The point is the large internal fuel and weapon carriage is a major advantage for the F-22 and F-35. Which, is often over looked by there critics…………:cool:

We know, they make sure its cut deep into our brains every time they promote it. Like the “First look-first shoot-first kill” sayings……zzzzzzzzzzzz Fell asleep***

BTW, Mr. Beesley looks like a nice guy, I’d love to hear what he has to say about the F-35 after few bottles of whisky. 😉

I bet it can time travel, well theres no reason why it shouldn’t because LM seems to think it can do everything else…But not as good as the F-22 of course…Or is it better than the F-22? Wait-Wait, confusing, they’re both best at doing the same thing apparantly…Uffff Those guys in the marketing department at LM have a tough job. :diablo:

Now the question is how much drag can a pair of AMRAAMs on pylons create. I mean, the thing is streamlined, aerodynamically designed to fly at about M4.0 so what kind of draggy structure are we talking about?

Speaking of drag. I’ve often wondered about how much drag those doors produce when they’re open & with that big gaping hole in the fuselage with all its bits & bobs inside, yep, aerodynamic airflow gets around that & what not. But still, makes one wonder.

Well, “they” have been pretty much saying that for god knows how long anyway, so its nothing new is it. For example-Just like a test pilot from BAE saying the Typhoon is a Swing-Role fighter. Yes and? We know. Anything else new we might be interested in?

Here you can see how the obsolete Typhoon and the futuristic F-35 will fight Su-35s and who will survive and who will die.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwvnhFgzIKI&feature=player_embedded

What a load of utter sh*te! Instead of useing Typhoons, why not use F-15’s or F-16’s…Oh wait, I see, its a “Superior Complex” thing. :rolleyes:

The Bucc is a cracking plane for low level bombing/interdiction, “but it ant no Tornado.”

The Tornado really does have an advantage in any combat/performance variable I can think of. (Bar range, A clean Bucc can outstrip a clean Tornado, but add tanks and the usual AtA refuelling and thats gone)

For example; If we talk about the GR.1 version here, as it was the immediate successor to the Bucc.

As far as avionics goes the Bucc cannot compete. The TFR/navigation/target/weapons systems were all superior to the Buccs. The main advantage these gave was the Tornados ability to fly less than 100 ft through any terrain in any weather and drop a wide variety or ordinance with absolute precision. Combat loads gave no limits on the pilot perception of performance, effectively early care free handelling systems were employed in the avionics package.

The cockpit in the Tornado was a much nicer enviroment, far more user friendly and more importantly alot more comfortable when hugging the terrain for hours at a time. The Bucc was noted for its ability to do this resonably well due to its weight/wing loading, but the Tornado was in another league.

The survivability was a leap forward again for the Tornado. Very sophisicated ECM’s were employed not only on pylons but also throughout the aircraft. Also counting to this was the flight computer’s ability to detect various “danger zones” and to work out specific routes to deter from them, if they hadnt been accounted for before the mission.

Weapon variation was greater, and specialist weapons such as JP233’S could be used.

Sheer physical performance is better such as max speeds at all altitude, turning, climb and acceleration which are all handy in various ways.

Mainly it was a true multirole aircraft that did the tasks just about better than any competitor, and for the main just simply better.

It gave the RAF a very good chance of striking targets in Easern Europe, if a war ever did kick of, without expecting huge losses.

Totally agree!

I was reading something about the Bucc on pprune, I think from someone that used to be in the backseat. He said something like, you don’t fly around the hills & mountains at low level in the Bucc…Just fly through them. Solid as a rock.

I don’t think the Typhoon, (If you exclude its A/A performance, the amount of weapons, weapons stores etc) was a great leap over the Tornado like the Tornado was over the Buccaneer. The Buccaneer was great at what it could do, but as you say, typhoon1, it was no Tornado. The gap between the Bucc and Tonka was huge, but the gap between the Tonka and Tiffy isn’t so huge, and saying that, the Tornado is no Typhoon. When Typhoon came on the scene, the Tornado had/has bl**dy great A/G capabilities, avionics etc even though at that time, in theory the Tiffy could/can carry a lot more ordanance. But in other areas, well what can you say, the Tiffy owns the Tonka, of course.

Makes sense?…

The last shield of christianity, has to do with the Antemuralis Christianitatis. They were names given to the Croats by Europeans. The Croat friend was using the past history to make a point to me. So you understand now?

I am sorry to have bothered you, but politics is also part of the arms purchase and since others also did political analysis about us, i thought i should reply. Information never hurt anyone.

I do understand that you ‘re not interested in that. But, you have some options:

– Skip my posts.
– Signal my posts to a moderator and ask them to be deleted. I have no problem with that, it’s not my site to decide what to permit and what not.

You have an option or two too with all do respect, stick to Typhoon or don’t bother going on about something different. Yes, politics has a part in arms purchases, but just leave politics out of it. Its an aviation forum not some politics or whatever forum.

You’re crazy mister.

Nic

Yes, and? Is there any point to what you’re saying or are you just spouting off random chit-chat?

I find it amusing that someone with the screenname EELightning would refer to the F-4 in negative terms since, unless you are blind, the Lightning has to be one of the ugliest airplanes to have ever been designed.

The F-4 is unorthodox yes, but ugly….no. It’s a thing of beauty.

The Lightning? Flat out ugly.

I could say the same thing about you. Amusing. :rolleyes: