Typhoons Best Raptors?

connies4ever · Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:58 pm

Being reported in the latest AIR International (vol. 83, no. 3, ppg 68-72) that at the most recent "Red Flag"in Alaska that Luftwaffe Typhoons from JG74 were able to jump Raptors from 525th FS. On return to home base, a/c 30+29 had a Raptor "kill" silhouette" and 30+30 had three.

These were not "stock" Typhoons, having had a recent radar s/w upgrade, MIDS upgrade, and DASS optimisation for air combat.

Of course, USAF pilot recollections seem to be somewhat different.

[Edited 2012-09-05 05:59:37]

bigjku · Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:26 pm

I think this was talked about somewhere else here. But the essentials of it are that in a tightly defined scenario, namely in a tight turning dog fight in visual range, the EF can hold its own and probably then some with the F-22. This should not be a shock in certain scenarios but it is also pretty unlikely in a real combat scenario that an F-22 is going to let itself be caught in that situation. It is also fairly unlikely that most aircraft it would be facing would be put up in a configuration that would let them dog-fight at full capability (no external fuel, light weapons loads).

A far more likely scenario for the F-22 is either it defending an ally from aggressive air attacks, in which case the attackers are laden with heavy weapons/fuel to do the mission or the F-22 acting as offensive counter air as part of a larger assault against an IADS where the other side is also busy trying to fend off hundreds of incoming cruise missiles and other standoff weapons.

From a kinematic perspective there is really only so much anyone can do without going very exotic at this point. The whole point of the F-22 is to avoid that turning fight.

autothrust · Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:58 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 1):
I think this was talked about somewhere else here.

Red Flag Raptor Vs. Typhoon (by wingman Aug 2 2012 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)

While the F-22 rule the BVR combat, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor

[Edited 2012-09-05 07:07:07]

connies4ever · Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:59 pm

BigJKU -

Take your points and I agree that the whole F-22 concept is to avoid a close-in turning fight and do it BVR. In fact the Typhoons had no external fuel and in that scenario probably easily out-turn the Raptor. Not so sure about the no external fuel in a real scenario, Typhoon is pretty good on internal fuel. What was shocking to me in the piece was the assertion that Raptor really only has about 30-35 minutes on station before bingo. I thought it had better legs. And there is the lingering comm problem issue.

Oroka · Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:09 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 2):
In a dogfight the Typhoon is without a doubt better.

So, where are the stats on how many kills the Raptors had on Typhoons?

Most likely the Raptors were handicapped by the ROE. Red Flag is a learning experience... they learned something.

bigjku · Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:19 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 4):
Most likely the Raptors were handicapped by the ROE. Red Flag is a learning experience... they learned something.

This is very important as well. No one is going to learn anything getting blasted from 50km's away by a plane they can't see.

HaveBlue · Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:29 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 5):
No one is going to learn anything getting blasted from 50km's away by a plane they can't see.

That made me chuckle, good stuff.

I would like to know how many kills the Raptor got on the Typhoon as well. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Oroka · Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:16 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 5):
No one is going to learn anything getting blasted from 50km's away by a plane they can't see.

Eventually someone will figure out a tactic to track stealth aircraft, and will get the jump on the F-22. Refining dog fighting skills now is better than learning the hard way later.

connies4ever · Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:46 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 4):
Quoting autothrust (Reply 2):
In a dogfight the Typhoon is without a doubt better.

So, where are the stats on how many kills the Raptors had on Typhoons?

A very good question and not made clear in the article. However, it did say the Typhoon/Raptor engagements were limited to BFM (Basic Fighter Manoeuvring) situations, which I think implicitly puts it in the WVR sphere. Will be interesting to see if, in the next Red Flag, Typhoons will be deployed with Meteor, which is a BVR weapon. Or Meteor simulators, which I am sure are coming as well.

Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
Eventually someone will figure out a tactic to track stealth aircraft, and will get the jump on the F-22. Refining dog fighting skills now is better than learning the hard way later.

Well, you can note that they're there (note: not there there...) with L-band radar, but can't track accurately enough. Bi-static radars CAN track them, but setting up an airborne bi-static situation in combat seems difficult. So something beyond X-band, presumably. Or, using -band and enhanced computer processing. It's amazing how much information can be extracted from any image given enough processing power.

ebj1248650 · Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:35 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 3):
Not so sure about the no external fuel in a real scenario, Typhoon is pretty good on internal fuel. What was shocking to me in the piece was the assertion that Raptor really only has about 30-35 minutes on station before bingo. I thought it had better legs. And there is the lingering comm problem issue.

