Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

$120 dollars each? Man, that's cheap. Devil

F-16.net Sponsor

Thumper3181 wrote:

EF will never achieve level of LO that F-15SE. The canards detract greatly from stealth and no amount of marketing BS from the consortium can change that. Every time those things move out of the horizontal they increase the frontal RCS. EF can apply all the RCS reducing treatment they like but until those canards go it will all be in vain. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Typhoon_f2_zj910_canard_arp.jpg

A possible software upgrade (if not yet there):
Teorically it should immobilize canard's move via software (fly-by-wire) when in cruise flight (manouvering with wing surfaces like a miorage 2000) enabling canards when in dogfight.

Neno wrote:

A possible software upgrade (if not yet there):
Teorically it should immobilize canard's move via software (fly-by-wire) when in cruise flight (manouvering with wing surfaces like a miorage 2000) enabling canards when in dogfight.

The canards are an integral part of the aircraft's flight control system. As such they provide stability and pitch control during flight. You cannot just disable them when they are inconvenient.

madrat wrote:

$120 dollars each? Man, that's cheap. Devil

He's talking about the Typhoon..

Anyway I see Eurofighter have removed the claim of it being a "stealth fighter" with a stealthy update to their site. Interestingly thay've claimed the RCS is around a quarter of that of a Tornado so its RCS levels are probably not very gspecial at all in reality. I could never grasp how it was said to be stealthy anyway seeing as it has an ACTIVE missile warning system.
Still, I found a Eurofighter magazine that claims Typhoon is a 5th gen fighter. Laughing

http://www.eurofighter.com/fileadmin/we ... 0b_Low.pdf

And as Thumper says they can't simply lock the canards to make it more discreet.

Thumper3181 wrote:

Lets get a few facts straight. The performance of EF and F-15 is comparable and depending on what F-15/engine combination you compare the F-15 is in some respects superior in performance. The only claim that has ever been made to the contrary was by the EF consortium. The F-15 in most versions and weapons load out has more range than a comparably loaded EF.

Craig Penrice, former Eurofighter test pilot at BAES has flown the F-15 on an exchange tour with the USAF and made a comparison of its performance to the Lightning he has flown with the RAF and the Typhoon he has flown as a test pilot. He commented that the F-15 represented a quantum leap in performance over the Lightning, but that the Typhoon represents an equal quantum leap in performance over the F-15. The F-15 has a greater range due the larger capacity of its external drop tanks. Integrate larger drop tanks and/or CFTs on the Typhoon and there might be no real gap at all. On internal fuel the Typhoon can easily match or exceed the range performance of the F-15. The currently limiting factor is the much lower capacity of Typhoon's current drop tanks.

Quote:

The F-15E and the F-15K provide far better A2G capability and range while still providing comparable A2A capability. Funded upgrades for the F-15 include AESA, MIDS and helmet mounted sight. The F-15K also adds a FLIR and an IRST. In fact current F-15E/Ks have comparable avionics to EF and the addition of the AESA will put these airframes in another league.

I agree that the evolved F-15s offer equally advanced avionics, though there appears to be no great level of sensor fusion and its EW suite is far less comprehensive up to date. he AESA won't do anything about the airframe as such either and such a radar is slatted for the Typhoon as well. The F-15 will temporarily get back its radar advantage, though the majority of the world wide F-15 fleet remains to be fitted with the inferior MSA variants of the AN/APG-63/70.

Quote:

Growth potential is far greater in F-15 due to its larger size (ability to accommodate more/bigger stuff), a larger installed base, an already funded development spiral, and a major customer far more likely to spend money on developing upgrades.

And you want to tell us that the available internal volume of the F-15 isn't already used up by something? Are they flying empty airframes around? It's not as easy as that and if you compare the internal fuel load in relation to the aircraft's size the Typhoon is certainly more compact. According your logic the F-15 must offer a greater growth potential than the F-35 as well, because it is so much bigger.

Quote:

EF will never achieve level of LO that F-15SE. The canards detract greatly from stealth and no amount of marketing BS from the consortium can change that. Every time those things move out of the horizontal they increase the frontal RCS. EF can apply all the RCS reducing treatment they like but until those canards go it will all be in vain.

Really and you want to tell us that the huge horizontal stabilizers on the F-15 are stealthy and have no impact on its RCS? Explain is the funny magics! And what exactly are the RCS figures for both aircraft to base your assertion on?

Quote:

In terms of cost the EF is much more expensive. Looking at both the Saudi and the Austrian deal the export price for EF is in excess of $120 dollars each. This compares to the export price of the F-15K of $100 million and Boeings estimate that the F-15SE will go for around $100 million as well.

The Austrians had to pay ~63 mln € fly away per airframe according the original contract. Didn't knew the $/€ ratio is ~2:1.

Scorpion82 wrote:

Craig Penrice, former Eurofighter test pilot at BAES has flown the F-15 on an exchange tour with the USAF and made a comparison of its performance to the Lightning he has flown with the RAF and the Typhoon he has flown as a test pilot. He commented that the F-15 represented a quantum leap in performance over the Lightning, but that the Typhoon represents an equal quantum leap in performance over the F-15.

Yes but what else would he say as he's involved directly in marketing the Typhoon and has previously been involved in some really rather questionable marketing hype such as this story:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... -f-35.html

(I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him)

So let us dismiss all the claims about the F-22s non obvious performance advantages as they are not underlaid with any facts, except for claims. Shouldn't we? In other words everything said about the Eurofighter by Eurofighter guys is all lied and everyone else just tells us the truth. Rolling Eyes

I'm only being fair, afterall look at all the anger and extreme suspicion (many calling him an outright liar) over John Beesley's comments about the F-35...

But really, I do find Eurofighter marketing highly dubious, what with previous claims it was a full on stealth fighter (now removed) and current claims that it is a 5th gen fighter and fully multi role to boot. And add the fact unlike Beesley Penrice IS directly involved in the marketing of the Typhoon.

Penrice is now involved in marketing as he is no active pilot anymore, in the past he was no different to Beesley in his purpose/job.
Marketing is one thing, but I have read/heared a couple of claims from operational pilots as well which speak highly of the aircraft, also in comparison to the F-15 as a fighter.

Eurofighter has never touted the Typhoon as stealth aircraft in the sense of the F-22 or F-35, they highlighted reduction measures yes, but they made no claims the way you say.

And for the matter Boeing, Dassault etc. does the same.

And btw they still say:
"Low observability technology is incorporated in the basic design. The combination of low visual detection; low radar reflection; use of passive, systems; defensive aids; secure communications and the capability of supercruise supported by a cockpit, that gives the pilot a clear tactical picture and continuous and instant control over the level of emissions from the aircraft, ensure that the Eurofighter Typhoon has high survivability and the ability to operate independently from ground and airborne control agencies in dense electronic warfare environments. The Eurofighter Typhoon is, by any standard, a low observability aircraft with a fleet effectiveness superior to any other competitor."
http://www.eurofighter.com/capabilities ... tures.html

Last edited by shep1978 on Oct 13, 2010 - 03:24 PM; edited 3 times in total

Scorpion82 wrote:

Eurofighter has never touted the Typhoon as stealth aircraft in the sense of the F-22 or F-35, they highlighted reduction measures yes, but they made no claims the way you say.

They have actually, they've simply changed the page somewhen in (i'd estimate) in the last two years. I have posted the word for word quote a year or two ago on Key publishing which upset a few fan boys if I remember rightly.

(I'll have a look through their site on google and try and find it though its a big task, according to the internet wayback machine Eurofighter site has used the robots txt tool to block us from finding previous page versions too, which is interesting.. )

Ok, I've had a quick look and whilst I have NOT been able to find the actual cquote I can link you to an article that very clearly backs up what I say and whilst I realise it is not definative proof it is certainly pointing toward the fact they DID claim it as a stealth fighter. A quote from the article reads:

"Eurofighter marketing literature makes much mileage out of a claimed “stealth” capability, acquired by the use of S-bend inlet tunnels and selective application of radar absorbent materials. The design spec is claimed to have included bounds on RCS performance.

The assertion that the aircraft has a “stealth” capability is curious by any measure, since there is no evidence of planform alignment, panel edge alignment, blending or faceting, all established techniques used and proven on US types such as the F-117A, B-2A, YF-23A, F-22A and the JSF prototypes. Indeed the external carriage of stores alone would make the Typhoon's radar signature at least 10-100 times greater than the golfball to insect sized RCS we are accustomed to with US types. Unless the Europeans have invented new laws of radar scattering, the aircraft is at best a conventional fighter with reduced forward sector RCS, comparable to evolved F/A-18, F-16 variants, the Rafale or the B-1B."

Now doesn't that sound to you like they read what I also read, that the Eurofighter consortium was indeed touting Typhoon up as a "stealth" aircraft, they even quoted the word 'stealth' and this sentence
"The assertion that the aircraft has a “stealth” capability is curious by any measure" is very telling. Note that he didn't quote that Eurofighter said it was Low Observable but that they claimed it was"stealth"

Article is here: http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-Typhoon.html

Give me more time and I think I will be able to find said quote from Eurofighter somewhere on the net.

Last edited by velocity264c on Oct 14, 2010 - 01:59 PM; edited 1 time in total

Quote:

F-22s non obvious performance advantages as they are not underlaid with any facts, except for claims. Shouldn't we?

Elaborate on this please? Didn't really get it.

Eurofighter Typhoon 5th generation WTF

[/quote]

velocity264c wrote:

Elaborate on this please? Didn't really get it.

We don't know many performance figures for the F-22, so we? Yet no one questions generalised statements about its superior performance over the teens.
The same measure is not applied to aircraft like the Typhoon, similar claims, from similar people are called in question and often simply dismissed as marketing ploy etc.

Quote:

Eurofighter Typhoon 5th generation WTF

You laugh, but they have some valid points. In the end it's of course marketing as it is in the case of LM etc. But once again people want to believe what best fits their view of the world.

Thumper3181 wrote:

The canards are an integral part of the aircraft's flight control system. As such they provide stability and pitch control during flight. You cannot just disable them when they are inconvenient.

Why ?

Neno wrote:

Thumper3181 wrote:

The canards are an integral part of the aircraft's flight control system. As such they provide stability and pitch control during flight. You cannot just disable them when they are inconvenient.

Why ?

Because the canards are an integral part of the Typhoon's aerodynamic concept. The aircraft is highly unstable in the subsonic regime and tends to violently pitch up all the time. The canards counter that pitch up moment and stabilize the aircraft. To pitch the aircraft the canards release and let the aircraft go before capturing it again and stabilize it. It's like deactivating the F-16's horizontal stabilizers.

For those who want to learn more about the Typhoon's aerodynamic concept:
http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFull ... 035-01.pdf

Scorpion82 wrote:

velocity264c wrote:

Elaborate on this please? Didn't really get it.

We don't know many performance figures for the F-22, so we? Yet no one questions generalised statements about its superior performance over the teens.
The same measure is not applied to aircraft like the Typhoon, similar claims, from similar people are called in question and often simply dismissed as marketing ploy etc.

Quote:

Eurofighter Typhoon 5th generation WTF

You laugh, but they have some valid points. In the end it's of course marketing as it is in the case of LM etc. But once again people want to believe what best fits their view of the world.

You most likely mean you don't know the F-22 performance, but one thing is still a fact, what kind of performance does the Typhoon do? I see barrel roles wide turns, and a change in direction its flying in and that's what people of Europe call maneuvering? I'm sure its not all of them. But when you see an f-22 maneuvering, if anyone ever pays attention and realizes its not using thrust vectoring for one and can already make very sharp turns and supersonic speeds and still maintain control is something to look out for.

This may not prove anything but worth listening to pilot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMitljiECKg

And if the Typhoon is a 5th Gen fighter( well by these people who say it is) then to me the F-4 Phantom II, MiG-21 Fishbed are 4.5 en fighters

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 versus Eurofighter Typhoon