F-35 JSF vs Eurofighter Typhoon
- Active Member
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 05 Feb 2005, 02:20
CheckSix wrote: 'F-35 lacks manouvrability a bit', true...
If the Typhoon goes A2A against the F-35 the Typhoon will carry typically 2 ASRAAMS/ Iris-Ts, 4 BVRAAMs, 1 1.000 liter or 2 * 1.500 liter tanks + aprox 6.250 liter (4.995 kg / 11.012lbs) internally.
The F-35 on an A2G mission, has it's target designator, ECM equipment, most of it's weapons except maybe a pair of AIM-9X's and fuel INTERNAL.
The Sidewinders does not add much drag and RCS and the F-35 (A) has an in-board usable 'swimming pool' of gas containing 10.290 liter / 18.073 lbs / 8.198 kg
A dirty cofiguration against an (allmost) clean configuration, so the bare T/W ratio, wingloading, and SEP numbers can be somehow misleading.
In fighter manouvering, excess power is important so does the lift/ drag ratio.
The public consumption figure for the F-35 max speed is Mach 1.6, many observers believe that in fact this number is higher, estimated from 1.8 to even 2.0+, so the F-35 Mamba can 'energize' it's AMRAAMs almost at the same speed as the Typhoon.
For comparison, the subsonic cruise speed of the F-35 is 100 km/h (60 miles/h) higher than the F-16, I do not know the subsonic cruise speed of the Typhoon.
The aerodynamic lay-out of the Typhoon is optimised for supersonic speed, the F-35 is optimised for Mach 0.8 - 1.2. In WVR, the F-35 driver will probably choose for horizontally (out-turning) manouvres and the Typhoon will go for vertical outclimbing/diving manouvres.
In A2A combat, situation awareness is very important. The F-35 has the better LPI radar, ALR-92-ish RF signals analyser and 360 deg infra red DAS and eventually with the IR EOTS, presented at a 'Big Picture' screen.
So I think, even in WVR combat the F-35 can fight it's oponents effectively.
If the Typhoon goes A2A against the F-35 the Typhoon will carry typically 2 ASRAAMS/ Iris-Ts, 4 BVRAAMs, 1 1.000 liter or 2 * 1.500 liter tanks + aprox 6.250 liter (4.995 kg / 11.012lbs) internally.
The F-35 on an A2G mission, has it's target designator, ECM equipment, most of it's weapons except maybe a pair of AIM-9X's and fuel INTERNAL.
The Sidewinders does not add much drag and RCS and the F-35 (A) has an in-board usable 'swimming pool' of gas containing 10.290 liter / 18.073 lbs / 8.198 kg
A dirty cofiguration against an (allmost) clean configuration, so the bare T/W ratio, wingloading, and SEP numbers can be somehow misleading.
In fighter manouvering, excess power is important so does the lift/ drag ratio.
The public consumption figure for the F-35 max speed is Mach 1.6, many observers believe that in fact this number is higher, estimated from 1.8 to even 2.0+, so the F-35 Mamba can 'energize' it's AMRAAMs almost at the same speed as the Typhoon.
For comparison, the subsonic cruise speed of the F-35 is 100 km/h (60 miles/h) higher than the F-16, I do not know the subsonic cruise speed of the Typhoon.
The aerodynamic lay-out of the Typhoon is optimised for supersonic speed, the F-35 is optimised for Mach 0.8 - 1.2. In WVR, the F-35 driver will probably choose for horizontally (out-turning) manouvres and the Typhoon will go for vertical outclimbing/diving manouvres.
In A2A combat, situation awareness is very important. The F-35 has the better LPI radar, ALR-92-ish RF signals analyser and 360 deg infra red DAS and eventually with the IR EOTS, presented at a 'Big Picture' screen.
So I think, even in WVR combat the F-35 can fight it's oponents effectively.
Last edited by locum on 01 Jul 2006, 21:29, edited 1 time in total.
- Active Member
- Posts: 102
- Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 23:49
Typhoon's top speed is Mach 1,6 carrying 3x1000l supersonic tanks, 4xAMRAAM, 2xIRIS-T.
Maybe in this configuration it is comparable to a clean F-35A in terms of flight characteristics.
F-35 seems to be optimised for subsonic speeds, good range and payload.
Maybe in this configuration it is comparable to a clean F-35A in terms of flight characteristics.
F-35 seems to be optimised for subsonic speeds, good range and payload.
- Active Member
- Posts: 132
- Joined: 05 Feb 2005, 02:20
The F-35 Triple Ugly can manouver with 9 G, when loaded with max. internal fuel + 2 2.000lbs JDAMs + 2 AMRAAMs + eventually 2 external AIM-9s. For comparison: the F-16s G limit with the same equipment is 5.5 G.
What is the maximum G limit of the above mentioned Typhoon configuration?
And those 3 1.000 l. gasbags have a lot of drag.
What is the maximum G limit of the above mentioned Typhoon configuration?
And those 3 1.000 l. gasbags have a lot of drag.
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 03 Jul 2006, 23:15
Umm, one thing I have trouble with here is the claims the F-35's radar is inferior to the F-22As. The F-35 radar builds upon the F-22As and has more T/R modules. Its also larger and more powerful in size.
Also, its RCS is approximately that of a golf ball, roughly .0014m. Its also optimized for frontal RCS reduction and and against ground-based radar.
Lastly, where are you getting you numbers on CAPTOR and CAESAR? Aren't those classified? Also, where are the Europeans getting their T/R modules? Such IC-systems arent produced much outside of the US. Or are they going the French-route and putting "Made in the US of A" parts in their radar?
The F-35 is the better aircraft hands-down. While it wasnt designed with pure AtA in mind, it can do all those roles equally well.
1. The Eurofighter will always be seen by the F-35 first and will always be forced on the defensive by incoming BVR missiles. The Typhoon or any aircraft cannot attack and prosecute what it cannot see.
2. The Eurofighter still lacks AtG capabilties that it was intended to have.
3. The ECD has no stealth and no attempts at RCS reduction. Comparing it to the F-35, it might as well be a BUFF.
4. The F-35 can penetrate enemy air defenses more easily and with less support.
5. The F-35 has DAS.
Lockheed Martin recently stated that the F-35 is the world's best fighter-aircraft... After the F-22A of course.
Also, its RCS is approximately that of a golf ball, roughly .0014m. Its also optimized for frontal RCS reduction and and against ground-based radar.
Lastly, where are you getting you numbers on CAPTOR and CAESAR? Aren't those classified? Also, where are the Europeans getting their T/R modules? Such IC-systems arent produced much outside of the US. Or are they going the French-route and putting "Made in the US of A" parts in their radar?
The F-35 is the better aircraft hands-down. While it wasnt designed with pure AtA in mind, it can do all those roles equally well.
1. The Eurofighter will always be seen by the F-35 first and will always be forced on the defensive by incoming BVR missiles. The Typhoon or any aircraft cannot attack and prosecute what it cannot see.
2. The Eurofighter still lacks AtG capabilties that it was intended to have.
3. The ECD has no stealth and no attempts at RCS reduction. Comparing it to the F-35, it might as well be a BUFF.
4. The F-35 can penetrate enemy air defenses more easily and with less support.
5. The F-35 has DAS.
Lockheed Martin recently stated that the F-35 is the world's best fighter-aircraft... After the F-22A of course.
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1682
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00
As has been said, comparing the two just misses the point. I have a problem comparing an operational jet with one that hasn`t flown yet....
The Typhoon was never meant to be an attack aircraft. It`s A2G package is still being developed, in a hurry I might add for export purposes because people decided that MULTI-ROLE was the way ahead, in terms of costs and export profit.
It is just wrong to say that Typhoon has no Lo observable features...
A limited low observability IS built into it. It cannot be classed as a stealth aircraft though. Some features evolved during it`s long design phase.
S-shaped intakes with sloped sides and rounded lower section, all meant to lower RCS. Wing leading edges, wing tip pods and rudder trailing edges are RAM coated. There has also been a lot of work on the radome to reduce frontal RCS/ and out of band RF emissions. Recessed weapons (also reducing drag). BAE say the Typhoons frontal RCS is only bettered by the F-22, take that as you will....!
One let down is that the ECR-90 is supposed to be easy to detect, a problem that won`t be solved until CAESAR is fitted.
The French and others used US built T/R modules until recently, now Europeans are building their own T/R modules.... An all European T/R module is used in CAESAR AFAIK.
There is a lot of talk about the capabilities of an aircraft that doesn`t even exist, F-35 that is.....I think we should wait and see. Especially when we see an aircraft with no weight/power/range issues.....That still isn`t clear. The F-35 has a lot of fancy features, is anybody CERTAIN that all of those features will work as advertised and be as capable as the manufacturers say? In aircraft as in anything else, some kit works superbly, some kit turns out to be a P.O.S.!
On paper, the F-35 SHOULD be a better striker if you need a stealthy, day one attacker etc....As long as no one comes up with a way of detecting low RCS aircraft in the next ten years. Anyone take any bets?
I don`t think the F-35s radar will be inferior to the F-22s, just optimised for differing roles. The F-35s unit may not be able to do A2A as well as the F-22 because it primarily does a different job....ie, ground mapping and targeting, etc...
The Typhoon was never meant to be an attack aircraft. It`s A2G package is still being developed, in a hurry I might add for export purposes because people decided that MULTI-ROLE was the way ahead, in terms of costs and export profit.
It is just wrong to say that Typhoon has no Lo observable features...
A limited low observability IS built into it. It cannot be classed as a stealth aircraft though. Some features evolved during it`s long design phase.
S-shaped intakes with sloped sides and rounded lower section, all meant to lower RCS. Wing leading edges, wing tip pods and rudder trailing edges are RAM coated. There has also been a lot of work on the radome to reduce frontal RCS/ and out of band RF emissions. Recessed weapons (also reducing drag). BAE say the Typhoons frontal RCS is only bettered by the F-22, take that as you will....!
One let down is that the ECR-90 is supposed to be easy to detect, a problem that won`t be solved until CAESAR is fitted.
The French and others used US built T/R modules until recently, now Europeans are building their own T/R modules.... An all European T/R module is used in CAESAR AFAIK.
There is a lot of talk about the capabilities of an aircraft that doesn`t even exist, F-35 that is.....I think we should wait and see. Especially when we see an aircraft with no weight/power/range issues.....That still isn`t clear. The F-35 has a lot of fancy features, is anybody CERTAIN that all of those features will work as advertised and be as capable as the manufacturers say? In aircraft as in anything else, some kit works superbly, some kit turns out to be a P.O.S.!
On paper, the F-35 SHOULD be a better striker if you need a stealthy, day one attacker etc....As long as no one comes up with a way of detecting low RCS aircraft in the next ten years. Anyone take any bets?
I don`t think the F-35s radar will be inferior to the F-22s, just optimised for differing roles. The F-35s unit may not be able to do A2A as well as the F-22 because it primarily does a different job....ie, ground mapping and targeting, etc...
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 03 Jul 2006, 23:15
The F-35's radar is a further development of the F-22A's. Advances from this system will be seen in future F-22A upgrades.
The F-35 can have some merit. It has flown to some exten (as the X-35). And it uses proven technology in the Raptor.
As for the Typhoon's LO features. Against a modern radar system, they might as well be nothing. It has some optimization, but it wasnt really designed for it.
By now you know I harbor issues with the Tiffy. But I dont think its the aircraft Europe needs. Or the aircraft they had the capability to produce. They took a good idea and ruined it. Then delayed it so that when it finally flew, it would be obsolete. Basically, theyve built an aircraft that still cant keep up with the latest F-16BLK 60s. Not having an AtG role hurts it immensly since most warplanes these days drop bombs. Not fire missiles.
The F-35 can have some merit. It has flown to some exten (as the X-35). And it uses proven technology in the Raptor.
As for the Typhoon's LO features. Against a modern radar system, they might as well be nothing. It has some optimization, but it wasnt really designed for it.
By now you know I harbor issues with the Tiffy. But I dont think its the aircraft Europe needs. Or the aircraft they had the capability to produce. They took a good idea and ruined it. Then delayed it so that when it finally flew, it would be obsolete. Basically, theyve built an aircraft that still cant keep up with the latest F-16BLK 60s. Not having an AtG role hurts it immensly since most warplanes these days drop bombs. Not fire missiles.
- Newbie
- Posts: 11
- Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 19:42
skrip00 wrote:Umm, one thing I have trouble with here is the claims the F-35's radar is inferior to the F-22As. The F-35 radar builds upon the F-22As and has more T/R modules. Its also larger and more powerful in size.
I think your confusing size/module count for the two radars. The APG-77 is bigger with a larger module count. The -77V1 uses the same technology, going to 'tiles' instead of 'bricks' but I have no idea if the module count goes up with this new radar or not. At any rate most industry pubs point to higher A-A performance for the APG-77.
Brad
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1682
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00
The F-35, when it enters service, will be far from a "developed" aircraft, just like Typhoon. Congress wants to slow down the production schedule I believe to allow a less rushed development program, AFAIK. We could be looking at 2015 before we see a mature system.
It looks to be the same kind of process for most new types. The Typhoon has had a long gestation period, the F-22, although more complex, has been alive for the same amount of time. The complexity-re-time taken to get the thing into service can be blamed on the ever shifting requirements and inter-government wrangles. Building an aircraft with 4 "equal" partners was always going to be a bitch.
The Tornado F3 was never going to be an air superiority king. Europe HAD and HAS a very good medium range striker in the Tornado GR4 (RAF). Europe needed an air superiority fighter.
To maintain a European fighter industry and to fulfill that role, we needed the Typhoon, not the F-15.
I would hardly call the Typhoon obsolete. Look at the threats it might face, ie the Russian Mafia- SU, MIGs, ( Talking about those not in Russian airforce). It compares very well and betters them in many ways. Better SA, better engines, better avionics..
The S/Hornet came about very quickly, I suppose it was a big advantage to have a working jet at the squadrons to base it on. The USN also needed it quickly, no 20 year schedules there. The original Hornet wasn`t the S/Hornet of today, it had to be developed over the years. The same will be true of Typhoon.
It looks to be the same kind of process for most new types. The Typhoon has had a long gestation period, the F-22, although more complex, has been alive for the same amount of time. The complexity-re-time taken to get the thing into service can be blamed on the ever shifting requirements and inter-government wrangles. Building an aircraft with 4 "equal" partners was always going to be a bitch.
The Tornado F3 was never going to be an air superiority king. Europe HAD and HAS a very good medium range striker in the Tornado GR4 (RAF). Europe needed an air superiority fighter.
To maintain a European fighter industry and to fulfill that role, we needed the Typhoon, not the F-15.
I would hardly call the Typhoon obsolete. Look at the threats it might face, ie the Russian Mafia- SU, MIGs, ( Talking about those not in Russian airforce). It compares very well and betters them in many ways. Better SA, better engines, better avionics..
The S/Hornet came about very quickly, I suppose it was a big advantage to have a working jet at the squadrons to base it on. The USN also needed it quickly, no 20 year schedules there. The original Hornet wasn`t the S/Hornet of today, it had to be developed over the years. The same will be true of Typhoon.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 03 Jul 2006, 23:15
The F-35 program is not slowing down at all. There have been no reported delays, and everything is on schedule.
The funny thing is, the F-35A will do all the gruntwork in terms of testing. Weapons launching, systems tests, flight tests, etc. So the job is easier when working with the F-35B and C.
The Typhoon is also supposed to replace the Tornado in a strike role AFAIK.
On this note, i will concede some points:
1. The European aircraft industry needs to stay alive.
2. The faults of the Typhoon are not due to European technological incompetence. But more administrative.
3. Eventuall, after a very long teething period, the Tiffy will be a pretty decent warplane.
Right now, its still not performing up to expectation. It will... just not now. Hence my problem with it. Europe has produced an aircraft which cannot compete in terms of cost, capability, and performance, with aircraft like the F-16E BLK60, the F/A-18E/F, and so on. At least not yet. But by the time it does, the damage will have been done in terms of exports.
Tell me: Why would any nation buy a Tiffy if it can get a F-16 BLK60?
The F-22A on its arrival has out-done its own requirements. So has the SuperHornet. The US paid for these aircraft and ended up with alot more for their money.
The funny thing is, the F-35A will do all the gruntwork in terms of testing. Weapons launching, systems tests, flight tests, etc. So the job is easier when working with the F-35B and C.
The Typhoon is also supposed to replace the Tornado in a strike role AFAIK.
On this note, i will concede some points:
1. The European aircraft industry needs to stay alive.
2. The faults of the Typhoon are not due to European technological incompetence. But more administrative.
3. Eventuall, after a very long teething period, the Tiffy will be a pretty decent warplane.
Right now, its still not performing up to expectation. It will... just not now. Hence my problem with it. Europe has produced an aircraft which cannot compete in terms of cost, capability, and performance, with aircraft like the F-16E BLK60, the F/A-18E/F, and so on. At least not yet. But by the time it does, the damage will have been done in terms of exports.
Tell me: Why would any nation buy a Tiffy if it can get a F-16 BLK60?
The F-22A on its arrival has out-done its own requirements. So has the SuperHornet. The US paid for these aircraft and ended up with alot more for their money.
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 999
- Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 10:58
Why would any nation buy a Tiffy if it can get a F-16 BLK60?
In one word: Longetivity.
The Block 60 represents the pinnicle of the F-16 development and upgrade paths. The airframe is being used to its maximum capability. There is little potential for "easy" upgrades. It would be difficult to keep updating these airframes in order to keep up with the changing requirements.
Typhoon represents an aircraft at the beginning of its life, more than capable of defending your airspace from any potential real threat (highly unlikely a NATO nation will take on F-22s in a real war) out there in the near future. It was designed to be able to comfortably defeat the next generation of Russian aircraft not just the current production variants. It will very soon also have an A2G capability that is constantly expanding into something that could be counted as being much more "multirole" than certain other so called "multirole" similar aircraft.
After that waffle... the Tiffie has potential for upgrades and progress to the airframe to keep abreast of any threat for the foreseeable future. There is also space available for quite "easy" upgrades. An example is the radar... the CAESAR upgrade is being designed to be an antenna switch over, nothing more.
Massive potential.
Andy
p.s. your comment on not having a gun. Now, ALL aircraft are fitted with the gun, and it is maintained. However some of the equipment has not been purchased for loading the weapon (RAF only). Its also not fired often to help extend maintenance hours.etc as the gun needs servicing.etc and vibration.
Andy Evans Aviation Photography
www.evansaviography.co.uk
www.evansaviography.co.uk
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 03 Jul 2006, 23:15
F-16E BLK60s are brand new airframes AFAIK.
As for longevity, they offer more than the Tiffy has right now. In fact, much of the Tiffy's upgrade life will be to catch up. So there isnt musch longevity there.
Export orders also speak for themselves.
As for longevity, they offer more than the Tiffy has right now. In fact, much of the Tiffy's upgrade life will be to catch up. So there isnt musch longevity there.
Export orders also speak for themselves.
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 632
- Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 22:45
- Location: Romania
Export orders also speak for themselves.
You can't compare exports of a plane which is on the market for more than 25 years with one who began series production just a few years ago
"It's all for nothing if you don't have freedom" (William Wallace 1272-1305)
- Elite 1K
- Posts: 1682
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00
Senate votes to delay F-35
By Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg News
The U.S. Senate passed a $517.7 billion defense spending measure Thursday that would delay initial production of the first F-35 joint strike fighters by a year while restoring a backup engine for the plane that the Pentagon wanted to kill.
By a vote of 96-0, the Senate passed legislation that authorizes fiscal 2007 military spending. The measure cuts $1.2 billion the Pentagon wanted that would enable Lockheed Martin to begin building the first 21 production F-35s.
The spending cut, which would have to be agreed to by the House, would delay production for one year to allow for more development and flight testing....
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-5747.html
Typhoon and Tornado will serve together until about 2018. It seems more likely the Tornado GR4 will get an AESA before the Typhoon. Work in this direction is being done at time of writing. Yes, eventually, the Tornado will be replaced by Typhoon.
The Typhoon is performing to most expectations at this stage in it`s development, although there have been some concerns about the CAPTOR radar and spares availability, LRUs and such. Pilots love the aircraft, that speaks for itself....
On exports, watch the Saudi order, 48 aircraft could be just be for starters.....some say as many as 200 could be purchased. That is an export success in my book! We will have to wait and see....
It is not yet the all rounder the F-16 is as well as the F-18, but as you said, it ill get there, more quickly than you suppose....Meteor has been test flighted already, JDAM is being dropped right now.
Singapore wanted the Typhoon but it wanted Tranche 3 spec` aircraft NOW! That hurt exports, Eurofighter Consortium woke up and has hurried development of the A2G capability considerably.
By Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg News
The U.S. Senate passed a $517.7 billion defense spending measure Thursday that would delay initial production of the first F-35 joint strike fighters by a year while restoring a backup engine for the plane that the Pentagon wanted to kill.
By a vote of 96-0, the Senate passed legislation that authorizes fiscal 2007 military spending. The measure cuts $1.2 billion the Pentagon wanted that would enable Lockheed Martin to begin building the first 21 production F-35s.
The spending cut, which would have to be agreed to by the House, would delay production for one year to allow for more development and flight testing....
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-5747.html
Typhoon and Tornado will serve together until about 2018. It seems more likely the Tornado GR4 will get an AESA before the Typhoon. Work in this direction is being done at time of writing. Yes, eventually, the Tornado will be replaced by Typhoon.
The Typhoon is performing to most expectations at this stage in it`s development, although there have been some concerns about the CAPTOR radar and spares availability, LRUs and such. Pilots love the aircraft, that speaks for itself....
On exports, watch the Saudi order, 48 aircraft could be just be for starters.....some say as many as 200 could be purchased. That is an export success in my book! We will have to wait and see....
It is not yet the all rounder the F-16 is as well as the F-18, but as you said, it ill get there, more quickly than you suppose....Meteor has been test flighted already, JDAM is being dropped right now.
Singapore wanted the Typhoon but it wanted Tranche 3 spec` aircraft NOW! That hurt exports, Eurofighter Consortium woke up and has hurried development of the A2G capability considerably.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests