"John Cook" wrote in message
...
OK this is from memory... and the sources are not strictly 'official'.
I had heard some rumours that the F-35 and F-22 AESA antennae will be
merged because the MMIC's from the F-35 will be retrofitted to the
F-22's ( they are very expensive and larger.)
The number of MMIC's may also be the same in both aircraft to make a
common 'cheap' AESA antennae (1200 IIRC).
The whole avionics suite of the F-22 is now obsolete, and will cost
another $3.5 Billion to 'upgrade' thats the cut from the $11.7 Billion
thats been bandied about.
Do you have anything to support that contention? There is a bit of a
difference between wanting to improve the computers during the spiral
development process and claiming that the "whole avionics suite is
*obsolete*", isn't there?
Just the official reports!!, Lockheed has only purchased enough
processors for 155 F-22's because there out of production, the demand
for Air to ground operations has increased the demand on processing
power, something the original processors are not quite upto hence the
_need_ for the 'upgrade'.
Let's see, 155 out of a possible total buy of some 269 aircraft, or a more
likely buy of 200-220, would seem to indicate that the first few *years* of
production are covered. Nor has it been conclusively demonstrated that these
processors are incapable of handling the aircraft's air-to-ground strike
needs during it's initial gestation; more in the form of not being able to
handle the *ultimate* (post spiral) capability that is envisioned.
So the processors are obsolete, (too old)... the Avionic architecture
needs to be replaced before the F-22 can become the F/A-22 because the
present system is based on the old processors and rewriting the code
is pointless on an obsolete system, that would only support half of
the F-22 fleet
You appear to be reading quite a lot into this situation that has not been
clearly stated. The F/A-22, when it first enters into frontline operational
service, will be capable of conducting precision ground strike operations,
with the existing systems. It is desired that the system be enhanced through
its lifetime, hence that $11 billion dollar cost, which includes
enhancements to its ISR capabilities (and one would suspect that is where
the enhanced radar is goinfg to be of the most value), its AA capabilities,
etc.
They have to go with a more COTS based system (similar to, if not the
same as the JSF), which they are working on now, for fielding in (very
optomisticlly) in 2007.
A simple analogy for you, the old 486 computer still works, but when I
wanted to run XP on it the demands of the system increased to the
point where it was useless to try, and you couldn't buy a 486
processor anywhere to support it.
I call that an 'obsolete system', it worked great running win 98.
Now the Raptor can't run the software to do its air to ground mission
for the same reasons what would you call it?. "processor
challenged???"
"Can't run the software" to do the air-to-ground mission? Odd, as the USAF
claims that at present, "The F/A-22 also has an inherent air-to-surface
capability." It can already lug a couple of JDAM's. So how does that even
*require* an optimized ground mapping radar to allow it to strike ground
targets with significant precision?
Out of curiousity, why do you have this visceral hatred of the F/A-22?
Does
it perhaps stem from the fact that you know your own nation can never
afford
it, or what?
I don't hate it, I just think its not worth the money, if it had been
half the price and worked as advertised I would be impressed.
As it is the price is $150M and development is not mature, production
has started, How would you describe the F-22 process?.
LOL! By your definition, no aircraft would ever enter service, as
"development is not mature". I guess you have kind of missed out on the
*continuing* development of the F-15, F-16, and F/A-18, huh? I'd describe it
as about par for the course, especially when viewed against contemporaries
like the Typhoon and Raptor, which are also entering service while
development continues. You really need to get your head out of the WWII era
in terms of fighter development--heck, even before that, as we saw with how
both the P-47 and P-51 gestated (recall the original P-51's were purchased
and produced with less-than-optimal engines, to boot).
Its not a model that every industry is adopting is it.
Looks an awful lot like the same model the Europeans are using, based upon
where they are with Rafale and Typhoon.
I do not doubt that Australia can't afford it, however its looking
increasing likely that the US may join us in that.
I think you can probably count on seeing that "Silver Bullet" force enter
into service...oh, that's right, you are the guy who can't grasp the
viability of that approach, being so firmly wedded to your purely
Lanchesterian model of attritionary combat and all...
Brooks
Brooks
Normally a program this far into production can't be cancelled, but
this program seems to be trying real hard...
The JSF seems (at least so far) to be much more aware of getting
development right first, then moving onto production. (and it doesn't
need the F-22 SMURFS:-))
Cheers
John Cook
Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.
Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk
John Cook
Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.
Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk