• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

	Director, Operational Test & Evaluation
FY97 Annual Report

F-22 RAPTOR

	Air Force ACAT ID Program 339 systems Total program cost (TY$) $70,865M Average unit cost (TY$) $161.06M Full-rate production 3QFY03 Prime Contractor Lockheed - Boeing - Pratt & Whitney

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION & CONTRIBUTION TO JOINT VISION 2010

The F-22 is an air superiority fighter designed to dominate the air environment in the 21st Century. Key features include low radar observability (with internal weapons carriage) and supersonic cruise while retaining superior maneuverability, wide field-of-regard offensive and defensive sensors, multi-spectral countermeasures, and high reliability.

Basic armament of the F-22 will be six AIM-120C missiles, two AIM-9 missiles, and a 20mm cannon. The F-22 will be a major contributor to the Joint Vision 2010 future strategy. It will be the predominant weapon system to provide full dimensional protection to all forces; but its stealth, integrated offensive and defensive sensors, and air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons mix will also allow it to support the precision engagement and dominant maneuver concepts of operation.

The F-22 successfully completed the Milestone II DAB in July 1991. Since then the program has experienced several major redefinitions as the result of budget reductions and cost growth. An independent Joint Estimating Team (JET) identified significant cost growth in the F-22 Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase and recommended major changes to the EMD program. A Defense Acquisition Board approved the proposed program restructure on February 5, 1997. The major elements of this restructure included the elimination of the four Pre-Production Vehicles (PPVs). The primary operational test impact of this change is the assignment of the two Lot 1 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) aircraft and the last two flight test aircraft (retrofitted, if required, to the LRIP configuration) to conduct the Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E), instead of the four PPV aircraft as originally planned. This program restructure also increased the length of the EMD phase by nine months, allowing more time for integrated avionics testing. Another change was the addition of an Integrated Hardware-in-the-loop Avionics Test (IHAT) facility to the program to reduce avionics development risk.

The first flight of the EMD flight test program occurred on September 7, 1997; a slip from the scheduled goal of May 29, 1997. Following completion of extensive ground testing at Marietta, Georgia, the first aircraft will be transported to Edwards AFB, California, to continue flight testing in Spring 1998. The second flight test airplane is scheduled to enter the flight test program by July 1998.

DOT&E's activities this year concentrated on resolution of issues related to finalizing the F-22 Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). This effort was successful and resulted in approval of the TEMP by the DOT&E on August 4, 1997. The primary issues which delayed approval of the TEMP for several years included development plans for a credible Air Combat Simulator (ACS) (formerly Full Mission Simulator (FMS)), an integrated test and simulation plan to support IOT&E including an F-22/F-15 effectiveness comparison, a high-tempo sortie generation demonstration input to the suitability evaluation, and an acceptable Live Fire Test and Evaluation (LFT&E) alternative plan. Toward this end, DOT&E participated in integrated product team (IPT) meetings of the Test Plan Working Group (TPWG), System Effectiveness Working Group (SEWG), Threat Working Group (TWG), and the Weapons IPT. The SEWG emerged as the IPT responsible for working many of the effectiveness evaluation issues including ACS requirements, verification and validation (V&V) of models and simulations, scenarios and threats coordination, and integration of AFOTEC's IOT&E plans.

Development of the ACS continued this year with final agreement to utilize the mission software portion of the operational flight program (not the entire aircraft OFP), hosted on a partial Central Integrated Processor (CIP) in the simulator in order to maximize support for software development and OT&E requirements. The ACS, consisting of two domed and ten manned interactive cockpit stations (MICS) at Lockheed Martin's Marietta facility, continued in the system planning phase.

A V&V plan for the models and simulations used for the systems effectiveness evaluation is scheduled for completion in early 1998. This plan will identify the models and simulations to be used, along with the data to be used for the validation process.

A waiver to live fire testing of a full-scale aircraft was approved, following Congressional approval last year to proceed with the waiver, in conjunction with the TEMP approval. The associated alternative plan includes hydrodynamic ram, dry bay fire and critical component separation tests as well as demonstration of active fire suppression systems. Cluttered, unprotected dry bay fire and component blast/fragment vulnerability have been the focus of 1997 testing during which approximately eighty separate shots were completed.

A sortie generation demonstration, using four aircraft for five days, just prior to the beginning of Dedicated IOT&E, is defined in the TEMP. This demonstration will provide credible data inputs to the models used in the evaluation of the F-22's operational suitability.

Laboratory testing of airframe and avionics components and subsystems continued throughout the year in the prime contractor's and subcontractor's labs. Engine testing continued in Pratt and Whitney's and AEDC's test cells. The Boeing 757 Flying Test Bed (FTB) is being modified to accept an APG-77 test radar early next year.

No operational tests have been conducted to date, but IOT&E planning reflects the TEMP's integrated test approach of evaluating the F-22's operational effectiveness and suitability through a combination of open air testing, ACS, hardware-in-the-loop (HITL), and constructive models. Credible simulation tools are mandatory to supplement the evaluation data from the 240 effective flight test sorties allocated for Dedicated IOT&E and some of the Combined DT/OT sorties. Critical HITL simulation facilities, in addition to the ACS, include the Avionics Integration Laboratory (AIL) at Boeing, Seattle and the Electronic Combat Integrated Test (ECIT) facility at Edwards AFB, as well as the already mentioned IHAT facility at Lockheed Martin and the FTB. The facilities are in various stages of modification/construction. To date, each facility has program funding through either the contractor or program officer. Planning for selection and VV&A of constructive models to assist in test planning and providing evaluation data for areas beyond those which can be addressed by ACS or open air test results is just being initiated. This planning will follow the Simulation, Test and Evaluation Process (STEP) guidelines recently approved by DOT&E and DTSE&E.

AFOTEC will initiate a five year Operational Assessment (OA) early in 1998. This OA plan is based on a structured assessment of all F-22 mission tasks. AFOTEC will utilize data from DT&E activities and the outputs of such constructive models as TAC/MARS, BRAWLER, EADSIM, ESAMS, LCOM, and Aircraft Readiness Model (ARM). The primary objective of the OA is to:

• Identify and assess potential major impacts affecting operational effectiveness and suitability

• Identify any programmatic voids or trends that would adversely impact the capability of the system to meet operational requirements

• Assess program documentation and testability of user requirements

• Assess the capability of the program to support OT

The nine month extension of EMD resulted in a slip of the start of Dedicated IOT&E to August 2002, with MS III now scheduled for August/September 2003.

LFT&E assessments of the F-22 continued throughout 1997. Preliminary evaluation of the cluttered, unprotected dry bay test results obtained during the year agreed somewhat with prior analyses but indicate that some of these bays are more susceptible to ballistic-induced fire than desirable.

Predicting dry bay fire occurrences and conditions prior to testing remains difficult. Additional technology work is needed in this area to improve aircraft designs.