Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

F-15SE Silent Eagle vs Eurofighter Typhoon which one do you thing will come on top.

F-16.net Sponsor

Mission? The Typhoon is smaller and more maneuverable, the eagle has a longer range and grater payload.

Both f-15se and eurofighter have more or less the same range.

Will the F-15SE have the equivalent of the 'Golden Eagle' ugrades?

I'm sure it depends on the strategy and stuff, right? Is this a one-on-one? BVR or WVR?

Who detects who first would be an interesting subject to address. If the F-15SE has LPI, it might be able to detect the Typhoon's radar emissions without worrying too much about the Typhoon detecting its own emissions.

In my opinion it would be a close fight and depend on the quality of pilots and their training. Both have LO features built into their designs and I imagine when both are carrying external weapons, their RCS is similar.

F-15SE
+ Superior radar and avionics
+ Superior ground attack capability
+ Low frontal RCS when using the CFT/weapon bay configuration, probably comparable to the F-117A

Typhoon
+ Somewhat greater maneuverability at most speeds/altitudes
+ Supercruise
+ Built in IRST
+ MBDA Meteor (eventually)

lampshade111 wrote:

+ Low frontal RCS when using the CFT/weapon bay configuration, probably comparable to the F-117A

Lol by painting some RAM on it and installing a radar blocker into the intakes?

Unfortunately, it looks like the Typhoon Program is winding down before it can see it's airframe potential exploited, and when it could be evolving a la F-15SE. You'd think a tranche 4 would be a competitive proposal being jointly developed, as a next gen tacair option to SE.

The Eurofighter programme progresses at slower pace than it should, thanks to crappy politics. The programme itself won't wind down as such, there are simply technologies/capabilities which won't make it in or not make it in soon. People usually link capabilities to tranches, but that's the wrong approach and a tranche 4 is unlikely at all (except you mean T3B). What has been optionally offered by the industry, were just that, proposals not definite plans which were road mapped and contracted.

The F-15SE is many ways nothing else than a F-15K/SG with some RCS reduction measures and reconfigured CFTs, plus new EWS and this aircraft has yet to fly, let alone find a customer and being fully developed.

Scorpion82 wrote:

lampshade111 wrote:

+ Low frontal RCS when using the CFT/weapon bay configuration, probably comparable to the F-117A

Lol by painting some RAM on it and installing a radar blocker into the intakes?

Boeing claimed it was comparable to the F-35 from the frontal aspect. Now since the F-22A was said to be stealthier than first generation stealth aircraft like the F-117A, I presume the F-35 is as well. Yet I didn't say comparable to the F-35 since Boeing is probably exaggerating a bit.

@Lampshade,
even the level of the F-117A can hardly be achieved by the few measures. As LM would say stealth must be designed in. It's more than doubtful that the F-15's barn door RCS can be reduced to such a low level.

lampshade111 wrote:

Boeing claimed it was comparable to the F-35 from the frontal aspect.

Which was complete BS.

Of course with RCS reduction and internal weapons, I'm sure it could be competitive with Typhoons/Rafales/Super Hornets, but with a bigger radar, and longer legs.

g3143 wrote:

Both f-15se and eurofighter have more or less the same range.

Negative. The F-15SE has a longer combat radius, especially if it has EFTs.

Quote:

Boeing claimed it was comparable to the F-35 from the frontal aspect.

Here's something to think about: if true low-observability comparable to that of the F-35 could be achieved by tweaking 4th gen airframes, then why even bother with the extensive shaping and high-tolerance construction when building 5th gen fighters?

That RAM used on the F-15SE must have eye of newt and virgin's blood as part of the ingredients. Laughing

Kryptid wrote:

Quote:

Boeing claimed it was comparable to the F-35 from the frontal aspect.

Here's something to think about: if true low-observability comparable to that of the F-35 could be achieved by tweaking 4th gen airframes, then why even bother with the extensive shaping and high-tolerance construction when building 5th gen fighters?

That RAM used on the F-15SE must have eye of newt and virgin's blood as part of the ingredients. Laughing

I agree with you, but Boeing only made the claim from the front, so the all aspect stealth needed for something like deep penetration of air defense would be missing from stealthed 4th gen planes.

As for the subject of the thread, I can't vote. The SE is still a little ways off. The EF-2000 is superior in terms of aerodynamics to the F-15 C/E, but the SE has internal weapons combined with the 229 engines. That's a lot of thrust (however, the extra weight on the SE hurts wing loading, and the EF has a better figure in that area than just about anything). Perhaps above Mach 1, the EF, with semi conformal missiles, will out fly the SE (the F-15 airframe was design for transonic combat), but that hardly matters if the SE gets a LPI lock and fires an AMRAAM.