Page 3 of 5

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2005, 17:38
by LebaneseAce
I agree with agilefalcon16. Remember, it ainĀ“t easy shaking off a close-range missile. The AIM-9X is extremely accurate. Lock on and boom.

Unread postPosted: 08 May 2005, 17:53
by calhoun
I cant believe this topic has gone on for this long. There is about a years worth of proof saying the Raptor would destroy the 16. Its called Operation Test at Edwards last year. We routinely flew 2 22's against 8 16's or 4 15's. The outcome? Pure destruction of all adversaries. They didnt even see the 22.

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2005, 16:01
by Entropy

BTW Agilefalcon16, you hit the nail right on the head.

If a Viper were to some how get into WVR fight with one, and was armed with JHMCS and AIM-9X AAMs, all the Viper would need to do is to get lock and the Raptor is dead.

IF he could get there, and get into a position on the raptor. This is also assuming that the raptor hasn't already pushed a 9X at him.

LebaneseAce, this statement here:

watched Al-Manar (before it was banned) and they had an interview with a Russian general. The Russians said that they had developed a missile that can take down any aircraft that is in service today. That means it can take down the F-117. And if it can down a Nighthawk, it can down a F-22.

Of course they are gonna say that. They're not gonna say, "Well, our missile can shoot down almost anything." Besides, where's the proof. How do they know it can shoot down the F-117 or the F-22. They would have to get hold of one first

Good luck with that. :wink:

Look guys, I love the F-16 as much as the next guy, but it would be obliterated, not destroyed, obliterated, by the F-22.

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2005, 20:01
by agilefalcon16
True, very true. :cry: But let's just look at the bright side, at least the Viper would have a better shot at it than other U.S. aircraft, such as the Eagle, Tomcat, or Hornet. :wink:

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2005, 22:35
by LazyTed
I would like to see the F-22 go WVR with the Typhoon....

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2005, 23:33
by calhoun
LazyTed wrote:I would like to see the F-22 go WVR with the Typhoon....

Pure annihilation. Goodbye Typhoon.

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2005, 04:09
by Entropy
Pure annihilation. Goodbye Typhoon.

YES!! The Typhoon would stand a slim chance. If the 16 and 15 can't, then the Typhoon can't either. :)

Unread postPosted: 12 May 2005, 14:12
by LazyTed
But the typhoon is better than the F-16 and F-15. It's a sorry day I know , but the F-16 and F-15 are being replaced for one reason. There not as good as planes such as the typhoon, that's why the F-22 has come about.

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2005, 03:28
by Entropy
What makes it better? Speed, maybe a little more agility. I know the Typhoon doesn't have thrust vectoring, and it essentially is a triangle with canards in the front. If it weren't for the computer controlling some of the functions, I don't think it would have the agility it has. Plus they would probably fire long or medium range missiles at each other before it even came down to agility. Besides, the main question posed was if it would match against a 22. It would lose, in WVR or BVR. Either way, as Calhoun said, good-bye Typhoon.

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2005, 03:51
by dimik
I believe that the Typhoon will incorporate 3D TVC engines, EJ230 engine. I'm not sure if it will be involved in the first tranche though.

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2005, 12:17
by agilefalcon16
Actually the Su-47 and the Su-37 are more maneuverable then the Typhoon and would have a better chance at taking the Raptor out in a WVR fight. The Typhoon would not have that much more of a chance at shooting a Raptor down than a Viper.

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2005, 15:14
by toan

The comment from the man who is the only person that have driven both F/A-22 and EF-2000 up to now ~ Gen. John P. Jumper, The Air Force chief of USA:

1. Gen. John P. Jumper said the Eurofighter is both agile and sophisticated, but is still difficult to compare to the F/A-22 Raptor. He is the only person to have flown both aircraft.

2. "They are different kinds of airplanes to start with," the general said. "It's like asking us to compare a NASCAR car with a Formula 1 car. They are both exciting in different ways, but they are designed for different levels of performance."

3. "The Eurofighter is certainly, as far as smoothness of controls and the ability to pull (and sustain high G forces), very impressive," he said. "That is what it was designed to do, especially the version I flew, with the avionics, the color moving map displays, etc. -- all absolutely top notch. The maneuverability of the airplane in close-in combat was also very impressive."

4. The F/A-22 performs in much the same way as the Eurofighter, General Jumper said. But it has additional capabilities that allow it to perform the Air Force's unique missions.

5. "The F/A-22 Raptor has stealth and supercruise," he said. "It has the ability to penetrate virtually undetected because of (those) capabilities. It is designed to be a penetrating airplane. It can maneuver with the best of them if it has to, but what you want to be able to do is get into contested airspace no matter where it is."

6. One advantage of having flown the Eurofighter, General Jumper said, is that it allows him to get first-hand knowledge of technology U.S. allies use and to see how America's handiwork stacks up. He said he believes the two aircraft are running neck-and-neck, but America must always be vigilant to ensure it stays on the cutting edge of aviation technology.

7. "You can see the technology that is out there compared with ours," he said. "You see the avionics and all of the great progress that has been made. You make sure you are not too complacent, because the technology that they have is very competitive with technology that we have."

According to comment of the Gen. John P. Jumper, I think a reasonable conslusion for the comparison between F/A-22 and EF-2000 should be:

EF-2000 has very impressive maneuverability, agility, and quality of handle that are comparable to F/A-22, the main gaps of the capability between the two fighters are:

1. Stealthy techonology: the fronatal RCS of F/A-22 is about 1/100~1/500 or less of the frontal RCS of EF-2000 in the air-combat configuration.

2. Supercruise capability in standard air-combat configuration:

a. F/A-22: 1.68~1.72 Mach at 40,000 fts.

b. EF-2000: 1.2~1.3 Mach at 36,000 fts (The Eurojet wishs to improve it to 1.5 Mach class in the future).

Therefore, if the two fighters play the BVR engagement, I admit that F/A-22 will have the much better chance to win the game. It may need three or even more Eurofighters to conquer one F/A-22, just like the situation of M-4 Sherman v.s Tiger / Leopard in WWII...............

However, if the condition is WVR dogfight, when both fighters will equip HMD and NG SRAAM on them and EF-2000 has the comparable maneuverability to and smaller size than F/A-22, I don't think that F/A-22 will have the significantly better chance to win the game.........

Of course, if F/A-22 can finish most of its foe during the BVR engagement, then it would be almost meaningless to discuss the victory chance of the dogfight of nearly non-existence.............

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2005, 00:39
by LazyTed
Great post... What is the F-22 max speed in after burn?

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2005, 05:39
by toan
LazyTed wrote:Great post... what is the F-22 max speed in after burn?

Classified. The official declaration is Mach 2.0 +, but some military experts believe that it could reach Mach 2.5 at least.

Unread postPosted: 15 May 2005, 13:29
by calhoun
The P&W engineers told us the pilot was the limiting factor in the top speed.