Type 45 Destroyer vs F-22 Raptor

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Type 45 Destroyer vs F-22 Raptor
JTR~~ 8/28/2010 7:06:13 AM

Yes this is another vs. post. But this one is new (i haven’t seen this one on here so far) anyway, Type 45 destroyer, top of its field most modern surface ship in service and claimed by many to be the most advanced anti air destroyer in the world, how would such a ship fair against the F-22 raptor again top of its own relative class, the world’s most advanced warship against the world’s most advanced fighter plane, would the excellent Sampson radar be able to locate track and destroy the highly stealthy plane or would the F-22 use its tricks to send the ship to the bottom? You decide frankly i know not all too much about the Type 45s capabilities, however i do know that it has excellent radar, and is packed with high tech missiles also know i can track over 120 targets at once, prioritise the most dangerous and systematically destroy them one by one, it is also claimed the one type 45 can do the job of 5 of the older type 42 class, so like the F-22 it is a force multiplier, I also know that it has incorporated stealth features and many other technical innovations, but like I said who would win? try to keep it unbias please

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 NEXT

earlm 8/28/2010 11:00:04 AM

Anyone notice that the volume of posts has collapsed over the last month and that it took quality with it?

Why don't we change the topic to: How can naval forces use networking to deal with VLO aircraft and missiles?

Can you track VLO platforms from non optimal angles and fusing the scintillations that these platforms give off?

If you can track them, how do you hit them with something?

Would IR seekers work better on a missile that is fired from a platform under attack and guided to the drop basket using offboard data since the VLO platform will be pointing its front towards the ship under attack?

Quote Reply

VelocityVector 8/28/2010 7:40:58 PM

My personal wet dream - naval forces are involved here after all - non-lethal exercise would pit Daring versus Growlers and Global Hawk suitably-equipped and networked. I probably wouldn't live long enough to ever learn the test results publicly but, man, that's a battle of the electrons I would find tremendously interesting. Whose computers would fail them first? Welcome to my own private Idaho ;>)

Concur with earlm as to the rest. SP is the Delta House of military blogs, I picture a soused Belushi standing by the door, "c'mon in and grab a brew, don't cost nuthin'." (he he...)

v^2

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 8/28/2010 8:08:39 PM

if its single seeker tech then maybe - but we're in multi-seeker territory with tri-seekers in development...

multi-seeker means all-aspect. no need for the shooter to be pointed at the target.

Quote Reply

VelocityVector 8/28/2010 9:04:35 PM

A thing with multi-seekers is that engagement geometry may force a choice as among the data they gather respectively. This can amount to nothing typically else vary widely enough that a target set might exploit the differences and cause calculable misses. From my low-earth perch the problem is non-trivial and imperfectable. As for launch platform, these commonly are optimized for head-on LO, so that's how they will tend to approach a surface target. A munition presents greatest surface area, whether LO or not, perpendicular to its direction of travel. Head-on launch is, I believe, still the most likely of the patterns for attacking surface from the air. 0.02

v^2

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 8/28/2010 10:49:05 PM

As for launch platform, these commonly are optimized for head-on LO, so that's how they will tend to approach a surface target. A munition presents greatest surface area, whether LO or not, perpendicular to its direction of travel. Head-on launch is, I believe, still the most likely of the patterns for attacking surface from the air. 0.02

that's true in the luxury sense, but all aspect means contempt of engagement issues. you also have to consider that the shooter may not necessarily be the weapons manager once launched. CEC, handoff issues etc...

nobody goes in as the lone ranger

Quote Reply

earlm Tri seekers for AA? 8/29/2010 11:11:51 AM

1. Radar

2. IR

3. Passive radar/HOJ?

I'm sure on the first 2, but what's the third component of a tri seeker?

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 8/29/2010 5:51:12 PM

1. Radar

2. IR

3. Passive radar/HOJ?

I'm sure on the first 2, but what's the third component of a tri seeker?

There's no "set" criteria for a tri-seker config apart from the fact that it has 3 discrete seekers to cover different detection and acquisition modes and that they companion each other on the flight to the target.

as a hint, miniaturised AESA is no longer a pipe dream. conformal arrays are no longer a pipe dream. ribbon arrays are no longer a pipe dream. miniaturised CCTV on low bandwidth is also here, but it's not an active autonomous system (in a sense). Optical and digital recognition slaved to the system is already here.

Quote Reply

LB Amusing 8/30/2010 5:55:56 AM

It's amusing to imagine the data required to make even broad conclusions about the question posed exists in the public domain. This of course leaves aside the F-22 being an air superiority fighter not a naval strike aircraft.

In any case the issue is not a given aircraft getting within weapons range. The real issue is how many of what type of weapons can overwhelm a Type 45. Needless to say that information isn't going to be available either but it's quite possibly a number less than 48.

So here's a thought, assuming Type 45 can shoot down guided bombs, how many F-22's launching 8 guided SDB's outside engagement range are required to defeat a Daring? One might be forgiven for assuming 6 or less. RN DDG's have a long history of being less effective than advertised. It will be great if this fate eludes the 45's but that's far from certain.

It's difficult to believe PAAMS at 25kw is superior to the 6mw Aegis system that has had many decades now to mature not to mention Standard vs Aster. Daring better be outstanding, there will be very few at the tip of the spear.

Quote Reply

Ispose Hmmm 8/30/2010 3:20:00 PM

Maybe the tactic is to send in the Raptor...unseen on radar to strafe the ship and take out its radar...once that is done then any non stealthy aircraft can take out the ship. I'm assuming that the ships missiles need the radar to fire and that they can't be fired manually using IR...don't know enough to answer that question.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 8/30/2010 5:33:41 PM

there's a very good article countering and establishing why the F-22 and JSF exist and how they are companion systems.

I'll see if I can find it as it articulates clearly why both aircraft are necessary - and gets past the dumbed down criticisms that are invariably trotted out about the JSF (and F-22)

less passion and idealogical strutting with more considered analysis is of benefit to all.

Quote Reply

1 2 3 NEXT