Ohh I’m sorry I didn’t realise the standard of discussion here at KeyMags was that whenever RCS was mentioned you have to provide a full spherical measurement across all radar wavelengths.

You don’t.

But when you harp on about the F-35 completely avoiding detection due to this RCS “figure”, then you get called.

Ohh really? So using the nose RCS against the most common wavelength used by radars,

You might want to revisit that sentence.

you know that part of the aircraft that is most often pointed at threat radars,

Perhaps because the threats will be doing everything to avoid going nose to nose to get around this very issue. If you understand my previous statements, you’ll understand what I mean by this.

Perhaps you’d like to explain to everyone how important it is not to forget the high point of the RCS of a moving LO shaped aircraft on the bow tie points at 45, 135, 225 and 315 degrees?

You still don’t get it, do you?

When wavelengths become long enough, everywhere is a relative “high point”.

Well if the problems, all relatively minor,

Sorry, but WHAT?!?!

Cracks from fatigue in frames after 1500 flight hours when the frames are supposed to be good for 8,000 flight hours?

A complete re-design of the aft structure to accommodate a move of the arrestor hook anchor?

Aviationweek

Basically Boeing f**ks over the US taxpayer once again.

The deal offered by EADS is only going to look better and better as time goes on. Boeing probably already realise there is not a hope of KC-46 being on time and on budget.

Long wave radars are useful for detecting stealth fighters, but the problem with long wave radar is that it cannot provide very good resolution and can have trouble with a sustained detection. This makes it difficult to assess the direction of the bogey.

That is an argument from the 1980s.

Signal processing has moved a long way.

Sending a Typhoon to intercept doesn’t seem very likely to succeed, since the bogey would still be able to detect and probably lock on the Typhoon before the Typhoon detects it, even if the Typhoon knew where to go.

How will it detect a Typhoon approaching it face on from the flank? In that scenario PIRATE will generate a return as quickly as EOTS and from a range sufficient to allow the Typhoon to use its superior missile and missile launch kinematics.

It also doesn’t resolve the problem of the missile getting a good lock BVR, since VLO characteristics does make locking difficult.

The Captor-E has very wide field of view, allowing tracking and updating of enemy position post launch while swiftly breaking away from the other guy’s nose.

In that sense, while the F-35 can’t turn away as quickly, it’s much harder to land a kill against.

You don’t seem to understand the Typhoon won’t even have a missile launched at it. Easier to avoid a missile that is never fired at you…

In that situation the F-35 would probably have to rely on its VLO to make a lock and kill difficult. However, that only highlights why VLO is an advantage. In a WVR situation the Typhoon can’t capitalize on a kinematic advantage against a VLO air frame because it is more difficult to lock.

You realise what I mean about a trolling engagement. Shadow boxing – 50-100 miles apart. Moving the fighter screen around to generate a weakness in the air defence, either for the fellow fighters in your sweep, or for other assets to take advantage of.

In such a defensive situation, the Typhoon would fare better than the F-35.

Neither the F-35 or Typhoon are really suited to take down F-22 class fighters. One depends on a kinematic advantage that is all but neutralized by a detectability disadvantage, and the other suffers from a kinematic disadvantage.

The Japanese doctrine is defensive; the Typhoon is better suited to executing that doctrine than the F-35.

When on the defensive, it doesn’t matter so much if they see you too late – it matters more you localising them and killing them earlier.

However, the whole selling point of the F-35 is that it can peel away at kinematic disadvantages with sensor fusion.

Can it?

“Sensor fusion” is a big buzzword… well “buzz term” I suppose – in reality it means very little.

Every other aircraft has advanced RWR, MAWS, IRST, helmet cueing etc to some degree.

As soon as the F-35 turns its **** on the other guys, their IRST or radar will see it. Then its bye-bye.

F-35s are not meant to operate alone.

Neither are Typhoons. Or Rafales. Or Gripens. Or F-22s. Or J-20s. Or T-50s.

Also one should not discount the sensor capabilities of the F-35.

What are these?

None of the 4.5 fighters can match it today, and small a/c like Rafale and Gripen will also not be able to match it tomorrow. Typhoon should be able to fit a quite large and powerful AESA however can it fit a system similar to EODAS? I don’t know.

According to Northrop-Grumman’s own gumf.

The DAS provides:

Missile detection and tracking
Launch point detection
Situational awareness IRST & cueing
Weapons support
Day/night navigation

So does the others not have:
MAWS?
MAWS?
IRST with missile cueing?
Meaningless words.
Meaningless words.

Yet again – the fanbois are deceived by another new acronym. :rolleyes:

The EODAS doesn’t work as advertised anyway, indeed it may never do so.

Of course the Typhoon also does not need to emit. However if the two meet and both are supplied with radar data from e.g. an AWACS then (assuming that both AWACSes have the same performance) the F-35 will have a natural advantage due to VLO.

It depends on the wavelength of the search radar. Above certain wavelengths, the F-35 will be every bit as visible as the Typhoon (note – RCS is a function of wavelength).

If both use AESA in LPI mode then F-35 will also have a clear advantage; for at least two reasons… 😉

LPI is over-rated… criminally so.

I accept that for X or Ku band radar, at some slightly wider frontal angles, the F-35 will have a usefully better RCS than the Typhoon.

From the flank or hind, the difference is relative only and will not be low enough to be significant. i.e. it will not result in a change in the positions of either aircraft – if the F-35 was facing the flank of the Typhoon, it was in the advantageous position anyway and visa versa.

If both fly silent and do not emit volunterily then the F-35 will still have an advantage due to strongly reduced IR signature and superior IR sensors.

You mean the use of fuel to prevent the electronics cooking? ha ha ha

Is the EOTS better than PIRATE?

yes but in the context of this thread, can the Typhoon you espouse support for, push down the PAKFA and J-20 :diablo:

Operating in an air defense environment only?

Probably yes… or at least, make a better job of it.

Scenario 1: Long-wavelength (and range) search radar acquires the enemy (forget about VLO on fighters for long wavelength radar – its a fallacy).

#1a: The Typhoons head straight in at a high altitude and KE level from a favourable intercept angle (from both friendly and hostile signature and subsequent disengagement perspectives) then localise the inbounds using PIRATE or CAPTOR-E; thus it can launch Meteor from outside the engagement envelope of the current Russian and Chinese missiles. The Captor-E allows for (very) off (aircraft) boresight tracking of the Meteor into the kill.

#1b: If the F-35 has the same search radar, it cannot provide the same kinematic boost to its missiles, nor can it turn it’s nose as far away from the enemy whilst continuing to guide it’s missiles. Therefore the F-35 falls closer to the engagement envelope of the opposing fighters, exposing its more vulnerable flank/hind and lacking the speed to disengage.

Scenario 2: If it is a trolling engagement with both sides knowing the other’s position.

The F-35 is not quick enough to keep up with the T-50 or J-20. The EF-T is. Basically the F-35 would be maneuvered into unfavourable positions and the enemy would strike when it suits.

Scenario 3: If it is a blind engagement with neither side knowing the other’s position.

All aircraft have passive IR sensors; The APG-81 is “LPI”*, the Captor-E is “LPI”* (Selex-Galileo already build “LPI” radars), the T-50 and J-20 radars are unknown.

Therefore, while the F-35 may** have an advantage over the T-50 and J-20, it does not have any advantage over the EF-T.

So, basically, I would expect 2 wins to the Typhoon and a draw.

*IMO, LPI is a load of bull… but for the sake of this discussion I will ignore the evidence and pretend it works.

**depending on their radar types

It depends on what level of maturity is acceptable for the primary customer.

True… if, as far as fighting a war goes, you want an expensive paperweight on 3 wheels… then the F-35 is fully fit for service.

If you want an effective fighting machine; well, at the minute its not very close.