F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 11:17
by jessmo111
The RAF’s Typhoons and French Air Force Rafales training alongside the U.S. Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors at Joint Base Langley-Richardson, Virginia, to learn how to better coordinate fourth and fifth-generation fighters. While the Raptor is essentially a dedicated air superiority fighter, the F-22 and F-35 are similar in many ways. Thus, many of the lessons learned can be carried over to joint F-35/Typhoon operations.

While the Typhoon and the F-35 won’t be competing with each other directly in the British service, the manufacturers are nonetheless engaged in a dogfight to secure sales. In that arena, the Typhoon—despite its superior aerodynamic performance—is slowly being edged out by the stealthy F-35. If the current trend holds, the F-35 might end up being the only Western fighter left on the market.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... nate-15535

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 11:19
by jessmo111
T-dog Arm chair general extraordinaire says :





TDog > ArmChairGeneral • 6 months ago





"The author likely meant it that way, but the F-35 currently has a whole host of problems that aren't getting fixed anytime soon. The technical problems are well-known and are actually the least of anyone's problems. Don't get me wrong, having ALIS lock technicians out of the system or having to restart the radar in flight when it goes on the blink are pretty bad, but the systemic problems that the F-35 will engender are far more dangerous.

For example, the F-35 is more expensive to fly than other planes. Its stealth coating needs to be refurbished after so many flight hours and its various systems need more thorough maintenance than other designs. The end result is that these planes spend more time on the ground than other ones would, meaning we either have to buy more planes (unlikely) or allow our pilots less flight time. I know some folks will claim simulators can make up for the shortfall, but video games, no matter how sophisticated, can not replace the real thing.

Furthermore, due to the expanded cost of the entire program, the likelihood of replacing legacy aircraft with inferior numbers of F-35's is quite high. Already it's been proposed that to save money, for every 10 legacy aircraft retired, only 8 F-35's would step in to fill the void. Regardless of what its proponents say, less is less. A US Air Force twenty percent smaller would be harder pressed to fill the same missions it is performing today.

And those are just two items. Suffice to say the jack of all trades model isn't the best because while it may do all jobs well, it will do none of them great no matter what the ad copy says. We will find ourselves saddled with a compromise plane whose only shining achievement was to make sure the entirety of our air power went from varied, flexible, and effective to "good enough."

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 13:20
by mk82
Jessmo111....please put that steaming pile of a comment into the basement dweller thread where it bloody belongs. Parroting falsities and stupidity doesn't make it true.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 16:20
by mixelflick
Typhoon will wind up like every other 4th/4+/4++ fighter - dead.

Even with the most basic of its capabilities, details are starting to leak out about how effective it is in exercises. Completely evading/downing F-15E Strike Eagles comes to mind. They're some of the most sensor rich platforms in the USAF...

The U.K. though, is in a unique situation: They'll be flying both Typhoon and the F-35. I gather they'll be using the Typhoon for air- to air work, with the F-35 for air to ground. Once the Typhoon runs into PAK-FA type aircraft, I think you're going to see their F-35's devoted to air to air like, real quick

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 17:40
by les_paul59
jessmo, the typhoon would have been a brilliant aircraft if it had been operational in the early 1990's....It's kinematics are exceptional with only the raptor and pak fa being more suited to the high altitude interceptor role.

But unfortunately it launched around the same time as the raptor, which is light years ahead of the typhoon in almost every way.....still waiting on that typhoon aesa tho lol

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 18:18
by blindpilot
@Jessmo111
jessmo111 wrote:
"... the F-35 currently has a whole host of problems that aren't getting fixed anytime soon.

False and a misleading assertion. Development is development and is proceeding (making fixes) as well or better than many other fighter programs historically.
The technical problems are well-known

Actually internet trolls only think they know anything because of the ubiquitous availability of wild opinions on the web. If they haven't been there, done that, they are just continually repeating the garbage by the last 14 year old in his mom's basement. The counter arguments are from actual AF combat fighter pilots and design engineers and fleet maintenance personnel, many with years and thousands of hours experience in numerous fighter types and 5th Gen/F-35 hands on. who know something about what is being said. What part of that don't you get?
...having ALIS lock technicians out of the system
ALIS is actually working pretty good and improving its value every day with the IOC squadrons.
or having to restart the radar in flight when it goes on the blink are pretty bad,
A. It was never "pretty bad." Other fighters have flown operationally with worse issues... but B. that has been fixed in timely matter with each block where it show'd up. If you actually knew any thing about software ... well next point ..
but the systemic problems that the F-35 will engender are far more dangerous... more expensive to fly ... stealth coating needs .... systems need more thorough maintenance. The end result is that these planes spend more time on the ground than other ones would,
actually sortie availability is meeting, or exceeding expected rates for this early in the program.
meaning ... buy more planes ... inferior numbers ...for every 10 legacy aircraft retired, only 8 F-35's would step in to fill the void.
Again you have no clue what it takes to put together a package for a mission. When 4 F-35s can do the same thing a 17 aircraft package used to do, and which 100 4th gen aircraft can't even do without dying, .. 10 to 8 actually increases capability, even if the formula was correct which it isn't. It's a ratio you pulled out of your ...funny math place
And those are just two items. Suffice to say

Actually you probably had a dozen or more factual errors in your "two points" Suffice it to say, you are just throwing out stuff you read somewhere, and one wonders if you have ever been near an aircraft or program before.

mk82 wrote:Jessmo111....please put that steaming pile of a comment into the basement dweller thread where it bloody belongs. Parroting falsities and stupidity doesn't make it true.


What he said ...

MHO
BP

PS Why don't you run over to Dragon's thread viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27248 and try to get your feet on the ground a bit. He just released a new video. Which as always is pretty good.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 20:51
by jessmo111
Calm down, Im just posting a quote.
I would date an F-35 if it had the right parts some im probaly a bigger fan than you.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2016, 21:04
by popcorn
There are valid discussions to be had re Typhoon and F-35 but some quality control would be nice. That quote belongs in the basement.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 25 Sep 2016, 23:13
by XanderCrews
I just wonder why we are posting comments that are not only months old but utterly unoriginal to boot.

I remember reading that same thing names changed in 2000 with the super hornet

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2016, 13:07
by hornetfinn
I think there is not many real competitions left where Typhoon (or Rafale or Super Hornet) would be a serious contender. Only if F-35 is not available, will other options be really interesting. IMO, more interesting is how to improve interoperability with each other as these jets will be used side-by-side for at least couple of decades. I think most important are AESA for much improved sensor capability and also CFTs to maximize the range/endurance/payload. Of course upgrades to all systems and especially networking are important.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 26 Sep 2016, 19:09
by SpudmanWP
Keep in mind that ME customers are precluded from the F-35 for the most part due to the whole Israel must maintain superiority by law thing.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2016, 06:46
by hornetfinn
SpudmanWP wrote:Keep in mind that ME customers are precluded from the F-35 for the most part due to the whole Israel must maintain superiority by law thing.


True, but then there will not be any competition with F-35. If we consider the two meeting in combat, then it will go very badly for the Typhoon. Typhoon has met F-22 in combat and Typhoon pilots say that they were never able to get within 20 miles before being targeted even if they did everything right. It will be as bad or possibly worse against F-35s due to F-35s equal or better stealth, more numerous sensors, more advanced sensor fusion, even better networking and especially the likely much higher numbers. Eurofighter Typhoon is a great jet, but hopelessly outclassed against F-35, just like all earlier generation fighters are.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 27 Sep 2016, 09:34
by charlielima223
hornetfinn wrote:
True, but then there will not be any competition with F-35. If we consider the two meeting in combat, then it will go very badly for the Typhoon. Typhoon has met F-22 in combat and Typhoon pilots say that they were never able to get within 20 miles before being targeted even if they did everything right. It will be as bad or possibly worse against F-35s due to F-35s equal or better stealth, more numerous sensors, more advanced sensor fusion, even better networking and especially the likely much higher numbers. Eurofighter Typhoon is a great jet, but hopelessly outclassed against F-35, just like all earlier generation fighters are.


