Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:31 am

With Dassault and Sukhoi withdrawing from the contest, another battle shapes up anew for these two erstwhile rivals.....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © YK
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Lofting



http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...hoon-to-battle-f-15k-in-seoul.html

Quote:
"Boeing and Eurofighter go head-to-head again for 20-aircraft deal, as Dassault and Sukhoi withdraw interest"


Will Seoul be able to dispel perceptions of bias towards the F-15K?
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:26 am

They already operate the Eagle and their forces are heavily intertwined with the USAF so I see absolutely no chance for the EF even if it proofs to be better than the Eagle.
Also the Eagle has another advantage as it is a proven concept and its all developed out and can be used also as an A2G fighter whereas the EF still needs to be fully developed on that front (as far as I know and that ain't far).

Also like the article said it seems that S. Korea must thank the EF-consortium to even want to come to the competition because otherwise it would have been a ripe apple to pluck at no discount price for Boeing.
There are more countries that are evolving into a situation whereby they practically exclude contestors from other countries besides the US to compete for these orders (JAPAN & ISRAEL come to mind) and therefor they are more likely going to pay full price .

[Edited 2007-03-21 23:36:59]
[edit post]
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Thu Mar 22, 2007 7:35 am

Quoting Arniepie (Reply 1):
They already operate the Eagle and their forces are heavily intertwined with the USAF so I see absolutely no chance for the EF even if it proofs to be better than the Eagle.

The EF has already proven its superiority against the F-15 several times. However i agree they will go for the F-15 because its cheaper and they are already operating it.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
ATCGOD
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:46 am

Quoting Arniepie (Reply 1):
They already operate the Eagle and their forces are heavily intertwined with the USAF so I see absolutely no chance for the EF even if it proofs to be better than the Eagle.

I thought I'd read in AW&ST that this was just about guaranteed for the F-15K for just this reason.
 
Bobski
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 4:00 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:00 am

I agree, this is just a formality and the ROK will probably go for more F-15Ks. It makes sense as it is less expensive and they are already operating the type, although the EF is undoubtedly the superior aircraft.
Who is Benjamin Breeg?
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:02 am

I'd say in its current offering, the EF is not the superior aircraft. When the rest of the systems integration happens and A2G testing completes, you'll see a surge of orders....Check
 
Acheron
Posts: 1825
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:14 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 7:44 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Thread starter):

Don't think the Typhie has most of a chance, even if it proves better than the Eagle, like it has been mentioned before.
In that case, maybe something similar to what happened with the Osorio MBT and Saudi Arabia will occur, who knows.

Quoting Bobski (Reply 4):
I agree, this is just a formality and the ROK will probably go for more F-15Ks. It makes sense as it is less expensive and they are already operating the type,

 checkmark 
 
Beta
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 5:56 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:53 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 2):
The EF has already proven its superiority against the F-15 several times.

Do you have any evidence or credible source for this statement? Please share them. What's the combat record of the EF against any adversarial fighter jets, F15 or not? And No. Exercise in controlled environment does not count in my book. I will accept as truth however if one says the EF is a more advanced design fighter jet, and hence it is likely more advanced than the F15E.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:50 pm

Quoting Beta (Reply 7):
Do you have any evidence or credible source for this statement? Please share them. What's the combat record of the EF against any adversarial fighter jets, F15 or not? And No. Exercise in controlled environment does not count in my book. I will accept as truth however if one says the EF is a more advanced design fighter jet, and hence it is likely more advanced than the F15E.

In war games the A-10 has taken the AIR TO AIR honors of the games, yet you would have to be on some serious drugs to order them for that role.

I too would like an in depth comparison of the two to prove the point. Where does the Eurofighter have advantages over the F15 that would let it get the kill while remaining safe. In my A10 example they did it because the other true fighter was forced to come down to play with it... use extremely low altitude and low speed flight to prevent missiles from being effective and then when the pointy nose flies by use the gun or missiles to finish it off. If you then forced the A10 to come up to fight the F15 or whatever on its terms it would be dead meat as its slow, has pathetic air to air missiles, and paints up as a nice bright target.

So what does the Eurofighter bring to the table that the F15 doesn't. How does it do its work. Clearly this is the question any Airforce will ask itself in the process, and if the answer is "nothing" then they will go with the older proven platform unless the Eurofighter is massively cheaper to buy. I can prove on two points why the F15 is better than the Eurofighter w/o any technical knowledge of the planes offered in this contest. 1. The F15 is a proven platform, with proven success 2. proven track record of sortie rate and MX cost. So you know that it works, and will work when you need it too while not bankrupting your government.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 7:36 pm

Quoting Beta (Reply 7):
Do you have any evidence or credible source for this statement? Please share them. What's the combat record of the EF against any adversarial fighter jets, F15 or not? And No. Exercise in controlled environment does not count in my book.



Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 8):
too would like an in depth comparison of the two to prove the point. Where does the Eurofighter have advantages over the F15 that would let it get the kill while remaining safe.

I will try to sum all data/infos i found that proves clearly the EF superior.

Quote:
#Flight-envelop(Standard air-combat configuration):

Fighters: F-22A RAPTOR/EF-2000 TYPHOON/F-15C EAGLE
Sea-level: 0.15~1.21 Mach/0.15~1.15 Mach/0.15~1.00 Mach
10,000ft: 0.15~1.40 Mach/0.19~1.40 Mach/0.15~1.10 Mach
20,000ft: 0.18~1.75 Mach/0.22~1.65 Mach/0.20~1.30 Mach
25,000ft: 0.20~2.00 Mach/0.28~1.85 Mach/0.25~1.45 Mach
30,000ft: 0.25~2.00 Mach/0.30~2.00 Mach/0.30~1.60 Mach
40,000ft: 0.30~2.00 Mach/0.35~2.00 Mach/0.40~1.76 Mach
45,000ft: 0.40~2.00 Mach/0.40~2.00 Mach/0.55~1.70 Mach
50,000ft: 0.50~2.00 Mach/0.45~2.00 Mach/0.65~1.60 Mach
55,000ft: 0.60~2.00 Mach/0.50~2.00 Mach/
60,000ft: 0.70~2.00 Mach/0.75~1.85 Mach
65,000ft: 1.00~2.00 Mach/0.88~1.70 Mach
67,500ft: 1.20~2.00 Mach/

# G-load..................-3/+9G(Normal),+15G(Maximum)
# Instaneous turn rate/Sustaneous turn rate:30~35/>20(degree/sec)

# Agility:
1. 45,000 fts, 1.6 Mach, maximum G-load:5G.

2. Radius of turnning at low level:600m;30% less than F-15C.

3. Low level, 300kt, 7G, radius of turnning:Less than 700m (The test-pilot declared it is better than F-16, F-18, and RAFALE.)

The supersonic turn radius for EF-2000 and F/A-22 with 5G agility at the height of 40,000~50,000 fts is 40~60% of the supersonic turn radius for tradional fighters (F-15, F-16......) with 2~3G agility at the height of 40,000~50,000 fts.

In the supersonic range the airplane is unstable in the lateral movement - with Mach 1.5 a curve dia. meter can be flown by 6 km without losing speed.



T/W of Taking-off with standard AA configuration(100% internal fuel + 6MRAAM + 2SRAAM),AB:
F-15C:1.030~1.052
EF-2K:1.050~1.081(Peace time)
EF-2K:1.108~1.140 (War time)
EF-2K:1.155~1.189 (EJ-200 with small revision)
EF-2K:1.208~1.243(EJ-230 upgrading)
F-22A:1.033~1.110 (F-119, Official declaration, 35,000 Ibs*2)
F-22A:1.121~1.269 (F-119, Actual performance, 38,000 ~ 40,000 Ibs*2)


T/W of Taking-off with standard AA configuration(100% internal fuel + 6MRAAM + 2SRAAM),MAX. MIL:
F-15C:0.634~0.648
EF-2K:0.700~0.721(Peace time)
EF-2K:0.805~0.829 (War time)
EF-2K:0.805~0.829 (EJ-200 with small revision)
EF-2K:0.840~0.865(EJ-230 upgrading)
F-22A:0.752~0.809 (F-119, Official declaration, 25,500 Ibs*2)
F-22A:0.770~0.828 (F-119, Actual performance, 26,100 Ibs*2)


WING-LOADING of Taking-off with standard AA configuration:
F-15C:362.96~370.57 kg/m2
EF-2K:340.00~350.00 kg/m2
F-22A:366.53~394.08 kg/m2


SERVICE CEILING:
F-15C:60,000 fts
EF-2K:65,000 fts
F-22A:65,000~70,000 fts


TAKING-OFF
F-15C:900 fts
EF-2K:less than 900 fts
F-22A:800 fts


LANDING:
F-15C:3,500 fts
EF-2K:1,640 fts



Frontal RCS :

EF-2K: 0.10~0.25m2 / RCS of F-15 is (11m2)


50~55 seconds to climb to the height of 12,000 m / F-15 "Streak Eagle": 59.38 secs



Tracking:

AN/APG-63V2 AESA
a. F-15 C +
b. 140 NM (260 km)..........F-15, Su-27
c. 78 NM (145 km)............F-16, MIG-29 SMT
d. 44 NM (82 km)..............EF-2000



CAPTOR
a. EF-2000 Tranch 1 and 2
b. 119 NM (220 km)..........F-15, Su-27


CAPTOR with AESA(Tranche 3)
a. EF-2000 Tranch 3
b. 178 ~ 208 NM (330 ~ 385 km).........F-15, Su-27

-CAPTOR Radar can track and identify up to 20 targets simultaneously.
-CAPTOR is designed to be highly resistant to ECM and passive countermeasures.
-Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) radar's such as the American APG-77
-CAPTOR offers twice the power output of the APG-65 combined with long range search and track and continuous illumination (for semi active missiles)

Features the F-15 doesnt have:

-PIRATE (Passive Infra Red Airborne Tracking Equipment,entirely passive in nature and thus impossible to detect)

Up to 200 targets can be simultaneously tracked by the system using one of several different modes

-PIMAWS, or Passive Infra-red Missile Approach Warning System.

-Laser Warning Receiver (LWR)

-Helmet Mounted Sight

-DVI

-Towed Radar Decoy

-VTAS/HOTAS

-Supercruise 1,2~1.3 (with payload)(without 1.5)(Tranche 3 may can 1,7)

-9g manouvers at supersonic speed.

-Frame supports up to 12g / F-15 8g

Also here some simulated combat results:

In the JOUST simulation, BVR results against an SU27 upgraded to SU35 were as follows:

F-22 10.1:1
Typhoon 4.5:1
Rafale 1:1
F-15C 0.8:1
F-16C 0.3:1

Quote:

From AFM "Singapore very impressed with the Typhoon" and Western Daily Press

".....................It is a very capable aircraft and better than the American F16 he champions. In a recent competition run by Singapore to find a replacement for its F16 fighters, Typhoon was up against the American F15E and the French Rafale. Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests. According to one observer, neither competitor aircraft could claim the same (Defence Analysis August 2004)."

