User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 1:13:55 AM EDT
44,000lbs , DRY WEIGHT, according to Lockheed Martin.
Seriously, how the fuck (and lets be honest, WHY THE FUCK) can such an aircraft be so heavy? That's heavier than an 18 wheeler in some cases. I thought these things were made out of unicorn materials like kevlar / carbon, magnesium and titanium? Are the wings made out of fucking lead and inconel? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 1:41:13 AM EDT
[#1]
There IS a lot of heavy metals used in the airframe, inconel among them.
I'm sure there is an abundance of miracle fiber stuff too, but that ain't all that light either. Add in the weights of the specialized avionics, radar and other stuff, landing gear, it's easy to see how a plane can get fat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 1:44:54 AM EDT
[#2]
They are bigger than they look.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 2:05:40 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are bigger than they look. Yep, though lower to the ground that an F-15, up close they are big bastards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 2:10:40 AM EDT
[#4]
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22?
Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 2:18:36 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. Shit, name any 4 Air Superiority fighters that will kick one Raptors ass. You can't. It's THAT good. (Most of the 'Kill shots' that you see by F/A-18's are hitting Raptors in the pattern at Langley) As for the Weight... Remember, it's got 70,000 pounds of thrust for a reason. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 2:21:31 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority supremacy fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. FIFY 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 2:30:36 AM EDT
[#7]
Think about the engineering that needs to take place to keep even 20k pounds from ripping itself apart while maneuvering at multiple Gs while more or less suspended by the wings.
The skeleton/structure to do that has got to be substantial. Add in the fact that it must do this with huge assed heavy engines and whatever it is carrying for fuel/munitions and it is easy to see it get heavy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:50:21 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are bigger than they look. Is that because of stealth technology?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:52:39 AM EDT
[#9]
If you ever see one flying with an F16 on the wing it will make more sense. They are big.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:56:04 AM EDT
[#10]
The math is really simple 44,000 pounds of dead lift.
+ fuel and lubes. + Rockets, bombs, 30mm ordinance. Go to the gym now and hit the weights see how close you can get 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 8:56:23 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 10:54:44 AM EDT
[#12]
F35 and F18e/F is 33kish , the 22's wing area is about twice as much.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 12:21:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Op derp.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 1:11:00 PM EDT
[#14]
WHY ARE GIANT METAL THINGS HEAVY
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 1:29:25 PM EDT
[#15]
I'd love to see the spec sheet on the treadmills they use to launch those things.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 4:42:53 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep, though lower to the ground that an F-15, up close they are big bastards. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They are bigger than they look. Yep, though lower to the ground that an F-15, up close they are big bastards. F-4 was the size of a Greyhound, wasn't it? I remember my dad telling me when they first got to the Naval Academy the bus parked by a display F-4, and he realized just how big the plane was! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:02:17 PM EDT
[#17]
F-14 was about the same weight.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:37:20 PM EDT
[#18]
F-105 max T.O. weight was a little over 52k#.
You had to be able to climb a tall ass-ladder to load up-off in it too!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:38:36 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
F-4 was the size of a Greyhound, wasn't it? I remember my dad telling me when they first got to the Naval Academy the bus parked by a display F-4, and he realized just how big the plane was! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They are bigger than they look. Yep, though lower to the ground that an F-15, up close they are big bastards. F-4 was the size of a Greyhound, wasn't it? I remember my dad telling me when they first got to the Naval Academy the bus parked by a display F-4, and he realized just how big the plane was! It was a bus...with boundary layer control 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 5:58:38 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The math is really simple 44,000 pounds of dead lift. + fuel and lubes. + Rockets, bombs, 30mm ordinance. ordnance Go to the gym now and hit the weights see how close you can get FIFY |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2014 6:26:18 PM EDT
[#21]
If you think the F-22 is big you'ld be amazed at how big a Flanker is
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 9:42:24 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
F-4 was the size of a Greyhound, wasn't it? I remember my dad telling me when they first got to the Naval Academy the bus parked by a display F-4, and he realized just how big the plane was! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They are bigger than they look. Yep, though lower to the ground that an F-15, up close they are big bastards. F-4 was the size of a Greyhound, wasn't it? I remember my dad telling me when they first got to the Naval Academy the bus parked by a display F-4, and he realized just how big the plane was! The F-4 was big, but the first time I saw one next to an F-14 I realized just how small it was. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:19:37 AM EDT
[#23]
I would have to say most of the nickel based Alloys like inconel would be in the engines . ( for heat)
But I'm not sure what the frame would be made off ? None corrosive you would think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 8:16:10 PM EDT
[#24]
The empty weight is nothing. MTOW is about 84000lbs. That's the same as a DC-9, ladies.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 8:26:44 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 8:31:16 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WHY ARE GIANT METAL THINGS HEAVY 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 8:36:49 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have to say most of the nickel based Alloys like inconel would be in the engines . ( for heat) But I'm not sure what the frame would be made off ? None corrosive you would think. The substructure is aluminum alloy and titanium alloy, and I expect several steel fittings are used at point loads. The tail booms are titanium weldments; I don't know the extent or use of titanium skins in the in the engine bays, I've only examined the booms. The remainder of the skins are graphite-epoxy. The windshield is a thick piece of plastic sized mostly for bird strikes; it's probably a laminate of acrylic and polycarbonate; that is what I would expect. The canopy overhead will be about 1 inch thickness or a little more. The landing gear are steel alloys, probably Aermet 100. The fasteners are a mix of aluminum, titanium, A286 steel alloy, PH13-8Mo steel, Inconl, titanium-columbium alloy in some solid rivets, and probably monel in some blind fasteners. The subsystems will be fabricated from aluminum, steel and titanium tubing, maybe some Inconel tubing in the bleed air takeoff, glass-epoxy and kevlar-epoxy ducts, silicone-glass ducts and boots, aluminum castings, probably titanium castings, with the various parts assembled with fasteners, adhesive, and welding. Lots of sealant to control corrosion and seal tanks and bays. Lots of paint, too. This cutaway will give some minor sense of everthing in a fighter that you can't see; note the amount of equipment crammed inside. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 8:37:37 PM EDT
[#28]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 9:04:18 PM EDT
[#29]
Guess I'm into big girls because that is one of the best looking birds I've ever seen
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 9:40:49 PM EDT
[#30]
The paint is rather heavy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 9:55:49 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. It's being used against fighters? Huh, that's news. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 9:57:18 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. Which is? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:03:36 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which is? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. Which is? air superiority. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:07:00 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
air superiority. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. Which is? air superiority. I guess I'm confused, then.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:08:52 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
air superiority. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, suddenly since we actually killed people with one, its time to have 5 threads on the F22? Go ahead, bash it. Name the air superiority fighter that will kick its ass on the regular. Go ahead. The EffTurdyFyve if our overlords are to be believed. No one has ever suggested the JSF would be an air superiority aircraft, nor that it would kick the F22's ass. They're two completely different birds for two completely different missions. They have essentially nothing in common. The main advantage the JSF has is that its avionics and weapons systems are about two decades newer, but kinematically it's not designed to do the things the F22 is. Which is? air superiority. Clarifying, the F-22 is designed to do one thing well, Air Superiority. Everything else is secondary, despite the fact that it can penetrate air defenses that nothing else can. The F-35 is designed as a Strike Fighter first. It's designed to deliver bombs on targets, including targets that are heavily defended. It's air superiority skills are purely secondary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:13:34 PM EDT
[#36]
Watch this video, and notice how small the P51 looks.
 Then look at this picture of a jeep and some people next to a P51. http://fitzvideo.com/sky_surfing/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/P-51Jeep2012-03-31-08_16_52-id1.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 10:33:37 PM EDT
[#37]
If you ever get a chance to watch the demo flight of the F-22, and see what unbelievable things this bird can do, you will quickly understand this bird needs to be built beefy and strong to support the G loads they can go through. Watching a 44k lb plus fighter gracefully tumble through the ski is a sight to behold.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 11:09:15 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Clarifying, the F-22 is designed to do one thing well, Air Superiority. Everything else is secondary, despite the fact that it can penetrate air defenses that nothing else can. The F-35 is designed as a Strike Fighter first. It's designed to deliver bombs on targets, including targets that are heavily defended. It's air superiority skills are purely secondary. In case I wasn't clear, this is what I was trying to say. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2014 11:29:21 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you ever get a chance to watch the demo flight of the F-22, and see what unbelievable things this bird can do, you will quickly understand this bird needs to be built beefy and strong to support the G loads they can go through. Watching a 44k lb plus fighter gracefully tumble through the ski is a sight to behold. Takes a lot of that to sling ordnance into the sand, does it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2014 1:17:30 AM EDT
[#40]
The smallest of the CRJ's I fly, 200, weighs in at 53k. It's not a big plane.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
