A:

1. Typhoon has not equipped HMD yet, and it hadn’t equipped PIRATE formally until the Tranche I, Block5 fighter entered service in 2007. It is very possibile that Typhoon still hasn’t use PIRATE to try to against Raptor up to now.

.

Two points

a. If according to RAF chief, clouds influenced the outcome in favor of the raptor, this clearly indicates that an IR device for BVR sensing was used by the other part. Or else clouds would have blocked both opponents. Right?

b. In the recent Defendory exhibition that was held in Athens, last month, a Eurofighter Consortioum spokesman, stated that even if CEASAR will not be incorporated, the PIRATE is able to search and track stealth targets. Up to 70nm away.

http://www.defencenet.gr/defence/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5528&Itemid=49

Σε ερώτηση του http://www.defencenet.gr, όσον αφορά το κατά πόσο θα μπορούσε το EF-2000 Typhoon να αντιμετωπίσει το τεχνολογίας stealth μελλοντικό του δυνητικό αντίπαλο, το F-35, η απάντηση που λάβαμε ήταν πως χάρη στην ύπαρξη του παθητικού συστήματος έρευνας και ιχηλάτησης υπερύθρων IRST που διαθέτει το μαχητικό, το PIRATE, ουσιαστικά το πλεονέκτημα του χαμηλού ηλεκτρομαγνητικού ίχνους των αεροσκαφών stealth ουσιαστικά παύει να υφίσταται.

In a question of http://www.defencenet.gr, referring to the ability of the EF-2000 Typhoon to counter the stealth technology and future potential opponent F-35, the answer we got was that thanks to the passive search and track IR system PIRATE, the advantage of the low electromagnetic return, cease to exist!

Its all greek to me….

PS of course the EADS spokemans quote, can always be marketing BS.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/11/guy_builds_f35_fighter_jet_on_his_own-2.html

At least in Australia the F-35 enjoys a rather good reputation.
In fact they already “operate” one!

http://www.4tforum.gr/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=9939&start=2430&st=0&sk=t&sd=a#p1333260

Κατ’ αρχή σε κλειστές αερομαχίες τα τάιφουν ΠΑΝΤΑ υπερίσχυσαν των φ-15/16 (μάλιστα μια φορά 1 τάιφουν νίκησε ζεύγος από φ-15/16, ποτέ δεν θυμάται είπε περίπτωση και σε άλλες ασκήσεις φ-15/16 να έχει καταρρίψει τάιφουν) ενώ από τα ράπτορ έχασαν με μικρή διαφορά (narrow win), κυρίως όταν είχε σύννεφα δεν μπορούσαν να τα εντοπίσουν εγκαίρως λόγω στελθ, ικανότητα που όμως χάνεται εάν το α/φος φέρει εξωτερικο οπλισμό ή έστω και ένα ατρακτίδιο ή δεξαμενή, συνεπώς το ραπτορ πλεονεκτεί καθαρά μόνο εάν φέρει αποκλειστικά τον περιορισμένο εσωτερικό του οπλισμό και σε μάχες πέρα από τον ορίζοντα διότι ανιχνεύεται δύσκολα από τα ραντάρ α/φων και (ενεργών) πυραύλων (πέραν του ότι είναι πανάκριβο για αγορά, δύσκολο, απαιτητικό και ακριβό και στη συντήρηση, μόνο 120 θα πάρει τελικά η usaf ενώ προγραμμάτιζαν… 500 και επί του παρόντος δεν υπάρχουν σκέψεις για εξαγωγή ούτε καν στο ισραήλ, επίσης το θέλει και η ιαπωνία). Το ράπτορ συνολικά κρίνεται καλύτερο από το τάιφουν αλλά υστερεί σε συντελεστή κόστους/αποτελεσματικότητας.

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_txt

According to the translations from the website mentioned above. The Greece post said that F-22A had only gotten a “Narrow Win” over Typhoon in “Closed air combat”, not in the condition of BVR combat.

And personally, I don’t think this kind of result is suprising, especially when you consider the difference of WVR weapons that F-22A (AIM-9M) and EF-2K (AIM-132) use nowadays……

Toan I contacted this man, and he was most willing to answer.
He told me that the DACTs lasted a week, and were both BVR and WVR.
And some time they went for guns.
He also told me that the raptor was visible to the radar from certain angles , not only azimuth but azimuth and elevation angles.
He concluded that with the introduction of CEASAR and METEOR, the situation for the Typhoon against L/O targets will improve even more.

A: What DACT exercises in which year??

A:

The IRST today is still more a complement for radar (helping radar to cue and identify the target that radar has found and picked out) than a completely independent sensor to search, track, identify, range, and lock the target by itself in the long range. A modern IRST like Pirate can detect 200 targets at the same time. However, in this kind of situation, the pilot can only see 200 light spots on its screen that is impossible to tell which target(s) /light spot(s) is / are the real bad guy(s), not to mention gathering the necessary information to shoot it / them down.

If the pilot wants to use IRST to do the jobs of tracking, identifying, and ranging, then it can only handle a single target at one time within a very limited effective range (around 30 ~ 55 km), which is still not good enough when considering that the combination of Raptor + AIM-120C6/C7/D has the BVR capability to attack more than six targets at the range of 80 to 100 km+ away……

And even if the pilot of EF-2000 identifies and locks F-22A successfully with the help of Pirate IRST, then what kind(s) of weapon(s) shall Typhoon be able to use to shoot Raptors down?? The active seekers of BVRAAMs like AIM-120 or Meteor are much less powerful than modern fighters’ radars today, which are highly unlikely to be able to lock Raptor successfully. Modern WVRAAMs with IIR seekers like ASRAAM or IRIS-T may have more chance, but their effective range is much less than AIM-120C6/C7/D, especially when the later is fired from the F-22A with high speed (1.5-1.8 M) supercruising…..

I do not have all the answers. A lot of these details are clasified and cannot be disclosed, so we can only assume.

I think it is safe to say that PIRATE can work as a standalone sensor.
Of course it works better in a combination with the radar, but when the pilot shuts it down, it can provide azimuth and elevation information about IR targets, and possibly TRACK this targets, under certain circumstances.
The basic problem is ranging, of course. Personally I do not believe that any IRST sensor can provide accurate range measurements mainly because both sensor and target are moving.

But, there might be an other solution! Aircraft fly in pairs. If angular information by BOTH PIRATEs can be combined through datalink and sensor/fusion, range information CAN be obtained. Provided that sensor fusion software is able to match contacts of one PIRATE with contacts of the other.

Ov course there is the range issue. I really dont know.
Still assuming, if the raptors need to fire their AMRAAMS in max range, they need to fly supercruising. And although the raptors may not using their A/B, their skin temperature is quite high!

Anyway I contacted this guy and I have to say he sounded VERY credible.
Nevertheless it is one source, and still needs to be cross-confirmed.

I think, this multi-ID joke must end.

I watch this forum since 1999, cant remember anything like this before.

You know how a rumor spreads.
Usually there is an idea thrown on the table, and than all little parrots propagate it, as if granted.

I wouldnt hold my breath.

Excactly. Thrust is a force versus drag. Both do drop in a similar way, but not the same way with height. That is related to military or dry thrust at subsonic. AB or wet thrust is not effected in a similar way. The oxygen content does drop with the height too, but when the mass flow is high it does drop much slower. 😉

I will give you a rough example of the GE J-79 from memory.
It is ~50 kN and a sfc of 0.84 static at ground level. 5100*0.84= 4284 kg/h or 71,4 kg/min.
At ~40.000 feet and Mach 0,9 it is ~12 kN and a sfc 0.9+. 1224*0.9= 1102 kg/h or 18,4 kg/min.

thanx