This is where that fundamental shift comes in that so many idiots on the interwebs cannot mentally and emotionally comprehend. It would be like having an army equipped with only bolt action rifles go up against another army equipped with assault rifles and squad automatics. It just won't end well. Stealth, integrated avionics/sensor fusion, and networking has/is changing how air combat are/will be fought. You can have the best WVR dog fighter in the world but if you can't even get there; what is the point?

Image

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 08:13
by franciwzm
hornetfinn wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Keep in mind that ME customers are precluded from the F-35 for the most part due to the whole Israel must maintain superiority by law thing.


True, but then there will not be any competition with F-35. If we consider the two meeting in combat, then it will go very badly for the Typhoon. Typhoon has met F-22 in combat and Typhoon pilots say that they were never able to get within 20 miles before being targeted even if they did everything right. It will be as bad or possibly worse against F-35s due to F-35s equal or better stealth, more numerous sensors, more advanced sensor fusion, even better networking and especially the likely much higher numbers. Eurofighter Typhoon is a great jet, but hopelessly outclassed against F-35, just like all earlier generation fighters are.



Not really: typhoon pilots says that in 2006 at langley in 1 vs 1 scenario they constantly detect f22 at 40km, up to 80km; this is a 1vs 1 scenario with old captor;that translates in a real world rcs of not less then 0,016, that is still very very low; in a 2 vs 2 scenario detection ranges are obviously much more consistent; new e-caesar projectist says that is phisically impossible that new aesa gonna detect f35 any shorter then 72km, that translates in much more in real worl...But obviosuly we are speaking about best mechanical radar in air to airt an best aesa ....( 8-10% more range then apg 77 and 200 degrees repositioning capability)...You should also remember thta european missiles are more advanced: iris-t is certified to destroy even small angd more agile wvr missiles, and it is more a defensive weapon on typhoon then an offensive one. In recent trilateral f22 pilots simply admitted to be astonished by typhoon agility in supersonic regime...Official declaration...May be you dont kknow that sustainedd turn rate in supersonic regime is better for typhoon the f22... (g6,4 at mach 1,6)

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 11:33
by basher54321
franciwzm wrote:
Not really: typhoon pilots says that in 2006 at langley in 1 vs 1 scenario they constantly detect f22 at 40km, up to 80km; this is a 1vs 1 scenario with old captor;


Which pilots? what source?
What was the F-22 config? - 2 x drop tanks and a Luneburg lens?

franciwzm wrote:Official declaration...May be you dont kknow that sustainedd turn rate in supersonic regime is better for typhoon the f22... (g6,4 at mach 1,6)


According to who? please provide the source.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 12:04
by charlielima223
franciwzm wrote:
Not really: typhoon pilots says that in 2006 at langley in 1 vs 1 scenario they constantly detect f22 at 40km, up to 80km; this is a 1vs 1 scenario with old captor;that translates in a real world rcs of not less then 0,016, that is still very very low; in a 2 vs 2 scenario detection ranges are obviously much more consistent; new e-caesar projectist says that is phisically impossible that new aesa gonna detect f35 any shorter then 72km, that translates in much more in real worl...But obviosuly we are speaking about best mechanical radar in air to airt an best aesa ....( 8-10% more range then apg 77 and 200 degrees repositioning capability)...You should also remember thta european missiles are more advanced: iris-t is certified to destroy even small angd more agile wvr missiles, and it is more a defensive weapon on typhoon then an offensive one. In recent trilateral f22 pilots simply admitted to be astonished by typhoon agility in supersonic regime...Official declaration...May be you dont kknow that sustainedd turn rate in supersonic regime is better for typhoon the f22... (g6,4 at mach 1,6)


Image

Possible fanboy contact detected... :lol:

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 13:27
by les_paul59
franciwzm, I don't wanna call your comment bullsh*t but a claim like that needs to be backed up by sources.

I will concede that in wvr combat between a typhoon and raptor it is a toss up because the typhoon has great kinematics but I have never heard of any typhoon pilot talk about besting the raptor in bvr, let alone detecting it at any useable range.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 16:13
by mk82
Hornetfinn: " Typhoon has met F-22 in combat and Typhoon pilots say that they were never able to get within 20 miles before being targeted even if they did everything right"

That says it all. Just ask any Luftwaffe Eurofighter pilot who flew against the F22 from BVR (i.e. realistic) distances in recent exercises.....they all conceded that the F22 was superior/da king in that arena (BVR).

Indian Air Force SU 30 MKI pilots weren't particularly overwhelmed by RAF Eurofighters and I believe French Air Force Rafales achieved lopsided kill to loss ratios against RAF Eurofighters in an exercise held in the Canary Islands (I believe). The Eurofighter, though impressive in many respects, is not automatically some European Uber Wunderwaffe......the skill/quality of the pilot makes a lot difference naturally (frankly the most important factor in air combat). At end of the day, if the Eurofighter can smash Suckhoys/MIGs flown by scumbags and network well enough with 5th generation platforms to facilitate deadly cooperative/Wolfpack tactics...that's a big thumbs up for me :mrgreen: .

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 19:55
by franciwzm
basher54321 wrote:
franciwzm wrote:
Not really: typhoon pilots says that in 2006 at langley in 1 vs 1 scenario they constantly detect f22 at 40km, up to 80km; this is a 1vs 1 scenario with old captor;


Which pilots? what source?
What was the F-22 config? - 2 x drop tanks and a Luneburg lens?

franciwzm wrote:Official declaration...May be you don't know that sustained turn rate in supersonic regime is better for typhoon the f22... (g6,4 at mach 1,6)


According to who? please provide the source.



Not really: tha day after raptor pilots did not want to play anymore...No luneburg at all...Can you understand thta theorical 0,0001 rcs is just for 1000%1000 allineation ? it is not difficult..For sam reason in a 2vs 2 scenario detection range is much more then ina 1vs 1 scenario...Why must i poost the link for a 10 years old story thta has been commented thousands of times and made top secret by american autorities 10 years ago? you probably have no knoledge on thi issues..
ANYWAY official source and 2006 images about this secret encounter with german typhoon (that were only batch 4 with neither irst operative and not much ecm active yet) is by international AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45.


internatinal AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45..It has been comment hundreds of times even on this platform 10 years ago...How old are you ? 18 ?

Look at original pictures here http://eucitizens.eu/Forum/index.php?topic=166.0
The day after raptor pilots did not want to play anymore...Anyway this does not mean that raptor has still important advantages in bvr, but in a 4 vs 4 scenario with new aesa ( 8-10% more range then apg77 and 200 degreees reposiitong capability) and meteor high chances that all fighters get shoot down...( I mean in bvr )

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 20:04
by botsing
franciwzm wrote:Why must i poost the link for a 10 years old story thta has been commented thousands of times and made top secret by american autorities 10 years ago? you probably have no knoledge on thi issues..

Do we really need to take this serious?

p.s. Your spelling makes you sound like a drunk, work on it please.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 20:34
by XanderCrews
botsing wrote:
franciwzm wrote:Why must i poost the link for a 10 years old story thta has been commented thousands of times and made top secret by american autorities 10 years ago? you probably have no knoledge on thi issues..

Do we really need to take this serious?

p.s. Your spelling makes you sound like a drunk, work on it please.



http://i.imgur.com/FdClufZ.jpg

Reminds me of Marin Crops lol

Also loled at "made Top secret" really? After the article was written and openly shared on the source you showed us? Bold strategy.

Don't know enough about the details (which would indeed be classified) assuming Luneberg lense was active and then CAPTOR vectored on it.

In real life F-22s are hanging out at 50,000 ft and operating with impunity. The only way a typhoon gets them is if they descend, make themselves seen and then decide to dogfight. Everytime anyone trains against F-22s, F-22s have to slow down and not do what they would actually do in order to get any training done. Or else F-22s would simply dominate.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 21:20
by basher54321
franciwzm wrote:Not really: tha day after raptor pilots did not want to play anymore...



:doh:

Thanks - I guess that means we can totally ignore everything else you write then - hope you can sober up some day.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 21:36
by eloise
franciwzm wrote:internatinal AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45..It has been comment hundreds of times even on this platform 10 years ago...How old are you ? 18 ?
Look at original pictures here http://eucitizens.eu/Forum/index.php?topic=166.0
The day after raptor pilots did not want to play anymore...Anyway this does not mean that raptor has still important advantages in bvr,

You know what , i saw people dragging this over many forums before ,everyone said it came from AIR POWER REVIEW with exact detail as you cited but no one can actually post the photos of the page where they found it , all they can do is link to the exact forum that you just cited , but none can post the photo of the page in the magazine , why is that ? . Is it really because the incident was made top secret suddenly or because people made things up ?

Secondly, an air exercise is not the same as a game you playing with your friends , pilots don't have the option to be like " nah i lost so i dont want to play anymore" , that not how military work. Try that sh*t and you will be kicked out immediately

Thirdly, aircraft don't have the same RCS from all aspect , RCS value varied with aspect angle. For example : below are some computer-simulated radar scattering graph of XB-70 , Su-27 , C-29 , F-35 (it cant be 100% accurate because they cant take RAM into account ). But do you see how much RCS changed with aspect angle ? , even if Typhoon did detect F-22 from long distance , how do you know it is not from the aspect where F-22 has the highest RCS ? what if the Typhoon look at F-22 from behind or from the beam aspect ?
Image
Image
Image
Image

Last but not least, you want to talk about real world situation , if we are to talk about real world situation then there must be jamming , once you factor in jamming. How on earth can Typhoon even compete with F-22 ?
Image
Image
Image
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... press.com/

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 21:58
by eloise
franciwzm wrote:
Not really: typhoon pilots says that in 2006 at langley in 1 vs 1 scenario they constantly detect f22 at 40km, up to 80km; this is a 1vs 1 scenario with old captor;that translates in a real world rcs of not less then 0,016, that is still very very low; in a 2 vs 2 scenario detection ranges are obviously much more consistent; new e-caesar projectist says that is phisically impossible that new aesa gonna detect f35 any shorter then 72km, that translates in much more in real worl..

Not to burst your bubble but even if what you said is true ( which it isn't ) detection range and tracking is still far from the same thing.Not to mention effect of jamming
Image

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 22:03
by garrya
Franciwn grammar and spelling reminded me of that blackadam guy in Keypub.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 02 Oct 2016, 22:44
by les_paul59
The raptor is in a class of it's own in bvr combat, end period stop. Those are just the facts, what's going to be scary is when it can fly with f-35's feeding them information. In a real world scenario they might never have to emit anything, just get the info from the f-35 and lob amramms like ghosts.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 04:34
by charlielima223
les_paul59 wrote:The raptor is in a class of it's own in bvr combat, end period stop. Those are just the facts, what's going to be scary is when it can fly with f-35's feeding them information. In a real world scenario they might never have to emit anything, just get the info from the f-35 and lob amramms like ghosts.


In exercises the only time the designated aggressor aircraft ever came close to the Raptor was because it had to be initially set up that way from the start. I've talked to Aggressor Pilots at Nellis AFB open house events in the past, flat out tell me they can't even get within WVR of the Raptor before getting shot at. They don't know they were shot at or shot down by a Raptor until the control personnel tells them that they are out of the game.

https://theaviationist.com/2012/12/10/viper-dogfight/

However, the toughest of the fighter jet to face in aerial combat, at least if you are seated in an F-16, is the F-22 Raptor: “It’s not a matter of trying to kill him, but to see how long you can survive!” as “Rico” says in “Viper Force: 56th Fighter Wing–To Fly and Fight the F-16” book by Lt. Col. Robert “Cricket” Renner USAF (Ret.)


No doubt F-35s and F-22s in the same airspace would be a very potent "hunter-killer" team.

Back to F-35 Typhoon phallic measuring...

If the F-35 kinematics is indeed somewhere between a Viper or Hornet I would think even the Typhoon would have to give the Lightning its due respect.

quoting the same link...

And how can the Viper perform against the Eurofighter Typhoon?

During more or less a decade of service with the Italian Air Force, the F-16 has been extensively used to train Typhoon pilots in WVR engagements. According to the Italian pilots, the F-16 matches the F-2000 under 10,000 feet. But above FL100 the Typhoon becomes quite difficult to beat since its superior aerodynamics give the Eurofighter can out maneuver the Viper at every engagement


Than again this is if the Typhoon could even get close enough to the F-35 to begin with. If current aircraft are having a close to zero chance of getting close to a Raptor, how could they get close to the F-35 that is reportedly more stealthy than the Raptor and has better passive detection and sensor fusion?

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 08:42
by franciwzm
Anyone wants to criticize assumption that in a 2vs 2 or 4vs 4 scenario stealth aircraft gonna be detected at much longer distances ?

Anyone wanna criticize that old captor detection range figures are better of all but apg77 ? So why you refuse as sci-fi that captor has been able to constantly detect f22 at 40km and up to 80km in one case 10 years ago ? is it a personal offense ?
Why do you enjoy getting personal and offend me? Are you 15 ?

I provided link, and datas has been officially put to sleep for security issues...Nevertheless that encounter between f22 and typhoon was not official...Why do you like offending who provide (me) well known data? Just because you dont like it ? Keep dreaming about luneberg lens..Simply at langley they wanted to test f22 vs a capable opponent, but they did not take in consideration eurofighter pilots interviews with media...

Anyway captor can detect a 1 square meter target from 185-200km, and considering that in order to cut by half detection range you must reduce rcs 16 times (obviously considering 100%100 allienation that never gonna be to happen in real scenario especially in 2vs 2 or 4 vs4 ) it translates in real world rcs for F22 of 0,016 or more, which is stilll very very low.

I have written also that batch 4 typhoon use for exercise neither had first operative: typhoon irst os best ion the world by huge margin (double range that one used on su-35 despite being more compact) anc can detect an f16 size thermal signature 90km away..what about f22 thermal signature ?smaller then a fighter of its class, but for sure not smaller then an f16...

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 08:52
by optimist
franciwzm, of course typhoon will rule the sky and kill the f-22 and other so-called 5th gen. But like your air force isn't buying 5th gen, my air force isn't buying the typhoon. Nothing either of us can do, except pis* into the wind.

but I think pictures would improve your posts. It would be good if you included pictures, see our plane in the cloud, looks good in the air

Image

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 09:05
by vanshilar
The source quoted by the forum itself said that the Raptor pilots said they were unstealthed. That means Luneberg lens, or transponder, or some other method to ensure they were detectable.

Wasn't it directly from the mouth of Typhoon pilots that they couldn't even get within 20 miles of a Raptor even if they did everything right? Or is that also part of the supposed "hush hush" secret campaign?

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 11:09
by mk82
Damn Optimist!! :mrgreen: That is certainly not a Eurofighter Typhoon (too beautiful to be a Typhoon) haha! :devil:

Jesting aside...

Francis dude: " I provided link, and datas has been officially put to sleep for security issues...Neverthless that encounter between f22 and typhoon was not official...Why do you like offending who provide (me) well known data? Just because you dont like it ? Keep dreaming about luneberg lens..Simply at langley they wanted to test f22 vs a capable opponent, but they did not take in cosnsideration eurofighter pilots interviews with media..."

