F-35 JSF vs Eurofighter Typhoon

[wrightwing]

It's completely viable to believe that the Pirate could spot an F-35 at a further range than AIM-120C NEZ if not maximum range.

No, it is not!

It's funny that later on you mentioned that PIRATE "may have" (note that IRST detection ranges are always a thing of "might be" since they depend on optimal factors such as weather, this as opposed to Radar) a detection range of of 74 km but that converted to nautical miles is a bit lower than 40 nautical miles. Yet on top of this, you ignore the F-35 IR reduction measures and still boost up the PIRATE IRST detection range against a F-35 at 50 miles

> 74 km is the specification given by someone who manufactured components of the sensor at initial release, software updates have increased this since. Rand state 50nm as do other sources. Meanwhile your sources are what exactly in comparison ?

If the Typhoon managed to detect the F-35 at a range of 20-25 nautical miles when the F-35 is flying straight towards the Typhoon and subsonically, you could already consider the Typhoon to be "lucky" and the AIM-120C and AIM-120D have maximum ranges much longer than that while at least the AIM-120D NEZ should be longer than that in most circumstances.
Moreover, the F-35 doesn't need to fire its AMRAAMs at their NEZ range. It can fire them somewhere between the maximum range and the NEZ range. If the Typhoon doesn't notice the incoming AMRAAM launch (which is a good probability) then it will be killed nonetheless. If the Typhoon manages to detect the incoming AMRAAM soon enough the advantage is still on the F-35's side since the Typhoon will have to go defensive (or else it DIES) and all the F-35 has to do is to close further (while the Typhoon is defensive) and shoot another AMRAAM (or even another) until the Typhoon simply dies. GAME OVER!

The most common C-5 variant only has a maximum head on range of about 60km and most AMRAAM have been launched under 40km. Actually investigate actual AMRAAM kills to realise how near to WVR they have usually been launched at. Even the later models require a cooperating non-maneuvering head-on target for their lofted trajectories to work as the extra range has been bought mainly by better avionics and software. The Meteor is a far more deadlier missile at range as it modulates its fuel burn on the way in. AMRAAMs can also be detected according to Rand

• AMRAAM launches have large, unique thermal
signature
– Could allow early detection of F-22 and
missile launch warning at up to 50+ nm
• AMRAAM at Mach 4 generates 1200 deg. F shock
cone – missile could be tracked at up to 45+ nm

The Typhoon going defensive could mean still coming forward at a cranked angle while still tracking using IRST. If both can track each other on the way in then who wins could come down to tactics and better platform kinematics and missile performance/numbers/countermeasures.

The IR reduction on the F-35 is mainly on the nozzle but any aircraft has a worse IR detection problem from the back anyway and if a Typhoon spotted an F-35 from the rear it would close it down fuel permitting.

Wrong again.
The F-35 has a bunch of other IR reduction measures such as having the engine buried in it's fuselage which shields its biggest IR source (again the engine), it can carry cooled fuel in its fuselage fuel cell (which shields its engine even further), it has the S-Duct intake which not only shields the air intakes from Radio (Radar) waves but also shields the IR source from the engine when the F-35 is flying towards an IRST.

This is a speculation but I would say that the F-35 skin material should also help against IR. Anyway, you cannot find none of the above in the Typhoon so I have absolutely NO doubt that the F-35 IR signature is a magnitude lower than the Typhoon IR signature! This means that the F-35 IRST will detect the Typhoon sooner than the Typhoon IRST even if both aircraft were flying with their radars turned off!

Order of magnitude lower ? Complete fantasy talk ! Show actual documented figures not design features. The F-35 has the most powerful fighter engine ever built with heat production to match, it needs features to get its IR signature down. In comparison the EJ200 are small tidy engines with under half the thrust.

Not will but are able to defeat. It's no accident that F-15/F-16/F-18 are all being steadily updated with IRST21 sensors which is the evolution of the original F-14 IRST and being publicly advertised as an anti-stealth feature. If a stealth aircraft is being consistently tracked by an IRST then it is in some danger, that's just physics. The hard part for the non-stealthy aircraft is surviving long enough for its IRST to have started tracking and maintaining tracking during missile journey.

You can even believe in Unicorns for all that I care
IRST won't defeat Stealth, period! The Typhoon IRST will always have a much, much and much lower range than the F-35's AESA Radar against the Typhoon.
And I'll be surprised if the PIRATE IRST can actually detect a F-35 flying straight towards the Typhoon at any range longer than for example the CAPTOR-E radar can also against the F-35.

The fact that some F-15/F-16/F-18 are being updated with IRST21 sensors - "steadily" being IMO an overstatement - This is IMO more of a marketing trend than anything else. If anything, IRST's are here in order to give a PASSIVE TRACKING ability to fighter aircraft and they are definitely NOT some "silver bullet" against Stealth!
You know that IRST are not a new technology, right?? For example, F-8 Crusaders in the 1960's had them, you know?

The USN don't agree with you. They are prepared to take a stealth, drag and maneuvering hit by putting that IRST21 sensor on a F-18 centerline fuel tank which is obviously not going to be dropped which doesn't sound like a marketing fad to me. Legion IRST21 pods are going on virtually all F-15s and a lot of F-16s. Pirate will see F-35s about 5-6 times further than Captor-E. F-35 is not a stealthy IR aircraft and WVR is easier to see than a F-16 as pilots have noted.

p.s. Sabres are great WVR dogfighters and F-35 have been virtually killed at Red Flags more than once so contrary to your very bold claims are not invulnerable or unbeatable. Air to air combat is a lot more nuanced and haphazard then you realise. The F-35 characteristics are about loading the dice in its favor but it still has to roll those dice like any other aircraft.

You're flat out wrong. You're quoting specs under ideal circumstances, against conventional targets. F-35s are not conventional targets. They've had significant IR signature reduction compared to 4th generation aircraft (materials, shaping, cooling, paints, engine exhaust, etc...). The amount of thrust is irrelevant to the IR qualities. The AMRAAM C5 variant is not only not the current missile, but has a longer max range than 60km (more like 105km). The C7 is the current missile on the F-35, and the D is currently being integrated

[tailchase]

The last time I looked into thus US manufactured IR sensors (I mean the actual chips) have been at least a technology generation ahead of any capability in Europe. Whatever is coming out of Europe, the sensors that the US has on hand abd probably tested against F22/35 are better.

Take another look ? (hints : sofradir, elettronica, first sensor etc etc.)

More to the point, there is a bunch of diference between detection distance and detection where one can build a solid usable track. pure "detection" rage is only one of the metrics. e.e. First RBE2 PESA had a shorter detection range than RDY radar. However, itcould build solid track further than the latter.

[marsavian]

The range of the AMRAAM improved from A/B to C3/5 to C7 to D. Studies have been done on the C5 a few times, once by the RAF on Typhoon and they all roughly say the same thing

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... KYZY4IS11U

Page 17, Figure 15, aircraft launch speed Mach 0.83 at heights of 500m, 5000m, 10000m give ranges of 38, 48, 66 km. Yes if you are going at higher Mach (76km range at 10000m in this study for Mach 1.5) and also have a height advantage and a lofted trajectory (94km in this study for C5) like C7/D it will go further but those are the sort of numbers for usual speed and equal height opponents. In fact AMRAAMs usually get launched at less then 25nm in real combat.

[ricnunes]

> 74 km is the specification given by someone who manufactured components of the sensor at initial release, software updates have increased this since. Rand state 50nm as do other sources. Meanwhile your sources are what exactly in comparison ?

LOL, now you're quoting RAND. The same guys that in the past said that a single Su-35 would defeat two (2) F-35s

AMRAAMs can also be detected according to Rand

Quoting RAND again...

The Typhoon going defensive could mean still coming forward at a cranked angle while still tracking using IRST. If both can track each other on the way in then who wins could come down to tactics and better platform kinematics and missile performance/numbers/countermeasures.

A Typhoon going defensive against an incoming AMRAAM means putting the nose AWAY from the F-35 which means that the chances to tracking the F-35 with its IRST (or Radar) are even slimmer than having the nose directly "aimed" at the F-35.

Order of magnitude lower ? Complete fantasy talk ! Show actual documented figures not design features. The F-35 has the most powerful fighter engine ever built with heat production to match, it needs features to get its IR signature down. In comparison the EJ200 are small tidy engines with under half the thrust.

Really?? The guy who's trying to argue that the Typhoon would have parity against a F-35 in an air-to-air combat is saying that the F-35 IR reductions are fantasy??

You ask me about documents. How about you posting some reasonable points countering (with documents if you will) what I previously said?

Besides of all the features that I previously mentioned which you're dismissing as fantasy you can read a post from Hornetfinn which I'll also re-quote below:
viewtopic.php?f=56&t=28509

IMO, IR signature is practically impossible to guess. There are features in F-35 and F135 that could make it very possibly have lower IR signature.

1. Higher bypass ratio means there is more cool air available to cool the engine and exhaust
2. Longer length meaning that hot parts of engine are further away from exhaust giving somewhat more time and space to cool the exhaust gases and even out the heat
3. Being developed directly from F119, it's likely there are lessons learned from it and improved in F135. This includes also IR signature.

Now if you look at the Typhoon engines, it's almost the opposite:
- Small Engines (Typhoon) which actually does NOT help dissipate and distribute heat at all -> More heat on the Typhoon Engines.
- F-35 engine has higher bypass ratio -> Cooler engine (F-35)
- F-35 Engine was developed from the F-22 which already had some important IR signature reduction in mind.
This together with I previous said:
- The F-35 has only one and cooler engine which is "buried" well inside the fuselage frame:


While the Typhoon has TWO (2) and hotter engines which runs along and shapes the fuselage itself or resuming, the Typhoon fuselage doesn't shield both engines much, if any. Here:


So, if you think that both F-35 and Typhoon have the same or similar IR signature and that the F-35 IR signature isn't lower then with all due respect, you can only be insane...

The USN don't agree with you. They are prepared to take a stealth, drag and maneuvering hit by putting that IRST21 sensor on a F-18 centerline fuel tank which is obviously not going to be dropped which doesn't sound like a marketing fad to me. Legion IRST21 pods are going on virtually all F-15s and a lot of F-16s. Pirate will see F-35s about 5-6 times further than Captor-E. F-35 is not a stealthy IR aircraft and WVR is easier to see than a F-16 as pilots have noted.

And now it's my time to ask you where is the evidence that the US Navy is putting the IRST21 on their aircraft (Super Hornets) in order to counter Stealth??

I repeat what I previously said: IRST are great tools for PASSIVE detection and tracking and are just one more tool to gather target data and this is why they are being fitted on US aircraft for example.
They are NOT being fitted because they are some sort of "silver bullet" against Stealth!

"Pirate will see F-35s about 5-6 times further than Captor-E"?? LOL, LOL and LOL
As it was explained to you before, if the Typhoon is luck and the conditions (including weather) are IDEAL and I mean REALLY IDEAL, the PIRATE could detect an incoming F-35 at 40-50 km, NOTE: Kilometers NOT MILES (or any sort, like you posted!) Put some clouds on the setting/scenario and that range will drastically drop, perhaps even to Visual Range! The Captor-E should be able to detect an incoming F-35 at a range of 30-40 km (again kilometers) but this in any weather condition. That's NOT 5 to 6 times more (IRST compared to AESA Radar)! By the way, where are the documents backing up this preposterous claim of yours??

Being said the above and since weather conditions are usually far from ideal, I would say that there's a good chance that the CAPTOR-E could eventually detect an incoming F-35 at an even better range than the PIRATE in many circumstances.

Actually is not that hard to reach such conclusion, IMO that is. Where is Eurofighter putting its eggs in terms of sensor upgrade for the Typhoon? The IRST? No! The AESA Radar (CAPTOR-E)? Yes!
I rest my case here.

p.s. Sabres are great WVR dogfighters and F-35 have been virtually killed at Red Flags more than once so contrary to your very bold claims are not invulnerable or unbeatable. Air to air combat is a lot more nuanced and haphazard then you realise. The F-35 characteristics are about loading the dice in its favor but it still has to roll those dice like any other aircraft.

F-35's have been shot down during Red Flag by SPAWNING/REVIVING enemies!
SPAWNING/REVIVING enemies don't exist in real battlefields for Christ Sake!

In anyways, you're talking about EXCEPTIONS, like things that happen 0.01% of times. I'm talking about RULES, like things that happen 99.9% of times!

[basher54321]

> 74 km is the specification given by someone who manufactured components of the sensor at initial release, software updates have increased this since. Rand state 50nm as do other sources. Meanwhile your sources are what exactly in comparison ?

Range figures without some detail behind it are almost useless - I expect it can also detect the Sun at a much further range can it not? This is really not looking at anything useful.


Back in mid-sixties I flew two jets with IRSTS. Really neat. Could pick up a B-52 head on at 60 - 70 miles, as confirmed by the radar that was slaved to the IRSTS. The smaller targets were harder, but looking down with non-doppler radar it wasn't too hard to get a lock.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25345&p=268993#p268993

[ricnunes]

The range of the AMRAAM improved from A/B to C3/5 to C7 to D. Studies have been done on the C5 a few times, once by the RAF on Typhoon and they all roughly say the same thing

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... KYZY4IS11U

Page 17, Figure 15, aircraft launch speed Mach 0.83 at heights of 500m, 5000m, 10000m give ranges of 38, 48, 66 km. Yes if you are going at higher Mach (76km range at 10000m in this study for Mach 1.5) and also have a height advantage and a lofted trajectory (94km in this study for C5) like C7/D it will go further but those are the sort of numbers for usual speed and equal height opponents. In fact AMRAAMs usually get launched at less then 25nm in real combat.

Even if the study that you posted is correct, are you even aware that the F-35 can fly at altitudes of 40,000 ft specially when performing air-to-air missions? Basically 10,000 ft higher than "your" study.
Regarding speed, I remember to have read somewhere that its cruise speed with internal weapons only (which is what we're talking about here) is around Mach 0.95, or 0.12 more than your study.

Both values (altitude and speed) will have a significant impact on the range of an AIM-120C5 compared to your study. Now imagine the AIM-120C7 which is basically the standard nowadays for the F-35 (which should have a bigger range than the C-5) and of course the AIM-120D which has even longer range.

As I said to you, your 50 mile detection range for the PIRATE IRST is simply wrong. If you said 50 km instead of 50 miles I could even buy it. You say that the AMRAAM (the C5, I imagine) gets usually launched at 25 nautical miles - your guessed NEZ I believe - that's more than 46 km. Which like mentioned above this in the threshold of the PIRATE's optimal and ideal potential detection range (which again almost never happens) against the F-35 and there's absolutely nothing that prevents the AMRAAM to be fired from a bit longer range (lets say 30-35 nautical miles) and still have a very good chance of killing the opposing Typhoon.


Oh, and I almost forgot the following previous post of yours here:

The Mig-17 has shot down loads of supersonic aircraft supposedly of a higher generation. Biplanes have shot down monoplanes and monoplanes have shot down jet fighters in WWII. The generational gaps are not gulfs or chasms but spectrum shifts of capabilities. Go Sabre !

Here you are again, speaking about exceptions (instead of the rules)

You know what I was dreaming/thinking about right now? Both of us having an air-to-air confrontation, me flying the F-35 and you the Typhoon. Oh boy, how hard you would be spanked...

[marsavian]

As I said to you, your 50 mile detection range for the PIRATE IRST is simply wrong. If you said 50 km instead of 50 miles I could even buy it.

I am not saying it, the manufacturers are saying it, > 74 km which is about 50 miles but which you are still blithely ignoring because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Both values (altitude and speed) will have a significant impact on the range of an AIM-120C5 compared to your study.

Not significant but incremental which I already quantified in the quote with Mach 1.5 and high altitude loft examples which are in the study too ! Still less than 100 km best case against a non-maneuvering target coming head on at low altitude.

The Captor-E should be able to detect an incoming F-35 at a range of 30-40 km (again kilometers) but this in any weather condition.

If that were true then F-15s with bigger AESAs would be doing that too at those medium BVR distances but they are not in mock exercises. If Pirate can pick up an F-35 at 75km (all your IR reduction techniques can get rid of the manufacturers '>') then an AESA with 1400 elements is picking up a less than 0.0001 sq m RCS object at about 15 km which is the 5 to 1 ratio. F-35s are just not being picked up by 4th gen fighters at any sort of range in excercises because even if the most powerful AESA can spot them at 20km they will use EW to reduce that number yet again. IRST is the only real chance against radar stealth aircraft preferably allied to IR missiles.

F-35's have been shot down during Red Flag by SPAWNING/REVIVING enemies!
SPAWNING/REVIVING enemies don't exist in real battlefields for Christ Sake!

You are missing the point which is F-35s have been shot down when they have been detected. Obviously the hard part is for F-35 being detected before being shot down yourself but Typhoons have a long history of not being shot down in Red Flags.

[garrya]

Firstly, i dont believe any aircraft is invincible, F-35 included. With being said, i still disagree with you on some part

> 74 km is the specification given by someone who manufactured components of the sensor at initial release, software updates have increased this since. Rand state 50nm as do other sources. Meanwhile your sources are what exactly in comparison ?

Frontal detection range of Pirate in optimal condition is around 30 miles (48 km) AFAIK, moreover,detection is only the first step, passive sensor like IRST often need to rely on other means to get range/velocity measurement, all these methods have their own disadvantage: LRF has very short range, kinematic ranging is time consumming and not accurate, triangulation require linking several aircraft

Nevertheless, IR radiation are absorbed by water vapor so if you can detect your opponent with your radar you can easily stop their IR sensor from tracking you by fly above or below the cloud layer, depend on their respective altitude.

The most common C-5 variant only has a maximum head on range of about 60km and most AMRAAM have been launched under 40km. Actually investigate actual AMRAAM kills to realise how near to WVR they have usually been launched at. Even the later models require a cooperating non-maneuvering head-on target for their lofted trajectories to work as the extra range has been bought mainly by better avionics and software. The Meteor is a far more deadlier missile at range as it modulates its fuel burn on the way in. AMRAAMs can also be detected according to Rand

AMRAAM has longer range than 60 km according to the Russian

8E556856-8FFF-4C42-8DB1-22510C447645.png (134.24 KiB) Viewed 30680 times

Moreover, UK F-35 will use Meteor as well while Japan F-35 will use JNAAM which is a Meteor with AESA seeker, so Eurofighter doesn't really have an advantage here

F581BCF3-CE81-470F-85F9-8866F1DC9821.png (169.05 KiB) Viewed 30680 times

053FFC99-D390-4051-9630-4797FA6C5C24.png (142.01 KiB) Viewed 30677 times

Order of magnitude lower ? Complete fantasy talk ! Show actual documented figures not design features. The F-35 has the most powerful fighter engine ever built with heat production to match, it needs features to get its IR signature down. In comparison the EJ200 are small tidy engines with under half the thrust.

Engine thrust does not neccesary proportional with exhaust temperature or signature, F-135 can generate higher thrust than EJ-200, but it is also has higher bypass ratio. High bypass ratio engine generate thrust by moving a larger mass of air at slower velocity than low bypass engine, so they often have lower ir signature.
For example:

Furthermore, the serrated edge feature you saw on the F-35 nozzle will also reduce the exhaust length since it make the airflow more unstable, that too will help reduce IR signature

And then we should not ignore the fact that the vertical stabs of F-35 will hide its engine nozzle from most aspect, while small, the engine nozzle contribute to a very significant part of aircraft total IR signature due to how hot it is

4C522A68-A472-4DC4-AF59-03306E2438F2.png (52.08 KiB) Viewed 30675 times

And if Eurofighter pilot want to use his kinematic advantage by supercrusing then he will get further penalty in signature aspect

[wrightwing]

Bottom line, Typhoons are going to lose to F-35s a lot more often, than they're going to win. I doubt that the exchange ratios will differ much than the >20:1 vs other 4th generation fighters (which in many cases have better sensors Typhoons.)

[garrya]

Compare to the Euro canard, F-35 engine pipe shielding is much better

Typhoon-1_1859203b.jpg (55.92 KiB) Viewed 30473 times

[wrightwing]

^^^^^This. All the Eurocanards have exposed nozzles, which are far more visible, than the F-22/35 nozzles, which are shielded from multiple angles, and have cooler exhaust temperatures.

[spazsinbad]

Less than two pages to peruse here with of course some excellent info. Where but in the ENGINE sub-section:

Infrared Signature of the F135 engine? viewtopic.php?f=56&t=28509

[hornetfinn]

Has the F-22/F-35 IR signature reduction ever been quantified ? They certainly don't look very discrete on commercial FLIR which have spotted them at airshows. Anyway the principle remains, advancements in IRST are the main future threat to radio stealth aircraft which of course can be countered by them acquiring even longer range missiles/IRST themselves. It's a sensor arms race out there between Stealth/Radar/IRST/RWR/EW across the generations which does tend to blur the common 4th/5th generation distinction POV.

Actually all the thermal imaging videos I've seen have been made using pretty advanced military grade high definition (megapixel class) thermal imaging systems, by FLIR Systems Inc. Some B-2 video around has been made from Rapier missile system thermal imaging sight. So they have not been some cheap commercial devices, but actually more sensitive systems with better resolution than for example the Pirate IRST in Eurofighter.

Anyway, the distances in airshows are so short, that it doesn't tell much about capability of aome thermal imaging system to detect at longer distances away. In thermal cameras gain and contrast can be controlled (automatically or manually) and thus can "highlight" objects of interest. Like fighter jet at close range against clear sky is pretty easy to bring up for the system.

I'm sure any half decent IRST/FLIR system will detect and track F-35 or any other jet at some distance away. But F-35 has far superior IRST/FLIR system to what other fighters (like EF Typhoon) carry. It carries 7 very advanced IR systems which provides better range and far superior coverage.

[tailchase]

^^^^This. All the Eurocanards have exposed nozzles, which are far more visible, than the F-22/35 nozzles, which are shielded from multiple angles, and have cooler exhaust temperatures.

No what you see on Rafale isn't the noozle, situated maybe 10 inches inside, but ceramic plates.

Copyright: Armée française

[fbw]

But F-35 has far superior IRST/FLIR system to what other fighters (like EF Typhoon) carry. It carries 7 very advanced IR systems which provides better range and far superior

This is the second time this has been stated. It’s not accurate. Selex is widely regarded as the leader in IRST technology, so much so that NG was looking to partner with them. EOTS has more functions than IRST but not as good as a dedicated system like Pirate and skyguard-g. The L-M IRST21 (legion pod) is basically the same hardware as the IRST fitted to the F-14. The US hadn’t produced an IRST in nearly 30 years.