Spain - Typhoons and F-35's to replace Hornets?
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
- Location: Nashua NH USA
Not sure, but it was said that an F-35 going that far with two internal one ton bombs would still have 7-8,000lb of fuel when they landed. Even increasing the fuel burn by 50% makes that possible with reserves.
"Spurts"
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
- Newbie
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 14 Oct 2020, 09:07
[quote="ricnunes"]
[quote="franfran2424"]
The F-35A ... carries less ordnance than the ground attack Typhoon.[/quote]
The issue was this quote, which was demonstrably false. It wasn't an LGB/JDAM argument, it was the "less ord" argument. the ability to carry 8x250# class weapons AND 4x2,000#class weapons AND 4xAAMs AND the targeting equipment AND the ECM AND the fuel to get them over a long range. IIRC the Typhoon only has three pylons rated for 2,000# class ord, and those are the fuel pylons.
At best the Typhoon can carry 3 x 2000lb ordinance/bombs which is exactly half the F-35A/C maximum capability with the same type of ordinance and then again if the Typhoon carried those three (3) potential 2000lb ordinance/bombs this would be done at the cost of not being able to carry a targeting pod at all which in the case of the Typhoon is usually carried on the centerline fuselage pylon.
[/quote]
The typhoon has 13 pylons which can carry up to 9000kg (7000kg if operating with a full fuel tank). 8 underwing, 5 under fuselage. 1 of those would be the targeting pod.
The F-35A has 10 pylons that can carry up to 8200kg. 4 internal, 6 external.
I don't know where does the confusion come from. It has more pylons, more max weight... It's better for ground attack considering fuel consumption too
[quote="franfran2424"]
The F-35A ... carries less ordnance than the ground attack Typhoon.[/quote]
The issue was this quote, which was demonstrably false. It wasn't an LGB/JDAM argument, it was the "less ord" argument. the ability to carry 8x250# class weapons AND 4x2,000#class weapons AND 4xAAMs AND the targeting equipment AND the ECM AND the fuel to get them over a long range. IIRC the Typhoon only has three pylons rated for 2,000# class ord, and those are the fuel pylons.
At best the Typhoon can carry 3 x 2000lb ordinance/bombs which is exactly half the F-35A/C maximum capability with the same type of ordinance and then again if the Typhoon carried those three (3) potential 2000lb ordinance/bombs this would be done at the cost of not being able to carry a targeting pod at all which in the case of the Typhoon is usually carried on the centerline fuselage pylon.
[/quote]
The typhoon has 13 pylons which can carry up to 9000kg (7000kg if operating with a full fuel tank). 8 underwing, 5 under fuselage. 1 of those would be the targeting pod.
The F-35A has 10 pylons that can carry up to 8200kg. 4 internal, 6 external.
I don't know where does the confusion come from. It has more pylons, more max weight... It's better for ground attack considering fuel consumption too
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
- Location: Nashua NH USA
franfran2424 wrote:The typhoon has 13 pylons which can carry up to 9000kg (7000kg if operating with a full fuel tank). 8 underwing, 5 under fuselage. 1 of those would be the targeting pod.
The F-35A has 10 pylons that can carry up to 8200kg. 4 internal, 6 external.
I don't know where does the confusion come from. It has more pylons, more max weight... It's better for ground attack considering fuel consumption too
Because it actually isn't that simple. Let's talk real weight first. Max-empty-internal fuel
Typhoon - 51,809-24,251-11,010 = 16,548 (7522kg)
F-35A - 70,000-29,300-18,250 = 22,450 (10,204kg, but pylon weight limited to 8,200kg)
The F-35A has a higher weight margin and the margin is so large that even putting the heaviest load possible on each pylon will not result in reaching max take-off weight.
Now let's talk pylons for an AG mission.
Typhoon - 13 pylons. 6 are dedicated AA pylons and 1 of the remaining pylons will carry the TGP. It has 6 AG pylons remaining. As we have discussed, only two of these are rated for large weapons.
F-35A - 11 pylons. Centerline will not be used as of now, but it is still there. 4 of the remaining 10 are dedicated AA pylons. It has 6 AG pylons and they are all rated for large weapons.
Same number of AG pylons, more high weight pylons on the F-35A, more weight capacity on the F-35A.
Assuming the AA pylons (not internal or semi-recessed) weigh 150lb and the AG pylons weight 300lb
Typhoon - 936kg of AAMs, 1,091kg of pylons, 208kg targeting pod. 5,287kg capacity for the 6 pylons with 4 of them limited to 500kg class weapons. Before adding AG weapons the Typhoon has a fuel fraction of 0.274 with a sensitivity of -0.014 per 1,000kg of added munitions.
F-35A - 475kg of AAMs, 682kg of pylons. 7,043kg capacity for the 6 pylons, 4 of them rated to 1,000kg class weapons while the other two are rated for 2,500kg class. Before adding AG weapons the F-35A has a fuel fraction of 0.364 with a sensitivity of -0.015 per 1,000kg of added munitions.
So, the F-35A has just as many AG stations as a Typhoon, can carry more on each station both based on station rating and MGTOW limits, and has a higher relative fuel load to carry to payload farther. If the Typhoon wants to add range it has to sacrifice the only two heavy stations it has.
"Spurts"
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
- Active Member
- Posts: 179
- Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
- Location: Spain
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
Assuming the AA pylons (not internal or semi-recessed) weigh 150lb and the AG pylons weight 300lb
Typhoon - 936kg of AAMs, 1,091kg of pylons, 208kg targeting pod. 5,287kg capacity for the 6 pylons with 4 of them limited to 500kg class weapons. Before adding AG weapons the Typhoon has a fuel fraction of 0.274 with a sensitivity of -0.014 per 1,000kg of added munitions.
I dont understand where you get those numbers, can you explain it better?
https://aeropathfinder.blogspot.com/
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5183
- Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
- Location: Finland
EF Typhoon carries 5 tonnes of internal fuel while F-35A carries 8.3 tonnes. That's whopping 66% more internal fuel for F-35A. F-35A is less than 20 percent heavier (especially considering it carries targeting pod as standard) and has about 10 percent more thrust. So it will fly a lot further than EF Typhoon with the same loadout. EF Typhoon would need CFTs and all 3 EFTs to get close to F-35A range. That'd limit the max A/G loadout to 2 heavy weapons or 4 light bombs (1,000 lbs or less) or 2 heavy and 2 light bombs. F-35 on the other hand can carry 6 heavy weapons or say 4 heavy and 4-8 light weapons. I don't think EF Typhoon is competitive in payload and range with F-35A in real life configurations. For very short range work with small bombs it might have equal payload.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
- Location: Nashua NH USA
falcon.16 wrote:sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
Assuming the AA pylons (not internal or semi-recessed) weigh 150lb and the AG pylons weight 300lb
Typhoon - 936kg of AAMs, 1,091kg of pylons, 208kg targeting pod. 5,287kg capacity for the 6 pylons with 4 of them limited to 500kg class weapons. Before adding AG weapons the Typhoon has a fuel fraction of 0.274 with a sensitivity of -0.014 per 1,000kg of added munitions.
I dont understand where you get those numbers, can you explain it better?
Which numbers?
AAM weight was just looking up the weight for 4 Meteors and two ASRAAMs, pylons were assumed in the quoted portion so I did 2 AA pylons and 7 AG pylons, targeting pod is looked up for LITENING II or SNIPER.
I had previously discussed the weight availability after internal fuel so I subtracted the weight for the AA weapons, pylons, and TGP to get the weight available for AG munitions.
Fuel fraction was weight of fuel divided by total weight at that point and the sensitivity was showing how quickly the fuel fraction changed with added munitions.
"Spurts"
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
- Active Member
- Posts: 179
- Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
- Location: Spain
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:falcon.16 wrote:sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
Assuming the AA pylons (not internal or semi-recessed) weigh 150lb and the AG pylons weight 300lb
Typhoon - 936kg of AAMs, 1,091kg of pylons, 208kg targeting pod. 5,287kg capacity for the 6 pylons with 4 of them limited to 500kg class weapons. Before adding AG weapons the Typhoon has a fuel fraction of 0.274 with a sensitivity of -0.014 per 1,000kg of added munitions.
I dont understand where you get those numbers, can you explain it better?
Which numbers?
AAM weight was just looking up the weight for 4 Meteors and two ASRAAMs, pylons were assumed in the quoted portion so I did 2 AA pylons and 7 AG pylons, targeting pod is looked up for LITENING II or SNIPER.
I had previously discussed the weight availability after internal fuel so I subtracted the weight for the AA weapons, pylons, and TGP to get the weight available for AG munitions.
Fuel fraction was weight of fuel divided by total weight at that point and the sensitivity was showing how quickly the fuel fraction changed with added munitions.
Thanks.
https://aeropathfinder.blogspot.com/
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5985
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
- Location: Nashua NH USA
np
"Spurts"
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1131
- Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12
F-35 in Spain: is the SCAF at risk of crash?
By Vincent Lamigeon on 11/03/2021 at 3:38 p.m.
Madrid would consider ordering 50 F-35s from the American Lockheed Martin. A contract would be a huge blow to the SCAF combat aircraft project, launched by France, Germany and Spain.
Will the F-35 continue its raid in Europe? After the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy, Poland, Denmark, Belgium and Switzerland, Spain could join the club of European clients of Lockheed Martin's hunter. According to indiscretions obtained by Gareth Jennings, specialist in military aviation at Jane's, at the International Fighter Conference in London, Madrid would be in discussions with the United States for a potential order of 50 F-35s, including 25 in vertical take-off version for the navy (F-35B) and 25 in traditional version for the air force (F-35A). The contract could be signed in 2025, for first deliveries in 2027, says Jane's. Madrid would thus replace both its old F-18s and the Harrier vertical take-off fighters of the Spanish Navy.
This Spanish interest in the Lockheed Martin hunter is questioning. Beyond the confirmation of the "American preference" on fighter planes in Europe , regularly denounced by the boss of Dassault Aviation Eric Trappier, a Spanish order of F-35 would also be a major shock for the aircraft program of combat SCAF, launched in 2017 by Paris and Berlin, and joined in 2020 by Madrid...
https://www.challenges.fr/entreprise/de ... ash_787458
Some additional details: Spanish requirement covers 25 F-35As for air force and 25 F-35Bs for navy, both as Hornet replacements. Czechs for as many as 40 F-35As (also asked for info on F-16, but LM focusing on JSF). Both countries selection 2025 and deliveries from 2027 (ish).
https://twitter.com/GarethJennings3/sta ... 4761902080
I'm just amazed after all these years of references to VERTICAL TAKE OFF for F-35Bs (& also the Harrier but less so).
- Active Member
- Posts: 179
- Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 20:10
- Location: Spain
FCAS on that is different story. FCAS will be introduced in middle 40´s and Spain need retire all F-18 Hornet before and all T1 Typhoon on that dates. So need other fighter.
And FCAS will not have vertical take off, so it is stupid think it will be a problem to buy F-35B.
It is better for Ejercito del Aire, dont put all eggs on same bag (FCAS) and have other option before (F-35A). FCAS can be a very good producto, or a fiasco. And Typhoon will be going to obsolescence like a legacy concept fighter.
And FCAS will not have vertical take off, so it is stupid think it will be a problem to buy F-35B.
It is better for Ejercito del Aire, dont put all eggs on same bag (FCAS) and have other option before (F-35A). FCAS can be a very good producto, or a fiasco. And Typhoon will be going to obsolescence like a legacy concept fighter.
https://aeropathfinder.blogspot.com/
- Active Member
- Posts: 186
- Joined: 27 Apr 2019, 19:48
falcon.16 wrote:FCAS on that is different story. FCAS will be introduced in middle 40´s and Spain need retire all F-18 Hornet before and all T1 Typhoon on that dates. So need other fighter.
And FCAS will not have vertical take off, so it is stupid think it will be a problem to buy F-35B.
It is better for Ejercito del Aire, dont put all eggs on same bag (FCAS) and have other option before (F-35A). FCAS can be a very good producto, or a fiasco. And Typhoon will be going to obsolescence like a legacy concept fighter.
The F-35B order is to be expected to replace the 12 AV-8B+ that operate from Juan Carlos I. Although its more than expected...
The 25 F-35A LM are pitching I suspect is a bit of a hail mary to try and head off the deal that Airbus were negotiating with Spain for 20 new Typhoon Tranche 4's to replace the oldest EF-18. I don't expect LM to be successful with their F-35A bid as the Typhoon deal keeps Spanish production lines open in preparation for FCAS. I guess LM figured that if they're offering the F-35B they may as well speculatively offer F-35A to replace the EF-18 on the Canaries.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9792
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
timmymagic wrote:falcon.16 wrote:FCAS on that is different story. FCAS will be introduced in middle 40´s and Spain need retire all F-18 Hornet before and all T1 Typhoon on that dates. So need other fighter.
And FCAS will not have vertical take off, so it is stupid think it will be a problem to buy F-35B.
It is better for Ejercito del Aire, dont put all eggs on same bag (FCAS) and have other option before (F-35A). FCAS can be a very good producto, or a fiasco. And Typhoon will be going to obsolescence like a legacy concept fighter.
The F-35B order is to be expected to replace the 12 AV-8B+ that operate from Juan Carlos I. Although its more than expected...
The 25 F-35A LM are pitching I suspect is a bit of a hail mary to try and head off the deal that Airbus were negotiating with Spain for 20 new Typhoon Tranche 4's to replace the oldest EF-18. I don't expect LM to be successful with their F-35A bid as the Typhoon deal keeps Spanish production lines open in preparation for FCAS. I guess LM figured that if they're offering the F-35B they may as well speculatively offer F-35A to replace the EF-18 on the Canaries.
The Spanish Air Force and Navy very much want the F-35 to replace their Hornets and Harrier II's. Yet, the Liberal Government not so much....(plus pressure from France not to do so)
So, it's anyone's guess on what will happen?
If Spain is smart, they buy the F-35 because its going to be the cheapest option, can replace two fighters with one, solves STOVL needs, and then get as much of the formerly Turkish workshares as they can. Done in 1.
Choose Crews
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests