Eurofighter Typhoon

sealordlawrence said:
what happens after they have been delivered is meaningless.
Click to expand...
Which is strictly your opinion. And like I said, your opinion is a varible factor depends on where you're coming from. The fact that the tax payers paid for 160 and basically got a fleet of 105 aircraft isn't so meaningless. The fact that so many aircraft were retired early no doubt has to do with its cost/capabilities - a 5th generation price tag for a 4th generation fighter. The fact that the UK wants to get rid of that many aircraft that badly while persuing another american aircraft isn't so meaningless. It speaks alot about the wisdom of the people who started the eurofighter program.
 
The original article is amateurish and absurd - no doubt.

But before some extensive comparison of the Eurofighter vs. F-22 or the value of the Eurofighter respectively, let me just say, that those two aircrafts are not comparable. Eurofighter is the true multirole fighter, fully capable to attack ground or sea targets, while F-22 is only A2A optimized fighter with the limited ground capability. Not any other nation is capable/has the money/has the political will to buy that specialized plane. And when comparing the both, we must also consider the duties that those aircrafts are doing in their countries. F-22 in the UK is definitely not a good value as is not Eurofighter for the USAF. Last point - when evaluating the future capabilities, lets don't forget that the Europe is counting on the combined forces of the manned 4,5 generation fighters and UCAVs (Taranis and whatever comes from the nEUROn).
 
donnage99 - I agree with your premise that the report questions the efficacy of the entire Eurofighter program given the "end result", far too few airframes for a big cost. All the research billions could have been buying late model F-15's and F-16's and I bet the fleet would be bigger than 105 airplanes regardless of the current budget environment.
 
sealordlawrence said:
if you buy 160 then you pay for 160
Click to expand...

Which I never argued with ::)

It'll start to make more sense if you calm down a little and maybe look at it from different perspectives ;).
 
bobbymike said:
donnage99 - I agree with your premise that the report questions the efficacy of the entire Eurofighter program given the "end result", far too few airframes for a big cost.
Click to expand...

Given that the NAO report also states “[this] demonstrates that the amount that the department is paying for Typhoon is in line with that expected for similar kinds of aircraft.” the situation is far from clear. Could have bought F-15/16, would have saved a small amount of money but resulted in no UK Defence Aerospace Industry being left.
 
donnage99 said:
It depends which side you're looking at. I'm looking at from the taxpayer's perspective. I'm spending that much amount of money for that many aircraft I'm going to get for my country's air force, and the number is 105.

From the perspective of the contractor, it's not their fault. The bargain is 160 jets, so they delivered 160 jets for the price of... 160 jets. So whose fault is it? Not the contractors certainly. They upheld the bargain. The fault fell on the people who came up with the program in the first place.

And I did think about the raptor's lack of IRST and HMD, but considering its combat doctrine that is shaped around its supercruise, stealth, AESA, and RWR, without these sensors, the raptor is still relevant in its intended role. These features work in conjunction to provide the raptor with the ability to force a BVR engagement on the enemy, a scenario in which IRST and HMD seem less significant.
Click to expand...

The UK is not only buying 160 Typhoons it is also using them. The T1 examples were delivered between 2003 and 2008 and will be operated until 2019 according current plans. That means that these aircraft will be operated between 11-16 years and there is still the option to sell them afterwards re-curing some of the investment. It's not like the UK is buying these aircraft and scrap them after delivery! Would you say that the USAF has operated 0 F-117s just because they were retired about a decade earlier than originally planned?

The typhoon, without extensive stealth feature, will not be able to guarantee a first shot/first kill against modernized legacy aircraft, which are flooding the international market, unless it acquire a capable AESA.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of combat aircraft in service today lacks AESA radars and most of these aircraft appear to be inferior to the Typhoon in its pre-dominant area of air defence and air superiority. How many of the 1600+ F-15s are fitted with an AESA radar, how many of the 4500 F-16s are fitted with an AESA radar, how many of the ~1600 F/A-18A-F are fitted with an AESA radar? And is the AESA radar the sole relevant factor? Were all the radar equipped aircraft over the past 70 or so years useless because they lacked an AESA radar?
 
If Marcel Dassault's assertion that "if it looks good, it flies well" has any amount of truth in it, then it should not come as a surprise that the Typhoon was a pretty unimpressive performer from as early as the drawing board! The Gripen, and especially the Rafale, are sleeker and more impressive!

I am not expert to judge the technical side of things, but it seems to me that claiming a Typhoon to be more expensive than a Raptor is preposterous. First of all there is a whole decade between the two designs. Eurofighter involved no stealth features and there was no generally available data on stealth when it was designed. The F-22 builds upon all the experience that Lockheed Martin has gathered on the subject. What may be true, however, is that any production item is worth the investment only above a certain amount of items sold. And minus 200 examples of any aircraft is most likely a total lack of return on your investment. But since the Typhoon can be exported while the F-22 cannot, there is still hope that it will attract the less demanding customers.

All in all, if France, Britain and Sweden had pressed their national companies to work together at elaborating a common design, there would be a much better and cheaper Eurofighter in service by now that would integrate the best features of all three. Instead, we have the Typhoon, Gripen and Rafale which are more or less limited to their countries of origin, rely upon 20-year old design philosophy and have trouble finding customers! If the same nonsense had prevailed over the supersonic airliner and the European twinjet programs back in the 1960s, there never would have been a Concorde or an Airbus.

This is the fight that these European fighters can never win: when Lockheed markets the F-35 worlwide, the day of the Eurofighter will be gone forever.
 
Stargazer2006 said:
This is the fight that these European fighters can never win: when Lockheed markets the F-35 worlwide, the day of the Eurofighter will be gone forever.
Click to expand...

Not just the F-35, it's lost orders to the F-15 and others as well. Politics.
 
@Stargazer,
the Typhoon is not a solely British aircraft. Germans, Italians and Spanish were involved as well. I agree however that they should have collaborated and designed a common fighter, this would have favoured all of them. Much went wrong with the Eurofighter program, the planning and the politics behind it. Albeit I don't think that a Swedish participation would have been an option if the French kept onboard it would have been beneficial in many ways and I don't think that no solution could have been found.
 
They might have - look at their involvement in nEUROn.

Regards,

Greg
 
Times are different now and Sweden is a member of the EU since the 90s. Back in the 80s at the height of Cold War a Swedish involvement may have been critical for political reasons.
 
The company that markets Gripen, Gripen International, is a joint venture of BAe Systems and SAAB. Any European collaboration on future combat aircraft may well include SAAB.
 
Scorpion82 said:
The UK is not only buying 160 Typhoons it is also using them. The T1 examples were delivered between 2003 and 2008 and will be operated until 2019 according current plans. That means that these aircraft will be operated between 11-16 years and there is still the option to sell them afterwards re-curing some of the investment. It's not like the UK is buying these aircraft and scrap them after delivery! Would you say that the USAF has operated 0 F-117s just because they were retired about a decade earlier than originally planned?
Click to expand...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/03/eurofighter_nao_analysis/page2.html

The vast majority of combat aircraft in service today lacks AESA radars and most of these aircraft appear to be inferior to the Typhoon in its pre-dominant area of air defence and air superiority. How many of the 1600+ F-15s are fitted with an AESA radar, how many of the 4500 F-16s are fitted with an AESA radar, how many of the ~1600 F/A-18A-F are fitted with an AESA radar? And is the AESA radar the sole relevant factor? Were all the radar equipped aircraft over the past 70 or so years useless because they lacked an AESA radar?
Click to expand...

Please read my post carefully, friend. I never said that the typhoon is inferior than what is out there. What I said was that what the typhoon provided is marginal improvement over these aircraft. On a sidenote, I doubt that the typhoon, in combat configuration, with draggy external fuel tanks to make up for its smaller internal fuel volume, can kinetically outmaneuver larger aircraft with larger fuel fraction like the flanker and f-15 series. If you want air superiority, marginal improvement isn't exactly what you looking for. You want garanteed first look/first shot/first kill.

If you just need an aircraft with marginal improvement, than at least, it has to be cheap, like Gripen. The typhoon is not. Its price tag makes no sense when you looking at the capabilities it provide.
 
@Donnage,
what exactly do you want to tell me/us with that link ???

Wrt the rest. Well the Typhoon has doing fine during evaluations, test and exercises. This is certainly not fully representative for real combat missions, but the aircraft repeatedly proved to be quite dominant vs F-15s and F-16s. The "marginally better" claims is often put forward, but the operational feedback including direct statements from the pilots who operate that aircraft contradict this wide spread perception. Btw Typhoons internal fuel load is almost the same as that of the F-15A and its external drop tanks are relative small and light. Typhoon's fuel fraction is in fact quite comparable to that of the F-15 on internal fuel even against the C with 900 kg more fuel than the A.
Guaranteed first look, first shoot, first kill capability is definitely desirable, but that has rarely been the case over the past decades. Only the F-22 introduces a clear advantage here. Marginal improvements in one area may not be of great importance but a weapons system is the sum of its parts and what counts at the end is the overall package.
 
What significant advantages does Typhoon provide vs F-15 in a generic coalition scenario where the coalition is going against an IADS with competent interceptors? It can't conduct OCA over enemy territory until SAMs are suppressed, just like the F-15. It owns the Sukhoi T-10 series in BVR, just like the F-15 does. OTOH the F-15E and the models that have been exported to Israel and South Korea can conduct effective A2G operations TODAY. The one area where it looks like Typhoon is far better than the F-15 and maybe equal to the F-22 would be DCA against cruise missiles. Here the acceleration and missile capacity should make it king.
 
A lot of things in comparisons to the upgraded F-15C, such as a significantly smaller frontal RCS and lower visual signature, clearly superior agility and manoeuvrability, supercruise (albeit not of great tactical significance), superior acceleration and excellent climb performance. Its MMI is easily 2+ generations ahead and its avionics system is more advanced and better integrated, sensor fusion, a more comprehensive and sophisticated DAS, IRST/FLIR. The sole advantages of the few Golden Eagles in service right now is their radar and the F-15 offers greater range and endurance. I would in fact say that an F-15C with AN/APG-63(V3) offers an edge wrt cruise missile defence and the number of AAMs is similar to that of the Typhoon. Newer F-15E derivatives will mitigate many of the disadvantages wrt avionics and MMI at least to a certain extend. The F-15K still lacks an AESA radar and its EWS lacks equipment like TRDs, MAWS, LWS and uses more conventional RWRs rather than ESM and there appears to be no sensor fusion at all. The F-15SG might be more competitive here with possibly more advanced EW gear and the AESA. I personally wouldn't underestimate the Flanker either! Already the Su-30K proved challenging during Cope Thunder in 2004, the Su-30MKI is much more capable and afaik there were no BVR DACTs between the Su-30MKI and other western fighters during their deployments to the US and UK. Dunno about the more recent Indra Danush exercise last year in India.
 
I assumed Typhoon with CAESAR for cruise missile killing.

I think the Su-30 is at its best WVR. I really think that with networking, AMRAAM etc either F-15 or Typhoon will own the Sukhoi. The Typhoon's kinematic advantages are such that it should score very well against any T-10 series.
 
Well looked at it from what they are offering right now. Captor-E is a while away from becoming an operational reality. As CMs are usually subsonic the F-15 shouldn't have much issues to intercept them. The ability to detect them early and shoot them down is more critical and in this area the F-15 will offer an advantage until the Captor-E/Meteor combo is employed on the Typhoon. Btw also it's off topic what is the status of AIM-120D integration into the F-15?
The networking of western fighters is definitely an advantage, but the Indians will fit a new DL to their Su-30MKIs. Virtually every Flanker is equipped with a DL and has been since its inception. The DL currently used appears to be limited to a 4 ship exchange of position and radar data with the lead being able to assign targets to his wingmen. At least the Russian Flankers should be able to receive radar data from AWACS, the Su-30MKI can't as their new AWACS is incompatible, though that issue should be addressed. The Su-35S will reportedly be fitted with a more advanced DL, but there aren't many details known.
 
Subsonic or not speed matters. I am not sure about the 120D integration but there doesn't seem to be any hurry.
 
GTX said:
They might have - look at their involvement in nEUROn.

Regards,

Greg
Click to expand...

Now, yes. Back in the day, ( we're talking the 80's) no way. It would have angered the Russian Bear to a significant degree.
 
http://cgi.ebay.com/Eurofighter-Typhoon-2003-Development-Flight-Manual-/260761796078?pt=UK_Collectables_Aeronautica_MJ&hash=item3cb69d3dee#ht_500wt_1156

Cool thing to own...
 
For starters, there are four separate governments involved in decisions concerning Eurofighter Typhoon. This will slow down any process.

Secondly, it was claimed as recently as 2008 that CAPTOR-M offered advantages in some areas when compared with early AESA's:
Though electronically scanned radars offer faster scan rates, with search and track times up to one third quicker than those of mechanically scanned radars, the Captor-M enjoys significant advantages in range and azimuth coverage, and especially in range at the edges of the scan, where energy losses inherent in phase shifting can dramatically reduce the range performance of an AESA radar.
Click to expand...
I leave it to the experts to judge if those claims had merit; if so, for how long.

Thirdly, it worked with a finite investment of time and money.

Time seems to have caught up with CAPTOR-M.
 
Eurofighter Typhoon display model found on eBay.

Source
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Large-Eurofighter-display-model-/370655791672?pt=UK_ToysGames_ModelKits_ModelKits_JN&hash=item564cce8a38

Posted because I believe it is a nice model.
 

Attachments

  • $T2eC16hHJHwE9n8ikMJ-BQ(40)B+b!~~60_12.JPG
    $T2eC16hHJHwE9n8ikMJ-BQ(40)B+b!~~60_12.JPG
    27.2 KB · Views: 165
Via the Daily Telegraph:
eurofighter_2496545k.jpg
ORIGINAL CAPTION: The 100th Eurofighter plane is seen behind a water shield during a ceremony to hand over the plane to the German Air Force in Manching, southern Germany
Picture: GUENTER SCHIFFMANN/AFP/Getty Images​
 
Here from a magazine add, I present a picture of a land-based Tranche 3 Eurofighter Typhoon in Luftwaffe markings with CFTs, Meteor missiles, IRIS-T missiles, a targeting pod and smart bombs HOPE/HOSBO.
If I ever see this aircraft in real, it will be way after 2020. ;)
 

Attachments

  • EurofighterwithConformalTanks_2013.png
    EurofighterwithConformalTanks_2013.png
    424.7 KB · Views: 374
.
 

Attachments

  • EJ200_TVC_1.jpg
    EJ200_TVC_1.jpg
    157.1 KB · Views: 229
  • EJ200_TVC_2.jpg
    EJ200_TVC_2.jpg
    149 KB · Views: 207
  • EJ200_TVC_3.jpg
    EJ200_TVC_3.jpg
    139.1 KB · Views: 198
  • EJ200_TVC_4.jpg
    EJ200_TVC_4.jpg
    144.2 KB · Views: 191
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxLg2iRkOdQ

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-23296285
 
EDIT:
For the records, first flight of the Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 3 (ZK355, BS116) took place last Monday, December 2th 2013. The 2nd flight was on the following Wednesday.
Videos:
Code: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDr9BZmC4Dg
Code: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86QfbfsbdyI
Code: 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIFRY_NT_30


Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stu2112/
http://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=90150
http://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Typhoon-T3.jpg
 
This Interesting fuel tank solution, for Eurofighter Typhoon.
Was pitched as an Indian MMRCA (Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft).


Typhoon-CFT-Al-Ain.jpg


Also in a wind tunnel.
Typhoon-model-with-conformal-fuel-tanks-in-the-BAE-Systems-wind-tunnel-.jpg
 
This wind tunnel model with CFTs was unveiled 13 years ago, in 2001.
 

Attachments

  • CFT-shot2.jpg
    CFT-shot2.jpg
    12.1 KB · Views: 328
Yep,
The idea has been around for 13 yrs
But
This Mock-up was showcased at several exhibitions and airshows around the world,
including Al Ain, earlier this year.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom