Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/26/2005 12:03:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:07:33 PM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:06:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:07:19 PM EDT by Alien]
It's also got much newer technology packed into it than an F-15!

I still think we should have gone with the YF-23 Black Widow. Look at the monetary problems plaguing the Raptor program.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:06:57 PM EDT
Isn't the Eurofighter kind of a pseudo-government consortium? If so, aren't "profits" just really transfer payments from one govenement agency to another?

Or is the Eurofighter actually built by independent companies that sell to governments, but are not directly connected/controlled by them. I'm seriously asking, not trying to bash - since I'm not particularly well versed on how the Eurofighter program works.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:10:02 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:12:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:12:54 PM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
Isn't the Eurofighter kind of a pseudo-government consortium? If so, aren't "profits" just really transfer payments from one govenement agency to another?

Or is the Eurofighter actually built by independent companies that sell to governments, but are not directly connected/controlled by them. I'm seriously asking, not trying to bash - since I'm not particularly well versed on how the Eurofighter program works.



Private companies selling to the buyer nation. The 'Consortium' is just a 'work sharing' arrangement between the varous countries based upon how many they agree to buy.



Interesting. Thanks.

Is that how the Tornado worked as well? I remember LOVING that plane when it came out - the Viggen looked cooler, but the Tornado was definitely a better plane.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:15:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:
Now that's the way to run a fighter program, strong sales and PROFITS!


tinypic.com/e00pc2.jpg
The RAF's Eurofighter Typhoon… eats F-15's for breakfast!


'Star performer' Eurofighter helps profits take off
EUROFIGHTER has driven BAE Systems to post better-than-expected half-year profits.
The fighter programme was given a welcome boost at the end of last year when the four nations involved finally put pen to paper on a contract for the second tranche.
This, financial experts have said, has made a big impact on the company, which employs more than 7,000 workers on the Fylde, and helped them post the impressive results.
An improvement in trans-Atlantic relations has also helped the defence giant show off a 20.4 per cent rise in underlying earnings to £566m.
The figures were £59m higher that the £507m forecast by City analysts.
On the back of yesterday's announcement, BAE shares rose almost 4p to 334p during the day's heavy trading sessions.
Mick Turner, BAE chief executive, said the UK business programme had been the company's "star performer". These programmes, which along with Eurofighter boast some of the most high-profile weapon contracts in Britain, with the likes of the Type-45 destroyer and Astute submarine, saw revenues rise by 44.7 per cent to £1.2bn.
In March, BAE launched a £2bn takeover of US rival United Defence Industries, which helped give the company an "unrivalled transatlantic defence position".
The deal, which boosted BAE's land system division, was hailed as a key step in its strategy and put the company on course to generate £4.61bn from the world's biggest defence market this year. Around a third of annual profits are now expected to come from North America.
Mr Turner added: "We are a well balanced company, not overly dependent on any one sector of the aerospace and defence market and, in short, we are set to deliver good growth going forward."
08 September 2005


http://www.blackpoolonline.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=63&ArticleID=1139647




So how long til an arab or chinese pilot is shot down in one?
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:15:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:16:50 PM EDT by TIMMAH]


Remind me real quick, how many export sales does the eurofighter have?


Who won the South Korean fighter competition?

Who won the fighter competition in Singapore?


Greece?



­




Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:21:27 PM EDT
Looks like an F16 knockoff
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:22:03 PM EDT
The Typhoon is a sweet looking plane, but it looks like an upgraded X-31, which was built 15 years ago in the U.S.

Link:
www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-009-DFRC.html
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:23:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:24:39 PM EDT
So the headline is the Eurofighter, built in what 2002? can out dogfight and F-15 that was built 30 years ealier. Some accomplishment.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:25:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:
…run those F/A-22 orders and export sales past me again…


The spin here is horrible. How many countries are allowed to even see the F/A-22 sales video, two?
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:26:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:
So the headline is the Eurofighter, built in what 2002? can out dogfight and F-15 that was built 30 years ealier. Some accomplishment.



