Eurofighter Typhoon

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

peterb

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 03:52

Unread post20 Dec 2009, 13:12

Somehow I think the European governments will continue to develop the Eurofighter Typhoon, they have too much invested in it. I can't see the RAF buying F-22 Raptors for example, great though it would be if the RAF had them. However much you criticise the Typhoon it IS a useful aircraft and will be in service for quite a while.
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1094
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post20 Dec 2009, 14:27

Thumper3181 wrote:No they did not have it in the 70s. The American fighters had similar and in some cases superior performance compared to Typhoon in the 70s. I would point out to you that "fully integrated DAS, sensor fusion, NCW capabilities, that kind of MMI and avionics" are all things that updated teen series fighters either also have now or can be added as an upgrade if necessary.

They also have something very important that Typhoon does not. Several mature, fully integrated AESA solutions, and fully funded development spirals. How many of those Typhoons are going to get Pirate and a helmet=t mounted sight? How many of those first batch of Typhoons will quickly become obsolete because the first batch was fielded without full capabilities and probably will not be upgraded due to lack of funds?


Typhoon was a great jobs program but an utter failure as a fighter. You have plance that due to cost has drained military budgets and is in need of upgrading from day one. They will be nothing better than second tier fighters come 2020 and gate guards 10 years thereafter.

Typhoon would have been a great plane if it was fielded 15 years ago at a price that was affordable.



You are applying a double standard here. Sure the Typhoon isn't perfect, it is late and expensive, but it yet offers a combination of performances, capabilities and technologies in A2A which is hardly matched by most aircraft. It's certainly no F-22, but that doesn't mean it's a bad fighter or as you put it an "utter failure". During the evaluations and exercises the aircraft participated over the past few years it received a quite good reputation and was highly successful in the role it was intended for in the first place.
And while you asked all earlier T1 aircraft are going to be upgraded to block 5 as part of the funded R2 programme which was launched back in 2006. Many block 5 aircraft in service today are in fact upgraded block 2B & 2 examples. There are additional funds as part of the 9 bln € deal to upgrade T1 & T2 aircraft. The P1E is also long funded and earlier T2 aircraft will be brought to that standard as T1 aircraft are brought to block 5 within the R2 programme.
Offline

peterb

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 03:52

Unread post21 Dec 2009, 08:02

geogen wrote:Good assessment, Peterb. I think the current logic at least, is to hypothesize a future Euro mix of the latest 4.5 gen, F-35 and Euro-designed LO UCAV?


I've been looking at stealthy UCAV designs and this is clearly the way future combat aircraft design is going although I think a human pilot will nearly always be required.
Offline

bjr1028

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2009, 03:34
  • Location: Dubuque, IA

Unread post21 Dec 2009, 14:43

peterb wrote:Somehow I think the European governments will continue to develop the Eurofighter Typhoon, they have too much invested in it. I can't see the RAF buying F-22 Raptors for example, great though it would be if the RAF had them. However much you criticise the Typhoon it IS a useful aircraft and will be in service for quite a while.


I can see them trying to export, but both the Germans and the Brits are trying to wiggle their way out of the advanced tranche 3. Considering how cheap the Euro governments are when it comes to defense, I could see the CEASAR AESA radar sparsely deployed and future upgrades to the eurojet engine not funded.
Offline

duplex

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 398
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2005, 16:30

Unread post23 Dec 2009, 08:44

peterb wrote:Well the Typhoon is Europe's answer. How do you think it compares with it's rivals?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcFZcF17GJk





Typhoon must get an AESA and should be able to land on a carrier.
Otherwise it will have to fight for a very small market segment and remain pretty much a single mission fighter

High Altitude, + MACH 1,8 interception .. It's is probably the best in the world in this segment..
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post23 Dec 2009, 11:40

duplex wrote:
High Altitude, + MACH 1,8 interception .. It's is probably the best in the world in this segment..


If it were only intercepting defenceless bombers i'd have to agree with you, however its unlikely in this era that, for example, Russian bombers would be unescorted to the UK mainland. Typhoons unstealthy airframe is a big liability in such circumstances.
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1094
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post23 Dec 2009, 12:10

duplex wrote:Typhoon must get an AESA and should be able to land on a carrier.
Otherwise it will have to fight for a very small market segment and remain pretty much a single mission fighter

High Altitude, + MACH 1,8 interception .. It's is probably the best in the world in this segment..


And why is carrier compatibility so important if perhaps a handful nations operates conventional aircraft carriers at all?

And the aircraft is no dedicated inteceptor for Mach 1.8 only.
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 10:49

Scorpion82 wrote:
And the aircraft is no dedicated inteceptor for Mach 1.8 only.


Well what else is it? Its no striker thats for sure, it can't even run OCA or escort missions over modern SAM defended hostile territory without being a liability thanks to its conventional design though it should be alright in low intensity COIN conflicts like Afghanistan :lol:
I think you need to get over it an realise it will never be much more than an interceptor for those that operate it as they know its weaknesses and are honest about them and like i said before even then itspotentially in serious trouble if escorted by Flanker varients.
I doubt it goes much more than M1.8 for more than a minute if at all with a full weapon load and also what is the highest speed an AMRAAM can be launched from a Typhoon, I have my doubts about any Mach 2+ AMRAAM launches though I admit I could be off there if someone can prove they've done M2 and M2+ launches off a Typhoon in trials.
Offline

ed.r.lee

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2009, 21:10

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 13:05

Most of the times I stay away from "arguments" but here I can't help but wonder... what's the point of having the best fighter jet if it's being used to commit mass murder? :roll:

Egomaniac is always at work all over the world. I'm good, I'm better, I'm best. No, Mine is even better! Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah...

It's closer to reality who has more blood tainted on his hands. 8)
Offline

fasteagle

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 86
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2009, 11:20
  • Location: East Anglia/United Kingdom

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 14:40

Interesting view from ed.r.lee! Anyway, back to the point. I think we Brits have to accept we cannot afford to invest in super stealthy aircraft, even America can no longer afford them (400 Raptors reduced to less than 200). It is true to say it is late and hugely over budget, but look at F-35, getting ridiculously expensive now.

It is difficult to look ahead to future conflicts, and you need to strike a balance, how likely is it we will need to face an opponent with high level IADS, North Korea, Middle East or Afghanistan do not posses them, and i cant see us tangling with Russia (hopefully!). If we do, we will likely be doing it with the USA, who can tackle the high threats and we follow up in support.

Typhoon is ahead of teen series aircraft, both in aerodynamics and built in systems - most US aircraft appear to need bolt on ECM pods taking up a valuable hardpoint, although built in trailing decoys etc are used.

Just my thoughts. and like it or not, Typhoon is here to stay as one of the best options to those who cannot afford F-35s or downgraded export F-22s.
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 15:26

ed.r.lee wrote:Most of the times I stay away from "arguments" but here I can't help but wonder... what's the point of having the best fighter jet if it's being used to commit mass murder? :roll:


Just a thought but perhaps you should get interested in civilian aircraft if WAR planes and what they're designed to do is to much for you to stomach...
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 15:33

fasteagle wrote:Typhoon is ahead of teen series aircraft, both in aerodynamics and built in systems - most US aircraft appear to need bolt on ECM pods taking up a valuable hardpoint, although built in trailing decoys etc are used.

Just my thoughts. and like it or not, Typhoon is here to stay as one of the best options to those who cannot afford F-35s or downgraded export F-22s.


F-35 won't be much if any more expensive than a Typhoon and is far more survivable too. I agree typhoon is fractionally ahead in terms of aerodynamics than teen series by a few percentage points but from what I understand the BL 60 F-16's and F-15SE are far more advanced in terms of avionics than a Typhoon. Heck, Typhoon doesn't even have an AESA and its sensor fusion is said to be very questionable according to those in the know from what i've read over on PPRUNE.
Also, Typhoon was designed to tangle with Russian jets, it was percieved as its main job and to say it'll never happen is something that those of us without crystal balls might just disagree with.
Offline

ed.r.lee

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2009, 21:10

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 17:09

shep1978 wrote:
ed.r.lee wrote:Most of the times I stay away from "arguments" but here I can't help but wonder... what's the point of having the best fighter jet if it's being used to commit mass murder? :roll:


Just a thought but perhaps you should get interested in civilian aircraft if WAR planes and what they're designed to do is to much for you to stomach...


A friendly note though, I didn't indicate who or what or where. No need to be too defensive. :D Take a chill pill ya?
Offline

shep1978

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1395
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2009, 16:00
  • Location: UK

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 17:29

ed.r.lee wrote:A friendly note though, I didn't indicate who or what or where. No need to be too defensive. :D Take a chill pill ya?


I'm quite chilled actually,valium tends to have that effect and nowhere was I being defensive, all I did was to point out that if you find war planes so abhorent then perhaps its best to concentrate your mind on civilian aircraft. I shall say no more on the matter.
Offline

ed.r.lee

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2009, 21:10

Unread post05 Jan 2010, 17:34

fasteagle wrote:I think we Brits have to accept we cannot afford to invest in super stealthy aircraft, even America can no longer afford them (400 Raptors reduced to less than 200). It is true to say it is late and hugely over budget, but look at F-35, getting ridiculously expensive now.


I think the Brits have done the right thing in controlling the funds being used to develop these. Not only in the money aspect but it's completely out of rationality that Brits will want to purchase F-35 but yet, not allowed to access the computers. If anybody thinking the rest of the world is stupid, certainly not so.

fasteagle wrote:It is difficult to look ahead to future conflicts, and you need to strike a balance, how likely is it we will need to face an opponent with high level IADS, North Korea, Middle East or Afghanistan do not posses them, and i cant see us tangling with Russia (hopefully!). If we do, we will likely be doing it with the USA, who can tackle the high threats and we follow up in support.


That's another high point you raised. Until today nobody (including US) can provide hard evidence that the claimed threats exist. Everything is perpetuated on assumptions and there are far too many examples of how "expert opinions" are seriously flawed and mis-interpreted.

fasteagle wrote:Just my thoughts. and like it or not, Typhoon is here to stay as one of the best options to those who cannot afford F-35s or downgraded export F-22s.


US has spent the previous decades "unifying" the world and most countries are dependent on her both in economical and military support. If there's a product that does the job equally well and cost a fraction of F-35's price, it's only natural some other parts of the world will begin to lean elsewhere. In this light, this is bad news to US manufacturers. But of course, we know for a fact that most arms deal are politically-influenced than real independent assessment.

For many "buy-American" advocates, this is a very painful truth to stomach.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests