Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:01 am

Cmon, target drones w highly trained pilots offer almost zero deterrence.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:04 am

Cmon, target drones w highly trained pilots offer almost zero deterrence.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 7558
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Sun Dec 02, 2018 11:46 am

The only reason is to meet NATO requirements on paper. So a certain number of planes for a certain role. But preferably not of a quality that NATO would actually ask for them.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:11 am

Planeflyer wrote:
Cmon, target drones w highly trained pilots offer almost zero deterrence.


Outside the first couple of days of the Yom Kippur war we are yet to see any conflict in which SAMs are more than an inconvenience and had any shot to influence the outcome of that conflict.
There is no credible air to air thread anywhere with the exception of our allies.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
Ozair
Posts: 3108
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:09 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Outside the first couple of days of the Yom Kippur war we are yet to see any conflict in which SAMs are more than an inconvenience and had any shot to influence the outcome of that conflict.

Disagree on the inconvenience. GW1 was a good example of a SAM threat that persisted and impacted operations. The first week saw seven aircraft downed by SAMs, two SA-2Es, one SA-3, One SA-6, one MANPADS and two undetermined SAMs. In the month that followed another 18 aircraft were shot down by various SAMs, ranging from MANPADS to SA-9 and 13 and numerous undetermined. The above losses are listed here http://www.rjlee.org/air/ds-aaloss/

While IR SAMS were the most significant factor in the later weeks of the air conflict aircraft were still being targeted and lost to radar guided SAMs over a month after the air war started.

I don't think any anti-air campaign has influenced the outcome of a conflict including Yom Kippur.

tommy1808 wrote:
There is no credible air to air thread anywhere with the exception of our allies.

Agree with this, certainly nothing that could realistically challenge Coalition/NATO air supremacy.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:30 am

Ozair wrote:
Disagree on the inconvenience.


I meant it specifically in the "can change the outcome" way of inconvenience.

I don't think any anti-air campaign has influenced the outcome of a conflict including Yom Kippur.


Exactly. Yom Kippur may have become one, as the IDFs air support was fairly ineffective in the first days due to the SA-6 surprise. Alas ways to neutralize them where found rather quickly....

Agree with this, certainly nothing that could realistically challenge Coalition/NATO air supremacy.


Yeah, and probably not for a long time to come, and by the time someone can challenge that, it won´t be Russia, but rather China.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
Ozair
Posts: 3108
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:38 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:28 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Ozair wrote:
Disagree on the inconvenience.


I meant it specifically in the "can change the outcome" way of inconvenience.

Okay, that makes sense and is clearer.

It is a difficult question to answer as to whether anti-air campaigns could realistically change an outcome. Considering the Balkans conflict, where the US spent vast sums of money protecting air assests from air defences. IIRC they launched over 750 HARMs at targets when clearly there were not that many Serb radars to target. That threat environement meant every Coalition operating window was covered with SEAD aircraft from start to finish, as well as EA-6Bs while a RAND study concluded that NATO never succeeded in actually neutralising the Radar guided SAM threat. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1365.html
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Tue Dec 04, 2018 10:04 am

The Vietnamese and the US pilots that flew there would strongly disagree with the above assessments.

And since then 4th gen AC have made only incremental gains against SAMs whereas missiles routinely intercept other missiles.

5 th gen is a paradigm shift against SAM systems and to borrow a phrase anyone who ignores this does so at their own peril.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1577
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:25 pm

Planeflyer wrote:
And since then 4th gen AC have made only incremental gains against SAMs whereas missiles routinely intercept other missiles.

You forgot the beeka valley. 3rd gen AC knocked down 100% of a massive SAM defence at 0% loss rate.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:55 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
And since then 4th gen AC have made only incremental gains against SAMs whereas missiles routinely intercept other missiles.

You forgot the beeka valley. 3rd gen AC knocked down 100% of a massive SAM defence at 0% loss rate.



Ok fair I didn’t forget it but also understand that The Beeka valley is not comparable to what is in place today.

And Israel is buying F35’s to deal with current SAM systems
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:52 am

Planeflyer wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Planeflyer wrote:
And since then 4th gen AC have made only incremental gains against SAMs whereas missiles routinely intercept other missiles.

You forgot the beeka valley. 3rd gen AC knocked down 100% of a massive SAM defence at 0% loss rate.



Ok fair I didn’t forget it but also understand that The Beeka valley is not comparable to what is in place today.


In deed, no one can afford to dot the landscape with that density of SAMs batteries these days...

And Israel is buying F35’s to deal with current SAM systems


Israel is buying F35. End of story. They buy all modern US fighters the moment they can.Look when they got their F15 and F16.

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:07 am

Tommy, but they are buying F35’s and they know a fair bit up contested environments.

If they had not committed to the F35 your argument which essentially rests the idea that it is overkill would have some merit.

Germany because they are part of NATO can live w/o the F35 but w/o it they will depend on others who have it untill air defenses are degraded such that 4 th gen ac can operate

But Israel, who can least afford to make a mistake
 
vr773
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 5:10 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:22 pm

Let's do shots every time Planeflyer says "contested environment" ;)

Here is a hypothetical I was thinking about today: let's say Germany decides that it is indeed really important to get a bunch of F-35s to have the ability to drop bombs on Russian soil and let's also make the wild assumption that the F-35 is actually a fairly risk-free option to do so for years to come. -> What would be the earliest time Germany would actually be able to operate them to do that? Let's be super optimistic and say 2023. Let's also assume that this purchase wouldn't kill the FCAS program. What's the earliest time they would get those 6th gen systems? Let's say 2040.
If that's true, you're essentially asking the German taxpayer to pay $5+ billion just so that you're able to engage in a highly unlikely WW3 scenario for a time span of only 17 years. That would be politically and fiscally insane.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1742
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:05 pm

vr773 wrote:
Let's do shots every time Planeflyer says "contested environment" ;)

Here is a hypothetical I was thinking about today: let's say Germany decides that it is indeed really important to get a bunch of F-35s to have the ability to drop bombs on Russian soil and let's also make the wild assumption that the F-35 is actually a fairly risk-free option to do so for years to come. -> What would be the earliest time Germany would actually be able to operate them to do that? Let's be super optimistic and say 2023. Let's also assume that this purchase wouldn't kill the FCAS program. What's the earliest time they would get those 6th gen systems? Let's say 2040.
If that's true, you're essentially asking the German taxpayer to pay $5+ billion just so that you're able to engage in a highly unlikely WW3 scenario for a time span of only 17 years. That would be politically and fiscally insane.


FCAS won’t be in service in 2040 if they start today.

Eurofighter establishes a program office in 1986 for a fighter that entered service in 2003 that only did air to air. That’s 17 years so that is 2035 at best. Th Tranche 2 aircraft with a limited ground attack capability didn’t show up until 2013 so that is 27 years.

Eurofighter partners were fully defined in 1986. Any new fighter hasn’t even reached that stage yet.

Moreover you propose to skip a generation of both airframe and engine development and just hand waived away any issues with that. And then there is hope the thing will be ready to go in a timeframe comparable to the relatively unambtious Eurofighter?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:00 pm

Planeflyer wrote:
If they had not committed to the F35 your argument which essentially rests the idea that it is overkill would have some merit.

Germany because they are part of NATO can live w/o the F35 but w/o it they will depend on others who have it untill air defenses are degraded such that 4 th gen ac can operate


When they got the F15 it was overkill too.

But Israel, who can least afford to make a mistake


Israel got ~200 nukes. The notion of them facing any conventional existential threat is no more realistic than someone seriously invading Russia or the US.

You know what the least survivable air asset in a contested environment is? Helicopters! They are slow, can't pull g's and have a radar return that is extremely distinct and pretty large. Yet every military is buying them, even those banking in stealth.
What was the last contested airspace helicopters operated in? The no-fly zone over Libya in 2011. The government used them quite a lot to ferry troops around and to attack rebels. So how many did they lose in that contested environment, enforced by the best fighters you can get his side of the F22, that had absolute air supremacy and could pick them off with impunity, had high PK weapons and about the best radars you can put on a higher? None. So many. Talking about non-stealthy aircraft being target drones....

bigjku wrote:
Eurofighter establishes a program office in 1986 for a fighter that entered service in 2003 that only did air to air. That’s 17 years so that is 2035 at best. Th Tranche 2 aircraft with a limited ground attack capability didn’t show up until 2013 so that is 27 years.


Multirole capabilities where added in 1992, where they design was also made bigger and heavier.

Eurofighter partners were fully defined in 1986. Any new fighter hasn’t even reached that stage yet.


However, the who, what, where and how many was not sattled before 1997.

And then there is hope the thing will be ready to go in a timeframe comparable to the relatively unambtious Eurofighter?


I think being more cost efficient in the air2air role than the F22 was in itself a quite ambitious goal, even if they airframe was just state of the art.

Moreover you propose to skip a generation of both airframe and engine development and just hand waived away any issues with that.


The Eurofighter was build by four nations, 3 had not developed an air superiority fighter in decades and one had developed a version with BVR missiles of a strike/interdiction aircraft....

vr773 wrote:
Let's do shots every time Planeflyer says "contested environment" ;)


Prost!

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
mxaxai
Posts: 700
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Tue Dec 11, 2018 5:25 pm

angad84 wrote:
Just spoke to a mate at one of the EF partner companies. Apparently the centreline was the easiest to integrate Litening, because it uses a pretty standard pylon. Putting it on one of the BVRAAM stations would have required some very complex engineering, because the recessed station dia is smaller than a Litening, and they would have to create a new bit of mounting hardware to either keep it flush (or thereabouts) or hold it out away from the fuselage. Airframe masking is an interesting point, but I hadn't seen these posts before I spoke to him, so didn't think to ask.

Anyway, centreline with two bags should suffice for most use cases. Just found it interesting that there is no planet on which a Typhoon can do self-designated A2G precision strike with three tanks. I guess they could do the work if someone funded it, but right now it looks like whoever is buying is fine with the centre station.

Just a follow-up on this:
The new Lockheed Sniper ATP, that will be equipped first on the Kuwaiti Eurofighters, was recently flight-tested in Germany. It too was mounted on the centreline pylon. It seems that they're okay with that position.
Apparently, all partner nations are involved in testing the Sniper, so we might see it as a standard feature on Block 4 Eurofighters (if that happens). I don't think all Block 3B EFs are delivered with it, though.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1742
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:04 pm

I think being more cost efficient in the air2air role than the F22 was in itself a quite ambitious goal, even if they airframe was just state of the art.


I don’t think you can say it’s more cost efficient as an air to air fighter. It’s cheaper. But efficiency has a performance metric to it. In combat against a relative peer (say someone with SU-35’s or any other advanced Flanker variant) I would expect the EF to come off better but on something like a 2 or 3 to 1 basis. While the F-22 I would expect to push more towards 10-1 or likely as not get a clean sweep.

And that is in the air defense role. If you want to strike at someone I don’t expect the EF to do much better than 1 to 1 if it’s required to act offensively in contested airspace with SAMs in the area. That isn’t a knock on it, it’s just the reality of the situation for any non low observable plane.
 
User avatar
zululima
Posts: 421
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:21 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:05 am

bigjku wrote:
I don’t think you can say it’s more cost efficient as an air to air fighter. It’s cheaper. But efficiency has a performance metric to it. In combat against a relative peer (say someone with SU-35’s or any other advanced Flanker variant) I would expect the EF to come off better but on something like a 2 or 3 to 1 basis. While the F-22 I would expect to push more towards 10-1 or likely as not get a clean sweep.


It's hard to say what a "relative peer" conflict would produce, but if the F-15, after 40 years service, had a kill ratio of 104 to 0, I wouldn't expect the F-22 to take any non-flukey losses. Maybe you could get one in a fubar dogfight/melee, or sneak up on an airbase while one is landing, a-la Me-262 kills by prop fighters, but the majority will survive until they alone dominate the battlespace. Stealth is the ultimate cost-effectiveness in our era.
I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:05 am

zululima wrote:
bigjku wrote:
I don’t think you can say it’s more cost efficient as an air to air fighter. It’s cheaper. But efficiency has a performance metric to it. In combat against a relative peer (say someone with SU-35’s or any other advanced Flanker variant) I would expect the EF to come off better but on something like a 2 or 3 to 1 basis. While the F-22 I would expect to push more towards 10-1 or likely as not get a clean sweep.


It's hard to say what a "relative peer" conflict would produce, but if the F-15, after 40 years service, had a kill ratio of 104 to 0, I wouldn't expect the F-22 to take any non-flukey losses. Maybe you could get one in a fubar dogfight/melee, or sneak up on an airbase while one is landing, a-la Me-262 kills by prop fighters, but the majority will survive until they alone dominate the battlespace. Stealth is the ultimate cost-effectiveness in our era

In nothing is more cost effective than deterrence and the bad guys who do everything to be omnipotent to their population just hate it when their airspace and strategic assets are attacked w impunity.

Stealth and precision weapons make offensive operations in contested airspace( yeah, I get that some of you hate this term but if you’re honest w yourself your unease is testament to truth of the term) possible.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 9382
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 12, 2018 9:50 am

bigjku wrote:
I think being more cost efficient in the air2air role than the F22 was in itself a quite ambitious goal, even if they airframe was just state of the art.


I don’t think you can say it’s more cost efficient as an air to air fighter. It’s cheaper. But efficiency has a performance metric to it. .


The UK stuck with the Eurofighter because of cost efficiency, not price. The EF was estimated to win 5:1, the F22 9:1 for 60 to 100% higher price, making the Eurofighter 89 - 112% as cost efficient.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/d ... 31137.html

best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1162
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: Germany Considers Tornado Replacement

Wed Dec 12, 2018 1:07 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
bigjku wrote:
I think being more cost efficient in the air2air role than the F22 was in itself a quite ambitious goal, even if they airframe was just state of the art.


I don’t think you can say it’s more cost efficient as an air to air fighter. It’s cheaper. But efficiency has a performance metric to it. .


The UK stuck with the Eurofighter because of cost efficiency, not price. The EF was estimated to win 5:1, the F22 9:1 for 60 to 100% higher price, making the Eurofighter 89 - 112% as cost efficient.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/d ... 31137.html

best regards
Thomas



Seriously, the article you linked is from 1992. The UK is stuck with the EF because of head in the sand, legacy thinking. Western allies by now are very familar with Red Flag results and know full well what current loss would be for 4th gen and 5th gen ac. If those rates were anything close to what the article states many fewer nations would be adopting the F35.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos