Not necesarily the DATA LINK is used from other aircraft to guide a AAM like the Gripen does, you can run away and other will do the guiding also the Eurofighter needs recesing all those pylons becasue is small and its canards are draggy and not very stealthy, yeah there are marketing generation ++++ at EADS.

Also its boxy inlet is not very stealthy either, niether its fin.

The EJ-200 is not even an engine with 2D thurst vectoring and its design is old, yeah old, only for political considerations its flying, a MiG-29OVT will thrash it at close combat and the Su-35BM at any range, with thrust vectoring and newer R-74s will turn in a dime and outturn it

You are so wrong on so many points it is comical :D:D:D

EJ200 old???? Boxy intakes, hmm the ones with the s-shaped dimention interior, thus not exposing the turbine frontal faces as on the su-35:rolleyes:

would you mind explaining, in detail why the fin is not stealthy opposed to the two huge sails on the su-35?

But is this weapons’ configuration finally operationnal or not ? I’m lost… :confused:

yep

This thread is quite comical on how alot of people are down playing the Eurofighter. I’m going to stick up for the plane and set a few things straight.

Eurofighter can supercruise at mach 1.25, optimum conditions, loaded with 4 amraam’s, 2 asraam’s, and two wing mounted tanks. Removing these stores will enable higher, but not a significant amount.

Eurofighter has better climb, acceleration, sustained, and in some circumstances better instantaneous turn rates than su-35. It can consitently pull a sustaind 6.2g turn at mach 1.6, giving some indication of its supersonic agility performance. Only the F-22 beats it in certain areas in this place, not all.

Not having TVC in terms of MANOVERABILITY not AGILITY is only benefical at the very slow speed flight end, but if you have seen the eurofghter it basically behaves like it has it anyway, hence none of the partner nations really pushing for it, instead avanced short range missiles, IRIS-T, ASRAAM combined with helmet sight, enabling to pull nearly 50g will sort anything out! TVC does not improve agility, how quick the plane can move from one place to the other in a vector of space. An A380 is manoverable(how it can position itself in that vector of space but is it agile? No. They are completely different things. YEs the su-35 is relatively agile, but seeing it, it is still rather sluggish compared to fighter such as even the F-16.

Top speed, the Eurofighter is able to reach mach 2.2, maybe the su-35 is faster but at a not so important margin. If it was around mach 2.5, yes that would imply other factorrs, however its not.

Someone mentioned high altitude combat before. Eurofighter is designed to live there. EJ200’s, reign supreem. Recently stated by an RAF pilot in America as the Typhoon has been just declared operational in a ATG role, “The typhoon only uses twice as much fuel supercrusing with a substantial ATG payload, as it does when the engines are in IDLE.” The plane is phernominal at altitude. The Very large delta gives turn rates exceeding everything, F-22 may disprove in some areas. If you have read as much literatue as I have, spoke to as many pilots , back in the late ninteies, early 2000’s before EADS was really trying to market as a nearly omnirole fighter AKA rafale, the main point of the plane was, SUPERSONIC, HIGH ALTITUDE PERFORMANCE, in terms of acceleration, sustained and instantaneous turns performances, fuel consumption, supercruise. No matter how EADS plays the plane as a true multi role fighter, that is the underlinying feature of that plane, the rafale on the other hand is true omnirole.

All I can see the su-35 beating Eurofighter performance wise is range, weapons loads, but they are debatable. If you throw in in flight refueling, which Russia very very lacks, the typhoon can effectively have a greater range in any battle/war. Slugging how many? I think it is 12 AAM onto a su-35 will take a tole on its so called supercrusing capability.

Where I admit it starts to get a bit worrying for the typhoon is Long range ATA combat. 400km to detect large targets on the su-35? That is massive if it is true, ad the only way the typhoon will be really able, 100% to knock that thing out of the sky every time is with ASEA. If BAE, EADS consortium make one of those specific radar types I think it is pretty certain it will eat everying up, bar possibly the raptor, in every performance goal of a radar.

Someone above mentioned about Indian RAF exercise where long rang combat did not take place, missile were generic ranged. Nothing, absolutley nothing can be taken away from that exercise about typhoon vs su30mki, only that the sukhoi performed well, that could mean they expected 40 kills by the typhoon but managed to bring it to 30 :p Just remeber when the typhoon knocked up that ration of was it 46/7/8/9 kills for 1 typhoon in an european exercise in the past few years.

When you say a specific flanker type versus eurofighter, it is far to vague. Thinging a T3 machine will have engine’s rated to nealry 26,000 lb in reheat each, ASEA radar, possibly thrust vector and many more tricks it will be a totally diffent machine, alothought the one now does the job. thing F-16A block 1 vs F-16E block 60.