As far as I know Tranche 3 Typhoon is not defined, yet. This would be an solution. Make the Typhoon carrier capable. Maybe even our fine politicians will support this. The Admiral of the Marine, said, the Tornado has to be replaced by an carrierborn aircraft, even if Germany will never operate an own a/c carrier. So, no extra aircraft for the Marine, the Luftwaffe would loose an additional squadron, politicians happy, Marine happy.

The other solution would be Rafale, so UK und France could built exactly the same carriers, with much more workshare for the British. (To compensate the Rafale deal)

F-35C well, maybe Europe will see one day some Nimitz-class in British colours ?
Hm, if they had only found diamonds below the channel…

MiG’s and Flankers ? Never.

Rails??? do you seriously believe that wingtip rails would provide more aerodynamic force then the wing itself ??

You are right. The railes are no big problem. Only if missiles are attached you need a stronger structure.

the modulus is not the problem as forward swept wings have already been made using composite materials.

Yes, but without the additional stress of those wingtip railes. We all know that torque is the nastiest stress. In the end we all speak about the same problem: to make the wing strong enough for these railes you have to design oversized structural elements. And as aerodynamics limit your possibilities you can’t design those structural elements optimal, which means even more material if you don’t want to change the wing’s thickness. Ergo, it is heavy and provides not much room for fuel. If you streamline this aircraft a little bit, reduce unnaccesary control surfaces, use a wing that stores more fuel and eblarge the fuselage for additional fuel, you got: oups an Rafale. But this would of course be boring. This design looks much better. Maybe this little fin is inspired by the AFTI 16 ? Just a quick shot…

Yeah, carbon fiber

The young modulus of carbon fiber is not endless high. It is possible to produce a forward swept wing with it. But with those rails you got extra momentums to counter. So you would need a material with a higher young’s modulus or you had to increase the size of your structural elements,but there are limits given by the aerodynamic and weight. An other solution would be a lower g-limit. Lets say 4.5 instead of 9 or so. That is what I meant with decraesed manouverability caused by this rail-construction. Even if you use Si-Si-C (silicon infiltrated silicon carbide), you will have a problem with the limited dimensions.

I dont see why the canards would cause vibrations anymore than any other canard fighter.

Have a look at any other canard/delta. None of them has the canards placed in that way. Most of them have only one rudder, so no problem with the turbulences caused by the canards. The MiG 1.42 has the canards in a position, the don’t effect the rudders, too. Now let’s have a look at this design: those canards are placed pretty high. The turbulent airstream produced by the canards hits directly the rudders. That means they are less effective, additionally turbulences will cause vibrations. Vibrations mean you need a stronger structure, to counter them. This means weight.

My conclusion is: it is an great looking aircraft. It is limited to 5 g. It has a damn short range, because it’s structure is pretty heavy and provides not much space for fuel.
But it should have a good low speed handling. It is the perfect …. heli-buster !

So what is your idea to militarize it? Use napalm instead of water? Make a high-altitude drop and loose some flares. What a show! Or dump it on some city and have a smoke? Hehehe.

Perfect for chemical and biological weapons. Damn it, they produce weapons of mass destruction ! They belong to the axis of evil ! 😮

Learned something about Singapore and AMRAAM’s: they got theirs this march. 100 AMRAAM C, before stored at Guantanamo. Additional, they will get 50 AMRAAM C5 for $25,424,634.

ok ,we need the new plane to be able to chase the suks away. personally i vote for the rafale ,but i dont know what type have been offer to singapore, hopefully it will be the f-3 type with the m-883 with trust vector engine.with these the rafale performan may be better than the suks

First thing I hear about TVC for the F3. Could you provide any source ?

I is going to be very interesting tosee who is win the fighter contract for Singapore. Of the three candidates shortlisted, Rafale, Eurofighter and F-15, I think that Eurofighter is going to win the competition. Albeit, I want the rafale to win.

After reading the article on F-16.net I posted above, I think the F-15 will win.
Singapore will get the AMRAAM for all fighters, if they buy the Eagle.
As alternative, Singapore could buy the Rafale with MICA. So they had two independed sources for their weapons. But the U.S. could refuse to deliver the AMRAAM for the Falcons, if they buy french.
Typhoon is really ****ed up. It relies heavily on the British influence in Washington. Only if the U.S. give their o.k. for AMRAAM it will stand a chance. And Meteor, well I think I have already expressed my opinion about the rumored British plans to delay Meteor integration. Without these problems I would think the Typhoon has good chances in this competition. Able to carry U.S. and European weapons as well, and probably the best in the A2A arena.

The Eagle is shurely the least capable of those three birds when it comes to A2A engagement. But it is still a capable fighter with the new radar and latest AMRAAM. So, it depends on the package.