Sources:

http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/geschichte.htm

http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/daten.htm

http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/sensorik.htm

http://www.eurofighter.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/tech.html

BAE Systems, UK

http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

http://www.iee.org/oncomms/pn/radar/Roulston.pdf

http://www.mirage-jet.com/COMPAR_1/compar_1.htm

http://propro.ru/flankers/eng/Su-27.htm

http://www.eads.net/xml/content/OF00000000400004/5/02/40936025.pdf

Wikipedia


Also take a look at this thread:

Typhoon Excels (by EBJ1248650 Feb 21 2007 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)#menu51


I hope this helps to make a picture of the Eurofighter capabilitys. However the F-15 is a very impressive fighter wich deserves merit.

edit: fixed some links

[Edited 2007-03-23 12:42:34]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
checksixx
Posts: 1148
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:39 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:40 pm

I see so much 'guessed' information, I almost don't want to reply...it would take too long...Check
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:43 pm

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 9):
I will try to sum all data/infos i found that proves clearly the EF superior.

Cripes. Apart from anything else, that must be shooting for the best documented answer of the year!!  Smile
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:53 pm

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 10):
I see so much 'guessed' information, I almost don't want to reply...it would take too long...Check

Of course....if you say so. I dont think there is so much "guessed" information. If you would read all sources you could figure out most of this numbers. There are some numbers in my list wich cant be veryfied with 100% accuracy.( eg exact EF RCS classified,CAPTOR Range) But from pilot statements most of its potential is much better then expected.

Quote:


2004/05, magazine of AFM
An UK test pilot declared that the maximum Air-to-air tracking range of CAPTOR radar is "significantly longer" than the 100 miles / 161km.



Quote:

The actual radar cross section is of course classified, it is however set out for the RAF in SR(A)-425. According to the RAF the Eurofighter's RCS more than exceeds these requirements. More recent comments from BAE seem to indicate the radar return is around four times less than the Tornado. During a recent press event BAE Systems stated that the Typhoon's RCS is bettered only by the F-22 in the frontal hemisphere and betters the F-22 at some angles. Although the later comment is very questionable it still indicates a real attempt to reduce the Typhoon's radar signature.

Btw most of this numbers/infos arent from me, i just gathered it. I also could go deeper into detail of each number if you want.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 11):
Cripes. Apart from anything else, that must be shooting for the best documented answer of the year!!

Thanks but the Sources like http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk deserves the merit. Btw what does Cripes mean  Big grin

[Edited 2007-03-23 15:56:35]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:15 pm

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 12):
Thanks but the Sources like http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk deserves the merit. Btw what does Cripes mean

For "cripes", start with stunned amazement, then move to golly gosh, good heavens, good grief, heavens above. You tend to say cripes when needing a speedy exclamation that leaves you free to take the next step.

It comes as a surprise because most of what is written and posted about the EF makes it seem as if there was scarcely any point in designing or building the thing. Your summary suggests that at the very least, the EF is a little* more capable that has been claimed by many others.
*understatement for a great deal, and goes with cripes!! Big grin
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:49 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 11):
Cripes. Apart from anything else, that must be shooting for the best documented answer of the year!!

Thank you for the info the translator couldnt translate it. Thats always good to learn a new word  Smile

Quoting Baroque (Reply 13):
Your summary suggests that at the very least, the EF is a little* more capable that has been claimed by many others.

True, but IMO the problem is we always think things wich had in the past a great superiority are long time good (F-16,F-15,Su-27 etc..) but without big updates and a modular designed frame it wont.

I mean in the future when eg the F-22 will get better radar and FMRAAM it could track/destroy the EF without problems from a very long distance. Same is valid for other fighters like russian build ones. They are making pretty big advances. Maybe they make one day with cooperation of China or India a Superfighter wich could be a real threat to the F-22.

Of course this is only speculation. However the Tranch 3 Thypoons will be also much better and with the new Thrust Vectoring/AESA CAPTOR Radar & Meteor Weapon a very difficult enemy.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:53 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 9):
F-22 10.1:1

That should read 9.x : 1 as the virtual test was against ten Su-35. Even if the F-22 wins every fight, the rate would still be 10 : 1, and I doubt they claimed the Su-35 would not have a single change.
I support the right to arm bears
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:11 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 9):
Wikipedia



Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 9):
Also take a look at this thread:

Typhoon Excels (by EBJ1248650 Feb 21 2007 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)#menu51

OMG, you use Wikipedia and a.net as some of your sourses?  banghead 

How about this from
http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk/Eurofighter/tech.html

OpEval
The Eurofighter project has been subject to several operational evaluations. These have been carried out, independently from the Eurofighter consortium, primarily by Britain's DERA, the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (now split into QinetiQ and DSTL). Unlike many previous theoretical operational capability studies, the Eurofighter analysis utilised a true simulation approach. This was achieved through a number of networked battle simulation computers, termed JOUST, each of which can be flown by human pilots.

BVR Combat Rating
Raptor 91%

Eurofighter 82%

Rafale 50%

F-15 43%

F-18+ 25%

F-18 21%

F-16 21%


This system was used to comprehensively evaluate the BVR (Beyond Visual Range) performance of the Eurofighter and other aircraft against an upgraded Su-27 Flanker (comparable to an Su-35 Super Flanker and its equivalents). The studies investigated all aspect best performances from the major systems on each aircraft; avionics, structure (including RCS data), engine performance (including fuel usage), defences and man-machine interfaces. In these tests the French Rafale utilised the Matra-BAe MICA air to air missile (which is the primary AA weapon of the French airforce) while the other aircraft used the Raytheon-Hughes AMRAAM.

