The Raptor is a very agile and fast fighter.It does not need afterburner to fly supersonic.It is invisible to radar and can shoot at enemy aircraft before they can fire because of the Raptor's advanced radar.This aircraft replace the F-15 Strike Eagle.The F-22 is expenisive to build and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is taking over some missions.

I saw a F-22 flying around with a P-52 above Miramar the other day.

Poor Mustang wouldn't have stood a chance against the Raptor in a firefight.

VortexIII wrote: Actually Luna, I might need to disagree with you. The raptor has only a few advantages, like heavier armor, speed, weapons, and such. But the mustang could turn much tighter, so as long as he didn't let the rapto too far from his sights, he'd be in fair shape.

>Comparing a F22 Raptor to a P-52 Mustang
>Mustang has advantages

As amused as I may be, I must inqire upon the context of ths particular irony as I find myself slightly befuddled.

Surely you're joking, yes?

The F35 JSF I'd going to cost more than the Raptor. It is currently the most expensive defence program going. Many nations like Australia are stuck waiting for the F35 as the US won't export Raptor, even to allies.

Luna6 wrote: I saw a F-22 flying around with a P-52 above Miramar the other day.

Poor Mustang wouldn't have stood a chance against the Raptor in a firefight.

Slenderman wrote:

VortexIII wrote: Actually Luna, I might need to disagree with you. The raptor has only a few advantages, like heavier armor, speed, weapons, and such. But the mustang could turn much tighter, so as long as he didn't let the rapto too far from his sights, he'd be in fair shape.

>Comparing a F22 Raptor to a P-52 Mustang
>Mustang has advantages

As amused as I may be, I must inqire upon the context of ths particular irony as I find myself slightly befuddled.

Surely you're joking, yes?

I'm a little disappointed in all three of y'all. Why am I the first person to mention that there is no such aircraft as the P-52 the mustang is the P-51.

The turbulence alone created by the Raptor's engine could cause the Mustang to fall right out of the sky.

Obvious troll is obvious.

Jacob10000 wrote:

Luna6 wrote: I saw a F-22 flying around with a P-52 above Miramar the other day.

Poor Mustang wouldn't have stood a chance against the Raptor in a firefight.

Slenderman wrote:

VortexIII wrote: Actually Luna, I might need to disagree with you. The raptor has only a few advantages, like heavier armor, speed, weapons, and such. But the mustang could turn much tighter, so as long as he didn't let the rapto too far from his sights, he'd be in fair shape.

>Comparing a F22 Raptor to a P-52 Mustang
>Mustang has advantages

As amused as I may be, I must inqire upon the context of ths particular irony as I find myself slightly befuddled.

Surely you're joking, yes?

I'm a little disappointed in all three of y'all. Why am I the first person to mention that there is no such aircraft as the P-52 the mustang is the P-51.

There's an XP-52. (X means prototype). Does that count?

Lolz, yeah, made a little typo. But you knew what I was talking about, so that's okay. In our defense, I''ve seen it been called a P52 MANY times, and the mistake is quite contagious.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Mustang a plane that I've seen for sale for under $30,000?

Role: air superiority fighter

Builder: Lockheed Martin / Boeing

Variants: YF-22A, F/A-22A

Operators: USAF

The F-22 Raptor is the world's first stealth air-to-air fighter. It is developed to replace the F-15C in the air superiority role. The F-22 is the first production aircraft with the ability to super cruise – flying at supersonic speeds without the use of afterburners.

The plane's builder Lockheed Martin Corp., has built several F-22s for test purposes. Most are at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., undergoing a series of tests. Last year the pentagon approved production plans for an initial batch of 13 production aircraft.

Recently the designation for the Raptor was changed to F/A-22 to indicate the possible air-to-ground role of the aircraft. JDAM bombs can be carried in the internal weapon bay, while the optional external pylons offer a more flexible station for air-to-ground armament.

Specifications: Powerplant: two Pratt & Whitney F119-P-100 turbofan each rated at 155.69 kN (35,000 lb st) with afterburning

Dimensions: length 18.92m (62 ft 1 in); height 5.00m (16 ft 5 in); wing span 13.56m (44ft 6 in)

Weights: empty more than 13.608 kg (30,000 lb); Max Take-Off Weight 26.308 kg (58,000 lb)

Performance: max level speed at optimum altitude Mach 1.58 in supercruise and at 30,000 ft (9145m) Mach 1.7 in afterburning mode; service ceiling more than 15,240m (50,000 ft); g limit +7.9

Armament: one 20mm M61A2 Vulcan six-barrel gun with 480 rounds; 2 AIM-9X Sidewinder IR-guided missiles in internal side bays. Up to 6 AIM-120C or 4 AIM-120A AMRAAM missiles in internal fuselage weapon bays or 2 AIM-120C AMRAAMs and 2 GBU-32 JDAM bombs or 2 GBU-30 JDAM bombs. Up to four fuel tanks and up to 8 missiles can be carried on optional external hardpoints. (Reportedly there are plans for a F/A-22C with larger weapon bays capable or carrying a larger selection of Air-to-Ground weapons and weapons such as the AGM-88 HARM).

...copy and paste does wonders

Sauce: www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-3168.html

Note: this source is from 2005

Wow !! You forgot to mention the brand of tires??

Who would win?F-22 or F-4?(obvious)

F 22 vs me-262 who would win.or Henkel lerche vs f16

VortexIII wrote: As for me joking , you are correct, sort of (the best kind of correct). Yes I was joking , but you have it for the wrong reasons. The problem is the first people to comment on this were, drumroll please, airplane smart, so my joke could not fool them. End of story (almost)
The final thing I need to point out is something I said before when slenderman was accused of trolling, in which I believe I said trolling was the posting on the Internet in an attempt to annoy , harass, and a few other things I can't think of right now but I'm pretty sure I had no attempt of doing thus proving what I said was not at all an obvious troll .

Allied wrote: The Raptor is a very agile and fast fighter.It does not need afterburner to fly supersonic.It is invisible to radar and can shoot at enemy aircraft before they can fire because of the Raptor's advanced radar.This aircraft replace the F-15 Strike Eagle.The F-22 is expenisive to build and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is taking over some missions.

Actually, isn't the Strike Eagle the F-15E version? Two seater designed as a replacement for the F-4E (first jet I flew in as an incentive ride while a cadet)? My understanding is that the F-22 is to replace the F-15 in the counterair and air superiority missions, not necesarily in SEAD or as a Wild Weasel, and that the Strike Eagle is planned on being inthe active inventory for quite a few more years.

Part of the reasons why the F-35 is 'cheaper' is because of the economies of scale. The F-22 is to be a USAF weapons systenm only, and the total cost of the program comes entirely from the Air Force's budget. The F-35 was to have versions modified for carrier use so that the Navy and Marines could also use it. There are also planned purchases from many of our allies, and not solely within NATO. Therefore, the "cost per plane" decreases as more units are produced, and the DoD doesn't have to absorb the full amount for this program.

The aim was for the F35 to be cheaper, but the amount of components that can be reused between the different F35 variants I'd now much lower than anticipated so the savings are unlikely to occur.

Australia is already cutting back it's orders as the price of the program blows out.

That's too bad about Australia. The Chinese governement makes me very nervous....

Was the F-35 to be a replacement for your Hornets?

Yes, at the moment we only have hornets and super hornets. We will get F35s just not as many. We already out gun all the survived in the region other than China, and as a country with only 23 million people we will never be able to match them.

Isnt there some south Pacific military alliance?

Correct me if I'm wrong but say the mustang opened up say just over there and the F35 pilot was sleeping or say it was Big Tex playing dogfight and then say Luna was attacking him and made him jerk just so....coundn't the mustang shoot down the f35?

I'm not suite if the mustangs 50 calibre guns would do enough damage to a modern plan, they are armoured, just not sure what the f35 is rated against, but an A10 is designed to survive his from 23mm canon. o guess the f35 would be similar.

hammer_tool wrote: I'm not suite if the mustangs 50 calibre guns would do enough damage to a modern plan, they are armoured, just not sure what the f35 is rated against, but an A10 is designed to survive his from 23mm canon. o guess the f35 would be similar.

Of course it would do damage! That's six 50s!! A 21st Century plane still has to obey the laws of physics, and the kinetic energy alone from those six 50s would still do major damage.

You'd just have to have the Raptor motionless long enough for the Mustang jock to draw a bead...

As far as the A-10 goes, I know that the pilot and cockpit are located inside a titanium "tub" to help increase pilot survivability. There are also critical areas of the airframe, such as the engine and it's location, that are designed to help the airframe stay airworthy so that the pilot can return to base safely.

TEX: Would a WW1 plane damage an F-35? If so, could you fly one of your planes to Ft. Worth, where they are made? Please take video for us?

Just saw your pics. That's not the TEX I know.....did you lose weight?

Paul Mantz, Jr. wrote: TEX: Would a WW1 plane damage an F-35? If so, could you fly one of your planes to Ft. Worth, where they are made? Please take video for us?

Methinks ye jest....

1 shot from the A10's gun will destroy a tank.The shells are tipped with depleted uranium.The tank will burst into flames.

Theoretically, an 18th Century musket could harm an F -22. Highly unlikely, but a bullet is a bullet, no less.

...could a ball round pierce the armor of an F-22, though? I guess it depends where it hits. If it hits.

Anyways, the .50 cal rounds of the Mustang could certainly do some damage to a Raptor. But the fact that the Raptor is a state-of-the-art supersonic fighter jet with superior weapons and tech, it would be highly unlikely in a dogfight.

Allied wrote: 1 shot from the A10's gun will destroy a tank.The shells are tipped with depleted uranium.The tank will burst into flames.

You are correct Allied in that the A-10 has a pretty powerful gun. The GAU-8 Avenger is a 30mm gatling gun like cannon with seven barrels that can spit out up to 4200 rounds per minute up to an effective range of about 4000 feet. And yes Allied, they do have a mix of two different types of rounds used, an armor piercing that utilizes a depleted uranium core, and a high explosive incendiary. Quite lethal. I guess under the right conditions, if one round was to land perfectly within a tank, can get past the armor, and hit a magazine or fuel cell, it would be possible to destroy that tank with one round. Most likely depending on the type of tank, how it's deployed, you'd want to use enough to do the job though.

Luna6 wrote: Theoretically, an 18th Century musket could harm an F -22. Highly unlikely, but a bullet is a bullet, no less.

...could a ball round pierce the armor of an F-22, though? I guess it depends where it hits. If it hits.

Anyways, the .50 cal rounds of the Mustang could certainly do some damage to a Raptor. But the fact that the Raptor is a state-of-the-art supersonic fighter jet with superior weapons and tech, it would be highly unlikely in a dogfight.

Couldn't agree more.

Luna6 wrote: Theoretically, an 18th Century musket could harm an F -22. Highly unlikely, but a bullet is a bullet, no less.

...could a ball round pierce the armor of an F-22, though? I guess it depends where it hits. If it hits.

Anyways, the .50 cal rounds of the Mustang could certainly do some damage to a Raptor. But the fact that the Raptor is a state-of-the-art supersonic fighter jet with superior weapons and tech, it would be highly unlikely in a dogfight.

That soldier would have to fire that musket 10 minutes in advance to be able to hit a F-22 Raptor XD

Hey guys
You're missing one thing here
If a p-51 got in a dogfight with a f-22 the pilot would be able to breathe... If the f-22 pulled one of its famous hypoxia stunts it would have to rtb and the p-51 would win
Game
Set
match

I read in a mag that a f-35. lightning against a russian stealth su-....somthing. in dogfight, the su would win ( thats if the mags info is correct ) i wounder if so how would u compare the f-35 against the f-22 raptor and then against the russian stealth?? Too bad zuperman cant make the sinario for us.