Getting behind the other guy and turning tighter than he does is already obsolete today. There is no need to get behind the other guy to send a missile his way. Trying to turn tighter than the other guys is moot even in a dogfight today with the advent of HOBS missiles and HMS/HMDs.

Oh no DL! Surely you blaspheme! You mean all that wonderful maneuverability of the Eurocanards is pointless?

The Saudi deal was reported in pounds, not Euros. Reuters (not exactly an American friendly media outlet) reported the deal to be worth 4.43 Billion Pounds for 72 aircraft. So that there is absolutely no doubt as to what has been reported the exact quote is below.

"the Saudi Arabian defence ministry earlier in the day said a deal for the aircraft had been signed for the jets -- excluding weapons and maintenance -- worth 4.43 billion pounds ($8.84 billion)."
http://www.reuters.com/article/companyN ... 1420070917

For our European friends who may have a bit of trouble with the English language that means they paid 4.43 billion pounds for 72 aircraft and 72 owners manuals. They did not get fuel, they did not get weapons, they did not get maintenance.

Now as for math, the universal language it's simple.

4.43/.072 = 61.527 Billion pounds. At current exchange rates thats 126.08 million dollars a copy.

Now lets keep in mind. This is not for pre-production aircraft but for production models. For the money they don't get stealth, and they don't get an AESA. Must be nice to have money to burn and Uncle Sam to bail you out if you get in serious trouble.

Is manoeuvrability/agility less important in todays WVR engagements? Yes it is, but is it moot? No it isn't. Depends on the situation and circumstances.

The value of a fighter deal is typically about 50~100% more than the price of the aircraft alone. Based in the contract value one it is prudent to estimate the actual selling price of the Typhoon to be around $63~$95 million which is about right.

I think when we have these discussions of which plane is better we tend to try and compare them without supporting assets and in a one on one situation. Obviously that is not realistic.

However in this type of situation I seriously doubt that all 4 slammers are going to miss a single EF. If they do I would imagine one of two things happening, either the F-35 turns around and leaves the scene without the EF ever knowing where he was or if things are dire enough to risk it, the F-35 is like DL said somewhere, going to use it's stealth to maneuver into such an advantageous postion to use sidewinders or guns that again, the EF will not have a chance because he does not see him.

Sorry, maneuverability is nice, but it is very limited in utility in real life because of stealth, limitations of the human body, and the fact that the delta (if it is indeed more maneuverable which has not been proven yet) in maneuver capability between the EF and F-35 is not great enough to matter.

Normally DL I would agree with you but in this instance the only thing included in the initial 4.43 billion pound contract is the 72 AC, initial training an support. In other words it's 126 million bucks for the plane, the flight manual, a tank of gas and the initial warranty. This was cited in Bloomberg, Reuters, and now

However in this type of situation I seriously doubt that all 4 slammers are going to miss a single EF. If they do I would imagine one of two things happening, either the F-35 turns around and leaves the scene without the EF ever knowing where he was or if things are dire enough to risk it, the F-35 is like DL said somewhere, going to use it's stealth to maneuver into such an advantageous postion to use sidewinders or guns that again, the EF will not have a chance because he does not see him.

Your taking your imagination too far away from the purpose of this discussion.

First none here put the F-35 fighting the Eurofighter.

LOL!

Secondly I never heard of 100% PK for the AIM-120 before.

Nobody said that, but it is a very good missile. Probably the best medium range AAM currently in service.

Thirdly because you already demonstrated in other threads that you do not have any idea about missile kinematics or BVR tactics.

No Comments. You are entitled to your opinion on Thumper.

Fourth, because the Typhoon has the most comprehensive missile defense system avaiable anywhere.

The Typhoon's missile defense system is very similar to that on the F-18E/F -- automatic threat detection/defense management, self-defense jamming, towed decoy and expendable counter-measures. The F-35 will have an equal or better defensive suite plus the advantage of a VLO airframe and superior RF and IR sensor package.

Fifth F-35 is not like the F-22. I doubt it has active IR stealth measures.

Neither the F-22 nor the F-35 has extreme IR suppression measures, there is also no indication that they are different in this department. IRST as a volume search tool is useless because it is extremely slow if it needs to reach out to any reasonable range and it is very short sighted when operating at a wide field of view. The VLO aircraft will always have first look against a non-stealthy opponent.

Sixth, because Eurofighter can engage and hit more targets silmultaneously than the F-35.

An F-35 will be able to 4~6 internal AAMs. This is also the typical warload of a Typhoon.

Seventh, because F-35's combat persistence is lower, or else become as unstealthy as the Eurofighter is.

The F-35's mission endurance is higher -- it carries 8.4 tons of fuel vs 4.5~4.9 tons on the Typhoon. This gives it more range, more fuel with which to gain a kinematic advantage, more energy to dispense. When missile barging it can carry abour 14~16 AAMs, and its signature will still be lower than the Typhoon although no enough to prosecute VLO tactics, it still has a better radar, better IRST, better EW, better communication, better pilot interface and better range/endurance.

I think it due time for a bit of more humility and impartial analyisis from your part. Dont you think so? Chest banging doesnt add to the credibility of anyone in these kind of debates.

Oh no DL! Surely you blaspheme! You mean all that wonderful maneuverability of the Eurocanards is pointless?

Luftwaffe Typhoon pilots commented that the aircraft is more agile and manoeuvrable than the MiG-29, which provides superior turning performance in comparison to the F-15 or F-16.

Other pilots who have flown such US fighters made similar comments. Similar comments can be found for the Rafale when the aircraft was pitted against F-18s and F-16s during exercises.

I tend to believe that the F-35 won't be as manoeuvrable as Rafale, Typhoon or Raptor to mention some examples.

That's your interpretation.

why re you comparing a monkey wrench and a screwdriver?

consider who will partecipate, who will get there on time on day 1 and how, who will be it against, what kind of missions will they have to do, etc.

Again, really? At what speeds? At what altitudes? What is the load out? Very blanket statement that really does not stand up to scrutiny.

Care to cite a few sources because again, it's a pretty blanket statement you are making that has no basis in reality. You cannot keep repeating something and hope that if repeated enough times without challenge it will become generally accepted fact. Prove it.

Well actually when we did the T/W exercise, the fuel load, the internal stores and if we recalulate the wing loading based on the numbers we think the F-35 will come in at your opinion will have very little basis in fact.

No it said for initial training and support. It also went on to say that another several billion pounds was for ongoing support and maintenance. Thats an awful lot of money they are paying for some flight simulators,(well they don;t have a two seat EF), the initial warranty, the owners manual and a tank of gas. Can you please point me to the place that it says otherwise?

dwightlooi I didnt insult thumper, and he doesnt need your charity.

You also need to get some facts straight:

Typhoon is not limited to 6 missiles. You happen to just seen the low drag AA config in photos, i.e. 4 recessed AMRAAMs and 2 Sidwinders. The Typhoon has 13 hardpoints, one centreline hardpoint, four conformal fuselage hardpoints, and four hardpoints on each wing. Maximum payload is between 6500-7500kg, which includes up to ten missiles. Since the F-35 wont be certified to carry 6 AMRAAMs internaly for some time (isnt that an assumption on your part?) there will be only 4 avaiable hardpoints in the internal bay, plus another 4 externaly:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... -specs.htm
Making it a total of 8, and no "up to 16 missiles", where the heck you ever saw that?

A little more reading recommended before writing please.

On another note, F-22 does have active IR supression stealth, fuel irrigation in the wings, for friction heat dissipation.

P.S. I insist no one here, at least I didnt put the Eurofighter fighting the F-35, thats entirely the product of your and thumpers interpretation of something I didnt quite write.

All very relevant comparisons, but this is not the page for strategy.

Off the top of my head I can think of two future scenarios where the two AC would be pitted against one another. Israel/Saudi Arabia, and Greece /Turkey. Aside from that there are commercial considerations.

consider who will partecipate, who will get there on time on day 1 and how, who will be it against, what kind of missions will they have to do, etc.