F-35 JSF vs Eurofighter Typhoon

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

RonO

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 128
  • Joined: 09 May 2006, 23:59

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:04

Andy, your F-35 quote from Norway was from the Typhoon salesman and not the F-35 guy and as such should be taken with a huge pinch of salt. Be like taking the word of a Chevy salesman talking about a BMW.

I fear you miss the point on stealth. In one breath you say it's not very valuable and say technologies will soon be here to make it redundant and in the next breath boast of the stealth features of Typhoon Tranche 3 and various Bae programs (Replica, by the way, didn't fly - it didn't have any systems or engines). You can't have it both ways. Either stealth is a very valuable asset and all the world's manufacturers are justified in spending large fortunes developing it or it's a POS. Make up your mind.

What F-35 RCS do your radar ranges assume?

cheers
Offline

RonO

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 128
  • Joined: 09 May 2006, 23:59

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:06

For the record, I think Typhoon is an excellent aircraft with a different and somewhat overlapping set of capabilities than the F-35. The RAF should get both.
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:28

RonO wrote:Andy, your F-35 quote from Norway was from the Typhoon salesman and not the F-35 guy and as such should be taken with a huge pinch of salt. Be like taking the word of a Chevy salesman talking about a BMW.

I fear you miss the point on stealth. In one breath you say it's not very valuable and say technologies will soon be here to make it redundant and in the next breath boast of the stealth features of Typhoon Tranche 3 and various Bae programs (Replica, by the way, didn't fly - it didn't have any systems or engines). You can't have it both ways. Either stealth is a very valuable asset and all the world's manufacturers are justified in spending large fortunes developing it or it's a POS. Make up your mind.

What F-35 RCS do your radar ranges assume?

cheers


I don't claim it will be redundant and I do think it is a valuable piece of kit... I just don't think it is the be all and end all of air combat. Technology always moves on. So stealth also needs to move on.

Replica - BAE say it never flew however there were reports in the UK of an unknown craft flying out of Warton at night around the time its said the project was active. I was using it as an example anyway as the person above me claimed there was no evidence that any other nation apart from the US was doing significant stealth research.

There is more than one way to skin a cat... active cancellation (not plasma stealth before thats brought up) isn't anywhere as near as effective as true Stealth as it would be very quickley overloaded. However if you forgive the phrase it could be extremely effective at making the aircraft stealthy against missiles. Active radar missiles such as AMRAAM and Meteor, once active, seek the target out pretty much themselves using their own radar.... using active cancellation selectively on the missiles radar emissions.... it could in theory make the aircraft invisible to BVR missiles. Just not the launch platform ;). Rafale is supposed to be fitted with a basic form of the technology... although I'm skeptical as its a British design....

I have noticed I quoted the wrong figure for the F-35 detection ranges of the CAESAR in my previous post.... they match pretty much exactly the range where an F-35 will become F-22 food aswell. F-35 RCS is using a number of quoted sources... as derived by Toan...0.001m2... Typhoon is around 0.1m2 according to most sources (although one recently claimed 0.5m2). The figures below were mathematically calculated by Toan using the most common publically legitimately stated figures.

CAPTOR(EF-2000 Tranch 1 and 2):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 12 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 22 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 70 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 124 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 185 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 220 km+

APG-77 AESA(F-22A):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 35 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 112 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 200 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 300 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 355 km+

CAESAR AESA(EF-2000 Tranch3, post-2015 with 1,500 T/Rs):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 18~21 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 32~38 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 104~122 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 185~216 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 278~324 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 330~385 km+

APG-81 AESA(F-35A/B/C):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 16 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 28 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 90 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 160 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 240 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 285 km+

and for comparison:
APG-80 AESA(F-16E):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 11 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 20 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 62 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 110 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 165 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 195 km+

RBE-2 PESA(Rafale F1/F2/F3):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 7~9 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 13~15 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 41~49 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 73~87 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 110~130 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 130~154 km+

APG-68 V9(F-16 C/D/I)and RDY-2(M2000-5MK2 and -9):
For RCS 0.0001 m2 class target: 4~5 km+
For RCS 0.001 m2 class target: 8~9 km+
For RCS 0.1 m2 class target: 25~30 km+
For RCS 1.0 m2 class target: 46~54 km+
For RCS 5.0 m2 class target: 66~80 km+
For RCS 10.0 m2 class target: 78~95 km+

Remind me never to try and write technical posts like that other one at 0200 after a night on the town....
Andy :lol:
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:36

There are a number of airforces that may end up operating both, not just the RAF.

The Italians have Typhoon, but will also operate a mixed fleet of F-35A/B's.

The most important potential place for duel operation is Turkey. It is increasingly likely Turkey are going to put a big Typhoon order in, news reports from Turkey this week have said they will be given a final assembly line in Turkey the possible order is so large. Typhoon replacing their RF-4, F-4 and F-5 fleets and the F-35 replacing their F-16 fleet.

Andy
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
Offline

Driver

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 185
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2005, 18:14

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:40

I've seen some comments about the EFA. The JSF-A needs a longer strip then the EFA... The EFA altough it doesnt have STOVL it can do extreme short take-offs WITH full payload.. And the JSF can go to sea, but hey not many nations feel the need. And Again there is technology being developed in Europe and they're well on their way with it too... too make stealth visible.

Again for home defence (For Europe because Europe on the contrary to the USA has a much smaller focuss on offence and more on defence as most will agree) the EFA is the one to go.
Offline

RoAF

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 632
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
  • Location: Romania

Unread post30 May 2006, 19:46

IF Turkey buys the Typhoon, Greece will follow right after it - or the other way around.
These two countries are priceless as customers, you get two customers with one marketing effort! :-D
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1684
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post30 May 2006, 21:05

boff180 wrote:There are a number of airforces that may end up operating both, not just the RAF.

The Italians have Typhoon, but will also operate a mixed fleet of F-35A/B's.

The most important potential place for duel operation is Turkey. It is increasingly likely Turkey are going to put a big Typhoon order in, news reports from Turkey this week have said they will be given a final assembly line in Turkey the possible order is so large. Typhoon replacing their RF-4, F-4 and F-5 fleets and the F-35 replacing their F-16 fleet.

Andy


Eurofighter Consortium are actually offering Turkey a position as the "Fifth" FULL partner nation, with full up assembly facilities etc.. Turkey would have responsibility of selling/marketing the Typhoon in certain regions in the same way as the other partners.

EF Ltd have just trumped the JSF deal offered by LM, which was worth $4 Billion.This included huge work-share. The Typhoon deal is worth $5 Billion and includes EF Ltd "club" membership. The cat fight begins.

The Typhoon looks more attractive, only because it is actually worth MORE money to Turkey. Maybe LM will "up" the ante.

Turkey is not in the EU, it would be cheaper to build Typhoons there in the long run, potentially? Same for JSF?
At least labour costs would be far lower as well as operating costs. Would Greece buy Turkish built Typhoons OR JSF? No, but they wouldn`t have to, there will be other production centres.

It is all politics and sales manouvre of course, but I think Turkey would benefit from having a mixed fleet. In any deal , Turkey will end up smelling very sweet though! LM and EF Ltd are falling over one another.

EF Ltd is considering expanding into the wider defence sector.. I don`t know if that is just marketing/bluff but UAV production for a Euro-UCAV has been talked about recently..Turkey would have a hand in this but for now, it is far too distant to pin any hopes on financially....Who knows what shape EU UCAV policy will be, it is rather fuzzy at the moment.

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/arti ... wsid=44656
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 May 2006, 21:09

Driver wrote:Compared to what's out there... Yes.


Compared to what specifically? (And the F-22, B-2 & F-117 are off the table because nobody else is going to be buying those).
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 May 2006, 21:16

idesof wrote:the F-35's air-to-air capabilities, which are not significantly lesser than its larger cousin's, are being purposely down-played so as not to alert Congress that the F-35 will be significantly cheaper, but not significantly less capable, than the F-22.


While it's safe to say the F-35 is #2 in air to air there is a LARGE difference between #1 and #2. In flight performance (speed, altitude, manuverability) the F-35 won't touch an F-22. The F-22 has a more powerful radar and greater weapons load. It also has the ALR-94.
Offline

Driver

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 185
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2005, 18:14

Unread post30 May 2006, 21:41

#2? that's a good one, O I needed a laugh :D. The EFA will carrie phoenix missles soon plus in close combat... The EFA is sayed to be able to match the F-22 in manuverability there is no evidence supporting this nor is there any saying it isn't true and I kinda believe it cause that thing can turn! Specially with the 3D thrust vector nozzles they might be giving it in a later tranche.
Offline

locum

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2005, 02:20

Unread post30 May 2006, 22:20

Sferrin wrote: '2nd in air-to-air', can you prove this? The Typhoon has a beter T/W ratio, lower wingloading and more specific excess power than the F-35.

Driver wrote: 'phoenix missles', smoking funny grass, boy? Phoenix missiles were carried by the F-14 only, maybe you are mean the Meteor.
Driver can you tell us which European countries are developing counter-Stealth technologies and what kind of technologies, I am very curious.
Nulla tenaci invia est via.
Tzaruch shemirah, hasof bahr
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post30 May 2006, 22:25

driver... phoenix...NO.... METEOR... YES.

Although I do agree, the F-35 will not be #2 in the a2a role.

The F-22 is #1 most definately its combo of high payload, high stealth and powerful networking... there is nothing that can match it in BVR. In WVR, it has a match in the Typhoon, the 22 does have a higher instantaneous turn but in a sustained fight they are equals.

