The nice thing with a simulation, is that it will do its job, according to what data you will feed it with.

10:1 exchange ratio. That was done how? 1 on 1 and so in 9 times out of 10, the Typhoon would win?

How did they simulate the russian aircraft’s EW capability against the Meteor?

Did the simulation do large formation scenarios too? Because i have always wondered. In greek video with our eastern neighbours, a greek pilot says to his formation “It must be a tight one, it must be a tight one!” (meaning tight formation)”. Meaning, the poor fella, wasn’t in the position to clearly tell how many targets were flying head on to his formation (unfortunately radars aren’t like X rays to see the one behind the one you have in front of you), let alone lock them all. What about the fact that you carry 4 and not 10 Meteors and that if you want good chances for a kill, you must either wait to come much closer or shoot 2 at 1 target? How are you going to make the 10 to 1 kill with 4 missiles?

Or the reverse, how about multiple typhoons? What ratio’s would be given then? Such things as passive amraam/meteor shots could be used by two Typhoons which is a very formidable technique as used by the F-22.

Hmm. With the new AESA, Meteor, and a HMD Rafale will pose a serious challenge to even the Typhoon in a2a… A pity all this arrives so late.

L

Until Typhoon gets the same :D, however long that may take is anyones guess :rolleyes:

I believe it was a Tornado F3 that got a kill of a Typhoon F2. So I heard anyway.

I wouldnt rubbish that claim, when pushed to its limits the F3 can be very impressive, lol, as long as it doesnt carry the huge Hindenburger tanks

Global; What was the point of posting that other than trying to litter the forum with rubbish?

It surely can engage the afterburner long enough to accelerate to M2.0 and make a shot, doesn’t it? 🙂

Thats what I’m trying to get at, actual combat time and the time envelope in the BVR engagement is very short (well atleast in 99% of combat events) allowing the eagle to try and at least approch mach 1.7/8

And whoever is saying the jet would out of fuel very quickly in ful AB is quite wrong, its short.

If the Raptor pilot doesn’t mind giving up a higher IR signature, he can fly faster than the Eagle with a combat load.

quite right, lol, forgot about the internal weapons storage, still though I think the point is still there

The maximum speed of the F-15 is over Mach 2,3, not 0,9. These claims are made to show an artificial ‘advantage’ that does not really exist.

I can kinda agree with this but also not. In combat the actual time in theatre is very small, therefore an F-15 can afford, I guess, to go past mach 2. etc..(or whatever is the max AMRAAM firing speed) for the shot of the missile, it certainly wont be travelling that fast for long. Basically for a very short, but important instant in the engagement it can actually better the Raptor in missile Kinematics at least.

However the Raptor can do 1.7 SC I have heard, which will obviously give huge benefits in IR/Fuel reduction, but you have to ask will the combat take that long to result in the Raptor becoming more efficient and showing its advantages?

But the prices u mentioned are staggering.

Quality things don’t come cheap 😉