Scorpion82Wonder how flexible the Typhoon and Rafale would be going up against an S-400 site or tangling with PAK-FA or J-XX. 😉
Scalp-EG, Storm Shadow, Taurus against known sites. Reduced RCS+ECM+RWR/ESM for early detection, localisation and identification. You guys seem to believe that european fighters are empty airframes without any electronics.
Scorpion82Why are you automaticaly comparing with the Americans? Its not thier fault we went for and pumped so much money into a conventional and therefore obsolete design is it? Spare me the ‘stealth was there from the start’ Typhoon fairy tale as well, it doesn’t wash. I accept the Rafale is a semi stealth design but Typhoon – you’re having a laugh.
Because the talk was about american types. And a reduced frontal RCS was indeed part of the design. If you like it or not. No one says it’s stealth, but LO treatments are obviously applied and the reduced RCS has been taken into account (s-shaped intakes, semi conformal weapon stations, “smiling intake shaping…). Add the generally compact airframe, composites and RAM coatings and materials and you get a fairly low frontal RCS. RF control has been taken into account as well.
Scorpion82And lets face it its already out of date already, all the Euro canards are if we are honest about it. External weaponry and fuel, no meaningfull stealth that wasn’t an after thought for marketing purposes, 4th gen electronics and sensors, exclipsed by current Russian fighters in performance also factor in a serious lack of supporting assets to boot.
All in all not impressive at all and liability in any sort of high threat enviroment. 30 years on it will be the equivilent of us (the UK) still flying hawker hunters as frontline fighter jets would be today!
Ah yes, the lack of an AESA radar makes the entire sensors and electronics 4th gen :rolleyes:
The LO treatment of the Rafale or Typhoon weren’t an afterthought for marketing purposes, but designed in. There was no requirement for VLO, however and the limited flexibility as shown with the F-22, associated with its huge costs didn’t justify stealth. Let alone that the Rafale or Typhoon were designed to replace a couple of types in different roles, unlike the F-22 which was designed to replace a single type in a single role. Supporting assets are far better than what most nations can pose, the US apart.
Scorpion82REALLY? Chines forbody lift is more advanced and I have yet to see Eurofighter or Rafale show any post stall maneouvrability features in their designs. (Chining, larger tails etc…)
Back in the later 70s MBB put TVC into equation for PST manoeuvrability. That TVC wasn’t selected in the end for the basic configuration doesn’t mean the aircraft wouldn’t be PST capable.
Scorpion82I guess F-22 Raptor is around twice the weight of a Gripen,
More close to three times the Gripen 😉
I should also add that all i’ve read on transonic says transonic is ~ Mach 0.95 ~Mach 1.05
Depends on the airframe. But I’m sure my friend Lordassap will correct me on that.;)
Scorpion82Typhoon suffers from europe’s “US Buber Alles” syndrome. 🙁 Results; development of upgraded versions suffers.
Just out of curiosity, what does the boldened passage mean? “Above all”?
stick a resized TVCed F-119 in them and they’ll turn circles around the Raptor…
I guess a TVC equipped and maybe bit uprated M88 or EJ200 will do just fine ;).
Scorpion82This is where someone inserts a line saying “of course they would say that X nations pilots would be sacked if they said otherwise” seeing as we hear it all the time concerning American products.
I talked to those myself as well, with no official standing behind them and playing a watch dog. There aren’t people who rely on internet press releases only ;).
Scorpion82Can it carry them internally? Can it carry ANY useful war load internally? No.
Was the Typhoon designed to do so?
It is a fact that there is significant US content in some very advanced systems on the plane.
GPS and MIDS? Once Galileo is online we can easily go it alone, but that is a different matter and has nothing to do with “we couldn’t”. There is a quite nice european solution of IDM, which exceeds MIDS performance by a fair margine and in return for help in other areas I could well imagine Sweden would not be so reluctant to share more of their datalink advancements.
If it where so easy to replicate it would not have taken the UK close to a year to be able to export the plane to SA after the investigation into BAE bribery was dropped in the UK. They where still waiting on approval from the US.
Ever heared about alliances and compability?
Maybe it’s a fine aeroplane for airshows and wowing the fanboys but other than the home market and the fact that the Saudis have a history of buying from (and being bribed by) BAE it has to date not won one competition in which it has been entered. The fact is as a warplane it’s nothing special and very expensive.
The F-22 is even more expensive and will never achieve the same degree of operational flexibility by design! Austria selected Eurofighter for the best offer. But exports tell not that much, as economics and politics play a much greater role in there.
It is a fact that it is not yet fully developed. T3 may or may not happen and even if it does the plane will still lack the ability to carry it’s weapons and all of it’s fuel internally. It will still lack a fully developed and mature AESA. It will still lack DAS and it still will not have the network centric capabilties that the F-35 will have.
You pretty much compare an aeroplane which will not be fielded for some years and which require even more years before it becomes what it is supposed to be.
The F-22 haven’t the NCW capabilities of most current fighters and a DAS like system isn’t available as well. Pretty funny how you guys combine the positive points of ALL US designs and weight it against a single european design.
Sure it’s a good fighter now. What happens in twenty years. Even the Super Hornet has a more robust and fully developed avionics and sensor suite.
The AESA apart, care to elaborate on that “suprior” avionics and sensor suite? Funnily there are lot lot of guys here claiming that, but no one ever cared to further elaborate on that, instead just making a generalised unproven claim!
Scorpion82Same could be said of the F-35. (Hint: “journalists” don’t count)
Pretty much pilots told it themself in interviews and any EF pilot I talked to myself is verry confident about this aircraft.
Scorpion82I think you’ll find that the massive bomb and missile load would never be used in combat, much like when pics of the F-15E used to appear in magazines and books years ago of it carrying 24 bombs.
With the difference that aircraft are actually flying in such configurations (see green flag). It’s not just for marketing purposes in this case!
Scorpion82Personally I think the UK missed the boat on this one. It is fantastically expensive. It is going to cost a kings ransom to fully develop and it will never be a true multi role aircraft like the F-35 or Super Hornet. I know people go on about what it is “going” to have and how well it performs but in this age of AESA radars, stealth, network centric warfare and 360 degree situational awareness and high off bore sight missiles is it really that much of an advantage to be able to perform marginally better in some regimes than it’s peers? It seems to me that this is just a giant jobs program for the UK and Europe. Hell, it can’t even be exported without Uncle Sam’s approval.
The Eurofighter programme ensured more indepence from the US for the participating nations and that they would receive an aircraft suited to their requirements, rather than suiting their requirements towards a US design. The programme ensured that the participating nations maintain/increase their expertise in designing, developing and producing advanced military aircraft. 60 – 70 % of the invested money flows back into the states budget, which wouldn’t be the case when buying foreign aircraft, even with license production. Political independence and a lot of economical benefits, incuding 100000 jobs in Europe are a strong point. Delays and cost overruns? Yes, but which aircraft didn’t suffer from that (hint look at the F-22 for example)? The Typhoon is at the beginning of its 30+ years service life with a lot of growth potenial left!
Scorpion82To me, that looks like you are inferring that the 1.44/Su-47 will serve as the Russian’s (and their client’s) 5th Gen fighters.
)
For the Russian they would have actually been 5th gen fighters, if they had entered service. They were the next generation following the russian 4th gen types MiG-29 & Su-27.
Scorpion82You still have not answered me. If stealth for fifth gen is a LM hype, then why are the Russian and Chinese designs giving impetus to stealth ? :rolleyes:
I actually had, if you would bother reading then you would know.
The latest block teen series integrate almost everything the Rafale or Typhoon does. The difference between an F 16 blck 60 and a Rafale is way less than that between F 4 and early F 15s.
See post above.
F 22 is an air dominance fighter. It will blow everything out of the sky so that the F 35 can do etc.
Point is that Rafale and Typhoon do not have anything over the F 16 and 18 to justify their respective prices.
Point is you didn’t get the point mate, sorry.
Scorpion82What is the source of this information?
I will seek for it when I have time.
Scorpion82Scorpion it’s a little rich from a guy who is inventing 80% of what he writes.
Please go learn your basics. 😀
Wait who said engine thrust decreases with mach or the Rafale supercruises for 2 hours?
So much about inventing stuff and learning the basics 😀
Sign In
