Graham Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 As a Brit and huge fan of the Typhoon, I just think it would be increadibly cool if the US ended up buying hundreds of Eurofighters after the closure of the F-22 line, to bolster their A2A capability. Of course, it would never happen, but if it did, I would laugh my ass off for days. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Porkchop Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 As a Brit and huge fan of the Typhoon, I just think it would be increadibly cool if the US ended up buying hundreds of Eurofighters after the closure of the F-22 line, to bolster their A2A capability. Of course, it would never happen, but if it did, I would laugh my ass off for days. Graham I don't know, 20 or even 10 years ago I would have said it would never happen. But with the current "environment" I could see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Perhaps the era of UCAV with a2a capabilities is fast approaching. Soon war will be one big videogame OMGLOL WTF, stop ganking my plane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3997 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 (edited) I don't know, 20 or even 10 years ago I would have said it would never happen. But with the current "environment" I could see it happening. The Typhoon is not that much better then a late model F-15 its current radar is actually worse and so are it's current weapons. It still uses the AIM-120B with the Meteor "in the pipe" and an upgrade to be able to the use the 120C also planned (since the Meteor has been delayed even more recently). Meanwhile the US is already moving into the AIM-120D and a design for a ramjet AMRAAM was already drafted, but rejected. This is also comparing current USAF F-15s if we look at possible variants such as the Silent Eagle the Typhoon arguably becomes inferior. The Typhoon is a lightweight tactical fighter and it shows as though it can roughly match the performance of older heavy fighters like the F-15 (and some models of the SU-27 family) it is not decisively superior in any meaningful way. The F-15s raw thrust, ample fuel supply, and superior sensors would serve it far better in 90% of modern air combat scenarios then the Typhoons nominal advantage in low speed handling would. (Even this would go away if one went for a truly radical new F-15 variant as experiments have shown the F-15 can support all the goodies that make current SUs the beasts they are) The US has over 600 F-15 still in service and the lines have orders for years to come so if a need suddenly appeared newer model F-15s would be purchased, likely as a stop-gap to restart production of F-22s if the need was truly dire. The Eurofighter would never even be considered and rightly so. Edited June 19, 2009 by Tk3997 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bri Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 The Eurofighter would never even be considered and rightly so. Correct, but for different reasons. No country that can build fighters themselves would consider buying foreign, out of fear of hurting the domestic industry and job losses. The quality of the planes involved is completely secondary to the political process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noyhauser Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 (edited) And it looks like there are more problems for the A400M, here is a bit of what they said- On March 30 Airbus Chief Executive Officer Tom Ender Stated that: "under the current conditions we cannot build the plane" His interview was quickly followed up by an EADS press statement saying that: "The group reaffirms that the contract signed in 2003 does not provide the necessary conditions for the successful development of the program, firstly because of unrealistic timetable, and secondly because the commercial nature of the contract dose not fit the reality of a military program containing high technological risks". All this above was from AIR INTERNATIONAL Vol.76 No5 Now to me the A400M thing sounds like they told people that they could built a military aircraft using commercial methods to get a cheaper aircraft, faster than a normal military program could and now they found out that they can't and are blaming the contract. If the contract was unfair, why did they sign it? I haven't been following the whole A400M too much but am going to do some digging to get up to speed, but if anyone would toss in their take on things that would be great. Basically the real problem came when France forced Airbus to chose an European Consortium engine (Europrop International TP400-D6). Most of the companies (save Rolls Royce) didn't have a long track record with Turboprop design. This was over a competing Pratt and Whitney Canada entry, which had extended experience with Turboprops (google up the PT6). Much of the subsequent problems with the A400M has been with the engines, particularly excessive vibration and issues marrying it to the A400's frame. The PW entry was based off of the company's new PW800 line, which was apparently 20% cheaper than the EPI TP400 and was closer to being produced. It also had massive domestic offsets for the European market. Reports coming out of Airbus at the time stated they preferred the PW entry for the above reasons, as well as the engine would have likely fit the project's parameters better. There are other problems with the project, but the engine issue has created the largest difficulties to date. Enders is right (he's just recently come into the job.) Had the program went with the PW entry it would have been a commercial program with acceptable levels of risk for the airframe. Yet by going with the unproven TP400 Airbus faced technological risks to what you might expect with a military project. The irony of the situation was that if Canada had signed onto the project circa 2003~2004 (which they were approached to) the PW engine probably would have been accepted. Instead the government dallied on a decision until France forced the matter to get the EPI engine. Canada subsequently decided to go with C-130js and C-17s in about 2006~7. I still think the program will go ahead. European states have too much invested in the project to watch it drop and go to a Lochkeed/Boeing split. Moreover the problems are of the governments own making, not Airbus. Gutting this high technology project to go for a U.S. system is politically unpalatable in the current economic climate, particularly in Germany and France. While everybody is crowing about the need for a replacement now, its not that hard to extend C-130s lifecycle for three to five years. Canada had to do it several times with their airframes. Moreover during a renewed push to sell the A400M in 2007 they offered a program to keep the C-130s flying until 2012 when canada could expect its A400 deliveries. There is no reason why this couldn't occur in for European countries. Edited June 19, 2009 by Noyhauser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 The Typhoon is not that much better then a late model F-15 its current radar is actually worse and so are it's current weapons. I'd agree that it's "not much better". I'd say it's actually significantly better than the older US fighters, in every area (sensors, agility, thrust etc). It's certainly done extremely well at kicking the ass of F15s, F16s and F/A18s in exercises so far. Seems to be second only to the F-22 IMO, and will in Tranch 3 configuration be superior to the F-35 in every area except stealth. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vifam7 Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 I'd agree that it's "not much better". I'd say it's actually significantly better than the older US fighters, in every area (sensors, agility, thrust etc). It's certainly done extremely well at kicking the ass of F15s, F16s and F/A18s in exercises so far. Graham Things like sensors, avionics, and engine thrust are relatively easy to upgrade. Agility is sometimes overrated. Training, tactics, and support systems can overcome slight deficiency in agility. As for Eagles and Falcons being beaten by Typhoons or Flankers, IIRC there's more to those stories than just the quality of the airframes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles316 Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 Has a F-16 been destroyed in Air to Air combat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anime52k8 Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 Has a F-16 been destroyed in Air to Air combat? a Turkish F-16D trainer was shot down by a Greek Mirage 2000 in 1996, and before that Pakistan lost one in 87 over Afghanistan, but Pakistan says it was shot down by a friendly F-16 on accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles316 Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 a Turkish F-16D trainer was shot down by a Greek Mirage 2000 in 1996, and before that Pakistan lost one in 87 over Afghanistan, but Pakistan says it was shot down by a friendly F-16 on accident. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 21, 2009 Share Posted June 21, 2009 Just got back from the airshow. Saw A-10 demo from the car (took longer to get there than usual--extra crowded) Saw Harrier, talked to pilot, bought squadron patch. Climbed up Harrier to look into cockpit (first step's pretty high up). Sat in a Blackhawk. Watched Golden Knights. Watched Harrier demo. Watched Blue Angels. Lighting SUCKED this year for pics, everything's back-lit. Just a few of the decent ones, and a video. (the video looked a lot better before Photobucket did whatever it is they do--I had already converted it into FLV, but that wasn't enough for them apparently) Harrier yawing and sidling into a vertical landing: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted June 21, 2009 Share Posted June 21, 2009 As an old Hercules maintainer: Hooray for Fat Albert! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted June 21, 2009 Share Posted June 21, 2009 Perhaps the era of UCAV with a2a capabilities is fast approaching. Soon war will be one big videogame OMGLOL WTF, stop ganking my plane! You laugh now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyboy Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I spent a month in the desert earlier this year. Just wanted to share some of my pictures from there... F-16 over Iraq with some sort of newfangled camera pod. Not as good a picture due to the angle of the sun, but kinda cool to see the ordnance these guys are packing. Another dawn over Iraq, gassing up F-16's. F-18 over Afghanistan. Not sure why this dude was so close to us. He's literally 10 feet off the wing. Maybe he was mugging for the camera. Dassault Rafale over Afghanistan. French accents = very hard to understand. A-10's stateside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Interesting--VFA-131 didn't have the bird-slicers last time I checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Awesome pictures and yeah, that Hornet is almost frighteningly close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nied Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 This is just downright shocking! Note too that that headline is inaccurate, Boeing will announce the new flight schedule in a few weeks, from the sound of the modifications they need to do the first flight itself will likely be quite a few months from now. Also David you're really showing me up here. I went to the Andrews Air Force Base open house last month, and I'm still sorting and cropping the pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Seems the 787's engine run-up and control check last week was all smoke and mirrors before the Paris Airshow--make it look like they're days away from first flight, when they know darn well that the day after the show is over they're going to announce another modification to do. They knew about this issue in May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Boeing's screwed. The 787 issue isn't minor. It was the wing starting to delaminate at some 30% below the stresses required for certification. You can't "patch" a 30% lack of structural integrity for the wing-to-fuselage connection. ::edit:: More technical explanation with pics: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightbl...ng-th.html#more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Warning----something that makes the F-35 look good/cool: http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solution...eodasvideo.html One step closer to valk cockpits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Hmm. They appear to have fitted the F-35 with one of the "beam sweepers" from Gunbuster there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 HEY! When did the Typhoon become PR whipping boy?! Thats it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharky Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 As an old Hercules maintainer: Hooray for Fat Albert! Don't you mean "hey, hey, hey!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badboy00z Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Warning----something that makes the F-35 look good/cool: http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solution...eodasvideo.html One step closer to valk cockpits. That's awesome. I like the 360 degree view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Leader Posted June 26, 2009 Author Share Posted June 26, 2009 (edited) Hitler's Stealth Fighter. As part of the program, Northrop Grumman built a full scale replica of the Horten IX (Ho 229/Go 229) and conducted RCS tests on it. The results are on Wikipedia if anyone is interested. Edited June 26, 2009 by Apollo Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 (edited) Hitler's Stealth Fighter. As part of the program, Northrop Grumman built a full scale replica of the Horten IX (Ho 229/Go 229) and conducted RCS tests on it. The results are on Wikipedia if anyone is interested. I first learnt of the Go 229 thanks to Lucasart's SWOTL back in 91. What a blast! Still miss that game. I can't get a definitive answer on this but I think because there were no completed production versions, it is not clear if the Go 229 was to be armed with Mk-103s or Mk-108s. Was the captured prototype captured with the mounting points or cannons already mounted? Or no provisions were made for armament yet? Edited June 28, 2009 by Retracting Head Ter Ter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I'll second learning of the Go229 in SWOTL. That game taught me the difference between the B-17F and B-17G, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-ZeroOne Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Let me guess, David - you got a .50 calibre surprise when trying a head-on pass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Let me guess, David - you got a .50 calibre surprise when trying a head-on pass? Never stopped me when trying 12 o'clock strikes on bombers in European Air War Especially with 30mm cannons... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coota0 Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Let me guess, David - you got a .50 calibre surprise when trying a head-on pass? Yeah, I learned to go for the belly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phyrox Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 (edited) I can't get a definitive answer on this but I think because there were no completed production versions, it is not clear if the Go 229 was to be armed with Mk-103s or Mk-108s. Was the captured prototype captured with the mounting points or cannons already mounted? Or no provisions were made for armament yet? The nearly completed captured aircraft, Go-229 V-3, was unarmed, and none of the pre-production armed fighters had been started yet (Go-229 A-0). The Putnam book mentioned below states that among the incomplete prototypes captured at the workshops was a (barely begun) armament trials airframe. So the selection for the the eventual production aircraft was still in the air. That said, I have three different answers from three different books: Four MK 108 (from, Luftwaffe Secret Projects: fighters 1939-1945. Decent book, but not sure about its fine accuracy) Two MK 103 or Four MK 108 (from, The Horton Flying Wing in World War II) Four MK 103 for the unbuilt A-0 version (from, Putnam's German Aircraft of the Second World War. Usually pretty definitive, maybe not here however?) Final verdict: No, it is not clear (but probably not 4 MK 103s!) Edited June 29, 2009 by Phyrox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noyhauser Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 Yeah, I learned to go for the belly Yeah especially with the ME-163 armed with the SG500 Jagdfaust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Hingtgen Posted June 28, 2009 Share Posted June 28, 2009 I could rarely get that to work. Though when it did... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted June 29, 2009 Share Posted June 29, 2009 With memories of playing SWOTL and regularly wiping out swarms of B-17s at close range with my overloaded wing-tub cannon Bf-109G or Me262, it was a heck of a big change when I started playing Il-2 Sturmovik and it appeared as if the 8th AF had clones of Alvin York and Carlos Hathcock manning all the .50s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts