MILAVIA Forum
Military Aviation => Military Aircraft => Topic started by: Webmaster on December 26, 2007, 10:41:11 PM
-
There was an interesting letter among the AFM Feedback this month from an anonymous person, but obiviously from someone in the RAF close to the Typhoons.
He claims there was a one-on-one fight between RAF Typhoon and Indian Air Force Su-30MKI, during the latter's deployment to the UK even though the UK MoD has been stating it would not put its Typhoon up against the Flanker. From first-hand experience he tells that two inexperienced Typhoon pilots returned with big grins on their faces, after having 'toasted' the Su-30MKI. He says the Typhoon was too nimble and too powerful, and added that the Typhoons were not 'clean' either. He also says there's HUD video to back it up, but the MoD will probably not acknowledge it.
I suppose this is a good 'leak' for the RAF and Eurofighter, with so many people doubting the Typhoon's ability to hold its own against the 4+ generation Flanker. In my mind, there's never been a doubt about the Typhoon abilities and I've always thought the Su-30MKI had been overestimated. It's a 3rd generation design developed into a two-seat derivative for combat training and then developed into an interceptor controller, before going on to become the multi-role platform. It's very heavy! Thrust vectoring helps it to still do amazing things at low speed, but that doesn't mean it can beat a lighter, extremely unstable, delta-canard configured 4th generation fighter. But I guess this puts a lot of people's mind at ease.
Interestingly, the person also revealed some unofficial inside information of the Typhoon's performance against the F-22. It wasn't able to detect the F-22, but its self defence suite did detect it being 'painted' by the F-22. The Typhoon handled the Raptor in close one-on-one combat as it did with the Su-30MKI. As he puts it "The F-22s could not 'handle' the Typhoon close in and the Yanks were shocked!" Again a fairly obvious outcome, the F-22 has had to sacrifice performance for stealth. You can't have it all. Luckily both are on the same side, otherwise the Typhoon operator would have quite a headache thinking about how to detect and creep up on the F-22. As the F-22 would have worrying about avoiding close-in fights, although that thought would not to be new.
-
Just a quick FMI (for my info), whats the current price for a Raptor and a Typhoon??
-
Incremental "fly-away" unit procurement cost: cost to procure another unit
Program acquisition unit cost: unit cost including research & development
Export: commercial prices, subject to many factors
Estimates based on various figures I have seen:
F-22:
Unit procurement cost: $140-$180 million
Program acquisition cost: $300-$350 million
Export: $180-$240 million
Typhoon (Tranche 2):
Unit procurement cost: $100-$120 million
Program acquisition cost: $120-$140 million
Export: $110-$130 million
Basically, you'll have two Typhoons for the price of one Raptor, unless you're the USAF and have to pay the R&D program cost anyway.
-
It's a safer bet shooting the enemy down from 100 miles away than from 10 meters with a cannon, right...?
-
I'm not so sure the missile can be that manuverable. I mean carry feul for 100 miles...these things are huge. And Typhoon manuvers quite well.
-
Ah. Ok. Short range missile.
-
I thought the Raptor was designed to go up, fire a few long ranged missiles, then go home.
Isnt the Typhoon a proper dogfighter?
-
True. But it's medium range missile. AMRAAM stands for Advanced Medium Ranged Air to Air Missile, in case you didn't know.
The combat doctrine in both air forces are very different. True, The Typhoon stands a good chance against most fighters, but the Raptor stands an excellent chance of surviving almost any engagement.
-
I bet you have seen X men...there is a chic who controls the weather and kicks everybody's ass...now that anonymous person is trying to say that the EF is short of an X men plane and therefore can whipe out the Flanker and can cope fair enough with the Raptor...
First of all this "leak" is in accordance with the common logic......the new Typhoon is better than the old flanker and somewhat less capable than the Raptor...
I usually like to have my doubts with such "common logic statements"
1) If it was to dogfight, the small weight would not save the EF-2000. Remember, what counts is T/W where Flanker and EF are about equal, and furthermore, the unstable EF could never escape from a properly flown TVC Flanker, for laws of basic physics. The Flanker can just do anything, turn tighter, at smaller radius, create overshoots, stand in the air....in one vs one this would give it the edge.....
2) This doesn't mean that the EF is condemned to lose. With TVC it could do much the same, and combined with superior avionics might end as a winner.
3) For the same reasons (TVC) i doubt that it could beat easily the Raptor. We are talking for a better T/W ratio. I would bet my money on EF only if the US hadn't a helmet mounted sight system.
Maybe the outcome is fictious. Or it is like the Indian US engagement where the Eagles had restrictions on what to show they can do to Indians.
I leave a small, say 30% possibility to EF, again because i think RAF trains its pilots better than IAF.
-
That would be Storm... Ororo Munroe, was it? WRC we need you here i'm not an X-men fan...
Now those are some arguments...
Sorry, i'm not too well informed when it comes to Russian aircraft... What's the stand-off range of the Flanker vs. the Tiffy? I know we're talking dogfights here, but i believe the standard for air to air engagement is get in close and dirty only if the BVR battles don't resolve your conflict, no?
-
If you compare the diameter of the nose cone of the Flanker t to the diameter of the nose cone of the EF you'll see that the Flanker has larger diameter=larger radar antenna=better range. Sure thing, the EF has better processors, so i'd say, the tws capability for the EF is better whereas the Flanker beats in radar range....
-
That additional range over the Tiffy can be crossed in not too long? So the Typhoon should be able to get a missile off at the Flanker before the Flanker's systems have the time to respond?
Well, technically, it'll come down to counter-measures and missile reliability. I wonder what would happen if you stripped all three fighters of everything except engines and gun. Without the avionics the Typhoon would fall first, we know that, so we have to keep the software intact... But without TVC and missiles and radar, who would win?
-
Here comes the Specific Energy Power concept, devised from Major John Boyd (google for him, if you like...)
The aircraft that posseses the higher SEP = the higher available energy level, will have the best opportunities to win. The higher the SEP, the greater acceleration or rate of climb a fighter can achieve.
SEP= (THRUST-DRAG) X VELOCITY/WEIGHT= (T-D/W)*V
as you can see the T/W ratio is of paramaount importance.
Since Weight=Lift---> SEP= V*(T/W - k S/W) and the re you have the wing loading. A good design ia a good trade off between T/W and W/S.
Theoritically, to predict the outcome you need data like Thrust curves,and Drag polars. Then you plot the SEP curves for each fighter and you have the whole picture.
But thrust curves and drag polars are top secret data....
-
Ah yes. Physics lessons.
Thanks Valk i'll look into it.
-
Hi everyone, here’s my take… I’m really only familiar with the ‘22 and Typhoon so I will only comment on them
F-22:
Pros: All aspect stealth (radar and IR), supercruise of mach 1.5 , 2D thrust vectoring*, long range, highly maneuverable, integrated avionics, phased array radar
Cons: Limited combat persistence due to small payload (internal), not ‘multirole’**, currently it’s ‘rate limiting factor’ (borrowing term from chemistry) is it’s weapons. (AMRAAM c is good, but really needs something better, something along the lines of Meteor)
Weapons: M61A2, AMRAAMc and AIM-9M (later will get AIM-9X which has better off bore-sight ability and TVC)
Eurofighter:
Pros: Truely multirole (or will be after Tranche 2 is complete), supercruise of mach 1.3 and can reach mach 1.6 with three external fuel tanks and 6 AAMs, highly maneuverable with small turn radius and high sustained turn rates with some sources quoting superior performance over the ‘22 in parts of the supersonic envelope, will be getting the Meteor long range AAM
Cons: limited range with only internal fuel, limited stealth capabilities (some application of RAM and curved air intake, some sources quote RCS second only to the ‘22 in the next gen fighters), no TVC (yet), no phased array radar (yet)
Weapons: Mauser 27mm cannon, RAF will have ASRAAM (aptly named), AMRAAM (atm, but later will get Meteor upgrade), the Germans will have the IRIS-T
*Note that TVC does not ‘improve’ maneuverability, but allows for instantaneous snapshots for a cannon kill or missile lock at the expense of losing lots of speed. Another benefit is better trimming for supersonic flight resulting in better fuel efficiency.
**Not necessarily a con, for it does (will do) what it was designed to do, and will be complemented by JSFs which in my view are F-22s but carry bombs
Haven’t drawn any conclusions as I’m biased (I think the Eurofighter is simply beautiful and that’s not very objective), but I welcome any comments. As a disclaimer I must say not everything above is fact, but it’s what I’ve heard, seen, read over the last 8 years as a fan of flight sims and aviation in general.
-
>:(
what are doing?
F-22 is a 5th generation fighter that we can not compare it with another 4th generation fighters.
in dogfight in long range fights in middle range fights and in bombing is remarkable and an exception.
as it is named is the dominator of skies at least for 15 next years.
please do not compare this giant with another fighters.
-
Hi EEngineer,
It's true the F22 has no equal in terms of BVR combat, except maybe the JSF when it arrives. However it would be foolhardy to claim that the F22 was in a class of its own in terms of WVR combat, especially since it doesn't have HMS or significant off-boresight ability. It does have 2D TVC which gives it the ability to perform high AoA snapshots at the cost of speed bleeds, off setting this lack of off boresight somewhat.