Talk about a bad sport
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:26:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By M4Fanatic:
The Typhoon is a sweet looking plane, but it looks like an upgraded X-31, which was built 15 years ago in the U.S.

Link:
www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-009-DFRC.html




The X-31 was a thrust vectoring demonstrator. It never carried weapons or was ever intended to be operational, like the Mig-35 and SU-37. Eurofighter has no thrust vectoring and a weak version of supercruise.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:27:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By streetfighter:

Originally Posted By dport:
So the headline is the Eurofighter, built in what 2002? can out dogfight and F-15 that was built 30 years ealier. Some accomplishment.



Talk about a bad sport


The F-15 reigned supreme for 30 years. The Eurofighter is already living on borrowed time as the first F/A-22s are coming online.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:28:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By vito113:
…run those F/A-22 orders and export sales past me again…


The spin here is horrible. How many countries are allowed to even see the F/A-22 sales video, two?



Even if they do sell the F-22 when you buy it you get engines and plane basically. In avionics or weapons system sold with it is inferior to our current tech. The Japs may actually make the Raptor better if they buy it.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:32:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:33:08 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:33:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:42:50 PM EDT by TIMMAH]

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Remind me real quick, how many export sales does the eurofighter have?


Who won the South Korean fighter competition?

Who won the fighter competition in Singapore?


Greece?



­







Orders for 600+ for UK, Spain, Italy and Germany…

Not exports

Austria pegged for 24… Turkey is interested.

Woohoo!



…run those F/A-22 orders and export sales past me again…



BTW,

The F15 beat the Eurofighter in South Korea

The F15 beat the Eurofighter in Singapore

An advanced F16 beat the Eurofighter in Greece


FA22 is too advanced for any country except Britain, and Australia. Possibly Japan.


The UK would be in on the F/A22 if they could afford it.

F/A22 would own the Eurofighter in combat.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:35:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Mattl:

Originally Posted By M4Fanatic:
The Typhoon is a sweet looking plane, but it looks like an upgraded X-31, which was built 15 years ago in the U.S.

Link:
www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-009-DFRC.html




The X-31 was a thrust vectoring demonstrator. It never carried weapons or was ever intended to be operational, like the Mig-35 and SU-37. Eurofighter has no thrust vectoring and a weak version of supercruise.



Yes, I read the article, and already knew that. I was making a reference to their appearance, hence the phrase "LOOKS LIKE". Also, the X-31 had more technology than just thrust vectoring, and you see some of those concepts in the EF.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:36:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By dport:
So the headline is the Eurofighter, built in what 2002? can out dogfight and F-15 that was built 30 years ealier. Some accomplishment.




The F-15 is all you got… them F/A-22's will be better, well all 160 if you get them eventually…


1 F-22 can take out 5 F-15s. Let's say your Eurofighter is significantly better than the F-15, which I doubt it's this much better, but here's the argument.

So let's extrapolate that an F-22 can "only" take out four Eurofighters. 160 x 4 = 640

Yep, pretty much takes care of the Eurofighter population. Of course, we always have inferior F-15Es in reserve.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:41:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:44:26 PM EDT by TIMMAH]

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By dport:
So the headline is the Eurofighter, built in what 2002? can out dogfight and F-15 that was built 30 years ealier. Some accomplishment.




The F-15 is all you got… them F/A-22's will be better, well all 160 179 if you get them eventually…


1 F-22 can take out 5 F-15s. Let's say your Eurofighter is significantly better than the F-15, which I doubt it's this much better, but here's the argument.

So let's extrapolate that an F-22 can "only" take out four Eurofighters. 160 x 4 = 640

Yep, pretty much takes care of the Eurofighter population. Of course, we always have inferior F-15Es in reserve.




F15Es are getting AESA radar... won't be too 'inferior' then.


We are getting 179 F/A22s now, that number will probably change after the quadrennial defense review.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:44:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 12:45:03 PM EDT by M4]
How does the Eurofighter stack up against the Rafale? They at least look similar.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:46:53 PM EDT
My dad can beat up your dad.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:55:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By M4:
How does the Eurofighter stack up against the Rafale? They at least look similar.

www.math.univ-montp2.fr/~mohamadi/dasilvaweb/rafale.jpg




I have heard Rafales have similar record with Sukhois they are good at plowing fields at airshows. Plus Rafales are about 10 years longer in operation. I would hope the Eurofighter is superior in every aspect. The Rafale was initially intended for French Aircraft Carriers, last I heard it has been ten years and still not operational from carriers plus the Rafale has not been the seller abroad the Saab fighters have been.


Interesting Link
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:56:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By M4:
How does the Eurofighter stack up against the Rafale? They at least look similar.

www.math.univ-montp2.fr/~mohamadi/dasilvaweb/rafale.jpg





The Eurofighter is far better than the Rafale. The rafale is more of a ground attack aircraft than the Eurofighter though. The Rafale has also failed to get one single export sale. Both planes keep getting beat out by the F15



Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:58:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 1:01:29 PM EDT by TIMMAH]

Originally Posted By Mattl:

Originally Posted By M4:
How does the Eurofighter stack up against the Rafale? They at least look similar.

www.math.univ-montp2.fr/~mohamadi/dasilvaweb/rafale.jpg




I have heard Rafales have similar record with Sukhois they are good at plowing fields at airshows. Plus Rafales are about 10 years longer in operation. I would hope the Eurofighter is superior in every aspect. The Rafale was initially intended for French Aircraft Carriers, last I heard it has been ten years and still not operational from carriers plus the Rafale has not been the seller abroad the Saab fighters have been.
www.gabonline.it/Media_Link/Album/Saab%20Viggen_01.jpg
www.airforce-technology.com/projects/gripen/images/gripen1.jpg
Interesting Link




Gripen seems to be a pretty cool plane. I like small and lightweight fighters.


I think they should ram an F119 into one to make a super gripen with super cruise

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 12:59:32 PM EDT
Ain't no F-18
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:01:26 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:06:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

USAF General John Jumper don't reckon so… and he's flown both.


Now you are taking his quote out of context. He never said the Eurofighter could take an F-22 in combat. He said you had a nice flying fighter. He even used the term "best." So what? He was being diplomatic. You would have pitched a hissy fit if he said "it's nice, but it's no Raptor." It's called diplomacy.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:06:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 1:10:47 PM EDT by TIMMAH]

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:



The UK would be in on the F/A22 if they could afford it.

F/A22 would own the Eurofighter in combat.



We could afford it, we turned it down, same as we turned down the F-117 which the RAF was also offered. UK does not buy into highly stealthy manned aircraft, but they will buy into the UCAVS which they are heavilly involved in developing with DARPA and others.

USAF General John Jumper don't reckon so… and he's flown both.




Quit spinning his quote. He said the eurofighter was best before he flew F/A22, then after he said both planes were good, which is true.


You know the F/A 22 would easily win in combat

- It is stealthier than a F117

-It has a better power to weight ratio than the Eurofighter

-can supercruise far better than Eurofighter

-Better radar than Eurofighter

-Thrust vectoring

-Far better combat radius than eurofighter

-Internal weapon storage--it can supercruise with a large weapons load; unlike eurofighter.

You guys turned down the F117 and F/A22 because you could not afford to buy them in any numbers and chose the cheaper and less sophisticated Eurofighter.

A much closer match up would be with a Super Hornet or Upgraded F15 with AESA radar.



The F/A 22 is truly a "superfighter" with no match anywhere in the world.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:11:18 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:13:55 PM EDT



Don't get me wrong, the Eurofighter is a good fighter, but it doesn't come anywhere close to the F/A22.

It is more on par with a F15 with AESA or a F/A18E/F


Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:15:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:16:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:



The UK would be in on the F/A22 if they could afford it.

F/A22 would own the Eurofighter in combat.



We could afford it, we turned it down, same as we turned down the F-117 which the RAF was also offered. UK does not buy into highly stealthy manned aircraft, but they will buy into the UCAVS which they are heavilly involved in developing with DARPA and others.

USAF General John Jumper don't reckon so… and he's flown both.




Quit spinning his quote. He said the eurofighter was best before he flew F/A22, then after he said both planes were good, which is true.


You know the F/A 22 would easily win in combat

- It is stealthier than a F117

-It has a better power to weight ratio than the Eurofighter

-can supercruise far better than Eurofighter

-Better radar than Eurofighter

-Thrust vectoring

-Far better combat radius than eurofighter

-Internal weapon storage--it can supercruise with a large weapons load; unlike eurofighter.

You guys turned down the F117 and F/A22 because you could not afford to buy them in any numbers and chose the cheaper and less sophisticated Eurofighter.

A much closer match up would be with a Super Hornet or Upgraded F15 with AESA radar.





The Eurofighter is hardly 'cheap'!!!

… and our missiles do/will outrange yours, USAF has nothing in the box to compare with METEOR.

ANdy




Won't do any good if you cant see your target.

And advanced versions of the AMRAAM will compare to the METEOR.

We can build ramjet missiles fairly easily, too.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:17:52 PM EDT


I now predict you will say something about the FLIR on the eurofighter

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:27:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 1:29:15 PM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:30:22 PM EDT
I would rather have an F-101 Voodoo than a Eurofighter or Typhoon or whatever the hell it's called.

What's all that junk hanging off of it? Piercings don't look good on a fighter jet.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:30:27 PM EDT

Originally posted by TIMMAH:

I now predict you will say something about the FLIR on the eurofighter




Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:




Won't do any good if you cant see your target.

And advanced versions of the AMRAAM will compare to the METEOR.

We can build ramjet missiles fairly easily, too.




Kill the AWACS and make the fighters go active……

Or use passive IR to cue the missiles… unless LM has found a way to reduce the temperature differential between the exhaust and surrounding air to under 2 degrees it will track at 40nm.

Even the latest version of the AIM-120 is only good for @50nm and slowing down all the way, METEOR will be playing Mach 4.5 at 80+nm.

You could build ramjet missiles but it takes time, and you will be playing catchup, but Boeing is a partner in the METEOR program so could build it for you guys under licence.


Either way, all academic unless the RAF and USAF go toe to toe…

ANdy




Ha!
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:32:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Kill the AWACS and make the fighters go active……


And you still won't see our fighters.


Or use passive IR to cue the missiles… unless LM has found a way to reduce the temperature differential between the exhaust and surrounding air to under 2 degrees it will track at 40nm.


I guess you won't know will you? Should have bought the Raptor.


Even the latest version of the AIM-120 is only good for @50nm and slowing down all the way, METEOR will be playing Mach 4.5 at 80+nm.


Of course, if you don't know you're being fired on, see AESA radar, you won't know to manuever until the missile goes terminal and by then it's too late.


You could build ramjet missiles but it takes time, and you will be playing catchup, but Boeing is a partner in the METEOR program so could build it for you guys under licence.


Either way, all academic unless the RAF and USAF go toe to toe…

ANdy


Which isn't going to happen. However, I think we are closer to a ramjet missile than you think. These things have been sitting around basically waiting for funding.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:35:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:36:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:




Won't do any good if you cant see your target.

And advanced versions of the AMRAAM will compare to the METEOR.

We can build ramjet missiles fairly easily, too.




Kill the AWACS and make the fighters go active……

Or use passive IR to cue the missiles… unless LM has found a way to reduce the temperature differential between the exhaust and surrounding air to under 2 degrees it will track at 40nm.

Even the latest version of the AIM-120 is only good for @50nm and slowing down all the way, METEOR will be playing Mach 4.5 at 80+nm.

You could build ramjet missiles but it takes time, and you will be playing catchup, but Boeing is a partner in the METEOR program so could build it for you guys under licence.


Either way, all academic unless the RAF and USAF go toe to toe…

ANdy




First off, the F/A22 has Low Probability of Intercept radar, which means it can go active and you probably won't know it. It was designed with that possibility in mind. It can also focus so much radar energy on one point that it can probably jam any METEOR that the Eurofighter could get off.

It also has datalinks so that one F/A22 can go active and send targeting info to other F/A22s that are in closer that the Eurofighter does not know about. In effect, the F/A22 can be an AWACS.

The F/A22 can also take targeting info from other sources, such as: other planes, Patriot radars, AWACS, ships, etc.

Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:37:07 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:38:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By TIMMAH:

Originally posted by TIMMAH:


Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:
Originally Posted By vito113:
Originally Posted By TIMMAH:


y




Ha!




img.photobucket.com/albums/v133/macandy/f117.jpg
Ha!




I'd be willing to bet that the F/A22 has a smaller IR signature than the F117. Considering it's leading edges are cooled with jet fuel


Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:39:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:
Now that's the way to run a fighter program, strong sales and PROFITS!


tinypic.com/e00pc2.jpg
The RAF's Eurofighter Typhoon… eats F-15's for breakfast!


'Star performer' Eurofighter helps profits take off
EUROFIGHTER has driven BAE Systems to post better-than-expected half-year profits.
The fighter programme was given a welcome boost at the end of last year when the four nations involved finally put pen to paper on a contract for the second tranche.
This, financial experts have said, has made a big impact on the company, which employs more than 7,000 workers on the Fylde, and helped them post the impressive results.
An improvement in trans-Atlantic relations has also helped the defence giant show off a 20.4 per cent rise in underlying earnings to £566m.
The figures were £59m higher that the £507m forecast by City analysts.
On the back of yesterday's announcement, BAE shares rose almost 4p to 334p during the day's heavy trading sessions.
Mick Turner, BAE chief executive, said the UK business programme had been the company's "star performer". These programmes, which along with Eurofighter boast some of the most high-profile weapon contracts in Britain, with the likes of the Type-45 destroyer and Astute submarine, saw revenues rise by 44.7 per cent to £1.2bn.
In March, BAE launched a £2bn takeover of US rival United Defence Industries, which helped give the company an "unrivalled transatlantic defence position".
The deal, which boosted BAE's land system division, was hailed as a key step in its strategy and put the company on course to generate £4.61bn from the world's biggest defence market this year. Around a third of annual profits are now expected to come from North America.
Mr Turner added: "We are a well balanced company, not overly dependent on any one sector of the aerospace and defence market and, in short, we are set to deliver good growth going forward."
08 September 2005


http://www.blackpoolonline.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=63&ArticleID=1139647



Nice plane.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:39:27 PM EDT
"After careful analysis, we determined that the best place for a canard was on the opposition's aircraft."

--ATF USAF personnel in about 1990.


Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:42:25 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:45:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 1:46:08 PM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:48:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By Ustulina:
"After careful analysis, we determined that the best place for a canard was on the opposition's aircraft."

--ATF USAF personnel in about 1990.





hmmm…

tinypic.com/e02vyv.jpg

ANdy





Hrm, could be one of the reasons we didn't build it


Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:51:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2005 1:55:01 PM EDT by Ustulina]
Hmmm... when was the super F-15 canard built? What, around 1982? Did the canard get incorporated into the variegated C, E, J or any other production models?

Bueller....... Bueller?


Apparently I am wrong. 1988 was the year of first flight, with 1985 being date of contract award. Both dates, I would note preceeded the YF23 and YF22 first flights by about 1.5 to 2 years.
Link Posted: 9/26/2005 1:53:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vito113:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By vito113:


Which isn't going to happen. However, I think we are closer to a ramjet missile than you think. These things have been sitting around basically waiting for funding.



I know, I posted an article about the US program… still a good 10 years off for ISD.


At the current rate of funding. If we miraculously no longer had Iraq to worry about. Well, the concept and the plans have been out there for 10 years. Properly funded, it could be operational in less than 3, IMO.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top