Perhaps more up to date sources/links might be more useful for your arguments. Talking about Eurofighter pilot interviews...perhaps you should look at more recent Luftwaffe Eurofighter vs Raptor exercises -> Luftwaffe pilots admit to a MAN that the F22 was significantly superior in BVR scenarios PERIOD. The Luftwaffe Eurofighters never had a chance in those BVR scenarios. Oh BTW, Luftwaffe pilots even admitted that their Eurofighters were slicked off (i.e. no EFTs and minimal air to air missiles carriage) when they engaged F22s effectively in WVR scenarios. Funny how the Luftwaffe pilots only felt confident enough to engage F22s in slicked off Eurofighters (a Eurofighter ain't going to combat slicked off in most real world scenarios). Sorry, your 2006 article just ain't cutting it (because there are more substantial information recently).

Actually go on......go and ask an operational Luftwaffe Eurofighter pilot who has trained against F22s in exercises how the Eurofighter fared against the F22 in BVR scenarios-> to a person he/she would say not very well....guaranteed. Why don't you write to the German MOD about this...they might be surprisingly accomodating!

For all your chest beating Francis dude, why don't you ask French Rafale pilots what they think about the "indomitable" Eurofighter...let me give you a clue -> they would probably laugh about it, duly tell you stories about how they whoop the Eurofighter's **** in exercises (ridiculous kill ratios too to boot) and bought the T shirt ("I made the Eurofighter my b*tch"). How about the Indian Air Force SU 30 MKI pilots....they don't take the Eurofighter lightly but they are not overwhelmed by it either (quite a few Eurofighter kills in the Indra Dhanush exercises).

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 12:27
by garrya
franciwzm wrote:Anyone wants to criticize assumption that in a 2vs 2 or 4vs 4 scenario stealth aircraft gonna be detected at much longer distances ?.

I do, i see no reason as to why stealth aircraft will be detected at much longer distance in 2 vs 2 or 4 vs 4 scenarios ,
surely you can detect stealth from much longer distance if your aircraft was located in the sectors where stealth aircraft have high RCS spike , but that doesn't mean your aircraft will magically appear in suitable sector in 2 vs 2 or 4 vs 4 scenario
franciwzm wrote:Anyone wanna criticize that old captor detection range figures are better of all but apg77 ?

I do , even the new AESA CAPTOR only has the same aperture size as APG-81 , and about 20% smaller than APG-77 , that mean smaller gain
Image
CAPTOR will need T/R modules 2 times as powerful just to match APG-77 range. And the APG-63v3 is even bigger than that. Given equal level of technology , i dont see how can CAPTOR out range APG-81 let alone bigger radar like APG-77 or APG-63v3
franciwzm wrote: So why you refuse as sci-fi that captor has been able to constanctly detect f22 at 40km and up to 80km in one case 10 years ago ? is it a personal offence ?
Why do you enjoy gettin gpersonal and offend me? Are you 15 ?
I provided link, and datas has been officially put to sleep for security issues...Neverthless that encounter between f22 and typhoon was not official...Why do you like offending who provide (me) well known data? Just because you dont like it ? Keep dreaming about luneberg lens..Simply at langley they wanted to test f22 vs a capable opponent, but they did not take in cosnsideration eurofighter pilots interviews with media...

In your own link ,the pilot said F-22 wasnt stealthed ,that either mean luneberg lens or even 2 external fuel tank
franciwzm wrote: in order to cut by half detection range you must reduce rcs 16 times (obviously considering 100%100 allineation that never gonna be to happen in real scenario expecially in 2vs 2 or 4 vs4 ) it ranslates in real world rcs for F22 of 0,016 or more, whic is stilll very very low.

I dont follow your logic , are you so naive that you think air exercises are done with 1 Typhoon vs 1 F-22 take on each others from BVR to WVR and nothing else ?
franciwzm wrote:I have written also that batch 4 typhhon use for exercise neither had irst operative: typhoon irst os best ion the world by huge margin (double range that one used on su-35 despite beeing more compact) anc can detect an f16 size thermal signature 90km away..what about f22 thermal signature ?smaller then a fighter of its class, but for sure not smaller then an f16...
Keep crying like 15yo babies and keep offending me, pls.

According to Typhoon pilot , Pirate can detect a supercruise F-22 from 50 km
https://theaviationist.com/2012/07/13/f ... on-raptor/
Moreover, IRST performance fluctuated depending on weather condition and they need others form of ranging such as LRF to generate firing solution so IRST detection range doesnot really mean much

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 12:37
by eloise
franciwzm wrote:Anyone wants to criticize assumption that in a 2vs 2 or 4vs 4 scenario stealth aircraft gonna be detected at much longer distances ?
Anyone wanna criticize that old captor detection range figures are better of all but apg77 ? So why you refuse as sci-fi that captor has been able to constanctly detect f22 at 40km and up to 80km in one case 10 years ago ? is it a personal offence ?
Why do you enjoy gettin gpersonal and offend me? Are you 15 ?

Funny how, the head of future development for Eurofighter disagree with you, they seem to think that they need AWACS to deal with stealth aircraft, may be you should write them and let them know about that top secret exercise
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 35-345265/

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 13:51
by hornetfinn
franciwzm wrote:Anyone wanna criticize that old captor detection range figures are better of all but apg77 ? So why you refuse as sci-fi that captor has been able to constanctly detect f22 at 40km and up to 80km in one case 10 years ago ?.


LOL. Maybe you want to look at Swiss evaluation from 2009 where Trance 3 P1E enhancement level Eurofighter Typhoon was compared with both then current and future AESA equipped JAS Gripen and Dassault Rafale along with standard Swiss F/A-18C/D. End result being that Captor had only somewhat longer detection and acquisition ranges than AN/APG-73. It had somewhat better performance than AESA equipped Gripen and quite a bit lesser performance than AESA equipped Rafale. Rafale RBE2 AESA is much smaller than AN/APG-79 or AN/APG-81 and AN/APG-77 is twice as big and thus has almost twice the range performance also (if tech level is about equal). I wonder why Swiss didn't get to test this magical Captor version?

Swiss evaluation report:
http://lignesdedefense.blogs.ouest-fran ... suisse.pdf

Why would we believe something you claim without any proof?

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 15:12
by hythelday
eloise wrote:Funny how, the head of future development for Eurofighter disagree with you, they seem to think that they need AWACS to deal with stealth aircraft, ...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 35-345265/



In an internal simulation series, Eurofighter found that four Typhoons supported by an airborne warning and control system (AWACS) defeated 85% of attacks by eight F-35s carrying an internal load of two joint direct attack munitions (JDAM) and two air-to-air missiles, Penrice says.

According to Laurie Hilditch, Eurofighter's head of the future requirements capture, the F-35's frontal-aspect stealth can be defeated by stationing interceptors and AWACS at a 25º to 30º angle to the F-35's most likely approach path to a target.


Damn, EF is a beast... NOT :D

What if the enemy approaches from the other 300º left open for maneuver? What if the enemy blows your AWACS from the sky using off-platform weapons? What if the enemy goes in with a more aggressive tactics and more AAMs instead of JDAMs? EA against your radars and comms? Or does a dozen other things you cannot do...


This, coming from a Typhoon marketing advisor no less, should be enough to lock this thread down, but I guess the party will go on... :doh:

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 16:06
by franciwzm
No question at Typhoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by first, but that is not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring prove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena an f-16..It could be roughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowhere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 20:26
by garrya
franciwzm wrote:are you retarded ?

What wrong ? why are you insulting me now while just a moment ago you called people children because they insulted you ?. Let me guess , you cant argue again my point about radar range and IRST , and that make you upset ? :mrgreen:



franciwzm wrote:tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range:

The article didnot mentioned AIM-120 NEZ anywhere , it simply said that Pirate can detect a supercruise F-22 from 50 km , if it can detect F-22 from further distance they would have said it, simple as that


franciwzm wrote: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km:

And where do we get this so-called " typical range" from ? where is the source ? what is the condition ? ( altitude , aspect , speed )

franciwzm wrote: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same ,

detection range is roughly the same if their thermal signature is roughly the same , not one has 1/4 of the others


franciwzm wrote:...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine.

Nonsense , thrust and thermal signature are not proportional, F-135 is a high bypass engine so its exhaust plumes is mixed with significant amount of cold air , a majority of thrust in military power also generated by the fan stage instead of the engine core.
Then F-35 also has alot of air vents , heat exchanger to cool its equipment and engine bay
Image
Image
Image

Then there is also Topcoat IR reduction paint on both F-22 and F-35

franciwzm wrote:.Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...

And no where is it written that PIRATE can detect F-22 from longer distance than 50 km

franciwzm wrote:What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one.

How do you know if OLS-35 has haft range and sensitivity of Pirate ?

franciwzm wrote:, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Where did it said that ?

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 20:30
by garrya
BTW , about Typhoon alleged high kinematics performance , maybe you should have a look at this :
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthre ... verability

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 20:30
by basher54321
hythelday wrote:
This, coming from a Typhoon marketing advisor no less, should be enough to lock this thread down, but I guess the party will go on... :doh:


Ha - beginning to like this Laurie Hilditch fellow - surprised they haven't taped his mouth over yet :D




Thread reported - the incoherent drivel is one thing but for a member of ten years you might expect some basic manners.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 03 Oct 2016, 23:34
by charlielima223
@ franciwzm

No one is saying that the Typhoon is a piece of junk. Everyone here will agree that the Typhoon is a good aircraft. Yet when comparing the Typhoon to Lightning II and Raptor, there are just instances where the Typhoon comes up incredibly short. Your stance that the Typhoon is head and shoulders superior because unsubstantiated X and Y by you doesn't help your case at all. I have seen some of your comments over at The Aviationist, needless to say you come off as a fan-boy. You've said over at the The Aviationist...

aim 120 d no escape zone is 70km; meteor much more then 100(150?); new aesa on typhoon can detect an f 35 72km far, is perfectly allineated nose to nose; muc, much more in a non 1vs 1 scenario but 2vs 2 for example. Anyway i was talking eurocanards with metoer are much better then f35 +amramm vs russian fighters with large rcs, not f35...


I couldn't respond to that other than finding this...

Image

To me it looks like you're making a conclusion without looking at all the facts and then basing the outcome on your bias stance. We get it it... you LOVE the Typhoon and the Meteor (BTW European F-35s are supposed to get a modified Meteor for the internal weapon bay). BTW how do you know the Typhoons E-Captor can detect the F-35 head on at 75km? How did you come up with that? Your claim seems to fly in the face of recent interactions with the F-15Es at Mountain Home AFB equipped with the AN/APG-82.

Image

I don't exactly know the technical comparisons between the AN/APG-81 and the E-Captor radars but it would seem that reading the stuff here, the AN/APG-81 is slightly better in terms of power and detection. If that is indeed true how come the F-15Es were unable to shoot them down? Were they able to effectively detect and engage the F-35? What about the mention that during the same exercise/testing event that F-35s had to intentionally make their presence known just so that the defending SAM sites had something to do?

http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-too-stealthy-2016-8

"If they never saw us, they couldn't target us," said Lt. Col. George Watkins, commander of the 34th Fighter Squadron at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, told the Air Force Times.

To participate in the exercise as planned, the F-35As had to turn on their transponders, essentially announcing their presence so the SAM sites could see and engage them.

"We basically told them where we were at and said, 'Hey, try to shoot at us,'" said Watkins.


So your claim that the E-Captor could detect the F-35... head on, nose-to-nose; at your claimed distances isn't being supported by what is actually going on.

Then here you go on to talk about the "advantage" that the Typhoon would supposedly have (I say supposedly because the reality is that it isn't and perhaps you're the only one here that believes it) over the F-35 and F-22 with AIM-120Ds. What is the point of having a long range missile when you can only fire it at an opponent from 20mi away? I say 20km because I am pointing to the Typhoon F-22 Distant Frontier Red Flag Alaska...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ka-372957/

Pfeiffer says flying with the Raptor was an interesting experience.

"Its unique capabilities are overwhelming," Pfeiffer says.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ag-373312/

While Grune does not directly say that the Eurofighters emerged as the overall victors, he strongly implies it.

"I put out some whiskey. If they come back with some good performances, and if you know what the goal is from a BFM setup, and you achieve that, then I will pay you whiskey," he says. "And I paid quite a lot of whiskey."

That account, however, is strongly disputed by USAF sources flying the F-22. "It sounds as though we have very different recollections as to the outcomes of the BFM engagements that were fought," one Raptor pilot says.

USAF sources say that the Typhoon has good energy and a pretty good first turn, but that they were able to outmanoeuvre the Germans due to the Raptor's thrust vectoring. Additionally, the Typhoon was not able to match the high angle of attack capability of the F-22. "We ended up with numerous gunshots," another USAF pilot says.

+++

Grune says that the Raptor's advantage lies in its stealth and ability to dominate air-to-air fights from beyond visual range. That is not disputed by USAF sources.

"Its unique capabilities are overwhelming from our first impressions in terms of modern air combat," Pfeiffer says. "But once you get to the merge, which is only a very small spectrum of air combat, in that area the Typhoon doesn't have to fear the F-22 in all aspects."

The Typhoons were stripped of their external fuel tanks and slicked off as much as possible before the encounter with the Raptors, says Grune, who adds that in that configuration, the Typhoon is an "animal".


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... ts-report/

Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted.


Lets give the Typhoon with E-Captor radar and PIRATE IRST some benefit of the doubt. IRST could detect it from 50-90km away and come up with a SWAG and say the radar could detect F-35 or F-22 at at least 45km (I'm saying 45km because your earlier claims of 72km to even 80km isn't being supported by what is actually being seen in exercise events). Great you detected F-22 or F-35 but can you really engage them at that distance? As eloise has pointed out there is a vast difference from maximum detection range and maximum tracking range. To keep things simple 45km detection and cut that in half for actual tracking and engaging. So in "reality" (again I am interpreting this as a layman and enthusiast) the Typhoon could accurately engage the F-22 or F-35 at 25km and in with its Meteor missile. Essentially the Typhoon at BVR will ALWAYS be fighting with the shorter stick.
A good analogy of a Typhoon with Meteor and a F-22 or F-35 with AIM-120D (or even C7) is a fighting match between a champion Tae Kwon Do fighter standing at 6ft against another champion Tae Kwon Do fighter standing at 5'9". Then when they get into the ring the 6ft Tae Kwon Do fighter that he/she isn't able to use any types of kicks. What good is the reach when you can't even use it?

Now lets move onto IR stealth. It is IMPOSSIBLE to completely mask or reduce the IR signatures of fighter aircraft. It is POSSIBLE however to reduce them, by how much is not really known given the fact that there is no set standard of measurement.

please read... it touches on IR reduction methods
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... -benefits/

as garrya has pointed out the F-35 does have IR reducing designs and methods. As pointed out by the link the F-22 also has IR reducing methods such as having less exposed engine nozzles (so does the F-35) when compared to current fighter aircraft.

Image

Image

Image

Not so obvious is the shape of the engine nozzle...
(Though this was more about the Typhoon it touch on what I am saying)



The F-35's engine nozzle design came from the LOAN program. LOAN program showed that they could reduce the RCS as well as the IR signature.

http://newsfighter.blogspot.com/2011/07 ... etric.html

Image

Image

The the F-22's TV nozzles are shaped more to reduce its rearward RCS, I don't think it wouldn't be too far fetched that the F-22 has some type of IR reducing method for its engine nozzles as well to reduce the size of the plume. I cannot say the same however for the Typhoon as it has the traditional "turkey feathers".

Then you go on to claim the supposed "superiority" of the Typhoon at close ranges when compared to a F-22... maybe because my favorite fighter aircraft is the F-22...



I just realized that this is going on and on like a rant so I'll hold off and pick up another time.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 04:26
by XanderCrews
franciwzm wrote:
are you retarded ? tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"


So many guesses about things you can't possibly know... and if you did know could not say...

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 09:40
by optimist
franciwzm wrote:
are you retarded ? tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"

Normally I don't mind abusive posters talking dribble. You may recall me asking you to post pictures too. You didn't include a picture in your post for me to look at, because reading all of what you write is too tedious.. I have no other option than to report your post.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 10:30
by hornetfinn
franciwzm wrote:I have written also that batch 4 typhhon use for exercise neither had irst operative: typhoon irst os best ion the world by huge margin (double range that one used on su-35 despite beeing more compact) anc can detect an f16 size thermal signature 90km away..what about f22 thermal signature ?smaller then a fighter of its class, but for sure not smaller then an f16...
Keep crying like 15yo babies and keep offending me, pls.


Typhoons Pirate IRST is not the best in the world at all. The best current system is definitely F-35s EOTS and it's not even close. It uses the latest sensor technology which is about 10-15 years newer than what is used in Pirate. Pirate is early 1990s technology but development was protracted and it entered service way after it could've been. Pirate uses 2nd generation scanning array which has lower sensitivity, resolution and contrast than 3rd gen staring array used in EOTS. EOTS also has more powerful optics as it's basically an internally mounted FLIR/IRST pod and the image quality is extremely high as you can see in public videos. The Swiss said Rafale Front Sector Optronics was a special strong point for it and did not mention Pirate being something special in their evaluation report. I would think that would've been mentioned if Pirate indeed the best system in the world. Pirate is definitely a good and effective system, but not the best there is.

Russian OLS-XX are just crappy compared to any western IRST system. They use basically slightly upgraded 1960s technology non-imaging sensors which western countries abandoned decades ago. It can only detect a very small number of heat sources and can not create any images of surroundings and can not identify targets at all. It would not be able to tell a forest fire from afterburning F-15. OLS-35 can track 4 of such heat sources at best compared to hundreds in western systems. Sensitivity of such non-imaging systems is also way lower than in imaging systems which means they have much shorter effective range. Even AN/AAS-42 IRST used in F-14D 25 years ago was better system as it was imaging system. Russia has not had any choice as they've been unable to field their own imaging systems until very recently.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 11:56
by franciwzm
XanderCrews wrote:
franciwzm wrote:
are you retarded ? tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"


So many guesses about things you can't possibly know... and if you did know could not say...


You are right, but typhoon pilots report f22 like beeing an hot bird, so for sure its thermal signature is not inferior to f16,on which detect range with irst is of public dominion ( 90km)...

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 11:59
by franciwzm
optimist wrote:
franciwzm wrote:
are you retarded ? tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"

Normally I don't mind abusive posters talking dribble. You may recall me asking you to post pictures too. You didn't include a picture in your post for me to look at, because reading all of what you write is too tedious.. I have no other option than to report your post.


http://eucitizens.eu/Forum/index.php?topic=166.0

Are you neither able neither to see picture trough link I had to post on request as you are very short memory and dont remeber thousands of comments about this not official encounter in 2006 ?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/53994120@ ... ed-public/

Here is picture I have extracted from it before some autorithies try to cancel the page...
You should report yourself not beeing able to open links...

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 12:03
by franciwzm
hornetfinn wrote:
franciwzm wrote:I have written also that batch 4 typhhon use for exercise neither had irst operative: typhoon irst os best ion the world by huge margin (double range that one used on su-35 despite beeing more compact) anc can detect an f16 size thermal signature 90km away..what about f22 thermal signature ?smaller then a fighter of its class, but for sure not smaller then an f16...
Keep crying like 15yo babies and keep offending me, pls.


Typhoons Pirate IRST is not the best in the world at all. The best current system is definitely F-35s EOTS and it's not even close. It uses the latest sensor technology which is about 10-15 years newer than what is used in Pirate. Pirate is early 1990s technology but development was protracted and it entered service way after it could've been. Pirate uses 2nd generation scanning array which has lower sensitivity, resolution and contrast than 3rd gen staring array used in EOTS. EOTS also has more powerful optics as it's basically an internally mounted FLIR/IRST pod and the image quality is extremely high as you can see in public videos. The Swiss said Rafale Front Sector Optronics was a special strong point for it and did not mention Pirate being something special in their evaluation report. I would think that would've been mentioned if Pirate indeed the best system in the world. Pirate is definitely a good and effective system, but not the best there is.

Russian OLS-XX are just crappy compared to any western IRST system. They use basically slightly upgraded 1960s technology non-imaging sensors which western countries abandoned decades ago. It can only detect a very small number of heat sources and can not create any images of surroundings and can not identify targets at all. It would not be able to tell a forest fire from afterburning F-15. OLS-35 can track 4 of such heat sources at best compared to hundreds in western systems. Sensitivity of such non-imaging systems is also way lower than in imaging systems which means they have much shorter effective range. Even AN/AAS-42 IRST used in F-14D 25 years ago was better system as it was imaging system. Russia has not had any choice as they've been unable to field their own imaging systems until very recently.


I f you are right, and you could be, that doesnt change a fact about typhoon irst beeing able to detect f16 90km far, and for sure f22 and f35 from not less distance...That could only mean that f35 could detect f22 or other f35s at much longer distances with irst then with its radar. Is irst on f35 operative>? It too5-6 years to one on typhhoon to be operative, and it was not at langley in 2006. What we know that recently typhoon pilots have described f22 as an "hot bird"

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 13:28
by bigjku
There is a huge difference between the maximum range one can theoretically see a target at with IR sensors and the ability to conduct a volume search at that range. IRST is particularly effective when cued by AWACS or a planes radar. Less so to a pretty good degree when operating on its own.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 14:30
by botsing
bigjku wrote:There is a huge difference between the maximum range one can theoretically see a target at with IR sensors and the ability to conduct a volume search at that range. IRST is particularly effective when cued by AWACS or a planes radar. Less so to a pretty good degree when operating on its own.

Can EOTS be slaved to Barracuda like how the APG-81 can?

In that case when Barracuda detects and geo-locates a source, the EOTS can be slaved to it and use a very narrow beam.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 14:42
by popcorn
botsing wrote:
bigjku wrote:There is a huge difference between the maximum range one can theoretically see a target at with IR sensors and the ability to conduct a volume search at that range. IRST is particularly effective when cued by AWACS or a planes radar. Less so to a pretty good degree when operating on its own.

Can EOTS be slaved to Barracuda like how the APG-81 can?
K
In that case when Barracuda detects and geo-locates a source, the EOTS can be slaved to it and use a very narrow beam.

Most certainly. A benefit of the fusion engine.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 14:58
by garrya
franciwzm wrote:that doesnt change a fact about typhoon irst beeing able to detect f16 90km far,

You ignored the main question, where did you get this "fact" from? and what were conditions of the detection such as speed, altitude, target aspect?

franciwzm wrote:and for sure f22 and f35 from not less distance...

Nonsense, F-35, F-22 has various ir reduction measures while F-16 has none, no reason to conclude that they cant have smaller thermal signature
And you will still need LRF to generate firing solution, so detection range and lock on range isn't the same

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 15:04
by garrya
franciwzm wrote:Are you neither able neither to see picture trough link I had to post on request as you are very short memory and dont remeber thousands of comments about this not official encounter in 2006 ?

So the encounter was in an exercise but somehow it is not official? if Typhoon's radar was so good like you suggested then why Laurie Hilditch said that they need an AWACS station at a specific direction in regards to F-35 to defeat its stealth features? why not just use Typhoon radar?
In an internal simulation series, Eurofighter found that four Typhoons supported by an airborne warning and control system (AWACS) defeated 85% of attacks by eight F-35s carrying an internal load of two joint direct attack munitions (JDAM) and two air-to-air missiles, Penrice says.

According to Laurie Hilditch, Eurofighter's head of the future requirements capture, the F-35's frontal-aspect stealth can be defeated by stationing interceptors and AWACS at a 25º to 30º angle to the F-35's most likely approach path to a target.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 35-345265/

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 18:44
by XanderCrews
bigjku wrote:There is a huge difference between the maximum range one can theoretically see a target at with IR sensors and the ability to conduct a volume search at that range. IRST is particularly effective when cued by AWACS or a planes radar. Less so to a pretty good degree when operating on its own.



Correct. You have to know where to START looking. It's a huge sky.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 18:55
by XanderCrews
franciwzm wrote:
optimist wrote:
franciwzm wrote:
are you retarded ? tin the avianist report, amraam no escape zone was confronted with irst tracking: no question at yphoon can track a supercruising f22 at 50km by irst, but thati s not max range: typical range for an medium thermal source like f16 is 90km: now you should bring proove that thermal signature of 22 is 4 times smaller thena anf 16..It could be rpughly the same , ...While is well known that f35 thermal signature is quite large,at least with current engine...Nowere is written that max range with irst is 50km for typhoon...What we know i sthat su35 irst has half range and sensitivity then typhoon one...considering f22 is bigger bird a"Indeed, Typhoon pilots at Farnborough said that, when flying without their external fuel tanks, in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, the Eurofighter not only held its own, but proved to be better than the Raptor.

Indeed, it looks like the F-22 tends to lose too much energy when using thrust vectoring (TV): TV can be useful to enable a rapid direction change without losing sight of the adversary but, unless the Raptor can manage to immediately get in the proper position to score a kill, the energy it loses makes the then slow moving stealth combat plane quite vulnerable.

This would be coherent by analysis made in the past according to which the TV it’s not worth the energy cost unless the fighter is in the post stall regime, especially in the era of High Off Bore Sight and Helmet Mounted Display (features that the F-22 lacks).

Obviously, U.S. fighter pilots could argue that, flying a stealthy plane they will never need to engage an enemy in WVR dogfight, proving that, as already explained several times, kills and HUD captures scored during air combat training are not particularly interesting unless the actual Rules Of Engagement (ROE) and the training scenario are known.

However, not all the modern and future scenarios envisage BVR (Beyond Visual Range) engagements and the risk of coming to close range 1 vs 1 (or 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 etc) is still high, especially considered that the F-22 currently uses AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles, whose maximum range is around 100 km (below the Meteor missile used by the Typhoon).

Moreover, at a distance of about 50 km the Typhoon IRST (Infra-Red Search and Track) system is capable to find even a stealthy plane “especially if it is large and hot, like the F-22” a Eurofighter pilot said."

"

Normally I don't mind abusive posters talking dribble. You may recall me asking you to post pictures too. You didn't include a picture in your post for me to look at, because reading all of what you write is too tedious.. I have no other option than to report your post.


http://eucitizens.eu/Forum/index.php?topic=166.0

Are you neither able neither to see picture trough link I had to post on request as you are very short memory and dont remeber thousands of comments about this not official encounter in 2006 ?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/53994120@ ... ed-public/

Here is picture I have extracted from it before some autorithies try to cancel the page...
You should report yourself not beeing able to open links...



Thank you for posting that link, but I still feel it is ... "rather editorialized" to put it mildly.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 04 Oct 2016, 20:37
by basher54321
XanderCrews wrote:
Thank you for posting that link, but I still feel it is ... "rather editorialized" to put it mildly.



:lmao:
As much fun as it is to read a thread from ten years back that features none other than Picard and quite a few of the standard anti F-22/35 articles - and of course nothing to back up anything claimed thus far.


sferrin did you ever find the article?

I have that issue. As it is currently buried in a box in my shed somewhere I can't tell you what it says word for word. If it's the article I'm thinking of it was written by John Lake. As I recall (it's been years so take it for what it's worth), there were no direct quotes, no "we interviewed Cmdr. So-And-So and he said". It was more along the lines of "internet rumors say. . .". It came up for discussion on Key Publishing. He ended up sending me a copy of the full article (more than they had space allotted for in the magazine). It was pretty interesting. Will see if I can dig it up over the weekend, but I'm thinking it's gone.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=27650

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 05 Oct 2016, 11:31
by hornetfinn
There are several things that make the franciwzm's claims pretty meaningless even if they were totally accurate.

For WVR fight a lightly loaded Typhoon is definitely a dangerous beast. It has great T/W ratio, about equal to F-22 and aerodynamics is also very good. F-22 definitely has superior nose-pointing ability due to TVC and twin tails. Typhoon definitely has the advantage of HMD and very good HOBS IR missiles which F-22 lacks (but is getting in near future). I think for WVR the two are so close that it comes down to piloting skills and who has the better day. In the future the situation might well stay the same if F-22 gets HMD and AIM-9X and Typhoon gets aerodynamics modification kit fitted for even better maneuverability. F-35 also has extremely good WVR maneuverability according to experienced pilots and has the advantage of EODAS to detect and track threats.

However the problem is how the Typhoon could force such a fight. Even if Typhoon could detect F-22/-35 at some relatively meaningful distance, the problem is that surveillance and search radars can't. At the same time Typhoons would be tracked at very long distances with modern radars. Also the radars and other sensors in F-22/35 would detect and track Typhoons at much longer ranges than vice versa. So long before meeting each others F-22/35 pilots would know exactly where the Typhoons were and what they were doing. Typhoon pilots would have zero knowledge about where the F-22/35s were and what they were doing. So F-22/35s would maneuver to advantageous positions and likely use separation of tens of nautical miles between aircraft which is said to be normal for them. This would create horrible situation for Typhoon or any other 4th gen fighters as they would be at serious disadvantage when the fight starts. The jets would definitely not be flying towards each other like two horsemen in medieval jousting. That'd be just plain dumb for F-22/35s to do. Typhoons would be flying towards ambush where F-22/35s would attack them with pincher type movement or some other similar way which takes away the 4th gen jet capability to detect and engage. Most likely the first sign of such attack would be AMRAAMs or Meteors (European F-35s) going active or weak .

Even if Pirate could detect F-22/35 at 90 km away, it would not really know the distance to it and would not even know what the detection is. Only at distances where range and target speed could be determined (either with Captor or passive ranging both of which are possible only at significantly shorter ranges) would the Typhoon pilot have some idea that it is enemy fighter. This range is still so short even according to franciwzm's claims that there would be no problems for F-22/35s to just maneuver to totally avoid detection. Wide separation of 5th gen fighters also means that detecting one of them or even tracking it would be of limited value as there would be no way of knowing where his friend are or how many of them there are.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2016, 00:08
by les_paul59
The funnies thing about this thread is that the typhoon isn't even the best of the euro-canards. The rafale is probably more equipped to execute missions in a high threat environment.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2016, 03:03
by flighthawk128
les_paul59 wrote:The funnies thing about this thread is that the typhoon isn't even the best of the euro-canards. The rafale is probably more equipped to execute missions in a high threat environment.


Care to elaborate? I'm not challenging the view, just that I'm not all that up to speed on the Euro-canards (who cares about the second best right?) I know traditionally the Typhoon was used by critics to challenge the F-22, but it's much rarer hearing about the Rafale challenging anybody.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2016, 04:44
by eloise
flighthawk128 wrote:
Care to elaborate? I'm not challenging the view, just that I'm not all that up to speed on the Euro-canards (who cares about the second best right?) I know traditionally the Typhoon was used by critics to challenge the F-22, but it's much rarer hearing about the Rafale challenging anybody.

According to Swiss evaluation , Rafale was a better ac than Typhoon

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2016, 07:16
by hornetfinn
eloise wrote:
flighthawk128 wrote:
Care to elaborate? I'm not challenging the view, just that I'm not all that up to speed on the Euro-canards (who cares about the second best right?) I know traditionally the Typhoon was used by critics to challenge the F-22, but it's much rarer hearing about the Rafale challenging anybody.

According to Swiss evaluation , Rafale was a better ac than Typhoon


Exactly. That evaluation is by far the best and most official comparison of current Eurocanards, their evolved versions (Gripen NG, Rafale F3+, Typhoon Tranche 3 P1E) and latest F/A-18C. Swiss Air Force flew test flights with all competitors and compared them fo F/A-18C in all mission types. Evolved versions were evaluated with data provided by manufacturers. I trust their evaluation far more than some random bloggers and forum opinions.

Basically Rafale and Eurofighter were somewhat close in air-to-air missions (Air policing, Defensive Counter-Air, Offensive Counter-Air). Rafale was however considered more capable of the two and in DCA missions pretty significantly so. Eurofighter had deficiensies in EW, Detection and Identification capabilities. Rafale was considered much better than other Eurocanards when it came to Recce and A/G Strike missions. Sadly there was no comparison with F/A-18C in these categories as Swiss Hornets were not been tasked nor equipped for these mission types. Typhoon was considered to have significantly better performance than others (even Rafale), but avionics systems were clearly inferior to Rafale. These might well change with AESA and DASS upgrades, but these have to be implemented first.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 06 Oct 2016, 07:26
by hythelday
flighthawk128 wrote: Typhoon was used by critics to challenge the F-22, but it's much rarer hearing about the Rafale challenging anybody.


Probably because more Typhoons flew against Raptors than Rafales. Then again there's that famous video of F-22 in Rafale's crosshairs which was was used for chest-thumping quite a lot.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 12:02
by vanshilar
According to Laurie Hilditch, Eurofighter's head of the future requirements capture, the F-35's frontal-aspect stealth can be defeated by stationing interceptors and AWACS at a 25º to 30º angle to the F-35's most likely approach path to a target.


In other words, she bought into (or is at least peddling) the claim that the F-35 has frontal-aspect stealth only, like it's the J-20 or something. So it was probably just some simple simulation again.

Meanwhile, wouldn't the F-35 detect the emissions from the AWACS, and know how to get around them or shoot them down?

Additionally, I presume at the start of each engagement the AWACS are closer to the Typhoons. I wonder if the F-35 could pick up on the AWACS signals bouncing off of the Typhoons and use them to know where the Typhoons are :devil:

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 12:11
by charlielima223
vanshilar wrote:
In other words, she bought into (or is at least peddling) the claim that the F-35 has frontal-aspect stealth only, like it's the J-20 or something. So it was probably just some simple simulation again.

Meanwhile, wouldn't the F-35 detect the emissions from the AWACS, and know how to get around them or shoot them down?

Additionally, I presume at the start of each engagement the AWACS are closer to the Typhoons. I wonder if the F-35 could pick up on the AWACS signals bouncing off of the Typhoons and use them to know where the Typhoons are :devil:


I think I read somewhere that the F-22 and F-35 have the capability with their EW suites with their sensor fusion that they have a display that tells them their radar spike signature or something. Also that the F-22 and F-35 also have a visual representation of some kind of the electronic battle space. If those two features are indeed true, F-22 and F-35 would have a very easy time in evading as well as knowing where and when to strike.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 12:36
by botsing
vanshilar wrote:
According to Laurie Hilditch, Eurofighter's head of the future requirements capture, the F-35's frontal-aspect stealth can be defeated by stationing interceptors and AWACS at a 25º to 30º angle to the F-35's most likely approach path to a target.


In other words, she bought into (or is at least peddling) the claim that the F-35 has frontal-aspect stealth only, like it's the J-20 or something. So it was probably just some simple simulation again.

I think this has to do with two spikes in the radar deflection of the F-35 around the 30 degree angle from the front:

Image

If those spikes are real then you have the biggest chance of detecting an F-35 that is moving towards your position at that angle

At the time of his (it's a male) remarks these RCS calculations were about all they could build on. Those calculations did not take into account RAM and other stealth tweaks.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 15:16
by XanderCrews
vanshilar wrote:
According to Laurie Hilditch, Eurofighter's head of the future requirements capture, the F-35's frontal-aspect stealth can be defeated by stationing interceptors and AWACS at a 25º to 30º angle to the F-35's most likely approach path to a target.


In other words, she bought into (or is at least peddling) the claim that the F-35 has frontal-aspect stealth only, like it's the J-20 or something. So it was probably just some simple simulation again.

Meanwhile, wouldn't the F-35 detect the emissions from the AWACS, and know how to get around them or shoot them down?

Additionally, I presume at the start of each engagement the AWACS are closer to the Typhoons. I wonder if the F-35 could pick up on the AWACS signals bouncing off of the Typhoons and use them to know where the Typhoons are :devil:


If you're asking "would the F-35 detect the trap?" The answer is a resounding yes.

A quick aside:

These little scenarios always make the fox a shotgun equipped hunter themselves.

They always take loads of enemy assets to find a single F-35, once the F-35 is found the scenarios automatically equate that to killed-- yet In this case the Typhoons and AWACS are amazingly undetected! Even though they are detectable the moment they take off!! And if seen=killed, how do they live to spring their "trap" on the LO asset?

Double standards of peace

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 17:27
by les_paul59
The problem with that scenario is how does the awacs know what 20-30 degrees off center of the f-35 is, if no one can detect the f-35 to begin with. It's not great logic, and the f-35 will easily see the radio station size emissions coming from the awacs and adjust it's flight path to stay undetected or simply shoot the awacs down, I can't imagine that triangulating the position of an awacs with a four-ship of f-35's will be that hard.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 09 Oct 2016, 18:25
by eloise
botsing wrote:I think this has to do with two spikes in the radar deflection of the F-35 around the 30 degree angle from the front:

Image

If those spikes are real then you have the biggest chance of detecting an F-35 that is moving towards your position at that angle

Small note : those are spikes for 10 Ghz , AWACS radar work at lower frequency around 4-0.5 Ghz so the reflection lobes will be wider
Image

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2016, 09:18
by hornetfinn
eloise wrote:
botsing wrote:I think this has to do with two spikes in the radar deflection of the F-35 around the 30 degree angle from the front:

Image

If those spikes are real then you have the biggest chance of detecting an F-35 that is moving towards your position at that angle

Small note : those are spikes for 10 Ghz , AWACS radar work at lower frequency around 4-0.5 Ghz so the reflection lobes will be wider
Image


Yes, the return lobes will be wider with lower frequency, but the radar would still need to be within the same narrow azimuth range in relation to F-35 to be able to exploit the spike in any way. The radar transmit beam has to hit the F-35 in the right angle and the be reflected back to same radar as all these radars are monostatic. Bistatic radars could theoretically use the phenomena but would require that both the transmitting and receiving radar be at exactly right directions. That'd be so difficult to achieve that it would be pretty much impossible in real life.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2016, 23:10
by arian
A magic bullet is not a solution.

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 17 Feb 2017, 06:32
by spazsinbad
Austrians are disappointed with their TYPHOID deal: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-austr ... SKBN15V118

Re: F-35 versus Typhoon

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2017, 16:27
by count_to_10
So, I was looking at some F-35 airshow videos, and noticing just how far back the F-35's wing is on the aircraft. Curious, I checked the top-down images available on Wikipedia, and it really looks like the main wing of the F-35 is actually further back on it's fuselage than the main wings of the Eurocanards.

Image
Image