It only makes their plane look much better. I wonder why they’do that in marketing documents…
Oh wait, are you telling me that the Typhoon actually has a clean weight of ten “normal” tons?
And Dassault uses the “normal”, the “long”, or the “short” ton?
What’s the history behind 1016 kg = 1 ton ?
The British are a bit strange… 😀
I am surprised that with 5 tons internal and with drop tanks the ferry range is still only 3700 km? Or is that number wrong?
“Only” 3700 Km´s?!!
Loke, the three external tanks are 1000L only, thats quite long range for that amount of fuel!
So not an official source.
Not a critic towards you, but I can link to a dozen sites with different values, ranging from 4000 to 5000kg, that’s why I asked.
Do you think the 5000kg value is credible?
AFAIK there are three diferent official documents that confirm the 5 tons of internal fuel for the Phoon, two by Eurofighter themselves (including the latest comparison with the F-22 in the “Eurofighter World 2010/3” publication, you can find that in the Eurofighter site) and another one by the Luftwaffe, that has been posted severall times here.
It is indeed 5 tons, and its official.
The second he said that the extra features were not considered and they were calling it the KC46A I knew that was it.
Done is done hope this isn’t dragged on further.
X2
Its official, Boeing won.
An EMD contract of 3,5 billion US$ and a total of more than 30 billion US$.
So in addition to the $109 millions each fly away we have to add all neccesary weapons and techs that makes EF really multi role capable and pay for the integration, or development. So far EF has only LGB, nothing else and some design flaws limits its capabilities already (LDP on the centerline, only 3 wet/heavy stations).
On the other side we could have the already fully multi role capable Rafale for only $87 millions fly away and the only capability that the Rafale doesn’t have compared to EF (or that is not already cleared for integration by France), is HMS.
Those numbers of yours are completely bogus…
True, perhaps with the exception of some ME countries — just look at F-16 block 60 and the Mirage 2000-9.
Look at the Orbat of the Indian Air Force, where else would you find a Jaguar with an AGAVE radar? Not to mention the MKI, or Sea Harriers equiped with Derby´s and Israeli radars…
There are severall examples of evolved versions of platforms buying payed by foreign users, the Streak Eagle was developed with Saudi money, the heavy weight 9/10 ton evolved vipers were based on the “Soufa” airframe (a very diferent beast of the other block 50/52+), an israeli tailored fighter.
Cheers
since the EF is a overweight 12t fighter with a mca radar system for years to come, that even his own countries don’t want anymore!

Did the lens also distort the shadows?
The shadows at the array are at a different angle than the shadows on the rest of the airplane. :rolleyes: Clearly a photoshop.
DJ
The sun was in front and to the right of the aircraft, the shadows of the TRM´s would be projected to the left of the aircraft, slightly down, precisely where they are…
If you comparing with shadows on the ground those are being projected on a surface that makes a 90º angle with the radar antenna. Both are correct and if you have any doubts look at the shadow of the refueling probe, it has the exact same orientation of the TRM shadows.
It might be a photoshop but i dont see one single clue that it is.
ooppss, Thales developped hemt waffers throught UMS foundry, germans has no views on it at all, its not because EADS own 50% that makes french ownership to 75% of UMS that they put money to develop anything sensitive to rafale mmics, and versus.. Orsay are starting to develop GaN technologies and keep this for them..
Complete boll… and i am being being polite
That pic is obviously Photoshopped. Whatever that array really is, it looks like they rotated it so that the shadow would match the aircraft. Notice the elements are not centered in the array plate, and the mounting screws on one side do not match those on the other.
Phaid
Thats because the TRM´s are not centered…
The photo was taken with a bloody big wide angle, that was the only way to have the entire aircraft in the photo while at the same time having a great big image of the radar on the center, and a great big wide angle distorts, a lot.
Cheers
ppp :
lol !
Seriously , if both are doing the same shopping for the best stuff , the Thalès people would come up with the better end product . I am sure .
Their ideas and ways to do things are a lot more inventive than Selex even if they look strange at the first glance . I believe that there is is simply more brain power within Thalès staff .Cheers .
BW
Selex works with their own modules, they also work with the same UMS TR modules that Thales uses and by 2006 BAE systems were offering to them their own modules of their North American Foundry (the ones used by the AN/APG-81).
The Captor E will use either Selex TR modules, or the exact same UMS modules that are on the RBE2, both options are available.
Thank you GoldenPawn, it is the radar of the photo for sure. And the OSF matches perfectly to.
Or more probably the mock up is a copy of the original…
Thank you, Sintra!
I was wrong thinking there was but one foundry but
it still means that the ability to produce an AESA* is
there awaiting production! * ( For combat A/Cs )Tay.
The Selex 500 is already in production.