I just purchased F-22 today and was testing it out. I was flying at probably no more than 10,000 feet when I angled directly upwards and applied full afterburners. In a matter of seconds, the plane was at over 50,000 feet before it stopped climbing. It was probably climbing at a rate of 5000 feet/second. Can the actual F-22 do this, or is the IRIS model overpowered? (And if it is, can this be changed?)Thanks,boeing247

It does seem to be overpowered. I think IRIS said that they will be updating the FDE of the F-22.

I was flying at probably no more than 10,000 feet when I angled directly upwards and applied full afterburners. In a matter of seconds, the plane was at over 50,000 feet before it stopped climbing. It was probably climbing at a rate of 5000 feet/second.

That's not necessarily unrealistic: At full fuel thrust to weight is 1.09x, and at 50% fuel it's 1.26x, all acoording to here.Cheers,- jahman.

It was probably climbing at a rate of 5000 feet/second. Can the actual F-22 do this, or is the IRIS model overpowered? (And if it is, can this be changed?)

5000 feet per second is close to mach 5. Ummmm, no, it can't get anywhere close to that even in a vertical dive.

5000 feet per second is close to mach 5. Ummmm, no, it can't get anywhere close to that even in a vertical dive.

Sorry, misread that as 5,000 fpm...Cheers,- jahman.

No if it was 5000 ft/min then even the F-18 can out do it. 5000 ft /sec might be a little exageration. That would equal climbing from 0 to 50 000ft in 10 sec.

That's more or less what it did.Is there a way this could be fixed, or do I have to wait until the next update?(and I'll try it again with a timer to make sure I'm not exaggerating here)

Okay, I redid this, and I roughly climbed 45,000 ft (maybe a few hundred to a thousand less) in approximately 70 seconds. That's around 640 feet/second which is 38,400 feet per minute (though please correct me if I'm making a stupid math error). Definitely overpowered, no? Can this be fixed in the .air file or something?

Okay, I redid this, and I roughly climbed 45,000 ft (maybe a few hundred to a thousand less) in approximately 70 seconds. That's around 640 feet/second which is 38,400 feet per minute (though please correct me if I'm making a stupid math error). Definitely overpowered, no? Can this be fixed in the .air file or something?

OK, now this is a LOT different than 5000 ft per second!If anything, the model may be underpowered. At better than 1:1 thrust-to-weight, the jet can actually accelerate while in a vertical climb. Best time-to-climb in the raptor is obtained by busting mach right on the deck and then reefing it up to a high mach number supersonic climb. The F-15 Streak Eagle set a time-to-climb record in the 1970s from a dead stop on the rwy to ~40,000' in under 56 seconds--at mostly subsonic speeds. The F-22 lightly loaded has a similar thrust-to-weight ratio as the stripped-down Streak Eagle plus an airfoil designed for sustained supersonic flight. Bottom line: I don't think it's as far off the mark as you might think.

Although the actual F-22 climb rate is classified is thought to be between 50,000 and 65,000 feet per minute.Todd

The USAF says:

The F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft.

Presumably that would also include time-to-climb.According to Aviation Week (subscription required, so as cited in Wikipedia):

the F-22 has a greater climb rate than the F-15, despite the F-15's higher thrust-to-weight ratio

If anything, the model may be underpowered. At better than 1:1 thrust-to-weight, the jet can actually accelerate while in a vertical climb.

The part I still don't get about thrust-to-weight is that thrust declines pretty much in line with atmospheric pressure (density, actually) as altitude increases, so when thrust-to-weight is quoted, what is the reference altitude for that measurement?Cheers,- jahman.

Edited February 15, 201214 yr by jahman

The USAF says:Presumably that would also include time-to-climb.According to Aviation Week (subscription required, so as cited in Wikipedia):The part I still don't get about thrust-to-weight is that thrust declines pretty much in line with atmospheric pressure (density, actually) as altitude increases, so when thrust-to-weight is quoted, what is the reference altitude for that measurement?Cheers,- jahman.

Generally thrust specs are at sea level. Yes, thrust decreases with air density...but then again, so does parasitic drag.

Generally thrust specs are at sea level. Yes, thrust decreases with air density...but then again, so does parasitic drag.

OK, thanks for the clarification!Cheers,- jahman.