+ Brimstone and Stormshadow

Those are planned though. As far as I know there’s no current road map for an ARM though.

F35b – What other weapon do you need integrated to the Typhoon?

An ARM would be nice. HARM or ALARM aren’t integrated yet, and would be a nice asset for increasingly mobile SAMs.

It made sense to you even when it’s not true ? OK….

Are you intentionally misreading? Of course explanations can make sense without being true.

If someone arrives too late at a meeting, I could for example wager the guess that he’s been held up in traffic. That’s a possible explanation that makes sense. It could be untrue though, if the person arrived too late because he overslept. Or missed his train. Or forgot the meeting.

Now please tell me that none of these make sense because they can’t all be true at the same time. :rolleyes:

This story is very fishy. SAAB-Ericsson has been making top-notch EW suites for many years, much longer than IAI, & has no need of one from IAI.

I think the issue is with industrial offsets and cooperation as required by the RFP here, not Saab’s ability to do things by themselves.

What you refer to is this unconfirmed report:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/modern/f-22-vs-12344-9.html#post351443

Right, that was it. During the reunion seven Typhoons from RAF XI Squadron should have been there for the austere A-G package testing for three weeks. How much experience any of the pilots had facing the F-22 is unknown.

That sounds right. I’ll keep looking for the exact quote.

I remember reading that quote and a discussion about it on the defencetalk forums a while back.

But clean is an EF with AIM-120 and without drop tank on the same ideal dry day.

I think ‘clean’ is truly clean. Putting anything on it is another configuration. 🙂

But the always quoted 1.22 Mach achieved in Signapore was achieved with a Trainer T1 with center tank, and six rockets and intrims FADEC software, on a hot tropical day in tropical latitudinal and not in Alaska or desert climate like a F-22. Mach is not a fixed speed mark.;)

AFM says M1.21 for Singapore and the article text mentions nothing about loadout.

Since when the EF can do 1.5M in SC ?????

http://www.eurofighter.at/austria/td_lu.asp

“Der hohe Leistungsüberschuss der EJ 200-Triebwerke ermöglicht eine, für den Luftfernkampf in großer Höhe und im Überschallbereich wichtige, hohe Beschleunigung. Auch ohne Nachbrenner-Einsatz ist ein Marschflug mit ca. Mach 1,5 möglich (Supercruise).”

Probably on an ideal day. Its cleverly phrased to possibly make one assume otherwise, but I would still consider this to be in clean configuration.