The F-35 though is too compromised towards the a2g roll to completely overcome the Typhoon in the a2a role. The only big advantage it has is stealth. It has been said from UK reps it won't be as manouveurable as the Typhoon either.

Although my main concern for an offensive and defensive platform is combat persistance.... something the F-35 greatly lacks.... in a stealth configuration it can carry a total of 4 missiles, thats it... and it remains to be seen if most nations will be able to carry a Hobs internally.

Imagine a typical european defensive scene.... 2 aircraft on Q covering half the country. An unexpected first strike occurs and a package of 25 aircraft are inbound, the two Q aircraft are scrambled with orders to engage. The 2 F-35s are carrying a load of either 4 AMRAAm/Meteor or 2 Am/Me and 2 Asraam... They are the only aircraft in range before the package reach their target. The F-35s can only destroy (if all missiles find home) a total of 8 aircraft before they have to RTB... leaving 17 aircraft to hit their target. Ok unless its the ASRAAM aircraft they would of been hit without knowing they were under attack... but its not very effective as it hasn't got the persistance to cover the airspace and/or await second waves.

Put the F-22 in the position... The 2 aircraft wipe out 12 of the 25 targets at BVR range without them knowing they are there... with half the package gone out of no-where a lesser trained pilot may bug out and RTB... coupled with the fact another 4 aircraft can be destroyed in the merge before guns... a total of 9 aircraft would remain without gun kills. This would probably significantly reduce the effectiveness of the inbound package.

Finally, Typhoon in the same role... with one of 2 typical load-outs.... 6BVR+6WVR+2or3T, 8BVR+2WVR+2or3T. Before getting into the merge, they have defeated a similar number of aircraft to the F-22, between 12 and 16. Leaving 13 or as little as 9 aircraft remaining. Then in the merge, between 12 and 4 more aircraft could be destroyed.

Leaving a total of 9 or as little as 5 aircraft from the package remaining which would render it ineffective.

I know they are perfect scenarios with 100% missile reliability and no losses. However, its still a typical EUROPEAN defence scenario that could possibly, happen anywhere in the world.

The F-35 is going to be an excellent multi-role aircraft but not a complete king of the A2A roll.

In my book the A2A rankings are as follows:

#1 F-22
#2 Typhoon
#3 F-35
#4 Latest Sukhoi
#5 J-10 (based on what i have heard).
#6 Rafale.

Andy
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 May 2006, 23:40

LOL "the only advantage it will have is stealth" :roll: The only way it would lose to a Typhoon would be if the pilot were stupid enough to go guns with him. BRV the F-35 wins hands down and WVR (with HOBS and HMCS) it's whoever sees the other guy first. Since the F-35 will detect the Typhoon before it will be detected itself the F-35 will control the battle. He can either engage BVR, position himself for a WVR shot, or disengage with the Typhoon pilot unaware.
Offline

boff180

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58

Unread post30 May 2006, 23:52

People say about the opposing aircraft won't have a clue the stealth aircraft is there, but thinking about it... if there isn't an AWACs datalink present... the F-35 will need to use its own sensors to detect the target in the first place.... a radar signal will give away the direction immediately. And the same will happen with an EO system, as the laser range finder will give it away.

Also saying about HOBs, unless its an RAF or RAAF example (carrying ASRAAM internally), then if the aircraft is in a full stealth configuration... this is not an issue. A fact is that the IRIS-T/Aim-9X are NOT being cleared for internal carriage so it won't be carrying a HOBs in the first place unless it wants to sacrifice its stealth. Aim-9X is only being cleared for a dedicated "end of wing" (not wingtip) station.

Andy
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post31 May 2006, 00:42

boff180 wrote:People say about the opposing aircraft won't have a clue the stealth aircraft is there, but thinking about it... if there isn't an AWACs datalink present... the F-35 will need to use its own sensors to detect the target in the first place.... a radar signal will give away the direction immediately. And the same will happen with an EO system, as the laser range finder will give it away.

Also saying about HOBs, unless its an RAF or RAAF example (carrying ASRAAM internally), then if the aircraft is in a full stealth configuration... this is not an issue. A fact is that the IRIS-T/Aim-9X are NOT being cleared for internal carriage so it won't be carrying a HOBs in the first place unless it wants to sacrifice its stealth. Aim-9X is only being cleared for a dedicated "end of wing" (not wingtip) station.

Andy


Well that's dumb. :? You'd think they'd incorporate LOAL and internal carriage of AIM-9X on the F-35. I mean the cost to do that has got to be chump change compared to the cost of the program as a whole. Oh well. Maybe they don't see the need I guess. (Not saying it's so good it doesn't need it but that maybe they don't see it getting into situations where it would be the decision maker all that often).
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests