafra AFB in the middle east to participate in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course - is it possible to maintain a sortie rate of 97% or make a long journey to the middle east if the Raptor requires 30 hrs of maintenance for every hour of flight?

Unlike conventional aircraft's like Hornet or F-16, a large portion of the maintenance effort is focussed on low observable maintainability. This involves identifying and fixing any signature discrepancies identified by the SAS (Signature Assessment System). Signature discrepancies can be a result of damage to the aircraft's surface or structure that may compromises the aircraft's LO. The most time consuming aspect of repairs is the extended periods of time it takes to cure materials required to restore LO. As the F-22 approaches the 100,000 fleet flight hour milestone significant progress has been made using new and more portable curing techniques, on the flip side it does require skilled crew and expensive tools but that is the price you pay for the RCS of an insect and nascent technology.

To conclude, surface damage is a rare but when it does occur the F-22 will take longer to fix than most 4th generation aircrafts but it is no where close to the ridiculous figure quoted by Madcow.

Yes, the F-22 has a 97% sortie rate. But then it was a Lockheed official who said that the F-22 has to undergo an average of 30 hours of maintainence for 1 hour of flight. I also accept the fact that the F-22 has a RCS the size of the pellet, so the $44,000 hourly cost is to a certain extent justifiable, but is it really worth it? This just shows that the F-22 is not cost-effective and does not offer value for money. Cost-efectiveness and value for money have brrn my point from the first post. Maybe America is rich enough to bear this economic burden and I do not doubt America's economy.

If you go through one of my earlier posts, it is mentioned that the F-22 encounters a critical failure every 1.7 hours (on average). The link to that post is given below:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...22-raptor-detailed-analasis-3.html#post949383

Do you have any comments on that? And why is your government ashamed of the F-22? The link to the concerned post is given below:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...22-raptor-detailed-analasis-2.html#post949493

It seems the F-22's water vulnerability isn't just "skin deep" as I had indicated in a few of my earlier posts. The links to them are given below:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...22-raptor-detailed-analasis-4.html#post949383

http://www.guamnewsfactor.com/20091...r-4-Month-Deployment-To-Rain-Soaked-Guam.html

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-...22-raptor-detailed-analasis-3.html#post949444
 
Last edited:
The USA Defense Budget: $515,400,000,000 [2009]
The Russian Defense Budget: $43,200,000,000 [2008]
The USA Defense Budget is more then ten times that of Russia today an we cant really afford all we want in developing new fighter air craft, do you really think Russia can do more. Do you think Russia is even in the same ball park?

Fighting two wars is very expensive.

Holy Hell:
World record: 500th Indian “Flying Coffin” Mig crashes. The IAF ...
Sep 10, 2008 ... The main cause for such frequent crashes of MiGs is attributed to non-availability of Advanced Jet Trainers (AJTs) in India. ...
rupeenews.com/.../world-record-200th-indian-flying-coffin-mig-29-crashes/
That was in 2008, some say the number is as high as 750. Thats about the size of the Pakistan Air Force.


Around 50% of all Mig-21 crashes were do to pilot error; further, the mig-21 has been in service with the IAF for decades so the number of crashes will compound over a prelonged period.

This is not the first thread that you have started to troll by bringing in the Mig crash rates, what's even worse is that you blame the aircraft without as much as an after thought about why Indian Migs have crashed at such a rate. Here is a few reasons: maintanance, anomolies such as bird strikes, pilot error and poor weather. And again the Mig-21 have been in Indian service from the early 60's.

All Russia is doing is pimping its Migs a little and you all keep on buying them. Who was it that said the definition of insanity was to keep on doing the same thing and expecting differant results.
Or you could call it digging the same hole deeper and burying more pliots in it.

"Pimping" :rofl: it's called upgrading and everyone does it, why do you think the F-16 has had so many block upgrades and so many sales?

And if you're talking about the pak-fa then you just made a fool out of youself. The pak-fa is built by Sukhoi and it has no commonality with any previous Migs.


Your right go for another world record.
The India Air Force lost its 5th Mig-29 jet this year on Thursday

Before you start salivating, 19 F-16's crashed in 2006 with another 10 involved in accidents.
 
Last edited:
Before you start salivating, 19 F-16 crashed in 2006 with another 10 involved in accidents and i don't even know if that was the worse year.
19 F-16's of different Air Forces not single one.F-16's are quite reliable.PAF was given award by Lockheed Martin for 100,000 crash free flying.In 4 decades of F-16's operation with Pakistan only 7 crashes (out of which 1 was friendly fire incident, 2 were wild boar hits on the ground)
 
First lets address the 'maintenance intensive' issue you raised, 30 hours for every hour of flight if I recall? The Raptor has consistently maintained a sortie rate of 97% in every exercise it has participated in, it even made a long trip from Langley to Al Dhafra AFB in the middle east to participate in the Advanced Tactical Leadership Course - is it possible to maintain a sortie rate of 97% or make a long journey to the middle east if the Raptor requires 30 hrs of maintenance for every hour of flight?

Unlike conventional aircraft's like Hornet or F-16, a large portion of the maintenance effort is focussed on low observable maintainability. This involves identifying and fixing any signature discrepancies identified by the SAS (Signature Assessment System). Signature discrepancies can be a result of damage to the aircraft's surface or structure that may compromises the aircraft's LO. The most time consuming aspect of repairs is the extended periods of time it takes to cure materials required to restore LO. As the F-22 approaches the 100,000 fleet flight hour milestone significant progress has been made using new and more portable curing techniques, on the flip side it does require skilled crew and expensive tools but that is the price you pay for the RCS of an insect and nascent technology.

To conclude, surface damage is a rare but when it does occur the F-22 will take longer to fix than most 4th generation aircrafts but it is no where close to the ridiculous figure quoted by Madcow.

It is funny the way you repeatedly dodge soaringphnx's question with the same rhetoric. You basically are saying Washington post's article is mere bullshit.
If you are American, you would know, Washington post is a very reputed news organisation(on the top with NYTimes etc). They dont post bullshit they pick up on the streets or they can't have the reputation they enjoy currently. It will be a suicide to post such a scathing article on such a politically sensitive topic. They would have definitely made enough groundwork and research before publishing.
Now lets get some straight answers. Link to the article... again...

High-Priced F-22 Fighter Has Major Shortcomings - washingtonpost.com

With due respect, maam, I acknowledge that your knowledge in these matters is superior to mine. But lets cut the rhetoric, shall we?
 
☪☪☪☪;950938 said:
19 F-16's of different Air Forces not single one.F-16's are quite reliable.PAF was given award by Lockheed Martin for 100,000 crash free flying.In 4 decades of F-16's operation with Pakistan only 7 crashes (out of which 1 was friendly fire incident, 2 were wild boar hits on the ground)

Those F-16 crashes were compiled from all airforces operating the F-16, it's also great that Pakistan can take care of their F-16 but that's not what the discussion was about.
 
look Our neighbours both iaf and PAF start induction f-16 and mig.29 same period. From it out of 62 migs we lost 5 but for 50 f-16 you lost 8
 
Guys, can we please stop discussing about MiG-29 and F-16 crashes and return to the topic at hand? Thank you.
 
@ gambit and death.by.chocolate

A debate with you seems futile since you seem to have ignored all the articles i indicated and is still stubbornly sticking to your point without so much as a valid source. I am no longer interested in spending my valuable time arguing with you as it is pointless. Perhaps we can continue this discussion when the PAK FA is fully inducted and it's qualities are proven.
It is funny the way you repeatedly dodge soaringphnx's question with the same rhetoric. You basically are saying Washington post's article is mere bullshit.
If you are American, you would know, Washington post is a very reputed news organisation(on the top with NYTimes etc). They dont post bullshit they pick up on the streets or they can't have the reputation they enjoy currently. It will be a suicide to post such a scathing article on such a politically sensitive topic. They would have definitely made enough groundwork and research before publishing.
A 'valid source', eh? Are CNN or the NY Times or the WaPo 'valid' sources? Of course they are. But does that mean the CONTENTS of their articles contains the truth, the whole and nothing but the unbiased truth, therefore, immune to challenges? Hardly. If any of them said the moon is made of green cheese, are you going to accept them at face value just because they are reputable news organizations...???

You boys should educate yourselves on these two posts...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/531811-post51.html
So when water is on the surface of an F-22, of course it will increase the aircraft's RCS, from insect to small bird level, not because there is anything wrong with the aircraft but because of how the laws of physics works. Rachel Maddow and MSNBC is too wrapped up in their own political agenda and ratings to bother with these fine technical details. Which is more entertaining, claim that the US military is incompetent and wasteful or that the USAF is flying one amazing aircraft?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/532366-post60.html
This 30 hrs figure tell us absolutely nothing about F-22 maintenance. Its vagueness is purposely to be inflammatory, not informative.

Take your time and read them carefully. I need only to debunk the relevant so-called 'criticisms' regarding the F-22's weaknesses.

With due respect, maam, I acknowledge that your knowledge in these matters is superior to mine. But lets cut the rhetoric, shall we?
We have no need to resort to rhetorics. We leave the rhetorics to gullible people like you who thinks that just because they can dig up some alleged 'dirt' on the F-22 that trumps the laws of physics, logical thought processes and relevant experience. Looks like I have far more of the three than the both of you put together.
 
We have no need to resort to rhetorics. We leave the rhetorics to gullible people like you who thinks that just because they can dig up some alleged 'dirt' on the F-22 that trumps the laws of physics, logical thought processes and relevant experience. Looks like I have far more of the three than the both of you put together.

Righty ho Unkilji, please, would you mind informing this poor uninformed and downright deluded Indian with what laws of physics you are referring to?
 
Righty ho Unkilji, please, would you mind informing this poor uninformed and downright deluded Indian with what laws of physics you are referring to?
If you cannot read then how could you understand physics? :lol:
 
If you cannot read then how could you understand physics? :lol:

Arrey wah, this American knows it all. I'm working on a Masters in Physics, I'm sure you could suffer to elucidate upon me some of your unparalleled knowledge.

edit: Masters of Science but meh
 
Arrey wah, this American knows it all. I'm working on a Masters in Physics, I'm sure you could suffer to elucidate me.
Fine...Then just for you and your education, I am only a janitor with a GED. Did you read those two posts I presented? They came from what I dug out of the engineers' trash cans in my nightly cleaning rounds.
 
Fine...Then just for you and your education, I am only a janitor with a GED. Did you read those two posts I presented? They came from what I dug out of the engineers' trash cans in my nightly cleaning rounds.

Could you in your infinite kindness direct me to the two posts of which you speak?
 
Back
Top Bottom