These simulations concluded that Eurofighter has a win rating of 82% (100% equals always win, 0% equals always lose, 50% equals parity) against the target aircraft. A more typical way to present this data is as a combat exchange ratio, for the Typhoon this equals 4.5:1. In other words statistically one Eurofighter would be lost for every 4.5 Su-35 fighters shot down. This compares extremely favourably to the other aircraft (see also the BVR Combat Rating table); F-16C Falcon (0.3:1), F-15C Eagle (0.8:1), F-18C Hornet (0.3:1), F-18+ (0.4:1, NB this is not the current F-18E/F which is apparently a downgraded version of the F-18+ used in the studies) and Dassault Rafale (1:1). Only the LM/Boeing F-22 Raptor bettered the Eurofighter's performance with a combat exchange ratio of 10.1:1.

In addition to these overall combat performance results a number of individual comparisons have been made available. Of enormous importance for BVR combat is acceleration at medium altitudes and here the Eurofighter's acceleration at Mach 0.9 and 22,000ft equals that of the F-22. At supersonic velocities (Mach 1.6 and 36,000ft) the sustained turn rate of the Eurofighter betters all but the F-22, while its instantaneous turn rate is superior to the F-22. At low altitudes, Eurofighter can accelerate from 200kts to Mach 1.0 in under 30 seconds. In a similar vain to its supersonic performance, the sustained and instantaneous subsonic turn rates of the Eurofighter are bettered only by the F-22. Only the Rafale comes close to the matching the Eurofighter's capabilities in these comparisons.

An important point to keep in mind when examining this data is that full details on the simulations have not been released. Without this information it is not possible to determine whether Eurofighter optimal profiles were examined at the expense of more varied combat missions. However these studies do give some indication as to the potential of the Typhoon.

Eurofighter is also saying here the Rafale is a better fighter than the F-15? They also place both models of the F/A-18 at or above the F-16? They also say these simulations were done on a computer but can be repeated by human pilots? I just hope the Typhoon never comes up against an Isreali pilot flying his old F-4E.

BTW, The Eurofighter has been in developement since 1972, when the RAF first asked for it.
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:30 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):
OMG, you use Wikipedia and a.net as some of your sourses?

And how does your source differ from that what AutoThrust has said so far, even if he used Wikipedia? And he used quite an amount of sources, didn't he?

[Edited 2007-03-25 04:30:46]
I support the right to arm bears
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:33 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):
BTW, The Eurofighter has been in developement since 1972, when the RAF first asked for it.

The Eurofighter Consortium was founded in 1983.
Since when does development start as soon as one military branch is asking for a new weapon?
I support the right to arm bears
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:40 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 11):
Cripes. Apart from anything else, that must be shooting for the best documented answer of the year!!

Pardon my ignorance, I am far from being being an expert on the F15 but aren't those numbers for a C not a K? Would the K have different numbers? If not, then never mind!  Smile
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:25 pm

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 19):
ardon my ignorance, I am far from being being an expert on the F15 but aren't those numbers for a C not a K? Would the K have different numbers?

You are right, however from what i've readed the K version has improved avionics/radar and little improved engines and weights more with more wingload. If you have some other info we would welcome it so we can compare.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:56 pm

According to my limited resources, it seems as though it has completely new engines. Is it possible that noo ne is releasing the F-15K's specs? I certainly couldn't find it. The new F110-GE-129 engines are rated at 29K lbs/thrust. The F-15C's F100-PW-100, 220 or 229 produce 23,450 lbs/thrust. A considerable difference. I do not have a numbers comparison as you did but it would seem that the numbers posted for the F-15C are not up-to-date relative to the F-15K.

October 17, 2005 -- SEOUL - GE's F110 engine is powering Boeing's newest fighter aircraft, the F-15K, which makes its public debut at the Korean Aerospace and Defense Exhibition this week.

First flight of the F110-GE-129-powered F-15K occurred in March 2005. To date, the F110 has powered more than 75 flights of the first five production aircraft. In 2002, the Republic of Korea Air Force (ROKAF) chose the F110-GE-129 (rated at 29,000 pounds thrust) to power 40 new Boeing F-15K aircraft, launching the popular F110 on the twin-engine application.

"We are pleased to be powering a new generation of F-15 fighters," said Al DiLibero, general manager of the F110 engine program at GE. "We are also pleased that 78 of the F110 engines will be assembled through a licensing agreement with Samsung Techwin Co, LTD, continuing their long-term involvement with GE engines."

The United States Air Force (USAF) completed a highly successful field service evaluation of the F110-GE-129 powering an F-15E aircraft in 1999, after engines surpassed 1,900 flight hours on the aircraft. The USAF extended the program beyond the originally planned 1,000-hour mark due to the engine's excellent performance and high mission readiness rate of the aircraft/engine combination.

Earlier this year, the USAF awarded GE a $57 million contract to upgrade an initial 95 F110 fighter engines for F-16C/D aircraft as part of a Service Life Extension Program (SLEP).

Funded in the USAF F110 Component Improvement Program, the SLEP upgrade includes the successful CFM56-7 commercial engine core (which powers the Boeing Next-Generation 737s), 3D aero technology, and a redesigned flow path with changes to the combustor and high-pressure turbine


http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/pressc...er/military/military_20051017.html

[Edited 2007-03-25 06:58:11]
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:32 pm

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 21):
Is it possible that no one is releasing the F-15K's specs?

What better source than Boeing themselves?.....

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/...ilitary/f15/f-15k/f15kavionics.htm

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/f15kfacts.htm

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/...ilitary/f15/f-15k/f15kavionics.htm

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/f15spec.htm

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/f15ksurvive.htm

If detailed information on F-15K weapons and systems are needed, just scroll down the index on the left or check the IDS section for Boeing manufactured items. A visit to other OEMs' sites may be required for the others.

Debate on!  thumbsup   wave 
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:30 pm

While I agree that the EF is superior to the F-15K, I have to disagree with the "climb to 12,000m in 50-55 sec as opposed to 59 sec for the F-15 Streak Eagle"
Even the T/W ratio figures given for the EF with the upgraded EJ-230 engines of 1.208-1.243 still don't come close to the Steak Eagle figure of ~1.55 (25,000lb stripped empty weight with half fuel ~7000lb and 25,000lbf thrust F100-PW-100 engines BEFORE they were de-rated to 23,840lb in the mid-70's).
So, while the F-15C would lose out to the EF in climb rate, The F-15A-based Streak Eagle would smoke it AND the F-22A unless they did a "Streak" version of the EF or F-22A.
BUT, put the F100-PW-232 or F110-232 (both with 32,500lbf thrust) in the Streak Eagle and it would still smoke anything with a whopping 2.03 to 1!!!  box   stirthepot 


BTW; Boeing has investigated putting the F-119 in the F-15 as its the same size as the F100 and F110...
 
fumanchewd
Posts: 2878
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:43 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:15 pm

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 23):
BTW; Boeing has investigated putting the F-119 in the F-15 as its the same size as the F100 and F110...

 Wow!

Nice! But would the cruising and top speeds of the f-5f be considerably different then the C? I would imagine but have no sources.
In the time of chimpanzees, I was a monkey...
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:57 am

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 24):
But would the cruising and top speeds of the f-5f be considerably different then the C?

I would think so, as the F119 is designed for supercruise while the F100 is not (although reportedly with the F100-PW-229 the F15 can supercruise at mach 1.1 in clean configuration) I would guess that with the F119 the F-15 could match the F-22A or exceed in supercruise capability it as it has less frontal drag in a clean configuration and weighs substantially less, but its range would be severely limited as it carries less than half the fuel (internally) as the F-22A.

I have to say though, the EF-2000 is one heck of a nice airplane all-around. Much better than the Super Hornet, Rafaele, or F-15C.
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:27 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):
Eurofighter is also saying here the Rafale is a better fighter than the F-15? They also place both models of the F/A-18 at or above the F-16? They also say these simulations were done on a computer but can be repeated by human pilots? I just hope the Typhoon never comes up against an Isreali pilot flying his old F-4E.

The most accurate statement in this thread.  checkeredflag 
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:33 am

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 23):
hile I agree that the EF is superior to the F-15K, I have to disagree with the "climb to 12,000m in 50-55 sec as opposed to 59 sec for the F-15 Streak Eagle"
Even the T/W ratio figures given for the EF with the upgraded EJ-230 engines of 1.208-1.243 still don't come close to the Steak Eagle figure of ~1.55 (25,000lb stripped empty weight with half fuel ~7000lb and 25,000lbf thrust F100-PW-100 engines BEFORE they were de-rated to 23,840lb in the mid-70's).

The point is the EF wasnt stripped or emtpy weight half fuel and still can climb in 55 sec to 12k. However the F-15 is of course a world class climber.

But the F-15K still lacks in most areas against the EF. Much more detectable, lower g limits, lower agility, lower ceiling, higher wingload, worse radar.

Question doesnt the F-15K have the AN/APG-63V1 ? Because the numbers i got are for the AN/APG-63V2.

Quote:


according to the declaration from the pilots of UK, German:

EUROFIGHTER:

1. Standard air-combat configuration (with 4 MRAAM and 2 SRAAM), from braking off to 42,000fts < or = 90 seconds (Declaration from a German pilot).

2. Time to 40,000 fts after taking-off + Acceleration to Mach 1,5: in 60 seconds (Declaration from a UK pilot in Discovery Channel last year).
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:14 pm

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 17):
And how does your source differ from that what AutoThrust has said so far, even if he used Wikipedia?

Well, based solely on Wikipedia, the differences are already pronounced......

Specifications (F-15E Strike Eagle)

General characteristics

* Crew: 2
* Length: 63.8 ft (19.44 m)
* Wingspan: 42.8 ft (13 m)
* Height: 18.5 ft (5.6 m)
* Wing area: 608 ft² (56.5 m²)
* Airfoil: NACA 64A006.6 root, NACA 64A203 tip
* Empty weight: 31,634 lb (14,379 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 81,000 lb (36,000 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney F100-229 afterburning turbofans, 29,000 lbf (129 kN) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.54 (1,665 mph, 2,698 km/h)
* Range: 2,400 mi (2,100 nm, 3,900 km)
* Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,300 m)
* Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (15,000 m/min)


Specifications (Typhoon)

General characteristics

* Crew: 1 or 2
* Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
* Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
* Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
* Wing area: 50 m² (540 ft²)
* Empty weight: 11 000 kg (24,250 lb)
* Loaded weight: 15 550 kg (34,280 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 23 500 kg (51,809 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofans, 60 kN dry; 90 kN with afterburner (13,500 lbf; 20,250 lbf) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.0+, 2390 km/h at high altitude; Mach 1.2, 1470 km/h at sea level; (1,480 mph; 915 mph) supercruise Mach 1.3+ at altitude with typical air-to-air armament
* Range: 1390 km (864 mi)
* Service ceiling: 19 812 m (65,000 ft [35])
* Rate of climb: 255 m/s (50,000 ft/min)
* Wing loading: 311 kg/m² (63.7 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.18



Surprise - the bigger, heavier and older Strike Eagle has a higher top speed, almost triple the range, and the same climb rate as the smaller, lighter and newer Typhoon. It's a wonder then how its shorter times to altitude was arrived at with the same ROC but higher T/W ratio of the Eagle.

The armaments list is also heavily in the F-15E's favor.....

Strike Eagle

Armament

* Guns: 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan gatling gun, 510 rounds of either M-56 or PGU-28 ammunition
* Missiles: 8×
o AIM-7M Sparrow
o AIM-9M Sidewinder
o AIM-120 AMRAAM
o AGM-65 Maverick
o AGM-130
o AGM-84 Harpoon
o AGM-84K SLAM-ER
o AGM-154 JSOW
o AGM-158 JASSM
* Bombs:
o B61 nuclear bomb
o Mark 82 bomb
o Mark 84 bomb
o CBU-87 CEM
o CBU-89 Gator
o CBU-97 SFW
o CBU-103 CEM
o CBU-104 Gator
o CBU-105 SFW
o GBU-10 Paveway II
o GBU-12 Paveway II
o GBU-15
o GBU-24 Paveway III
o GBU-27 Paveway III
o GBU-28
o GBU-31
o GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb


Typhoon

Armament

* Gun: 1x 27 mm Mauser BK-27 cannon
* Air-to-Air missiles: AIM-9 Sidewinder, AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-120 AMRAAM, IRIS-T and in the future MBDA Meteor
* Air-to-Ground missiles: AGM-84 Harpoon, AGM-88 HARM, ALARMs, Storm Shadow (AKA "Scalp EG"), Brimstone, Taurus, Penguin and in the future AGM Armiger
* Bombs: Paveway 2, Paveway 3, Enhanced Paveway, JDAM
* Laser designator, e.g. LITENING pod



As for the F-15K, the first link in Reply 22 should have been this.....

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/index.html

Quote:

Flight and Weapon Systems

The F-15K is the only U.S.-produced fighter capable of long-range precision strike missions without escort, day or night, in any weather.

* Maximum gross takeoff weight and payload: 81,000 pounds and 23,000 pounds
* Maximum combat radius without refueling: over 1,000 nautical miles (1,800 km)
* Minimum altitude and maximum speed of terrain-following flight: 600 knots at 100 feet
* Power: two GE F110 turbofan engines (29,000 lb thrust class with afterburning)
* A mix of air-to-air weaponry: 20mm cannon; AIM-120, AIM-9, AIM-7, and AGM-130 missiles
* A mix of air-to-ground ordnance, including precision-guided munitions

Computer and Targeting Systems

The F-15K possesses advanced computer, display, protection, radar, and targeting systems:

* Avionics suite: Honeywell advanced display core processor (ADCP)
* Cockpit-display technologies: seven-color liquid-crystal displays, two upfront control panels (flat-panel), joint helmet-mounted cueing system (JHMCS), and wide-field-of-view head-up display
* On-board protection systems: Lockheed Martin ALR-56C(v)1 early warning receiver and Northrop Grumman ALQ-135M jammer
* Radar: Raytheon AN/APG-63(v)1 radar:
o Air-to-air and air-to-ground modes of APG-70 radar with additional sea-surface searching/tracking, ground-moving target tracking, and enhanced high-resolution ground mapping for long-distance target identification
o Improved reliability and maintainability
* Third-generation targeting and navigation systems: forward-looking infrared (FLIR) and infrared search and track (IRST)

Performance

The F-15 family has a combat record of 101 victories and zero losses, and the F-15E predecessor flew thousands of combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and in the Balkans.


Boeing provides the following simple, layman-friendly answers to common questions about the F-15K.....

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/f15/f-15k/f15kfaq.htm

[Edited 2007-03-26 08:16:45]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:52 am

I took Information only for the Anti-g suit and from Wikipedia. Your numbers dont show any performance comparison wich would prove the contrary.



F-15E Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (15,000 m/min)
Thypoon Rate of climb: 255 m/s (50,000 ft/min)

They seem to be very accurate numbers.  Yeah sure
However the F-15K using AN/APG-63V1 is even worse detecting the EF.


IMO the F-15 is a excellent platform with a good range against 3th generation planes which can carry "tons" of diffrent weapons which the Thypoon cant.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 28):
The F-15 family has a combat record of 101 victories and zero losses, and the F-15E predecessor flew thousands of combat missions during Operation Desert Storm and in the Balkans.

Acording some a.netters the Thypoon never did some skirmishes against the F-15E. However the combat record doesnt count as it wasnt against 4/5th.Generation plane.

Quote:

In June 2005, Scotland on Sunday reported that, when 'attacked' by two USAF F-15E Strike Eagle fighter aircraft, a Eurofighter on a 'Case White' conversion training sortie was able to out-manoeuvre the attacking aircraft and "shoot them down" (i.e., achieve radar lock for a long enough period of time to accurately launch missiles, had this been real combat

If this is true, i will leave up to you.

http://www.eads.net/xml/content/OF00000000400004/5/02/40936025.pdf

page 10
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4296
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:08 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):
y also say these simulations were done on a computer but can be repeated by human pilots? I just hope the Typhoon never comes up against an Isreali pilot flying his old F-4E.

Since Germany uses AMRAAM equipped F-4F Phantoms, it is fair to guess the Eurofighter was tested against the F-4 already...
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:57 am

Now, can we compare the Eurofighter with an F-15C?  Smile That seems like it makes more sense.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:07 pm

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 31):
Now, can we compare the Eurofighter with an F-15C

Look at my reply 9, all numbers are for F-15C. It shows clearly the F-15C and the Eurofighter arent in the same class.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:03 am

Perhaps, proper Slam Eagle and Attack Typhoon comparisons could be made soon with this latest development.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...r-wins-ground-attack-contract.html
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:41 pm

Update:

Boeing, once again, is the sole interested bidder.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi...Wn8AAAEAAHsmTY8AAAAB&modele=jdc_34

Quote:
"The bid was expected to become a three-way competition, but Lockheed Martin Co. recently expressed its intention of staying away from the project. The winner is to be selected early next year.

'The European consortium Eurofighter Typhoon has also informed the government that it will not participate in the project,' the source said, requesting anonymity. 'If Boeing submits a bid proposal by itself by today's deadline, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration will invite bidders once again.'

If Boeing makes the sole bid again, Korea is expected to select the company as the contractor, the source added."
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:14 pm

A pity, the Typhoon is a much better aircraft, unless S Korea wants a bomb truck instead of a defense fighter.  stirthepot 
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1528
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:36 pm

I think that the eurofighter is the superior jet here but vlearly it would not be chosen, i wouldnt go for it if i was them.

Fred
Image
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:28 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 2):

The EF has already proven its superiority against the F-15 several times. .

Really?

What is it's combat record? How many warheads on foreheads has it dropped in actual combat? How about survivability.? How many mid-airs has it had only to RTB?

If you are referring to the rumored meeting of US F-15Es and EF then I have to wave the  redflag  . Assuming they did meet the mud hen isn't optimized for air-to-air combat like the 15C. It has several modifications that enable it to be probably the best strike fighter on the planet. So if you were saying that the EF is a better AA a/c then the 15E I think I can stomach that better than saying the EF is a better overall choice than the 15E.
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:29 pm

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 37):
Really?

What is it's combat record? How many warheads on foreheads has it dropped in actual combat? How about survivability.? How many mid-airs has it had only to RTB?

Sorry but following your reasoning we should all go back and fly the P51 mustang because it has a better record than all existing fighters now.

BTW what is the combat record for the F22 these days?

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 37):
So if you were saying that the EF is a better AA a/c then the 15E I think I can stomach that better than saying the EF is a better overall choice than the 15E.

Wouldn't the Rafale be the better choice iso the F15 if S Korea would go for Strike platform with good A2A capabilities?
[edit post]
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:49 pm

Quoting SCAT15F (Reply 35):
A pity, the Typhoon is a much better aircraft, unless S Korea wants a bomb truck instead of a defense fighter.

 laughing  Good one, but can only agree. I guess its to expensive for S Korea.
Who knows maybe soon delivery slots will be available, so they could have got it very soon. (Austrian Eurofighter)

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 38):

Wouldn't the Rafale be the better choice iso the F15 if S Korea would go for Strike platform with good A2A capabilities?

Yes it would be definitely a better choice, though a more expensive choice. The Rafale has much better RCS, Agility and Radar.

[Edited 2007-04-22 13:50:33]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:57 am

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 38):
BTW what is the combat record for the F22 these days?

Where did that come from? Where in my previous post did I mention the F-22 being better than anything else?

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 38):

Sorry but following your reasoning we should all go back and fly the P51 mustang because it has a better record than all existing fighters now.

Dude are you serious with that statement? no 

I was trying to prove a point when I said

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 37):
What is it's combat record? How many warheads on foreheads has it dropped in actual combat? How about survivability.? How many mid-airs has it had only to RTB?

in response to

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 2):

The EF has already proven its superiority against the F-15 several times.

That point being one can not determine if an a/c is truly superior to another one without first going through the ultimate test of combat. The F-15E has three wars under its belt now with several other smaller conflicts. The Eurofighter on paper MAY be the superior plane but that hasn't been proved in real life. If the EF ever sees combat and performs better than a F-15E, THEN the statement that "it have proven it's superiority over the F-15" can be made, and I will agree.
So again I stand on my statement that the EF has not "proven its superiority several times over the F-15".
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1428
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:21 am

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 40):
in response to

Aj caramba didn't read close enough all the way trough the thread, well I guess this can happen if I read with one eye and work with the other, sorry about that dude.
[edit post]
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:20 am

Quoting Arniepie (Reply 41):
Arniepie

It's all gravy man.
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:58 am

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 40):
The Eurofighter on paper MAY be the superior plane but that hasn't been proved in real life. If the EF ever sees combat and performs better than a F-15E, THEN the statement that "it have proven it's superiority over the F-15" can be made, and I will agree.

Sorry that arguing doesn't make sense, besides the Thypoon IS not only on paper a superior plane in the same way the F-22 is superior to everything flying today. The Facts speak for them self, no matter if its a F15E or F-15C it still has worse capabilities against 4th and 5th generation Fighters.

Singapore tested the F-15,F-16 and EF extensive, and only the EF passed all three test.

Besides you can wave the red flag as much as you want, but there was a meeting and the EF won clearly over the F-15 and please mind that was a Tranche 1 Block 2 EF which wasn't fully operational.(without PIRATE,METEOR,TRD,limited DASS, Basic Autopilot etc...)

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 37):
It has several modifications that enable it to be probably the best strike fighter on the planet.

Please be so kindly to tell us which modifications that are which make it so much powerful?

The F-15C and F-15E arent so different apart from the improved engine,avionics and radar.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 1:20 pm

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 43):
Sorry that arguing doesn't make sense,

Yes it does. A superiorty claim can really only be made with an actual combat record to back it up. As for Singapore's test they were just that, tests, they weren't actual combat.

A perfect example of this theory could be applied to the NCAA football championship. On paper Ohio State should have destroyed the University of Florida. The actual result was much different. Florida annihilated OSU.


Look man, I'm not trying to start a fight. Like I said if the EF ever sees combat and its combat record shows that it is superior to the F-15E then I will endorse your claim. But until it has been through the only test that matters, combat, I'd hold off on it.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 43):
The F-15C and F-15E arent so different apart from the improved engine,avionics and radar.

There is a great deal of commonality but they are also very different.
As you mentioned:
New engines
Awesome radar
greatly improved avionics

While you only listed three things those three things improve the aircraft in more than three ways
Engines:More range and quicker acceleration
Radar: Multi-mode that allows for AA and for AG attack
Avionics:Allows for night targeting, NVG use, and better crew information management

One can also add:
Additional crew member to share the load.
Conformal fuel tanks to increase range
increased number of hardpoints that allows the Echo to carry almost every weapon in the inventory
LANTIRN targeting pod which allows for targeting and navigation in almost any condition.
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:37 pm

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 44):
A perfect example of this theory could be applied to the NCAA football championship. On paper Ohio State should have destroyed the University of Florida. The actual result was much different. Florida annihilated OSU.

You cant compare fighters with a football championship, because players are human, they dont bring always the same power and the "technical" diffrences between humans arent significant.

Btw: Do you missed the part about the skirmishes over Scotland?

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 44):

There is a great deal of commonality but they are also very different.
As you mentioned:
New engines
Awesome radar
greatly improved avionics

While you only listed three things those three things improve the aircraft in more than three ways
Engines:More range and quicker acceleration
Radar: Multi-mode that allows for AA and for AG attack
Avionics:Allows for night targeting, NVG use, and better crew information management

In every aspect you mentioned the EF is superior or same to this. The APG-63(not LPI) is not awesome compared to the AGP-77 or CAPTOR. The sensor fusion of the EF(like the F-22) is much better then the avionics of the F-15.
The CAPTOR Radar can track more targets at once while it offers much more output and is a LPI Radar.
The EF can climb higher at faster acceleration. Look at my reply 9.

An EF can track a F-15C over a distance 119 NM (220 km)away. While the F-15C with the APG-63V2 could track the EF only over a distance 44 NM (82 km).

Sidenote: The APG-77 can track a F-15C over 192 NM (355 km)!!

As i said the Facts speak for them self.

Note:This are all weapons wich can be used by the Typhoon:

Quote:

AIM-9L/I Sidewinder
ASRAAM
AIM-120A/B
IRIS-T
Paveway II
Rafael Lightning III
Mk 83
MK 84
MK 13/20
IRIS-T (digital Modus)
Paveway IV
MK 13/18
GBU 32 JDAM
AIM-120C-5
METEOR
Paveway III
GBU 24
MK 84
BLU 109
ALARM
TAURUS KEPD 350
Storm Shadow
Brimstone
BL755
NSM Penguin
AGM-88 HARM
BGT HOPE
BGT HOSBO
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:32 pm

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 45):
In every aspect you mentioned the EF is superior or same to this. The APG-63(not LPI) is not awesome compared to the AGP-77 or CAPTOR. The sensor fusion of the EF(like the F-22) is much better then the avionics of the F-15.
The CAPTOR Radar can track more targets at once while it offers much more output and is a LPI Radar.
The EF can climb higher at faster acceleration. Look at my reply 9.

An EF can track a F-15C over a distance 119 NM (220 km)away. While the F-15C with the APG-63V2 could track the EF only over a distance 44 NM (82 km).

Sidenote: The APG-77 can track a F-15C over 192 NM (355 km)!!

As i said the Facts speak for them self.

Note:This are all weapons wich can be used by the Typhoon:

You asked me to compare the upgrades to the F-15E compared with the F-15C, not compare it to the EF.

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 45):
You cant compare fighters with a football championship, because players are human, they dont bring always the same power and the "technical" differences between humans arent significant.

Who designed the EF? Who designed all aircraft? You could say a computer but, who ran the computer? Answer a human.



Autothrust
I'm not saying the EF is not a top of the line fighter. Once again all I'm saying is that I would hold off on making a superiority claim until after it has seen combat. That isn't too much to ask.
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:43 am

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 46):
You asked me to compare the upgrades to the F-15E compared with the F-15C, not compare it to the EF.

True i missed the point, but i wanted to show you the diffrences between this to planes which are pretty big.

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 46):
I'm not saying the EF is not a top of the line fighter. Once again all I'm saying is that I would hold off on making a superiority claim until after it has seen combat. That isn't too much to ask.

My point is the Eurofighter will not see like US counterparts a lot of wars or conflicts where one can see how it behaves in real combat.
Though the Typhoon was also build for maximum survivability in Hostile environment.(like any other fighter) So we have to compare its capability on competition/training/skirmish basis. At a certain point i agree with you, how exactly the plane will perform in real engagements you only see in real battles, but it gives you an idea.

To that, one has only to add its technical improvements over older planes and that gives you a good picture.

However, we will see further results at future skirmishes.

Regards, AT
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
KevinSmith
Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:08 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Tue Apr 24, 2007 7:41 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 47):
However, we will see further results at future skirmishes.

Regards, AT

Rock and roll man. Had fun debating with you.  Wink

-K
Learning to fly, but I ain't got wings.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Slam Eagle Vs Typhoon, Part 2

Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:00 pm

Well, barring major unforeseen events, the caption on this poster might well hold true for South Korea.....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...s/PUB_F-15K_PAst_Now_Future_lg.jpg

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...LAM-ER_on_F-15_Strike_Eagle_lg.jpg

Thanks everyone for your contributions.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests