Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
889091 wrote:How many combat ready Eurofighters does Germany have today? If I recall correctly, 2 crashed last summer (2019). If the situation dictates it, how many Eurofighters can the Luftwaffe scramble and get airborne with live weapons to defend Germany's airspace?
889091 wrote:How many combat ready Eurofighters does Germany have today? If I recall correctly, 2 crashed last summer (2019). If the situation dictates it, how many Eurofighters can the Luftwaffe scramble and get airborne with live weapons to defend Germany's airspace?
SteelChair wrote:I've always assumed, as a layman, that the Growler is probably loaded up with state of the art, super classified, EW capabilities. I wonder if Germany will get "the full package?"
Ozair wrote:SteelChair wrote:I've always assumed, as a layman, that the Growler is probably loaded up with state of the art, super classified, EW capabilities. I wonder if Germany will get "the full package?"
I expect that the general airframe and systems will be the same between the operating nations. Potentially there may be some difference in the EW pods acquired. I assume the German Growlers, if they are ordered, will not bother with ALQ-99 pods but go straight to the NGJ. There may be some differences in the jamming programs with the US likely having some US only programs.
It will be interesting to know, although doubtful it would ever be released, what the differences may be between German, Australian and US Growlers and additionally if the Finn's order what their aircraft will comparatively be equipped with.
SteelChair wrote:
It looks like I may have made some incorrect assumptions. I assumed the Growler was the most advanced with regard to computer hardware and software, but this article claims that the F-15EX has the most advanced mission computer and the most advanced radar in the world, even more advanced than the F-22.
SteelChair wrote:That makes the German decision more perplexing to me. Why not put the best radar and computers into the most kinetically capable airframe?
Ozair wrote:SteelChair wrote:I've always assumed, as a layman, that the Growler is probably loaded up with state of the art, super classified, EW capabilities. I wonder if Germany will get "the full package?"
I expect that the general airframe and systems will be the same between the operating nations. Potentially there may be some difference in the EW pods acquired. I assume the German Growlers, if they are ordered, will not bother with ALQ-99 pods but go straight to the NGJ. There may be some differences in the jamming programs with the US likely having some US only programs.
It will be interesting to know, although doubtful it would ever be released, what the differences may be between German, Australian and US Growlers and additionally if the Finn's order what their aircraft will comparatively be equipped with.
SteelChair wrote:That makes the German decision more perplexing to me. Why not put the best radar and computers into the most kinetically capable airframe?
Ozair wrote:German, Australian and US Growlers
Ozair wrote:SteelChair wrote:
It looks like I may have made some incorrect assumptions. I assumed the Growler was the most advanced with regard to computer hardware and software, but this article claims that the F-15EX has the most advanced mission computer and the most advanced radar in the world, even more advanced than the F-22.
Not really relevant. F-35 is getting a new processor in 2023 as part of TR2. https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/09/27/harris-lm-icp/
SH blk III is also getting a new computer. https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... block-iii/
As for radar having a powerful radar is only a part of the equation. If you combine a powerful radar, which F-15ex, F-22, F-35 and SH all have with low RCS you get a paradigm shift. Tactically combining a powerful radar with a low RCS is a massive advantage which the F-15ex can not do, it is still the same tennis court RCS.SteelChair wrote:That makes the German decision more perplexing to me. Why not put the best radar and computers into the most kinetically capable airframe?
F-15ex is at the end of the dev cycle while SH has a strong dev path forward. SH is also probably half the sustainment cost of an F-15 no matter the variant. There are also soon to be no USAF F-15 squadrons left in Europe.
tommy1808 wrote:Ozair wrote:SteelChair wrote:I've always assumed, as a layman, that the Growler is probably loaded up with state of the art, super classified, EW capabilities. I wonder if Germany will get "the full package?"
I expect that the general airframe and systems will be the same between the operating nations. Potentially there may be some difference in the EW pods acquired. I assume the German Growlers, if they are ordered, will not bother with ALQ-99 pods but go straight to the NGJ. There may be some differences in the jamming programs with the US likely having some US only programs.
It will be interesting to know, although doubtful it would ever be released, what the differences may be between German, Australian and US Growlers and additionally if the Finn's order what their aircraft will comparatively be equipped with.
From a plain cost perspective I would be highly surprised the hardware isn't identical, but software won't. For EW the knowhow is in the software. The RF hardware is not the capability enabler after all.SteelChair wrote:That makes the German decision more perplexing to me. Why not put the best radar and computers into the most kinetically capable airframe?
I would be somewhat surprised if either the FA-18 or F15 had any meaningful kinetic advantage over the Eurofighter. And the Tranche 4 AESA radar isn't to shrug at either. Hensoldt is a world leading company after all.
I am curious if the bi-static capability will be fielded. They tested it, SARah is about to be in orbit.
http://elib.dlr.de/55400/1/RoBaKrMo_TGRS10_ieee.pdf
Best regards
Thomas
SteelChair wrote:tommy1808 wrote:Ozair wrote:I expect that the general airframe and systems will be the same between the operating nations. Potentially there may be some difference in the EW pods acquired. I assume the German Growlers, if they are ordered, will not bother with ALQ-99 pods but go straight to the NGJ. There may be some differences in the jamming programs with the US likely having some US only programs.
It will be interesting to know, although doubtful it would ever be released, what the differences may be between German, Australian and US Growlers and additionally if the Finn's order what their aircraft will comparatively be equipped with.
From a plain cost perspective I would be highly surprised the hardware isn't identical, but software won't. For EW the knowhow is in the software. The RF hardware is not the capability enabler after all.SteelChair wrote:That makes the German decision more perplexing to me. Why not put the best radar and computers into the most kinetically capable airframe?
I would be somewhat surprised if either the FA-18 or F15 had any meaningful kinetic advantage over the Eurofighter. And the Tranche 4 AESA radar isn't to shrug at either. Hensoldt is a world leading company after all.
I am curious if the bi-static capability will be fielded. They tested it, SARah is about to be in orbit.
http://elib.dlr.de/55400/1/RoBaKrMo_TGRS10_ieee.pdf
Best regards
Thomas
With regard to kinetics, I'm sure the Eurofighter can out turn the F15 and would be very formidable in a close-in engagement. But with regard to raw power, top speed, payload capability, persistence/range, isn't the much larger F15 much more capable?
SteelChair wrote:I've always wondered about the fetish with stealth. Does a fighter even need stealth?
SteelChair wrote:If you're in a fighter, aren't you looking for a fight in the first place? Its different than an attack plane.
SteelChair wrote:And once you turn on the radar and begin emitting, doesn't that exponentially increase your chances of being detected and tracked, even with a so called low probability of intercept radar? And once you start shooting, doesn't that also give up the game of stealth?
tommy1808 wrote:
From a plain cost perspective I would be highly surprised the hardware isn't identical, but software won't. For EW the knowhow is in the software. The RF hardware is not the capability enabler after all.
Berlin has approved a contract for sensor house Hensoldt to complete development, production and integration work on an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar for its air force fleet of Eurofighter combat aircraft.
“With this decision, Germany is taking on a pioneering role in the field of key technology for the Eurofighter for the first time,” says Hensoldt chief executive Thomas Mueller.
...
Ozair wrote:I wasn't aware that Germany plans to go it alone on the AESA radar for their Eurofighter upgrade. Hensoldt was partnering on the CAPTOR-E but the way this report reads is that Germany will be funding the whole development and deployment of a different or variant radar to their fleet of Eurofighters.
art wrote:Ozair wrote:I wasn't aware that Germany plans to go it alone on the AESA radar for their Eurofighter upgrade. Hensoldt was partnering on the CAPTOR-E but the way this report reads is that Germany will be funding the whole development and deployment of a different or variant radar to their fleet of Eurofighters.
The way in which AESA is being implemented on the Eurofighter ihas given rise to delay and inereased cost. Not clever at all.
The German Bundestag has approved funding to develop, build, and integrate a new active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar system for the Luftwaffe’s Eurofighter combat aircraft fleet.
The approval by the Bundestag's Budget Committee, announced on 17 June, will see national sensor-house Hensoldt lead the effort to equip the Luftwaffe’s 79 Tranche 2 and 31 Tranche 3A Eurofighters with an updated AESA (also known as electronically scanned [E-Scan]) radar system.
…
The Eurofighter consortium that comprises Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK is already developing an AESA/E-Scan radar through the Euroradar consortium. This effort, led by Leonardo UK, builds on the aircraft’s existing Captor mechanically scanned (M-Scan) radar, and is known as Captor E-Scan and/or Captor AESA (CAESAR). This baseline AESA is referred to as Radar Mk 0 (also Radar 0), and is the system slated for Kuwait and Qatar, as well as initially for Luftwaffe Tranche 2 and 3 Eurofighters also.
…
Vorlage des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen
Abschluss von Verträgen mit einem Volumen von jeweils mehr als 25 Mio. Euro im Einzelplan 14 sowie Einwilligung in die teilweise Aufhebung der qualifizierten Sperre der Verpflichtungsermächtigung bei Kapitel 1405 Titel 554 17 - Beschaffung des Waffensystems Eurofighter - in Höhe von bis zu 1.083.957 T Euro gemäß § 36 Satz 2 BHO;
Beschaffung von Radargeräten mit elektronischer Strahlschwenkung sowie Entwicklung und Integration eines Mehrkanal-empfängers für diese Radargeräte für das Waffensystem Eurofighter
The first paragraph basically means that the budget was previously limited to 1 billion €, and that this limitation was lifted.Submission of the Federal Ministry of Finance:
Signing of contracts with a volume of more than 25 million euros each in Section 14 as well as consent to the partial lifting of the qualified block of the authorization under Chapter 1405 Title 554 17 - Procurement of the Eurofighter Weapons System - in the amount of up to EUR 1,083,957,000 in accordance with section 36 sentence 2 BHO;
Procurement of radar devices with electronic beam swiveling as well as development and integration of a multi-channel receiver for these radar devices for the weapon system Eurofighter
mxaxai wrote:I've looked through recent German reports and there seem to be two primary contracts:
- Outfitting of the Eurofighter fleet with the existing AESA radar (Captor-E) by Airbus (500 million €)
- Development & integration of a new multi-channel receiver (MCR) for the Captor-E by Hensoldt, in cooperation with Airbus and Indra (1.5 billion €)
The overall upgrade budget appears to be 2.8 billion €, I don't know what the remaining money is for. Hensoldt's press release is pretty nondescript: https://www.hensoldt.net/news/important ... logy-base/
The protocol of the budget subcommittee of the German parliament states https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/ ... g-data.pdf :Vorlage des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen
Abschluss von Verträgen mit einem Volumen von jeweils mehr als 25 Mio. Euro im Einzelplan 14 sowie Einwilligung in die teilweise Aufhebung der qualifizierten Sperre der Verpflichtungsermächtigung bei Kapitel 1405 Titel 554 17 - Beschaffung des Waffensystems Eurofighter - in Höhe von bis zu 1.083.957 T Euro gemäß § 36 Satz 2 BHO;
Beschaffung von Radargeräten mit elektronischer Strahlschwenkung sowie Entwicklung und Integration eines Mehrkanal-empfängers für diese Radargeräte für das Waffensystem EurofighterThe first paragraph basically means that the budget was previously limited to 1 billion €, and that this limitation was lifted.Submission of the Federal Ministry of Finance:
Signing of contracts with a volume of more than 25 million euros each in Section 14 as well as consent to the partial lifting of the qualified block of the authorization under Chapter 1405 Title 554 17 - Procurement of the Eurofighter Weapons System - in the amount of up to EUR 1,083,957,000 in accordance with section 36 sentence 2 BHO;
Procurement of radar devices with electronic beam swiveling as well as development and integration of a multi-channel receiver for these radar devices for the weapon system Eurofighter
It is unclear to me whether the Tranche 2 & 3 jets will receive the baseline Captor-E first and the MCR later, or both will be installed in one go. The former (2 steps) seems more likely, though.
ThePointblank wrote:It sounds like to me there maybe issues with the CAPTOR-E which is causing both the British and Germans to take pause. Otherwise, if the radar did perform as advertised and was superior to the current radar, they would be less hesitant to fund the upgrades.
Ozair wrote:ThePointblank wrote:It sounds like to me there maybe issues with the CAPTOR-E which is causing both the British and Germans to take pause. Otherwise, if the radar did perform as advertised and was superior to the current radar, they would be less hesitant to fund the upgrades.
The other side of this is software. Any operator could stick an AESA antenna on the front of most radars and get some gain but the real benefits for AESA come from the software. The Monch article indicates the physical design has been frozen for a number of years but the software is still being developed. Software delay is hardly new for defence programs but perhaps the system is mature enough for Kuwait and Qatar to go forward, neither Air Force is exactly at the pinnacle of military capability anyway.
Ozair wrote:ThePointblank wrote:It sounds like to me there maybe issues with the CAPTOR-E which is causing both the British and Germans to take pause. Otherwise, if the radar did perform as advertised and was superior to the current radar, they would be less hesitant to fund the upgrades.
I think the superior to the current radar may be the problem. The Captor-E is almost certaily better than the current Captor-M (even just for EP) but perhaps not enough to justify the investment. As the Monch article above talks about, the T2 jets don't have the additional cooling and electrical systems in place to handle the increased power of the AESA, therefore if you are only looking at upgrading T3 jets which number less than T2s the overall fleet may be more impacted on sustainment cost and fleet diversity than on radar performance.
mxaxai wrote:A few years back, the UK were pretty committed to buying Captor-E: https://rusi.org/commentary/uk-funding- ... te-never-0
Given the huge capability advantages of AESA radars over older mechanically scanned radar systems, there is a strong argument that ‘Captor-E’ should have been funded by the Eurofighter partner nations several years ago. The technology has been ready but the commitment from partner nations has been lacking. The result has been the decline in Typhoon’s fortunes on the international export market.
tommy1808 wrote:
It may also be that Software wise the aim is very high. They didn´t do all the AESA bi-static mode, Air to Air and Space to Air, testing for nothing, and that seems to be pretty tough to achieve.
I remember when Germany wanted a more advances Ka-Band seeker on the Meteor missile and couldn´t get the other partners to sign on.
best regards
Thomas
mxaxai wrote:The existing Captor-M is considered a very good, if not the best non-AESA radar on the market. It's very much possible that the operational advantage of Captor-E is relatively small, especially if you don't have the other systems ready to utilise the extra capability. For a new operator like Kuwait or Qatar, it would make no difference, but large operators like Germany or the UK would face significant costs for retrofits as well as having to train with two different systems. This would also be a reason why Germany is looking to replace the T1 aircraft. With Germany looking to upgrade the T2 aircraft, the additional cooling doesn't appear to be a problem anymore?
mxaxai wrote:A few years back, the UK were pretty committed to buying Captor-E: https://rusi.org/commentary/uk-funding- ... te-never-0
It's possible, though, that they didn't consider it as important once they started receiving the F-35, since the F-35 features a pretty powerful radar itself.
mxaxai wrote:Some German politicians are using the recent decision to relocate one third of the US troops from Germany to other places as an opportunity to, once again, advocate against the acquisition of F/A-18. They called Trump's recent actions "arbitrary", "acts of pressure" and "blackmail".
Others, however, point out that "the US have certain technologies that Europe currently cannot replace" and recommended to maintain the cooperation in defence technology. They also advised not to escalate the current conflict, citing "democratic boundaries" that not even Trump can violate.
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/mue ... -1.4984888 [German]
art wrote:mxaxai wrote:A few years back, the UK were pretty committed to buying Captor-E: https://rusi.org/commentary/uk-funding- ... te-never-0
Extract from the rusi.org article written in 2014:Given the huge capability advantages of AESA radars over older mechanically scanned radar systems, there is a strong argument that ‘Captor-E’ should have been funded by the Eurofighter partner nations several years ago. The technology has been ready but the commitment from partner nations has been lacking. The result has been the decline in Typhoon’s fortunes on the international export market.
Same old Eurofighter story - do it too late + increase costs enormously by doing it too late. Infantile project management..
Planeflyer wrote:The only thing for certain is the SH has very little chance accomplishing a deep strike Mission let alone surviving.
Who is advocating it and what is their a Rational?
art wrote:Planeflyer wrote:The only thing for certain is the SH has very little chance accomplishing a deep strike Mission let alone surviving.
Who is advocating it and what is their a Rational?
If you are tasked to deliver nuclear ordnance, you might as well not bother trying to return to base.
I say that because I had a friend who flew the English Electric Lightning. Its primary role was to intercept Russian bombers over the North Sea. It was armed with just two A2A missiles. When the world came perilously close to nuclear war in 1962, pilots were briefed that in the event of Russian attack they were to intercept and shoot down attacking bombers. When they had used their 2 missiles they should attempt to ram another target then eject. There would be no point in trying to return to base since there would be no base to return to. There would be no air-sea rescue after ejection either.
Planeflyer wrote:Germany is going to have their hands full keeping their airspace free of enemy ac let alone penetrating enemy territory.
Planeflyer wrote:Germany is not spending the money based on current threats. This is something they will live with for 40-50 years..
Planeflyer wrote:Not sure what you guys are talking about but the paradigm to stealth shifted 20 years ago so it makes zero sense doing what Germany is currently planning.