So hw do you explain the comments (and yes I mean assuming that they are true and not just more “the whole world hates America” comments) that the Typhoon is winning not all but most of the BVR engagements with the Raptor? If the Raptor is so good it should be winning all of them. Is this perhaps another example of European technology showing that it is not really so far behind the US?
Also explain how the Rap is so great if the Typhoon is half the price and will still win engagements with all the planes that the Raptor will ever have to fight?
According to those reports, the Typhoon did not win most of the BVR engagement. It lost most, if not all. However, the EF won most of the WVR fights. This isnt really a surprise. Both the EF and the F-22 know how to turn, but only the EF has a modern IIR missile (ASRAAM) and HOBS. That makes it very hard for any Sidewinder M only fighter.
Sparrow fins where ?? :confused:
Well, the Sidewinder blocks the space where the fins of the Sparrow should be. Unless they would want to launch a Sparrow with 3 fins only, its no practical load.
Nice F-111 bics btw. Do Australian F-111 have to carry the Sidewinders on the main pylons? No extra missile rails like in this pic?
It has new wing fences and a redesigned saw tooth.
And it has no gun.
I dont think so because I cant see the Sparrows fins.
I guess this is just an air show loadout.
But the pics are cool 😉
All the missiles and boms are blue, so yes, they are inert.
The wingtip pods also contain a towed decoy.
Are those bombs 1000lb?
Yes, 1000lb UK bombs.
Get video lan client.
It plays almost everything and you dont have to worry about codecs.
The cannon is just above the left pod in the first pic.
The CFTs dont create much drag actually. However, that is for subsonic flight only. I dont know how much CFTs affect top speed, but i’ve seen Mach 2.3. Maybe thats for an -229 Strike Eagle.
But the Flanker is in a class of its own if we are talking about range. The Eagle (clean) doesnt come close, but its also much smaller.
btw, a combat radius of 950km for an F-16? I dont think so.
Sink a carrier and hit a carrier are two different things. A few Su-30 that survived long enough to fire their missiles at a carrier wont sink it. There is still the CIWS on the carrier. But i think the damage of one direct hit would still be imense and could take the carrier out of action.
Better view of GR4A:
First two pics show the GR4. You can see one cannon.
Third pic shows a GR4A. No cannon, but IR windows (on both sides) and bulge under front fuselage.
I just noticed the different design of the saw tooth. I wonder if this change and the wing fences will be retrofitted to existing Super Hornets.
A SH/Raptor mix wouldnt be a bad idea imho. The SH is available now so the tired F-111 can go. Plus they can replace their oldest Hornets. Replace the rest with a Raptor squadron. A few decades later, get rid of the interim SH and replace them with the now proven and probably cheaper F-35.
You need replacement for the F-16, F-18 and AV-8. If you cancel JSF, there are two options: develop something else which will cost even more and thus isnt going to happen. Or buy something else like Rafale, EF, Super Hornet, Viper, Raptor.
Which would not be much cheaper because those would be Block 70 Vipers for example with latest equipment and engines. About the same stuff the F-35 will have but in much less capable and older airframe. To compensate for that, more Raptors will be needed for A/G work. That doesnt help reducing cost too.
So while more legacy jets might be a little less expensive, they are much less capable. Remember the price of the F-35 will drop too after the first batches much the same way it did on the F-22.