toanhttp://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4138514&c=FEA&s=INT
Stefan Zoller
EADS Defense & Security CEO
Published: 15 June 2009
Q. What are the chances of signing the contract for Eurofighter Tranche 3 before the German Bundestag parliament goes into summer recess?
A. I am very optimistic. The German government already is processing the file, so the intention is to have it passed through parliament before the summer break and before the elections, which means we have to sign the contract in the next coming days.
Q. Air forces now look to active electronically scanned arrays as a requirement. When will Eurofighter have AESA capability?
A. The focus on Eurofighter was to secure Tranche 3 – first tranche A, and then B – so that has kept us busy in recent months. Nevertheless, we have been progressing in parallel the E-scan radar, and we expect the next subject to be tackled with the governments is to conclude on the requirement and shape of such a radar, as it is inevitable that we need such a radar not only for our home countries but the export campaigns.
We have to conclude in the course of the year a principle go-ahead and agreement on specification of the radar. That means unconditional start of such a program.
toanIt is said that the first 2 Typhoons have been handed over to the RSAF yesterday on 11th June 2009. I hope to be able to provide links in the near future.
toanI meant Pierre M. Sprey. The man who conceived and shaped the F-16,
and led the technical side of the US Air Force’s A-10.dunno who Sprey/Kopp is…
Just because Mr. Sprey shaped and designed F-16 in 1970s doesn’t mean his thought and description for F-22A and APG-77 today must be right.
Stealth design — is a “myth,” Sprey said. That is because in order to locate the enemy beyond visual range, the Raptor (like every other fighter) must turn on its own radar, immediately betraying its location.
What a daring declaration ~ Especially when the fighter this man designed have been senselessly slaughtered thousand of times by Raptor + APG-77 during the exercises in the past six years:D
toanIf that’s the case then:
1. in the future one serious concern could be Accidents: If you cannot detect another a/c how can you avoid collisions?L
F-22A has a retractable RCS enhancer on its belly and a special signal emitter, both of which can help air-controller and its partners to catch its location in the peaceful time, or during the exercises with no need of full stealth.
Air superiority may become impossible to achieve if both sides have roughly same stealth levels — your opponent can always be lurking around as long as he still has some stealth a/c left….
This has already been happened since 30 years ago ~ In 1970s and 1980s, when USSR and USA had thousands of ICBMs and SLBMs to point to each other’s head…..
* The speed of ICBM/SLBM: 25 to 30 Mach.
* Each ICBM/SLBM can carry 8 to 14 MIRV or even MARV warheads.
* The frontal RCS of each warheads could be reduced to less than 0.000001 m2.
Actually, the threats of stealthy vehicles today is just a piece of cake comparing with the MAD during the cold war…….
toanAt least the RWRs used by F-15C and F-16C for USAF today should be useless when facing the APG-77. We can see the evidence from the results of F-22A versus F-15C & F-16C in the past few years.
As for the scenario of F-22A vs F-22A with full stealth, a Raptor’s pilot declared that USAF had played such games a few years ago, but the results are usually boring: Both sides are usually unable to find out each other during the whole exercise……
toanSensible thing?!!!!!!!!
The JCA fleet as just been cut to 66 units, add 123 Phoons and the entire RAF manned fast jet from here to 2030 might very well be less than 200 airframes… Sensible?
SIX ****** Sqn´s…
From 31 fast jets sqn´s in 1991, the RAF would be cut to SIX sqn´s in 2025!
Sensible?
Lets just hope that GB inc doesnt go to war alone with a competent foe for the next three decades… ?
Wellcome to join the rank of Sweden airforce:D
I think the final fate of Phoons and JCAs won’t be decided by the Brown’s government today, but the next UK government which is likely to be ruled by the Conservative Party. Will this make the future of Phoons and JCAs more unoptimistic???
toanThey sold 72 to Saudi but I thought they were not allowed to deduct those from the total number? Perhaps that has now changed? L
It has been changed. The 24 Tranche II Typhoon which were original for RAF but now being sold to RSAF won’t have the Tranche II replacement for RAF, which means that the number of Typhoon for RAF has already been decreased from 232 to 208.
And it seems that RAF will have to further reduce the final Typhoon’s number its own now (From 208 to 123 +/- a few reserved fighters ??? )…..
toanThe biggest two potential enemies of Japan, Russia and China, will build their own 5th generation stealthy fighters (PAK-FA/T-50 and J-12/J-14) and make them enter service at the period of 2015 to 2025. The most important thing for Japan should be acquiring the best fighter choice to face such kinds of threats. The problems of program cost and technological transfere should be much less important for Japan. After all, if the new fighter which finally chosed by Japan is incapable to deal with the best fighters that Russia and China airforces will have 10 to 15 years later effectively, then what is the point even the Japan has the best fighter-selling deal on earth??
toanRAF chief predicts controversial takeover of Royal Naval air power
Sir Glenn, 55, heaped praise upon the Typhoon, the RAF’s controversial multi-role combat jet, which, like the carriers, has been widely dismissed by many senior officers as a waste of money.
The RAF chief said that anyone – including his fellow senior officers – who suggested that the aircraft was a waste of money was speaking “rubbish”.
He also revealed for the first time that the Typhoon force will consist of around 123 jets and not the 232 as originally planned.
Privately, many senior officers believe that the aircraft is a Cold War relic and a waste of money. But Sir Glenn dismissed these claims as “rubbish”, adding that it was “disappointing” to learn that such smears were being peddled from within the Ministry of Defence.
He added: “There is no other aircraft better than the Typhoon except for a US F22 Raptor and an F22 is significantly more expensive. Typhoon is truly multi-role, it is a world class aeroplane. It is absolute rubbish to call it a cold war relic and that just demonstrates that people do not understand what the aircraft does.”
The RAF will only receive just over half the original number of the 232 Typhoons which were originally ordered, the rest will be sold to foreign allies to help pay for the cost of the aircraft.
Sir Glenn admitted that the 19-year operation in the Gulf, which began in 1990 and ended last week, and the war in Afghanistan had taken its toll on the RAF, from which it would take years to recover.
toanOK, this is presumably in a clean config — still there must be a reason why all the companies making 4.5 gen a/c work hard on reducing the RCS; look at the SH for instance. Even if adding stuff increases the RCS, I guess it still can give an advantage, perhaps in particular in a light a2a config?
L
Although not as good as the real stealthy fighter, reduced RCS still has a certain degree of usefulness for 4.5 Gen fighters during the combat, especially when the enemy fighters’ radars are not good enough.
Examples:
1. It is said that during the exercises between F/A-18Es of USN and F-16s of ANG, F/A-18Es in both A2A and A2G configurations had penetrated the defensive-line of F-16s secretly and successfully without being noticed for several times.
2. According to the French report, a productional Rafale had once stimulated a BVR head-to-head engagement and “shot down” a Mirage 2000-5F successfully during a flight-test. And before being killed, the Mirage 2000-5F had never discovered the existence of Rafale.
3. According to the declaration of Switzerland airforce in 2006, a Gripen once killed three F/A-18C of Finland airforce successfully during the exercise, and the LO performance of Gripen had helped a lot for this success.
toanTo put it in perspective i’d heard the Rafale is 2m^2 and Typhoon is 1m^2.
For Rafale, this is an outdated information for the techonological demonstrator Rafale A in 1980s. In 1999, the Dassault engineer declared that the frontal RCS of productional Rafale is 1/10 of the frontal RCS of Mirage 2000.
toanIf Mr. Obligatory’s post is right, then this study may be mainly admiring the greatness of Meteor AAM, not A2A capability of Gripen NG itself.
I wonder what subtype of R-77 did Su-35 use during the stimulation…..
* Basic rocket-powered R-77 –> Meteor is declared to have at least three times more NEZ and energy than this opponent. If Gripen NG + Meteor BVRAAM can defeat Su-35 + Basic R-77 with the exchange ratio of only 16:10, then I think it proves nothing but the inferiority of Gripen NG……
* Future ramjet-powered R-77 –> In this kind of situation, Gripen NG’s A2A capability may be proved since the both sides have used the similar class of BVRAAMs.
toan1. I think the EF-2000 studies we know never faced the enemy like Su-35 today…..
2. If Gripen NG + Meteor BVRAAM defeat Su-35 + “Rocket-powered” R-77 today with the exchange ratio of just 1.6 : 1, then I don’t think such kind of performance is impressive ~ Your missile is declared to have three to six times more kinetic energy and three to four times more NEZ than your enemy’s missile, and your fighter can just achieve this kind of exchange ratio, which is even poorer than the exchange-ratio performance of USAF F-4 v.s MIG-17/19/21 during the Vietnam war?? If I were the fighter’s manufacturer, I would not provide such kind of advertisement…….:D
toanThose buying Gripen NG will get the >22000lb thust version, it´s even cheaper than RM12 !?! so your RM12 figures is out.. at least for new customers..
It could even be a case to buy it with 26000lb thust. who knows? the only thing stated from saab are >22000lb F414.
The thrust figure I used in my previous post for Gripen NG is the thrust perfromance for F414-GE400 today (22,000 Ib / 9,979 kg class), not for RM12.
As I’ve mentioned before, for me, the 26,000 Ib class new F414 is still an anticipation today, just like EJ-230 for EF-2000 or M88-3 for Rafale, I won’t use such thrust figure in my personal estimation until there are confirmed news or informations to prove that the 26,000 Ib class new F414 will be used by the Gripen NG and/or F/A-18E for MMRCA competition one day……
toanDid you add the 20% more thrust of the GE 414? The same engine will be used in Gripen NG too…..
A:
The uprated GE414 is an anticipation right now, just like M88-3 for Rafale or EJ230 for EF-2000. We have no idea that:
1. If F/A-18E and / or Gripen NG will really get this uprated engine formally one day ~ American have demonstrated new types of F100 / F110 in 1990s with 36,000 Ibs class. However, they never enter service formally.
2. If F/A-18E and / or Gripen NG really get the uprated GE414 one day, will EF-2000 and / or Rafale also get the uprated EJ-200 / M88 in the same period of time and make the thing no difference??
the RD 33MK of Mig 35 has will have more thrust than the Mig 29 before.
A: The thrust I’ve offered for MIG-35 is already the number of RD33MK according to the information I get.
Also compare the numbers of Rafale and F16 you gave, both are pretty close although the F16 is only a single engine fighter and has nearly the same weight. Maybe you are right and the thrust of Rafale is ok, but in hot conditions, directly compared to F16 block 60 that UAE already has, it could be so close that they might not be very impressed by Rafales performance.
A: Rafale F3 today has about one ton more ground static thrust comparing with F-16E. Their T/W ratios that I offered above are similar because the internal fuel of Rafale is 4700 kg, while the internal fuel of F-16E (without CFT) is 3160 kg.
If both fighters carry the similar amout of internal and external fuel, then…….
And now imagine the trials in India, or Brazil where more aircrafts are in the competition, why should one of them buy such a costly aircraft then?
A: In that case, putting an uprated new M88 into Rafale will just make it become more expensive and won’t help the situation…….
Sign In
