toanThere was an article that mentioned the radar cross sections of the F-22/F-35 to be:
F-22: -40 dBsm
F-35: -30 dBsm
Can anyone convert these into RCS in m2?
I’m traveling and my fancy calculator is in my desk back home 🙁
-40 dBsm = 0.0001 m2 = 1 cm2 = the RCS of metal ball with 1.13 cm in diameter (Marble size)
-30 dBsm = 0.001 m2 = 10 cm2 = the RCS of metal ball with 3.57 cm in diameter (Table tennis ball size)
toanTwo things make F-35 as a necessity:
1. It seems that the final productional numbers of F-22A will be no more than 240, or even no more than 200 if Obama’s government decides to kill it as soon as possible.
2. On the other hand, the two most potent enemies for USAF in the foreseeable future, RuAF and PLAAF, are pursuing the 5th generation fighters of their own. Although they may not be able to get such kinds of fighter formally until post-2015 or even post-2020, we can still anticipate the numbers of 5th generation fighters that Russia and Mainland China will buy and export shall be much, much, more than 240…………and at that time, what kind of western fighter will be able to have enough capability and produtional numbers to support F-22A to face such kind of 5th generation red threats ??
toanThose stats from blue vs red dont mean a whole lot…. If the other jets we are comparing them to were red air, then, well they used percieved red air tactics and probably did not utilize the full performance of the given airframe. I think the eurofighter is a great jet but I don’t think its such a huge leap in overall capability to give it an absolute advantage over any well equipped later block F-16/18/15 etc… It should dominate in certain areas but pilot skill, rules and restrictions implemented will determine the outcome more than anything. In most excersises blue team should win.
Well, it is true that in some DACTs and exercises the red team percieved red air tactics and did not utilize the full performance of the given airframe, just like the Spring-Flag exercise my previous post mentioned above. However, there are still some exercises and DACTs that both sides have done their best to try to defeat each other, or the red team percieved much more high level red threats like Su-30, Su-35, S-300/S-400 and so on.
toanEurofighters against trainers (Hawks).:eek: Why was it only 49 to 1.
1. We don’t know how many times did the scenario of Eurofighter versus Hawk happen during that exercise.
2. We don’t know how many Hawks did one Eurofighter face during the subsonic dogfight.
3. Hawks is a trainer, but it is also very capable in subsonic dogfight ~ It is much more smaller than Eurofighter, and it can be pulled up to 8.0G during the low speed and low altitude dogfight, which is equal to or better than the upper limited G-loading of Eurofighter before the Block 5 fighter formally entering service. Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising if Eurofighter can’t win every dogfight with Hawk trainer.
toanThank you Toan.
Don’t you (or someone else) know how many Typhoons were engaged ? Had their missiles got a reborn capability as well ?:D
Eight Eurofighters in total was sent to participate this exercise. But I have no information that how many Eurofighters was sent to sky in each DACT engagement during the exercise.
toanRead up every dogfight exercise with Typhoon so far, everytime they were beaten (at least once) by the other side.
2006 Jun, a jointed exercise among RAF, RN, USAF, and FAF:
Blue team: 2 Eurofighter, 2 Mirage 2000, and 2 Hawk
Red team: F-15, F-16, and Tornado F3 with greater numbers.
Result: Blue team has only one loss during the whole exercise ~ one Eurofighter was “killed” by a Tornado F3.
2007 Mar, Night Tactical Leadership Training (TLT):
http://www.eurofighter.com/downloads/EFReviewIssue2.pdf
Other Nations were invited to participate,including the Americans with F-15C jets,flying both as team mates and opposition fighters, and once again Eurofighter Typhoon emerged largely unscathed.“We achieved a very high kill ratio ” declared Squadron Leader Smith.
2007 May, NATO Spring Flag Exercise:
Blue team: Including ItAF’s EF-2000, F-16, and AWACS.
Red team: Including Hungary AF’s Gripen C/D. No AWACS, Data-link, or AIM-120 stimulation.
Result: Before totally being destroyed, the Gripen C/Ds of Hungary AF’s had gotten 8 to 10 victories in A2A engagement, including one Eurofighter of ItAF.
2007 Sep 03 ~ Sep 20, Skylance 07 exercise:
Blue team: Eurofighter
Red team: Tornado F3 and Hawk with unlimited reborn capability.
The final exchange rate –> 49 (Red) : 1 (Blue)
2008 Mar 10, Typhoon Meet exercise:
Blue team: eight Eurofighters from the four nation AFs
Red team: 20 to 26 fighters including F-16 A/B MLU, EF-18, Mirage F1, and AV-8B.
Result:
The commander of RAF for this exercise: “Extremely positive ~ we defeated every red team fighter without any loss.”
toan:confused:
Unusual comment. What are you talking about ?
I think there are two kinds of possibility:
1. Mr. Seahawk has really gotten the first-handed report or evidence to prove that with the nice training and right tactics, USAF and USN pilots can still deal with Eurofighter quite well by using F-15 / F-16 / F-18 in A2A exercise.
2. He was making a sarcastic statement ~ since according to the military reports and articles I’ve read in the past few years, Eurofighter, Rafale, and Gripen have all gotten quite excellent performance and exchange ratio during the A2A exercises with F-15, F-16, and F/A-18 recently. Therefore, it is impossible to prove which one (Eurofighter, Rafale, or Gripen) has the best A2A capability by just showing its fighting score against F-15/F-16/F-18……
toanOn the other hand Typhoons got their ass whipped by F-16s, F-15s and F-18 regularly. :diablo:
Could you offer the report or evidence for such a declaration??? Up to now, I haven’t found this kind of article or report.
toanI heard that the Eurofighter has a 7.5G rated supersonic cup holder, totally surpassing the subsonic one the Rafale has.
What I’ve read and calculated……….
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/faq.htm
Wendigkeit – Wie wendig ist ein Eurofighter Typhoon? Kann man bei Überschallgeschwindigkeiten noch rechtzeitig vor der Staatsgrenze umdrehen ?
Der Eurofighter Typhoon ist was die Wendigkeit betrifft eine Klasse für sich.
Im Unterschallbereich ist das Flugzeug instabil in der Längsbewegung und fliegt bei hohen Unterschall-Geschwindigkeiten Kurvendiameter von wenigen hundert Metern.
Im Überschallbereich ist das Flugzeug instabil in der Seitenbewegung – bei Mach 1,5 kann ein Kurvendiameter von 6 km ohne Geschwindigkeitsverlust geflogen werden
English Translation by the Translator:
(Please correct me if the English translation below for the above Germany article has anything wrong….)
Agility – as an Eurofighter Typhoon is agile? Can one turn with supersonic speeds still in time before the state border?
The Eurofighter Typhoon is which the agility concerns a class for itself. In the subsonic region the airplane is unstable in the longitudinal movement and flies with high subsonic speeds curve diameters of few hundred meters. In the supersonic range the airplane is unstable in the lateral movement – with Mach 1.5 a curve diameter can be flown by 6 km without losing speed.
Personal calculation:
According to the formula of BFM, Turning raduis = Speed * Speed / G-loading.
# Turning radius = 3 km = 3000 meters.
# Speed = 1.5 Mach = about 440~442 meters/sec at the height of 35,000~50,000 fts.
Then the G-loading should be 440~442 * 440~442 / 3000 = 64.5~65.1 meter / sec2 –> About 6.6G
So, according to the Germany declaration mentioned above, the Eurofighter should be able to pulled up to 6.6G without losing speed during the Mach 1.5 flight.
http://www.defense-update.com/newscast/0807/news/010807_typhoon.htm
The new version (Tranche I, Block5 fighter) fully utilizes the Typhoon’s digital flight controls system, hence improving maximum load flight envelope to 9g at subsonic speed and up to 7 g for the supersonic speed.
toan1. The DASS isn’t yet integrated…
2. Towed decoy: the towed decoys of F/A-18E and Eurofighter are from the same manufacturer……….wrong, the decoy of the SH (ALE 55) is from Raytheon while the decoy on the EF (Ariel 2) is from BAE Systems….
A:
1. Eurofighter has already equipped PIRATE IRST, Lightening III FLIR pod, DASS with towed-decoy, and Data fusion techonology since Tranche I Block5 fighters.
http://www.eurofighter.com/news/article263.asp
The Block 5 capabilities can be described as full air-to-air and initial air-to-ground capability with full carefree handling. The aircraft is cleared for the 9g envelope as intended, with additional features such as sensor fusion, the full Direct Voice Input, enhanced GPS, the DASS (Defensive Aids Sub-System) countermeasures including automatic Chaff and Flare dispensers, radar air-to-surface modes including ground mapping, and initial FLIR (Forward Looking Infra-Red).
2. AN/ALE-55 is the product of BAES.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ALE-55_Fiber-Optic_Towed_Decoy
http://www.baesystems.com/BAEProd/groups/public/documents/bae_publication/bae_pdf_eis_fotd.pdf
toanProven technolgy? Such as AESA, fast computers based on PowerPC chipsets, fiber optic databus (1000 faster than mil 1553), multi-sensor integtration, 3 rd gen FLIR, towed decoy, JHMCS/9X, not to mention the capability to launch every A-G in US inventory? How many of these “proven” technologies are present on EF?
1. AESA radar: EF-2000 may get it formally after 2014.
2. Fast computers based on PowerPC chipsets: Already equipped in Tranche II fighter.
3. Fiber optic databus: Already equipped in Eurofighter.
4. Multi-sensor integtration and 3rd gen IRST/FLIR: Already done and equipped in Tranche I, Block5 fighter.
5. Towed decoy: the towed decoys of F/A-18E and Eurofighter are from the same manufacturer……….
6. HMD: EF-2000 will get one formally after 2009 or 2010.
toanWasn’t the F-22 going to receive a HMCS in a future upgrade????
Well, at least it still hasn’t been included in the upgrading plan of Block 35 project right now, which shall be performed during 2014 ~ 2018.
HMD is a very useful tool in both A2A and A2G mission, and some Raptor fighter pilots who drove F-15C with JHMCS before admit they miss this equipment.
toanRafale versus Tejas:
A. Formally Launched Time of the Project:
* Rafale: 1983 ~ 1985
* LCA: 1983
B. Maiden Flight of the 1st techonological demonstrator:
* Rafale A: 1986
* LCA TD1: 2001
C. Maiden Flight of the 1st prototype:
* Rafale C: 1991
* LCA PV1: 2003
D. First contract for production aircraft:
* Rafale: 1993
* Tejas: 2005
E. Maiden Flight of the 1st productional fighter:
* Rafale B301: 1998
* Tejas LSP-1: 2007
F. FOC of the first squadron:
* Rafale M: 2004
* Rafale B/C: 2007
* Tejas MK1: 2011 ~ 2013
G. The productional fighters that have been ordered at the end of 2008:
* Rafale: 120 (13 F1, 48 F2, 59 F3)
* Tejas: 20 (all MK1)
H. The productional fighters that have been delievered at the end of 2008:
* Rafale: 68 (42 Rafale B/C and 26 Rafale M)
* Tejas: 8 (LSP-1 to LSP-8)
I. The weapons that have been tested and formally used before the end of 2008:
* Rafale F2: MICA EM, MICA IR, Paveway II, Paveway III, AASM, SCALP-EG.
* Tejas PV1: R-73……..
toanAt this stage I don’t think it matters so much how we got here? Just that India needs to move on…………….
We know the ship is sinking………….lets stop the water coming in and we can blame the person responsible later!
The way you advise is like to blow up this sinking ship (LCA project) instead of trying to fix it up, and then paying much more money to buy a completely new one.
Well, this is a choice if you are rich enough, but I really don’t think India is that rich to give up the project it has invested more than 1.5 billion USD without any payback, and then paying another several or tens of billion USD to buy the fighters of Rafale or MIG-35 class for replacing its MIG-21……
toanSo, even with he numbers you provide the LCA (if it worked?) would be about the third of the price vs the best 4.5 Generation Fighters. Then you would have to consider the cost to maintain three LCA vs one 4.5G fighter. Which, by time you include Pilot Training, Maintenance, Ground Crew, etc. etc. etc. The LCA would hardly be inexpensive at all………….
Also, what do you believe the kill to loss ratio of LCA vs these types would be???? Personally, I would bet “WAY” more than three to one!:eek::eek::ee
A:
1. The pilot training, maintenance, ground crew, etc. of Tejas should be able to be completed by India itself with Indian price, while the the pilot training, maintenance, ground crew, etc. of Western fighters may need great amount of western country engineers’ help with Western workers’ price tag, which maybe several times or even ten times more expensive than Indian workers’ cost.
2. During the recent Red-Flag exercise, with the help of Israel radar and EWs, Indian MIG-21 Bison caused a very respectable threat to USAF’s F-15C and F-16C. The USAF pilots found that they usually failed to lock on MIG-21 at BVR range, and then have to dogfight with MIG-21 Bision within a very close and dangerous range……
If LCA can have better performance than the MIG-21 Bison mentioned above, I would say its air-defense capabilty is adequate enough.
3. There should be no question that the candidates of MMRCA have much better air-combat capability comparing with Tejas. However:
a. I am highly suspected that any MMRCA candidate can still win the game over Tejas in one versus three engagement, especially when both sides have the similar class of BVRAAM, WVRAAM, and HMD.
b. The main foes that Tejas is designed to against are the threats like JF-17, F-16A/B, and so on, not for fighting with the 4.5G and 5G fighters such as F-22, F-35, Su-35, EF-2000, Rafale ~ this should be the job for Su-30MKI, MMRCA, and PAK-FA in the future, and by the way, just when will PAF be able to get a 4.5G fighter with the same class of capability as the MMRCA candidates ??
Sign In
