F-16.net

seat_dreamer wrote:

Would SA really turn against the USA however ? I'd think they still have strong ties (F-15s, E-3s, relative support for the king etc.) I can imagine that the Saudis are far more logical than Saddam or most current Irani officials....It's a family business anyways, not an elected government...

Remember Iran and the Shah, the Ayatollah Khomeni and the Iranian revolution? I'm sure the U.S. was certain the Shah would last when it sold them F-14s and F-16s. I am not the least bit confident that SA will remain a U.S. ally. In fact, I look forward to the day when their E-3s, F-15s and Typhoons are gobbled up by a couple of Raptors. In the case of the Saudis, with friends like that, who needs Iran?

F-16.net Sponsor

Idesof wrote:

Picking a fight again, eh? You are full of it yet again. First of all, regarding this notion that I am an inveterate apologist for anything American, why don't you ask other members of this board, in particular Raptor_One, about my supposed blind allegiance to anything American? Why don't you ask those who have taken issue with me for disliking the Super Hornet almost as much as I dislike the Typhoon, another relic of a bygone era? Your ad hominem attack merely shows you've got nothing to show for your own line of argument.

Sorry Idesof I made that post in a rush, my post was actually saying Thumper was the one with the Blind US allegiance. Ill edit that.

Also remember the BBC are the ones who published the article, and my point still holds about them. Anything negative towards the government, civil service and even the forces (although they have changed their stance on that with Iraq, as they can use the 'poor troops in Iraq' to attack Mr Blair). I don't know if that article is true or not about the mock engagements.

SpeakTheTruth wrote:

Quote:

Thumper was the one with the Blind US allegiance

Yeah, I guess objecting to my tax dollars going to RR to help keep them in the fighter engine business is blind US allegiance. Sure why not help the competition at the expense of American jobs.

Lets give the British access to the crown jewels of the JSF project the source code. Hey they put up 2 out of 40 billion of the development cost.

I could go on and on about blind US Allegiance and how the British have got some brass balls. I am not ashamed of it. Unlike many, I take a bit larger view of things. Great Britain (like all nations) is a competitor first and a friend second. So yeah, I tend to look at things from an America first perspective and I at least do it openly unlike you from your perspective.

Now to facts (both on this board and other sources) about the Rhino. Today it has a smaller RCS, a much more powerful and sophisticated radar, better missiles, arguably more maneuverable at low speeds, and a more integrated counter measures suite. It also carries and delivers a greater variety of ordinance than the Tiffy. The Tiffy is faster and out accelerates the Rhino.

BVR Rhino sees and shoots Tiffy before Tiffy knows Rhino is there every time.
WVR (if any Tiffies are left) probably depends on who the better pilot is.
Interdiction Rhino due to variety of weapons carried and superior radar.

No lets not talk about trenches or tranches or whatever you want to call it. There is still plenty of room for growth with the Rhino.

Why does all this matter? Tiffy is being sold to nations who may or may not be friendly to us in the future. Tiffy is in direct competition with our exports and in fact makes it necessary for use to offer for export AC such as JSF, Rhino, and upgraded F-15s.

As for the BBC (a government funded entity); anything negative about the US they pounce on and expound. A real good example of the "warm" relations between the US and the UK.

idesof wrote:

he said he did not knot of any such mock engagements, and he would most assuredly know. Again, he did not say, no comment or can't reveal that or any such thing: he stated, have not know of any such engagements, period.

I have no idea if the Raptor and Eurofighter have mixed it up, and seem to be one of the few people on this board who doesn't really care if they have or not. However, if it has happened or not, the above statement is a perfect way to tell people to mind their own buisiness. If he say's "no comment" or "can't reveal that" then he leaves the door wide open to speculation and naysayers, of whom there are plenty. If he say's "didn't happen", then it doesn't matter if they've flown together or not, everyone knows what the official stance is. Case in point? Everyone knows that Bill Clinton "didn't inhale", and "did not have ***** with that woman", because he said so. Was he telling the truth? Draw your own conclusions. "No comment" and "I can't tell you that" are such cliche's now, that it is far better to make a direct statement (true or not) and leave it at that.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 26, 2005 Posts: 1455 Status: Offline

Thumper3181 wrote:

Now to facts (both on this board and other sources) about the Rhino. Today it has a smaller RCS, a much more powerful and sophisticated radar, better missiles, arguably more maneuverable at low speeds, and a more integrated counter measures suite. It also carries and delivers a greater variety of ordinance than the Tiffy. The Tiffy is faster and out accelerates the Rhino.

As for the BBC (a government funded entity); anything negative about the US they pounce on and expound. A real good example of the "warm" relations between the US and the UK.

Rhino versus Typhoon, Rhino has a smaller RCS, says whom? These figures are secret so no internet sources will tell you that.

Rhino has a better radar, ok...the AESA set in a lot of Rhinos can do a lot of things better than the CAPTOR in the Typhoon. The CAPTOR can do some things better than an AESA developed from technology circa 1998-2002 from what I have read.

Better missiles? Both aircraft use AMRAAM . ASRAAM V 9X, different missiles with different envelopes, each better in some aspects than the other, so about equal in my book as far as missiles go.

More integrated countermeasures suite? Nah, Block 5 Typhoons, which have just been type accepted and are being converted as we speak have FULL DASS,with automated, integrated missile countermeasures, full DVI, full carefree handling, full air to air capability. These are not some future "tranche" wet dreams, this is happening now.

Yup, the air to ground systems are much more mature on the Rhino, those on the Typhoon are only at the initial stages but WILL happen. The Typhoon can already use Paveway II, GBU-16. The CAPTOR also has ground mapping capability. BVR or WVR, it depends on the pilot, their training, SA on the day, with a little bit of luck...They could actually be quite evenly matched air to ar if it wasn`t for Typhoon being able to out climb, out accelerate and possibly out -turn the Rhino! I just want to state that this is my opinion and might mean squat actually. I think that note should be attached to a lot of posts on this topic!

One thing I am certain about is this...

As for the BBC, they are PUBLICLY funded and relatively free of government control. The BBC get some things wrong but mostly get it right. Much more preferable to watch than the awful FOX NEWS which is cringe worthy...

Thumper, I have no difficulty at all with your US-centric view, it is perfectly natural if not always palatable to some Laughing

Quote Snypa

Quote:

Rhino has a smaller RCS, says whom? These figures are secret so no internet sources will tell you that.

Judging by previous posts on this forum by other (some non American) members we do seem to have an idea of the the frontal RCS of various fighters. Since you have even participated in some of the threads I will not bore you with who posted them and when.

Frontal RCS of Blk II Rhino 0.1 - 0.01 M2
Frontal RCS of Tiffy 0.25-0.1 M2

Quote:

The CAPTOR can do some things better than an AESA developed from technology circa 1998-2002 from what I have read.

Such as? Certainly not detect track and lock the Rhino before it gets a slammer rammed down it's throat.

Quote:

Both aircraft use AMRAAM

But will the Saudis or the British for that matter be equipped with the latest version?

Quote:

possibly out -turn the Rhino

Nothing out turns the Rhino.

Yes the BBC is publicly (government) funded. Unlike FOX news that clearly delineates it's commentary from it's news and is privately funded. It speaks volumes of your politics.

Sure Fox's commentary is conservative but it is out in the open and is not presented as new/fact. You cannot say the same for the BBC's left wing, anti US agenda.

Sorry Snypa, it's people like you in the UK that really make me question whether or not we have put too much into our alliance with the UK. Seeing nothing wrong with the BBC speaks volumes. You may agree or disagree with FOX's opinions but I never mix up their news for commentary. Unlike the BBC they have never had any scandals or retractions of note that I can think of.

Sorry boys, what is Rhino?? Question

Enthusiast Joined: May 12, 2005 Posts: 47 Status: Offline

Used to be what they called the F-4, but I am pretty sure that is not what they are refering to...

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 06, 2006 Posts: 65 Status: Offline

More specifically the F/A-18 E and F models. This is due to the raised "hump" found between the gun and canopy on the Super Hornet (the hump can also be found on the G model).

seat_dreamer wrote:

Would SA really turn against the USA however ? I'd think they still have strong ties (F-15s, E-3s, relative support for the king etc.) I can imagine that the Saudis are far more logical than Saddam or most current Irani officials....It's a family business anyways, not an elected government...

Only if the royal Saud family was over thrown. Thats not too impossible.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 1035 Status: Offline

Thumper3181 wrote:

Nothing out turns the Rhino.

You apparently havn't seen a Raptor doing its thing...wait till you see the demo. Its the only aircraft I've ever seen that can out turn a Rhino to date.

Check

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 26, 2005 Posts: 1455 Status: Offline

Thumper3181 wrote:

Yes the BBC is publicly (government) funded. Unlike FOX news that clearly delineates it's commentary from it's news and is privately funded. It speaks volumes of your politics.

Sure Fox's commentary is conservative but it is out in the open and is not presented as new/fact. You cannot say the same for the BBC's left wing, anti US agenda.

Sorry Snypa, it's people like you in the UK that really make me question whether or not we have put too much into our alliance with the UK. Seeing nothing wrong with the BBC speaks volumes. You may agree or disagree with FOX's opinions but I never mix up their news for commentary. Unlike the BBC they have never had any scandals or retractions of note that I can think of.

THUMPER, vive la difference! If the US used your political template for picking NATO partners, guess what? You wouldn`t have any. European governments are generally not conservative.

The BBC have a knack of cutting through spin and BS without worrying about embarrassing any government. I would be worried if the BBC didn`t have scandal and government intervention. FOX toes the party line so effectively we would be better informed watching Sesame Street. The BBC is also not anti-American, a ridiculous assumption, based on what?

If you are worried about my politics, be very worried because the majority of the electorate in the UK share them, we voted a LABOUR prime minister into office and showed conservatives the door many, many years ago.

Oh wait? Wasn`t that the same government that went into Iraq and Afghanistan with the US? It`s a crazy world isn`t it?

I apologize to all and will not make any more political comment on this thread.

Frontal RCS is not the only measure or defence a fighter will have. If ALL engagements were head on it would be easy. What are the radar returns like when seen from above, below or lateral aspect? I still assert nobody knows the real RCS figures of any of these jets. Yes, I have taken part in some discussions but have never said the Typhoon has an X or Y RCS.

Nothing out-turns the Rhino? Think there are a few F-22 pilots whom would beg to differ. I wouldn`t discount the Typhoon on that just yet also, unless you have info` to the contrary?

On CAPTOR, look at some of the threads you quoted, the detective ranges for it were very impressive, if the figures mean anything at all. AESA is the way to go though I agree, at this juncture, the Rhino has a better radar. I wouldn`t count on the Typhoon not "seeing" the Rhino from any aspect though, that`s wishful thinking.

Thumper seeing as you insist to bring politics into all of these discussions, particularly the relationship between the UK and US maybe you should do some reading. As far as I can remember the UK has a large amount of military deployed in both US lead campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, of which money is just pouring out of the UK to fund these campaigns. Despite other nations leaving Iraq the UK has stood strong with the US, even sending additional Royal Marines and Harriers to Afghanistan upon US request. So perhaps questioning the UK & US relations isn't so necessary, think you may be basing it on public opinion which fluctuates remember. When troops come home in body bags opinions do change, and remember it wasn't so long ago that a lot of Americans were changing the names of French fries and removing french wines from restaurant menus because of the France's decision to VETO over Iraq.

The BBC is PUBLICLY funded, and tends to be very anti-government. I mean every news bulletin has something to attack Mr Blair and the labour party. The UK has developed a lot of unique tech over the years, most of which has ended up with the US and has made money for the US. Its tech sharing between two strong nations, and its required if coalitions like the current one are going to be successful in campaigns.

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Thumper3181 wrote:

Quote Snypa

Quote:

Rhino has a smaller RCS, says whom? These figures are secret so no internet sources will tell you that.

Judging by previous posts on this forum by other (some non American) members we do seem to have an idea of the the frontal RCS of various fighters. Since you have even participated in some of the threads I will not bore you with who posted them and when.

Frontal RCS of Blk II Rhino 0.1 - 0.01 M2
Frontal RCS of Tiffy 0.25-0.1 M2

Quote:

The CAPTOR can do some things better than an AESA developed from technology circa 1998-2002 from what I have read.

Such as? Certainly not detect track and lock the Rhino before it gets a slammer rammed down it's throat.

Quote:

Both aircraft use AMRAAM

But will the Saudis or the British for that matter be equipped with the latest version?

Quote:

possibly out -turn the Rhino

Nothing out turns the Rhino.

Yes the BBC is publicly (government) funded. Unlike FOX news that clearly delineates it's commentary from it's news and is privately funded. It speaks volumes of your politics.

Sure Fox's commentary is conservative but it is out in the open and is not presented as new/fact. You cannot say the same for the BBC's left wing, anti US agenda.

Sorry Snypa, it's people like you in the UK that really make me question whether or not we have put too much into our alliance with the UK. Seeing nothing wrong with the BBC speaks volumes. You may agree or disagree with FOX's opinions but I never mix up their news for commentary. Unlike the BBC they have never had any scandals or retractions of note that I can think of.

RCS and Super Hornet are almost an oxymoron. Add stores to it and that goes away. Also the band aid fix to try and cure the bad wing design and stores clearance issues.... hence we have the silly canted outward pylons. Not only more drag but good luck on trying to be avoided by any other top kit radar out there. The "Super" in the Super Slow Hornet can't get around that.

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Raptors in exercises with Eurofighters?