Also in terms of being a multirole (A2G in particular) fighter, I would say it definitely has stiff competition from a lot of the so called 4.5 gen fighters. (Gripen, Typhoon, Rafale, Su30MKI just to name a few)
-
Hi Mike_NZ
You mentioned in terms of being a multirole (A2G in particular) Gripen, Typhoon, Rafale, Su30MKI, none are as capable as the F-16 currently, most are in the Block-40 range of capabilities .
I look around and can find pictures of Su-30s dropping bombs and read listings of the different air launched weapons Flankers can carry but still feel the aircraft is used more as a air to air platform. I always felt a F-15E type Flanker nothing too special or different then the current models to be geared toward strike or attack is needed. I know Russia has the Su-34 but it may never get the funding therefore not produced in useful numbers. Setup a few squadrons and gear their training to 85% attack/strike, Flankers have great payload and range.
My idea is setup a number of Su-27M1/2 as attackers and replace the Su-24 outright. I know it might not be comparing oranges to oranges but forming a standard for Russia's AF may be more helpful. Its more cost effective use one baseline type that's a good performer as far weapons, training, maintenance, and production as well. Bring up most of Russia's 400+ Flankers to higher standards could replace most of their Su-24, Mig-29, and hopefully Mig-31 as well.
Nothing going to be built in numbers to replace the Flanker in ten years so its a better investment then most that Russia could make. Even if some of the Su-35 good points were upgraded into just 200 Russian Flankers it would a better investment then Mig-31/Su-24/Mig-29
-
You mentioned in terms of being a multirole (A2G in particular) Gripen, Typhoon, Rafale, Su30MKI, none are as capable as the F-16 currently, most are in the Block-40 range of capabilities .
I would have to agree with you there nonpilot, if only on the Eurofighter (don't know enough about the current abilities of the other fighters). The F16 has had a couple of decades to mature into it's current form, and it is very capable. However, in 5-10 years, I think the above mentioned fighters will most certainly overtake the F16 in terms of A2G ability as well as the a2a advantage they have now will be even bigger.
-
i think F-22 has limited fghting capability cuz it has been designed just of air to air combats but to remain stealth F-22 has to carry all the fight with just its internal fuel while eurofighter is a multirole aircraft it can carry more fuel with his CFT capibility.
-
Hi Jet Man,
The CFT tech is still only a 'possible' development for the Typhoon. It could come (if it does eventuate) in Tranche 3, and would certainly improve on one of the Typhoon's main criticisms: it's range.
-
i think F-22 has limited fghting capability cuz it has been designed just of air to air combats but to remain stealth F-22 has to carry all the fight with just its internal fuel while eurofighter is a multirole aircraft it can carry more fuel with his CFT capibility.
i'm not really sure about this... since US is now currently developing Small diameter guided bomb with penetrating warhead the GBU-39
Raptor is expected for being able to deliver A2G strikes with this small things, and she carries 8 of this , likely enough to disable some facilities
Raptor's advantage is her internal payload that allows her to remain stealthy till it reach weapons delivery range, unless defenders equipped with some sort of countermeasure like Low Band RADAR , they would have a hard time detecting Raptor, BTW i heard US are now developing a "stealthy" weapon pod for Raptor, dunno if they work the same for external fuel tank
EF-2000, well she carries munitions externally , which would betray her RADAR signature reductions, unless she uses very long range weapons..hmm maybe like JASSM she can be picked by Early warning RADAR at very great distances , or right after increasing altitude after a low altitude flight to evade RADAR
-
Well not been on here for a bit as ive been away in the sunnier climates but here is a scenario, The Typhhon is currently at moment going to Saudi as we all know , Oman and im sure a few other nations looking to equip with a good all round multi role platform.
In the Last few weeks the US has said it may now after congressional debate sell the F22 to Isreal. The point they said no was cause Isreal could take out Irans so called Nuclear sites would give Isreal advantage , but I guess over last few months to make Iran play the game like the 70s the USA will provide superior weapons to make them think no.
Anyway that was a long winded way to say maybe one day you never know in the middle east battle a Typhoon will be up against a Raptor
To this day and age we dont know how close or how good they both are but I can say for one thing , British Pilots can have a lesser model and easily take a bigger fish, its proven because of training . I think this time the Raptor although having BVR capability but close combat I would put a small bet on the Typhhon on this one.
Thoughts ;D
-
Maybe cannons only (smile face)