Scorpion82Yeah, but the Italians own it, use it (last I heard there was a maritime patrol unit based there), & AFAIK don’t need US permission to expand their use of it.
Things may have changed in the meantime. Back then I only saw US equipment on the base all maritime patrol aircraft and helicopters and there were few Italians there at all. Only saw US personal and the base rules were that of the US.
Scorpion82Sigonella is much closer than any of them. Decimomannu is in Sardinia, & to get to Libya from there you fly a few hundred km, then overfly Sicily, where Sigonella is. It’s an Italian AF base with a major US logistics base on it. Unfortunately it’s not a fighter base.
Looked much like an USN base rather than an AMI base when I was there back in 2005 or so.
Scorpion82As TMor said , we have 4 Rafales flying with the RBE2-AA .
I heard that during the Swiss evaluation , some (?) Typhoons were around and some air combat training took place . I don ‘t know if they were Italian or German Typhoons . I am going to try to find out but don ‘t expect any official sources as my own source is not sure of anything .
I admit now that I shouldn ‘t have posted such unreliable info . 🙁
But it was in good faith 🙂Cheers .
Very unlikely as the Typhoon and the Rafale weren’t in Switzerland at the same time and the evaluations included tests against F-5E and F-18C of the Swiss AF.
This is one thing that has never been proven , sorry to say .
One can find may BS internet sites who give the range vs RCS for many radars but they don ‘t have a bloody clue anyway . Did they call every radar manufacturer and ask for the classified data ???
From what we heard here and there from the users , the Captor seems to have a slightly better range than the RDY (M2000) which is quoted by Dassault with a 150km range against a fighter size target .
The PESA RBE2 is said to have a similar range than the RDY .
So , the Captor seems to have a slightly better range than the PESA RBE2 .
But by how much ???
According what I gathered the RDY-2 offers detection ranges of 130-140 km against a fighter target. Don’t know whether the original RDY offers the same range. RBE2’s repeatedly stated tracking range against a fighter target is given with ~100 km. If ~130 km is the detection range of the RBE2 against a fighter sized target, well we can match that against the “well beyond” 160 km tracking range stated for the Typhoon, indicating an even higher detection range. I don’t think there is any doubt that the Captor offers a considerably longer range performance than the RBE2, except from people like you for obvious reasons.
Whatever the RoE are , more often than not they are on the Rafale ‘s side simply because our pilots can identify the threat first , thanks to the long range TV cam .
Also , maybe Spectra can read Captor very early while Pirate is having a hard work with the RBE2 …
Reliable identification of targets is indeed critical during BVR engagements and may favour the Rafale thanks to its TV camera. This issue should more or less been resolved now with PIRATE being fully operational including the STTI mode.
Scorpion82@Sancho,
these the figures included in the 9.1 bln € contract value. The 2.5 bln € figure for obsolence treatment has been stated in a Combat Aircraft article and hints can be found in the other press releases. There is not ever a break down conducted in most articles. But feel free to believe what you want.
Scorpion82The 9.1 bln € T3A figure includes 2.5 bln € to adress obsolences on T1 and T2 aircraft. In other words it’s an upgrade for the existing airplanes. Cazolini stated a fly-away price of 58-59 mln € per airframe and if you substract 2.5 from 9.1 you arrive at 7.6. Divide this through 112 and you arrive at ~59 mln € per pop. Check older Typhoon news threads for more info.
Scorpion82@Blue Apple,
the Luftwaffe factsheet about the Eurofighter can be found here:
http://www.luftwaffe.de/fileserving/PortalFiles/02DB060000000001/W27P7GKP190INFODE/Fact%20Sheet%20Eurofighter.pdf
Tankinhalt ohne Zusatztanks = Fuel capacity without external fuel tanks
There are more sources than just that. I have a highres cockpit shot from DA7 n my HD (it was once available at Eurofighter.com, but appears to have disappearted) which indicates 4934 kg on the fuel display format and 4940 kg on the HUP.
Scorpion82Is it really the max. diameter? Don’t know the max diameter of the M88 out of my head, but for comparison the EJ200 has an inlet diameter of 74 cm and a max diameter of 85 cm (at 4 m length). Judging from pics available I would say that the M88’s max diameter is not more than 80 cm.
Scorpion82The F-15FX was mentioned a few years ago and there has been reports about the SE proposal being derived from it (albeit based on the F-15E). A Boeing executive claimed that a single seat variant could be developed if a customer requires it (probably pointing at Japan without saying it). Japan has also been mentioned as one potential customer for the F-15SE, so summing one and one up it seems to be on the table as suggested by earlier sources, though there weren’t much talking about the F-15 for Japan in recent month.
The JASDF originally prefered the F-22 and was even willed to pay up to 300 mln $ per copy, but the F-22 hasn’t been approved for export. Japan originally intended to make a decision in 2007 and introduce a new type from 2013 to replace its F-4EJ. The decision has been postponed in hope tp get a clearance for the F-22, though it might be possible that the Japanese were waiting for the F-35 as well. The government said that Japan would go for the Eurofighter, if the sale of the F-22 isn’t approved, probably to put pressure on the US. It obviously didn’t work, but the Japanese haven’t opted for the Typhoon as claimed. A final decision is still pending, but given the strong relationship between Japan and the US I think the chances for the Typhoon are slim. Afaik the JASDF requires an air defence fighter in the first place and its policy doesn’t allow for offensive weapons, this may change, but I’m not really up to date or overly well informed about Japanese politics and military requirements to do any further judgement on top of what’ being said already.
The Japanese appear to be interested to boost their national aerospace industry and have just ordered some additional F-2s to keep it busy. The Eurofighter offer might be more attractive here, though the US may also offer something with the F-15 & F/A-18. The F-35 is unlikely to be approved for local production IMO. A splitted buy is indeed an option, but I don’t think Japan is “strong” enough to develop an indigenous 5th generation fighter on its own, especially not on short notice. They need a new fighter rather soon if they want to keep their industrial base and if the JASDF wants to avoid a capability gap. The F-4EJ is just the start, the F-15J isn’t young either and will need a replacement around 2020+.
Scorpion82The M88-2 has an inlet diameter of 69 cm…
Scorpion82There are no real news about Japan. Eurofighter is pushing hard, but the chances are small. The Japanese are currently negotiating with LM about the potential purchase of the F-35, I don’t know whether a real competition is still going on or not, but it doesn’t look like that. Afaik the F-15FX (single seat version of the F-15SE) is offered as well.
Scorpion82Eurofighter CEO stresses that if no orders are secured this year that the production of the Typhoon will end in 2015. He doesn’t sound to optimistic albeit I could imagine that T3A production could be stretched by a year or so as it was the case for T1 & 2 to keep the production line running and buy some more time to secure orders. Interesting is the remark that Denmark has approached Eurofighter once again…
Scorpion82The previous CFTs were supposed to hold 1500 l of fuel each or in other words the same amount of fuel the aircraft could carry in 3 external tanks right now. If CFTs are used the range would be adequate. If the aircraft is using lighter weapons (1000 lb class or smaller) it could still use wing tanks+CFTs and if larger 2000 l tanks are integrated this would equate to 7000 l of additional fuel and 8000 l if the centreline tank is loaded as well. This may result in a ~2000 km combat radius, though more powerful engines might be desirable with such heavy loads. I basically believe that the Typhoon could be a quite capable multirole fighter, IF its potential is fully exploited but the “if” is what’s concerning me.
Scorpion82@mrmalaya,
there would still be quite some work left to be done. The CFTs haven’t been flight tested and need to be cleared for the flight envelope to make it to the front line and this clearance work is particularly time consuming and expensive, depending on how many resources are poured in. Up to date there were only some wind tunnel tests etc., the real CFTs have to be designed and integrated with possibly some changes on the airframe (APU exhaust etc.). It may not be the most tricky or expensive upgrade, but it won’t be done by building T3A aircraft with provisions for them.
Scorpion82@mrmalaya,
CFTs arn’t necessarily a part of T3A aircraft, but they will be built with provisions to adopt them. The RAF in particular expressed its interest in the use of CFTs, most likely due the reasons stressed out above. Brimstone integration appears not to be contracted yet, but could be handled in a similar way as the CP193. Eurofighter appears to opt for incremental upgrades now, as this is a cheaper and quicker way to address urgent operational requirements.
In a war with a normal enemy heavy bombs might be useful for penetrating hardened targets. There is no use for such weapons in COIN ops and I think that this is the reason why the planned PW III integration has been cancelled for the Typhoon. In most cases you would use stand-off penetration weapons anyway if fighting a serious enemy.
Scorpion82@Quadbike,
the identification is dependent on the agreed crypto keys for the IFF which are usually changed every day or even within hours! As long as the IFF is compliant with the crypto technology in general there won’t be any issues. Even if Pakistanis and Indians would use the very same IFF, a positive ID will only be obtained if they use the same code!
@Sancho,
I personally don’t think that it’s overly feasible, the graphic showed the Taurus being attached directly under the fuselage, slightly offset from the centreline and in front of the MLG, but flanking the nose gear. To keep the CG in place could be a major concern here and as stated above I don’t think it’s feasible. Larger drop tanks are no issue as long as the aircraft isn’t in need to carry large stores (2000 lb class bombs, stand-off missiles or similar) at the same time. 2000 l drop tanks are in fact considered as a potential addition and would neatly fit under the wings. For AA missions or AG missions reliant on smaller weapons (Brimstone, possibly ARMs or not to large ASMs etc.) it would be viable as well. CFTs are a better solution however and would provide adequate range while carrying heavy weapons. The Typhoon won’t match the range performance of the Rafale however, especially if the latter uses 3 x 2000 l tanks and CFTs (2300 l).
Edit:
You can find the image I mentioned on page 36 in this document
http://www.solakonferansen.no/jacobsen2007.pdf
Sign In
