stratable wrote:ThePointblank wrote:stratable wrote:Thanks for the detailed response guys!
I was also wondering what we know about aircraft capabilities:
Would you even bring the Super Hornets to places like Afghanistan or just leave them in Germany (for their nuclear role). Are there missions (excluding nuclear) where the Super Hornet
may be preferred over the Typhoon? (in terms of the Super Hornet being a more capable platform) - does anybody have any insight on that?
The Germans tended to not engage in actual combat operations; even over Afghanistan, their Tornado's were Recce only.
The only sort of actual shooting the Germans engaged with their Tornado's was during Operation Allied Force; German Tornado ECR's were escorting and providing SEAD for Allied strike packages by suppressing Serb SAM's.
Thanks for the info, I was kind off aware of the fact that the Germans don't do a lot of actual shooting. But I was really more interested in aircraft capabilities here
From a capabilities perspective the aircraft are close in some areas and apart in others. A look at a few areas;
Radar - SH has had an AESA for a long time, it is a reasonable size and is likely now very stable and capable. Eurofighter still doesn't have an AESA, the CAPTOR-E is yet to be installed on a production aircraft for operational use. The CAPTOR-E will also be a reasonable size but I expect it will have a few years of maturing before it is as effective as others currently on the market. The SH AESA is fix mounted at an RCS reduced angle, this may slightly reduce some of its effectiveness against A2G targets. The Eurofighter will mount their AESA so it can still mechanically rotate. Worse RCS performance but improved off angle targeting especially for A2A work. There is also the risk the mechanical mount will jam, a not uncommon issue with current non AESA radars.
RCS - Probably favours the SH but after you load both aircraft up with external tanks and weapons they are likely very similar.
IRST - SH will have it mounted in a fuel tank on the centerline, if Germany actually buy the option. Eurofighter has PIRATE IRST which is capable and effective but I don't believe most/any German Eurofighters are actually equipped with PIRATE. Perhaps Germany will buy PIRATE or an upgraded version for the next batch of 93?
Speed - Eurofighter is definitely faster and an excellent supersonic performer with a very impressive thrust to weight ratio. SH struggles supersonic because of canted pylons.
Manoeuvrability - Both are 9G airframes but the SH has the ability to pull much greater AoA. In a WVR fight I would give the edge to the SH, in a BVR fight I would give the edge to the Eurofighter as its speed would allow it to launch weapons further away and also support those with the mechanically moving AESA.
Range - The Blk III SH probably has a range advantage with the conformal tanks. The Eurofighter can be equipped with them but again Germany has to buy the option.
HMD - Both had HMS, probably equal in capability.
Weapons - SH has slightly more weapons integrated but Eurofighter is also pretty good. Problem is Germany has acquired few A2G weapons for the aircraft. Who knows how many Germany will acquire for the SH. The SH likely has a better payload range capability as the Eurofighter often has to trade fuel for heavy weapons. Conformals for the Eurofighter would assist greatly here. Interesting question will be whether Germany looks to integrate the Taurus KEPD 350 onto the SH or acquire maybe JASSMER? Also if the KEPD 350 will be integrated to German Eurofighters. Germany will also have to decide if they want to integrate Meteor onto the SH or keep that for the Eurofighter only.
Avionics/Cockpit - Probably edges to the SH here. Eurofighter started with some voice cockpit work but an interview with a German Eurofighter pilot on Fighter Pilot Podcast indicated the Eurofighter cockpit layout and use wasn't as easy, intuitive or capable as an F-16 and the SH is, IMO, an improvement over the F-16.
In the end the pilot is the one that would matter if the two aircraft ever met each other in a conflict.
As for how Germany will use them. I would be surprised if they dedicate the 30 SH for the nuclear role only. I expect they will do the standard A2G work of the Tornado fleet with the same weapons and have the nuclear role as just one of their A2G mission sets. I also expect they will train themselves given the whole fleet are F models. The RAAF has fewer F models and conducts their own conversion training. I expect Growler pilots will transition/train in the US to learn the specifics of the SEAD mission in the Growler.
Finally, Denmark evaluated both aircraft as part of their competition, below is what they found.
The above is not for the SH Blk III or a potentially enhanced Eurofighter though.