I found his figures interesting too, they seems to be painting a different picture to the official figures.

The loaded weight (full internal fuel with 2 ASRAAMs) quoted by the pilot is 17.5 tonnes or 38,600 lbs. This gives a ptw of only 1.05. This may explain why the pilot considered completing the loop in high temperture as ‘a tricky manoeuvre’.

In an imperial 17.5 tonne’s it is 38600 lb’s, but in a metric 17.5 ton’s, it is 35000 lb’s. So a bit of ambiguity. Each EJ-200 ENGINE produces 20,200 lb’s of thrust (pretty approx at the moment ignoring tempertaure etc..) If using 38600 lb for take of weight 1.05 T/W is the case, but 35000 lb net takeoff weight gives T/W weight of 1.15.

The plane is already rolling when it cuts to the cockpit. There’s no way of telling how long has passed between the two or if it’s even of the same aircraft. That’s why I said the video didn’t really show anything definitive.

Do you know the elevations and temps of the respective takeoffs? That matters. Was it a -220 powered E or a -229 powered E? That also matters.

On the link I posted just right-click and Save As. The Boeing link I posted first is to a GE powered F-15.

If you watch previous typhoon videos, you can see the reheats ignite almost immediately from brakes off due to the superb EJ-200 engine, thus you can assume the takeoff roll started approx 0.5 second earlier, giving a time of 6-7 seconds.:)

The second link you have given is the video clip I also have, and F-15e demonstration taken in 2001. Don’t get me wrong I am a fan of the f-15, specially the E, but still aint as quick 😀

I believe it is a an f-15e from Elmendorf, Alsaka with AK on the tail. These and the Lakenheath eagles have -229 engines. But as I said previously, things like flight control setups on takeoff do matter, however I am still talking in the general case, not so specific, otherwise one could spend hours finding such details, with not really that much point lol

Incorrect. Go watch the clip I posted. Both that and another clip I’ve got (82 Mb so no I’m not posting it) show Eagles getting off the ground as fast as the Typhoon in your posted clip. And these were not stripped but in airshow configuration- just like the Typhoon in the clip you posted.

It wont work for me but I do have the saved video clip of the f-15e demonstration flight found on Strikeeagle.com, and it takes off in 9 seconds. But people be your own judge, visit the site. Not as quick. And I dont think I am incorrect when I hav seen them both in real life this year not noly a few months ago, I am entitiled to compare them.

Also I have found the video of the typhoon taking off in 5 seconds;

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mCIPJ1g01OM

The aircraft take off in 14 seconds approximatively (from brake off), then accelerate with a not so impressive angle of climb, and finally, the pilot pushes the stick so as to climb nearly vertically (we don’t really know) and disappears through the clouds (the clouds being quite low).
I’m not sure this video (though it’s really impressive, i agree) demonstrate anything, compared to “rival planes”. 😉

TMor, the typhoon takes off in 12 seconds, you can use the little video timer at the bottom to accurately see (from brakes off). Also it does accelerate with a o.k climb angle, the runway being tilted on a small hill hides this. Then climbs ABSOLUTELY VERTICAL . And the cloud base seems not low at all. I have found a nice video for you;

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=aZsUntlm2Pw—-Rafale vid

The rafale takes off in 17 seconds, with a similar loudout, and certainly does not go straight up into the vertical after takeoff. I admit he does not accelerate down the runway as much as the typhoon, 😉 but the typhoon seems a hell of alot more impressive 😀

What I meant by rival planes is on QRA. Such as F-15’s or Rafale’s or F-16’s, can they get to the Interception as fast as the typhoon? What I am basically saying is this plane the new LIGHTNING in QRA.:D

Does anyone know if it will/has done a flight demo at MAKS 2007? , looks just static for this MAKS. Also does anyone reckon it will turn up at next years Farnborough or ILA berlin airshows?

“You harp on about JOUST not accurately simulating performance. QinetiQ had plenty of access to the best intelligence, and are reckoned to be pretty good when it comes to analysis. People who know (including Rand) are impressed by JOUST, whereas internet enthusiasts stung by the fact that their favourite fighter did poorly berate it and make accusations“

TO true.;)

BTW, I did not state the raptor was tracked by radar 80 miles away, that would have been a bit annyoing for the US 😀 , but wouldn’t it be possible pirate was used? I think it is more reality than myth.

“Its just not enough to say that the performance of the aircraft were overstated,for eg.the study was done with a Su-35 with predominantly Russian equipment,but the real Su-30 is nothing even like what was made out.It also contains a host of western equipment.” by Rayrubik.

Yes, will we assume the western equipment used is as good as the projected Russian equipment?

“I daresay you havent objectively looked at its contemporaries then, personally I think all these birds have pros and cons and are far too evenly matched. Only the Raptor, and to some extent the JSF has some silver bullets in the A2A arena that cant be met easily. And the JSF could also be addressed to some degree with iterative upgrades- a 1 Mtr antenna aperture allows that leeway.” by Ray

I certainly have, I rate the su-27 series as the most oustanding in fighter history. Yes they are resonably matched, in SOME respects, but there is a definate gap, separating some of the typhoon’s featues, compared to contemporaries. Out of interest what advantages does the Raptor have over the typhoon in WVR, appart from the (in my opinion) overrated TVC?

From what I have gathered from the posts, the most crucial card in WVR fighting is the WVRAAM. Does this then suggestin in ID, as they used a false weapons package, any WVR range fighting cannot count much to convey the truth.

“Dozer denied any had ever taken place (apparently suggesting the Eurofighter folks would not want to be embarrased by having their dream fighter go up against the Raptor and getting shot down in every engagement”[B[/B]

“The fact that people keep peddling this “story” and using the “rumors on the internet say” as some sort of confirmation/justification is just sad. If you want the truth go to Fence Check or F-16.net and ask a Raptor pilot. Better yet get a verified Typhoon pilot to give a first hand account. (Oh yeah, can’t do that because some internet armchair general said it was a security issue ) Sorry if that sounds harsh but even a casual look at the situation suggests that if their were a kernal of truth, however small, to it it would be big news. The F-22 certainly has it’s detractors, why aren’t they parading the story around for all to see? Why isn’t Japan, Israel, and Australia clamoring for Typhoons?“

Lol, isnt it possible the typhoon pilots kept it quiet, to not upset this somewhat invincible reputation the raptor has built up. I think we better call it a day on that one, I dont want the forum to be hijacked in an argument about this, The wayI see it, there is far to much speculation and rumor on both sides.

Well..obviously,repeating something again and again doesnt make it more believable to me.I will again reiterate the view from the IAF side is that the MKI can very well go up against the Typhoon.

Lets end it here..what will I believe?Some persons whom I personally know or some anonymous journalist who by the way keeps making blatant mistakes one after another?:p

Twisting words.The simulation is more representative of real-world BVR than what?The ID flying?Huh!So in that case why are you trying to base your conclusions on the ID flying?

Again,if JOUST isnt closer to reality,whats this obssesion to prove that the ID flying results points towards its confirmation?It a simulation,it isnt closer to reality,so the indications gotten from ID which confirm JOUST cannot be close to reality right?!

Just good old circular logic.
The reality is that in ID the missions were very structured and didnot offer much freedom to either parties.And within the very little freedom provided it was seen that the MKIs and EFs match up very well to each other.To compare it with a simulation which you claim to be “more representative of real-world BVR” is just comparing apples to oranges.The planes didnt even use their radars,ECM etc.

Degenerating into generics.Now we are into discussion about previous generations and such things.Nothing specific,nothing concrete.
Well FYI the “Flanker” in its present form is a 4++ generation aircraft,as is the EF and the Rafale.Each of them have their advantages which if put to use wisely can defeat the other.Agility?A super-manouevrable aircraft with TVC isnt agile?:rolleyes:

Yes you are correct, a super MANOUEVRABLE aircraft may NOT be agile, agility and manouvevrability are two different things. The MKI may be able to “Manouevere” at all speeds, greater than the typhoon especially in VERY low speed turns. However agility is the ability to retain energy and move quick such as the typhoons second-to-none climb and sustained turn performance, which with the Flanker ist bad :, but is not in the same league as the typhoon.:D