Typhoon likely goes to the scene of the battle and jettisons tanks before engaging. How much on station time the Raptor has would depend on how far it had to fly to get to the scene of the action. The shorter the distance to the fight zone, the longer it can stay on station, and that would hold true for any air-to-air fighter.

connies4ever · Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:30 pm

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 9):
Typhoon likely goes to the scene of the battle and jettisons tanks before engaging

Apparently for Red Flag the Typhoons took no tanks, but were escorted TATL by a Luftwaffe A310 MRTT.

NBGSkyGod · Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:40 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10):
Apparently for Red Flag the Typhoons took no tanks, but were escorted TATL by a Luftwaffe A310 MRTT.

I can't imagine that they didn't carry ferry tanks on the trip across the Atlantic, if the MRTT went tech or there was some other malfunction the Typhoons would have needed to make a divert field. They may not have utilized them for exercise, but they would have used them for the transit to and from Nellis.

ThePointblank · Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:48 am

Not to mention that the F-22 isn't equipped with a HOBS weapon like Typhoon is; they only JUST begun testing of the AIM-9X Block II, which among other things, has LOAL (lock on after launch). AIM-9M and -9X Block I are LOBL (lock on before launch).

By the time they've upgrade F-22 to include AIM-9X, Block II will be operational. Once its MLDs are upgraded, then it will have significant improvements in WVR lethality.

autothrust · Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:03 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 5):
No one is going to learn anything getting blasted from 50km's away by a plane they can't see.

The F-22 is don't matter how many times you guys repeat it not invisible.

The PIRATE Sensor is a Quantum well infrared photodetector and can detect the F-22 (frontal detection range up to 93km) , aswell as Pretorian can detect Stealth Planes and AESA Radars with LPI.

The IRIS-T is able to lock on a match and you can shoot down planes behind you with this weapon, even a F-22 is a easy target for the this weapon. (only if the F-22 is within range of course)

Quoting Oroka (Reply 4):
Most likely the Raptors were handicapped by the ROE

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 12):
Not to mention that the F-22 isn't equipped with a HOBS weapon like Typhoon

Sounds like excuses. Who's fault is it? In this matter you guys keep repeating the Typhoon is lacking of an AESA so the Typhoon is handicapped as well. Oh also the METEOR is still missing and 3-D Thrust Vectoring too.

[Edited 2012-09-06 00:07:47]

Oroka · Thu Sep 06, 2012 11:59 am

Quoting autothrust (Reply 13):
Sounds like excuses.

The Raptor is limited to what it is allowed to do in pretty much every joint exercise. They Typhoon is handicapped because it does not have an AESA radar (or stealth, or thrust vectoring)... not because it isnt allowed to turn it on. Discounting valid points as 'excuses' smells of a fanboy point of view.

autothrust · Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:28 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 14):

The Raptor is limited to what it is allowed to do in pretty much every joint exercise.

That applies of course only to the F-22.

Did you know that the AOE in Typhoon is limited normally but could exceed 90° ?

Quoting Oroka (Reply 14):
Discounting valid points

according to you

Quoting Oroka (Reply 14):
excuses' smells of a fanboy

for me it smells like cheap and totally irrelevant(in the Red Flag competition) excuses of fanboys without any idea about the Typhoon.

kc135topboom · Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:06 pm

Were the F-22s allowed to use its thrust vectoring features, and its supercruise features?

KPDX · Thu Sep 06, 2012 2:21 pm

I always love the fact that people forget about the little thing called a ehhh... pilot? Pilot skill matters just as much, I'd say...

bigjku · Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:02 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 7):
Eventually someone will figure out a tactic to track stealth aircraft, and will get the jump on the F-22. Refining dog fighting skills now is better than learning the hard way later.

Possibly, possibly not. As someone detailed above it is not that simple, certainly not in an airborne system particularly, to get the resolution you need to fire a weapon.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 13):
The F-22 is don't matter how many times you guys repeat it not invisible.

The PIRATE Sensor is a Quantum well infrared photodetector and can detect the F-22 (frontal detection range up to 93km) , aswell as Pretorian can detect Stealth Planes and AESA Radars with LPI.

The IRIS-T is able to lock on a match and you can shoot down planes behind you with this weapon, even a F-22 is a easy target for the this weapon. (only if the F-22 is within range of course)

I have never once said it is invisible. It is much harder to track and engage at range than the EF and in most full up realistic scenarios (both sides with AWACS support, neither knowing exactly what it is going to face in the scenario and being part of either an attack package or defending against said attack) that is going to be a major advantage. Modern radar will reduce but not eliminate this advantage.

The IRIS-T is a great missile, if you can get within 25km's. Otherwise you need to use a radar guided weapon (or develop a new IR guided weapon with greater range) which is an issue one would have to resolve.

I tend to side with the nations that had the chance to buy either the Eurofighter or the F-35 and choose the F-35 like Japan just did. They basically need an air defense fighter and for that mission they took an F-22 light over the Eurofighter so clearly some people paid to make these decisions see a good deal of value in VLO now and in the future.

Kiwirob · Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:49 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 13):
The F-22 is don't matter how many times you guys repeat it not invisible.

I was told the RN's sampson radar fitted to the Type 45's pick up F-22 pretty easy and form a long way out.

checksixx · Fri Sep 07, 2012 4:57 am

I love reading about how this radar or that radar CAN detect F-22's. Bottom line is that almost any radar can detect them...nothing special there. This has been the same all the way back to the F-117 days. Those that keep up with the conversations about radar detection should really educate themselves about it first. This will allow you to bring decent discussion about it rather than trying to convince us all a specific radar can detect them...of course it can. Its how the stealth features play into it that makes the difference between the radar being able to tell the F-22 apart from a bird or clutter.

IRST sensors are a great feature that many companies threw onto their aircraft after the soviets started doing it. Bottom line is that it isn't the end all, be all sensor that all of you think it is. You want to say that the even the F-22 is an easy target for a weapon system...but if you cannot get the weapon system to track it in the first place...even IR......then its not so easy is it??

As far as the Tiffy's 'besting' Raptor's...I'm sure it happened. Its happened before also. But what kind of training relevance is it to completely clean up your aircraft, just so you can perform to 'bag' a Raptor? None...thats the answer. That's exactly what they did. See a lot of clean birds flying around warzone's these days?? Nope.

autothrust · Fri Sep 07, 2012 7:58 am

Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
Bottom line is that almost any radar can detect them...nothing special there.

Not true for a lot of people the F-22 cannot be detected, it's invisible to the radar or ir or any kind of system or sensor.

Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
IRST sensors are a great feature that many companies threw onto their aircraft after the soviets

That's nonsense, you can't compare a 3rd Generation QWIP which act's like a radar and can TWS multiple targets to a soviet IRST Sensor which even needed a Laser to get range)

Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
but if you cannot get the weapon system to track it in the first place...

Why you cannot track it in the first place?

Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
completely clean up your aircraft

Whatever a clean aircraft is for you...

I'm not trying to say the Typhoon is better then the F-22 because it isn't. However the F-22 is not invincible and does not have in every discipline a gold medal

Legs · Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:50 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):
use its thrust vectoring features

That's a pretty interesting question actually. My first thought was that the control laws for the nozzles would be pretty much embedded into the flight control code. But on second thought, perhaps there is a lock out mechanism in case of a failure. At any rate, I seriously doubt that the nozzles would have been disengaged.

I plan to see if I can find out definitively, though I dont really hold much hope that the info is in the public domain.

acontador · Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:01 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
Not true for a lot of people the F-22 cannot be detected, it's invisible to the radar or ir or any kind of system or sensor.

There are no 'invisible' aircraft to radar, unless you come up with a design which is made entirely of radar-transparent materials, that is including the pilot, engines, weapons...and that's not going to happen for a while.

What you can do (and the designers have been doing in the designs incorporating stealth features) is reduce the radar cross section (RCS) of the aircraft up to a point where with current technology it's radar returns become so weak that they cannot be differentiated from clutter or other noise in the radar picture

There are many features that aircraft designers can use in order to achieve a very low RCS, some unclassified and apparent, like radar absorbent materials, modelling of the shape of the aircraft and careful positioning and shaping of skin-braking features (like access panels), with some other still highly classified.

With improving radar technology the threshold of the lowest RCS detectable by a radar system in a given scenario (geometry of flight path towards radar station, radar frequency, scanning method, environmental variables, etc.) is always getting lower, so it is only a matter of time until radars catch up with (current) stealth technology.

In other words, if you put a modern radar 10 feet from a Raptor (form the side) and point the scanning beam towards the aircraft at full power, I suspect that you most probably will get a nice radar return on your scope. But since this is not really an operationally relevant scenario, for the time being the low RCS of a Raptor is one of the facilitators that greatly improve the lethality of the system.

sovietjet · Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:51 pm

Low RCS is always optimized to be achieved given certain parameters. In pretty much all modern stealth and "stealthy" aircraft it is designed so the RCS is lowest when viewing from the front/bottom front. In essence, it is done so that when an F-22 is approaching you, you will get a very low RCS from your viewing angle. If the F-22 decides to maneuver in such a way that its top side is directly perpendicular to you then you will get a very nice radar return.

windy95 · Fri Sep 07, 2012 4:05 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
I'm not trying to say the Typhoon is better then the F-22 because it isn't. However the F-22 is not invincible and does not have in every discipline a gold medal

But it is a good thought that the Raptor and Typhoon will be flying side by side in real world scenerios. They make quite a combo that I cannot see anyone beating for a long time. I think the Skies over NATO are in good hands.

checksixx · Sat Sep 08, 2012 3:16 am

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
Bottom line is that almost any radar can detect them...nothing special there.

Not true for a lot of people the F-22 cannot be detected, it's invisible to the radar or ir or any kind of system or sensor.

You just got schooled by acontador above so I'll leave this one alone.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
IRST sensors are a great feature that many companies threw onto their aircraft after the soviets

That's nonsense, you can't compare a 3rd Generation QWIP which act's like a radar and can TWS multiple targets to a soviet IRST Sensor which even needed a Laser to get range)

Please actually read what people say before posting...I NEVER compared ANYTHING.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
but if you cannot get the weapon system to track it in the first place...

Why you cannot track it in the first place?

Due to its stealth and LO features...thought this would be common sense.

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
Quoting checksixx (Reply 20):
completely clean up your aircraft

Whatever a clean aircraft is for you...

Well I guess it would mean the same thing as it would to 99% of the remainder of people on here that know what they're talking about....a fighter NOT configured as it would be for combat...no tanks, no missiles or other things hanging from it.

ebj1248650 · Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:34 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 21):
I'm not trying to say the Typhoon is better then the F-22 because it isn't. However the F-22 is not invincible and does not have in every discipline a gold medal

No fighter is invincible and I doubt anyone here would argue with that point. The point is the F-22 has far fewer "weakness", for lack of a better way to put it, than any other air-to-air combat aircraft around. And ultimately, this is the goal of air superiority designers: Make your airplane far less susceptible to what the other guy's airplane can do. Make yours far superior to what he can do, and go the next best step: make yours far superior to the best improvement the other guy can develop.

bigjku · Mon Sep 10, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting autothrust (Reply 13):
The F-22 is don't matter how many times you guys repeat it not invisible.

The PIRATE Sensor is a Quantum well infrared photodetector and can detect the F-22 (frontal detection range up to 93km) , aswell as Pretorian can detect Stealth Planes and AESA Radars with LPI.

The IRIS-T is able to lock on a match and you can shoot down planes behind you with this weapon, even a F-22 is a easy target for the this weapon. (only if the F-22 is within range of course)

I have never once said it is invisible. It is much harder to track and engage at range than the EF and in most full up realistic scenarios (both sides with AWACS support, neither knowing exactly what it is going to face in the scenario and being part of either an attack package or defending against said attack) that is going to be a major advantage. Modern radar will reduce but not eliminate this advantage.

The IRIS-T is a great missile, if you can get within 25km's. Otherwise you need to use a radar guided weapon (or develop a new IR guided weapon with greater range) which is an issue one would have to resolve.

I tend to side with the nations that had the chance to buy either the Eurofighter or the F-35 and choose the F-35 like Japan just did. They basically need an air defense fighter and for that mission they took an F-22 light over the Eurofighter

epten · Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:13 am

Quoting connies4ever (Thread starter):
The whole point of the F-22 is to avoid that turning fight.

Then why did they bother with thrust vectoring? Why all those fancy post stall maneuvers?

Oroka · Mon Sep 24, 2012 1:31 pm

Quoting epten (Reply 29):
Then why did they bother with thrust vectoring? Why all those fancy post stall maneuvers?

Because they learned in Vietnam that some times even the best jet will get jumped.

Powerslide · Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:19 pm

Quoting epten (Reply 29):
Then why did they bother with thrust vectoring? Why all those fancy post stall maneuvers?

When the enemy sends up more aircraft than the Raptors have missiles for, it will have to switch to guns to finish off the rest. Having superior handling is never a bad thing.

spudh · Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:00 pm

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 31):
When the enemy sends up more aircraft than the Raptors have missiles for, it will have to switch to guns to finish off the rest. Having superior handling is never a bad thing.

I doubt any fighter pilot would willingly close to guns range while on the offensive. The gun is a weapon of last resort in a defensive posture, if you have the upper hand you should bug out when you've run out of missiles not risk your fighter in a knife fight

ThePointblank · Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:29 am

Quoting spudh (Reply 32):

I doubt any fighter pilot would willingly close to guns range while on the offensive. The gun is a weapon of last resort in a defensive posture, if you have the upper hand you should bug out when you've run out of missiles not risk your fighter in a knife fight

Indeed, the best fighter pilots know when to engage or not engage depending on circumstances. Having the performance to dictate this is important.

Eagleboy · Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:40 pm

Quoting Oroka (Reply 4):
So, where are the stats on how many kills the Raptors had on Typhoons?

I'm sure the USAF would have provided them if they were the victors......

.....in reality knowing that the F-22 can be beaten in a 'knife fight in a phone booth' is a good warning for the Raptor community. BVR and low observability are your trump cards.....never give them up. The fact that the Luftwffe jets displays 'kill' markings (as did a USN F-18 previously) shows how impressive the achievement seen to be viewed.

Whereas the Typhoon was designed to be super maneuverable (as was the Su-27/30/35) rather than stealthy.

The fact that the Luftwffe jets displays 'kill' markings (as did a USN F-18 previously) shows how impressive the achievement seen to be viewed. The F-22 is currently seen as the Top Dog among fighters.

The best part of Red Flag and the USAF aggressor program is the chance for dissimilar air combat training (DACT)
Both sides got this. As did the Indian Air Force pilots when they visited last year with their SU-30MKI's. The final score isn't the goal,the knowledge is.

Powerslide · Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:32 am

Quoting EagleBoy (Reply 34):
.....in reality knowing that the F-22 can be beaten in a 'knife fight in a phone booth' is a good warning for the Raptor community.

The Raptor community won't lose any sleep at night, they still have the biggest and badest toy in the skies. Wars aren't fought with handicaps placed on the more advanced side so its more even. The way I see it, they wanted to see what it would take for a Eurojet to keep up with a F-22. Considering how many "rules" they had to implement just shows how good the Raptor is.

Eagleboy · Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:36 am

Exactly.....everyone wants to 'beat' a Raptor......they are in the top spot and know it.

garysted · Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:54 am

Gents,

Followed this thread with interest. Although I don't wish to get involved in any 'which is the best' discussion, there is a couple of points that I don't think have been mentioned yet.

The Luftwaffe itself acknowledges that it's EF-2000 crews have not yet reached the same standard in air-to-air training that RAF Typhoon units have, which could possibly suggest that RAF Typhoons may currently be able to achieve better results against the F-22.

Secondly, besides a development aircraft or two, no standard line Luftwaffe EF-2000 is fitted with PIRATE, the other operators have that as standard on later build aircraft, being retrofitted on the remainder. I'm not qualified to comment on specifics, but I would suspect that the long range imaging capability of the sensor may help improve the EF-2000/Typhoon in the BVR engagement against the F-22. Again, if the Luftwaffe did not have that capability, then other operators may do even better, assuming the same level of training.

Gary

bigjku · Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:14 pm

I am not sure how useful PIRATE will be excepting in controlled circumstances. Simply put if the Raptor's knew the other side had the capability they would not close to within the effective range of it. Then there is still the problem that your AMRAAM or Meteor needs to use its own radar to achieve a lock and terminate the target as well. PIRATE might help you see the F-22 but it can't do much for engaging it until you are within range of an IR shot.

ThePointblank · Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:11 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 38):
I am not sure how useful PIRATE will be excepting in controlled circumstances. Simply put if the Raptor's knew the other side had the capability they would not close to within the effective range of it. Then there is still the problem that your AMRAAM or Meteor needs to use its own radar to achieve a lock and terminate the target as well. PIRATE might help you see the F-22 but it can't do much for engaging it until you are within range of an IR shot.

Indeed, the exercises occur under very controlled conditions, often with tons of conditions set. Had it been a real shooting fight, it would most likely be that all of the Typhoons would have been shot down without them seeing a F-22 in the first place, as the F-22 will enjoy a first look, first shoot advantage.

connies4ever · Sat Sep 29, 2012 3:26 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 18):
They basically need an air defense fighter and for that mission they took an F-22 light over the Eurofighter so clearly some people paid to make these decisions see a good deal of value in VLO now and in the future.

I'm not so sure about that. Domestic politics played a big role in EF's development: the need to preserve a viable military aircraft industry, as well drive technology. That's why Rafale is around, the French wanted to drive the car and the other nations said no. For those who bought the F-35, I'm sure a factor was the lure of industrial offset programs.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 35):
The Raptor community won't lose any sleep at night, they still have the biggest and badest toy in the skies

As long as the pilot gets oxygen.

Devilfish · Sat Sep 29, 2012 3:31 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 40):
As long as the pilot gets oxygen.

Latest article I read said they were getting "too much" oxygen! Wow!

bigjku · Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:17 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 40):

I'm not so sure about that. Domestic politics played a big role in EF's development: the need to preserve a viable military aircraft industry, as well drive technology. That's why Rafale is around, the French wanted to drive the car and the other nations said no. For those who bought the F-35, I'm sure a factor was the lure of industrial offset programs.

Would not really apply to Japan. They were not part of the development program and as far as I know don't really have a big piece of the production on the thing (I am sure they make some components but they probably make some for the EF as well since Japan is fairly heavy in electronics).

MadameConcorde · Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:10 am

Typhoons are truly impressive. I have seen them doing flying displays many times at air shows.

I was once invited by an Italian Air Force pilot to sit inside a Eurofighter/Typhoon cockpit during one of the air shows.

I was totally bewildered to see how much little room they have considering all the maneuvers they have to accomplish during flight. Getting inside was difficult enough. There was no pictures allowed but even on the ground this is an experience that cannot be forgotten. I can only imagine what it must be like to fly one of those machines especially in war context.

I bow down to all the pilots who are flying them. Much respect sirs!

What is the difference between a Typhoon and a Eurofighter/Typhoon?

The F-22 is just as amazing to watch doing displays at air shows - though I never got a chance to sit inside one.

flyingturtle · Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:30 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 43):
What is the difference between a Typhoon and a Eurofighter/Typhoon?

The British don't like something called "Euro..."

Wikipedia:

On 2 September 1998, a naming ceremony was held at Farnborough, United Kingdom. This saw the Typhoon name formally adopted, initially for export aircraft only. This was reportedly resisted by Germany, perhaps because the Hawker Typhoon was a fighter-bomber aircraft which was used by the RAF during the Second World War to attack German targets.

The BBC about this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/163092.stm

David

bigjku · Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:11 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 43):
What is the difference between a Typhoon and a Eurofighter/Typhoon?

The differences are mostly stealth, operating altitude and speed. The Raptor is basically designed to engage (and disengage) from the slower and non-stealthy legacy jets at will allowing it to generally kill without being vulnerable itself. If you want to engage them within the range that you could get a kill the F-22 either has to be compelled to engage you by outside circumstance (strike escort and can't leave ect) or the F-22 has to make a major mistake. The speed of the F-22 is as important as it's stealth in that regard.

MadameConcorde · Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:46 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 45):

Thank you. I thought the Eurofighters and Typhoons were the same but I wasn't sure.
It is just a matter of changing the name as I see.

I was happy to get my own sort of "on hands" experience of the beast.
It came totally unexpected. I guess it was one lucky day.

Are there two-seaters Eurofighters/Typhoons or are they all one-seater?

flyingturtle · Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:04 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 46):
Are there two-seaters Eurofighters/Typhoons or are they all one-seater?

There are 2-seat trainer variants, at least the RAF has one-seat fighters and two-seat trainers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon_variants

David

bigjku · Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:42 pm

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 46):
Thank you. I thought the Eurofighters and Typhoons were the same but I wasn't sure.
It is just a matter of changing the name as I see.

Oh, they are. I misread your question. I thought you asked the difference between Eurofighters and Raptors. Disregard my answer.

connies4ever · Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:31 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 44):
On 2 September 1998, a naming ceremony was held at Farnborough, United Kingdom. This saw the Typhoon name formally adopted, initially for export aircraft only. This was reportedly resisted by Germany, perhaps because the Hawker Typhoon was a fighter-bomber aircraft which was used by the RAF during the Second World War to attack German targets.

That's amusing, the British weren't shy about applying the name "Lightning" to their first true supersonic interceptor, even though during WWII the Arado Ar234 "Blitz" (Lightning) reconnaissance bomber had operated over England in the later stages of the conflict.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net