typhoon vs f-35, who is win?

[Eddie]

So you're basically saying that defensive countermeasures don't work against these missiles?

 

Active IR countermeasures, yes. Flares, no. Once modern imaging sensor missile such as ASRAAM have a lock, no amount of flare is going to break it.

[Emu]

Wiki is only a bad source for those who don't check for reliable references, and confirm those references have been interpreted correctly (so granted, most people).

 

The problem with wikipedia et al in general is that by using only publicly available information (obviously) they are only telling part of the story and more often than not missing significant details that actually change the ending of the story entirely.

 

A little bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing indeed.

Indeed. I don't suppose you know the answer to this debate wrt 2,000lb bomb carriage? I realise they're not presently used on RAF Typhoons but I think GBU-10s can only go on the same wing pylons as the drop tanks due to size and loading limits, is that correct? Not sure about GBU-31 carriage, if they were to be used.

[tflash]

The time that you just hang a payload under a pylon is long gone. Since the whole flight dynamics of an inherently unstable aircraft such as the Typhoon is managed by the computer software, every new payload requires software updates. Once you drop one of the bombs the software has to recalculate the trim of the aircraft.

The Typhoon was first tested for Paveway 2 bombs, then for Paveway 4. It is that weapon that is focused on, since it has many deployment modes. Software development focused on integrating those.

For heavier strike payloads Typhoon is testing the Storm Shadow missile, not GBU-10 bombs. GBU-31 has never been mentioned to my knowledge in connection with Typhoon.

[Eddie]

Can't say to be honest, we're not even looking at 2000lb weapons at the moment, and if we did it'd be EWPIII as used on Tornado not GBU-10 or GBU-31.

 

Certainly a max of four as only the centre and inboard wing pylons have AHDERUs needed for 2000b class weapon carriage, outboard pylons use ALDERUs. Not sure on any main gear clearance issues, but I suspect it might be the case.

[Emu]

What is the actual difference between EPWIII and GBU-10 if you don't mind me asking?

[Eddie]

EPWIII has GPS/INS, as does EPWII.

[Hummingbird]

Provided you actually know how well the F-35 performs, which you don't. Anyone short of someone involved with the F-35 program is just armchair quarterbacking....

 

Oh come on, you can't just make a ~200 kg/sq.m. difference magically disappear, esp. not with a conventional fuselage body vs a delta wing. That much can actually be rather precisely predicted.

[Emu]

EPWIII has GPS/INS, as does EPWII.

So is it basically the GBU-50 then?

 

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsraytheon-delivers-enhanced-paveway-ii-bombs-to-undisclosed-european-country

 

Raytheon has handed over a batch of more than 200 Enhanced Paveway II GBU-50 guidance kits to an undisclosed European customer, marking the completion of the precision-guided munition's first international delivery.

 

An enhanced dual-mode GPS and laser guided version of Raytheon's laser-only GBU-10 bomb, GBU-50 provides the 2,000lb MK-84 or BLU-109 penetrator with an all-weather GPS navigation capability, along with precision terminal laser guidance in the battlefield.

[NineLine]

predicted.

 

Or guessed (which ever word you like better)... either way, same result as what I stated. For someone that touts pilot info for WWII, you sure like to ignore its importance here, I would reserve judgement until for some reason these two go toe to toe in some training exercise... Eddie is the closest we get there, I like his answers on the subject.

[Eddie]

So is it basically the GBU-50 then?

 

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsraytheon-delivers-enhanced-paveway-ii-bombs-to-undisclosed-european-country

 

That would be the US designation for it yes.

[Exorcet]

If you can out turn, out climb and out accelerate your opponent by a noticable margin then given equal pilots the result should be a given in a guns fight

To apply those three things though, you need to see your opponent. This is not a given. In a jousting arena with guns only I would feel safe placing bets on the EF. In a real world scenario I'm not sure.

 

With a 312 kg/sq.m wing loading, delta wing with large LE devices and a high T/W ratio the EF should have it in the bag.

High sweep delta wings artificially decrease wing loading and these types of aircraft usually don't have a fuselage that produces as much lift. The delta is also going to have a lower lift slope and be more draggy until high speed is reached. The performance gap between the two planes is not precisely represented by the difference in wing loading and TWR.

 

More of my confidence in the EF comes from performance claims than the wing loading or TWR, and out of those two things I think the TWR is more significant given the nature of WL which ignores the quality of the lifting surfaces and ignores lift completely when it's not coming from the wings.

[Hummingbird]

To apply those three things though, you need to see your opponent. This is not a given. In a jousting arena with guns only I would feel safe placing bets on the EF. In a real world scenario I'm not sure.

 

Of course and I agree, but if countermeasures are or become effective enough to render missiles a lot less effective then maneuverability will prove crucial.

 

High sweep delta wings artificially decrease wing loading and these types of aircraft usually don't have a fuselage that produces as much lift. The delta is also going to have a lower lift slope and be more draggy until high speed is reached. The performance gap between the two planes is not precisely represented by the difference in wing loading and TWR.

 

More of my confidence in the EF comes from performance claims than the wing loading or TWR, and out of those two things I think the TWR is more significant given the nature of WL which ignores the quality of the lifting surfaces and ignores lift completely when it's not coming from the wings.

 

I really wouldn't say that deltas artificially decrease the wing area, delta wings are known for their turning prowess, esp. featuring a flat lifting body.

 

But the EF also features some very large drooping & forward extending LE slats, which is supposed to be one up in comparison to LE flaps and conventional slats.

[Basher54321]

Of course and I agree, but if countermeasures are or become effective enough to render missiles a lot less effective then maneuverability will prove crucial.

 

I really wouldn't say that deltas artificially decrease the wing area, delta wings are known for their turning prowess, esp. featuring a flat lifting body.

 

 

 

 

Countermeasures have proven very effective in previous conflicts - obviously different generations of flares and missiles were in use - however even if you know a missile is coming at you then you are generally defensive or dead - so you are already at a disadvantage.

 

The F-35 is supposed to be getting a NG DIRCM by Block 5 - potentially the only effective thing against imaging missile types - but even then there is no way anyone can say this will totally negate missiles.

 

Currently the WVR environment would appear to be suicide for all involved - but I have a good idea how the F-35 aero design could be of benefit.

[Hummingbird]

Or guessed (which ever word you like better)... either way, same result as what I stated. For someone that touts pilot info for WWII, you sure like to ignore its importance here, I would reserve judgement until for some reason these two go toe to toe in some training exercise... Eddie is the closest we get there, I like his answers on the subject.

 

There's a pretty big difference between pilot info about declassified aircraft that flew over 70 years ago and that given by test pilots today as they try to promote a new aircraft with the eyes of the whole world watching.

 

Give it 20 or 30 years and we'll have a more objective picture about the F-35's true capabilities, just like we have it for pretty much all fighters up to an incl. the legacy fighters today.

 

PS: I don't tout WWII pilot info, infact I've said it multiple times now that it's unreliable vs modern day pilot opinions on these old aircraft, and only useful if it can be actually be backed up by what we know is physically possible today.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Hummingbird

[StrongHarm]

I just can't stop wondering what black boxes are in that F-35 that could potentially and significantly tip the balance of this near even fight.. in a BVR or WVR. I imagine looking down and through the cockpit floor and seeing a Typhoon.. then locking onto it almost immediately and firing an advanced all-aspect sidewinder... then shrugging and heading off to the O-club.

 

Despite it's admirable maneuverability, it seems that the Typhoon is several orders of magnitude behind the F-35 in technology. However we allow ourselves to paint a nice picture of the Typhoon, this is an Apple IIe against a Surface Pro 3.

 

(Now watch.. someone is going to argue the merits of the Apple IIe against modern devices.. aren't people interesting?!)

 

EDIT:

It just occurred to me.. I was flying the EF2000 Typhoon flightsim in 1995 hahah!

 

 

Edited June 7, 2015 by StrongHarm

[tflash]

As it happens, the Typhoon's helmet is not that bad either: http://www.baesystems.com/enhancedarticle/BAES_157468/typhoon-helmet

[StrongHarm]

Yes .. not bad. BAE is not a bad company (actually, a great company in my opinion, but BAE isn't the only company putting parts on that bird).. and the Typhoon is not a bad aircraft. They do not however, have the same experience and access to resources that Lockheed Martin and the F-35 has... on the topic of comparing the two birds... Apple IIe and a Surface Pro 3.

[Hummingbird]

Strongharm no offense but it all sounds like a strong personal bias to me.

 

How you can have so much confidence in an aircraft that hasn't proven itself yet is a mystery to me.

[NineLine]

Strongharm no offense but it all sounds like a strong personal bias to me.

 

How you can have so much confidence in an aircraft that hasn't proven itself yet is a mystery to me.

 

No different in having a strong opinion against it without seeing what it can do operationally I suppose.

[Hummingbird]

No different in having a strong opinion against it without seeing what it can do operationally I suppose.

 

Well an aircraft designed primarily as a strike craft usually doesn't end up the world's best air superiority fighter, which is what Strongharm seems to believe the F-35 represents.

 

I'll say it again though: if the F-35 is to beat the EF then it'll have to beat the F-22 first.

[StrongHarm]

Hummingbird, text lacks emotional context.. so allow me to preface; I say the following in the nature of friendly discourse, not argument.

 

My bias.. or opinion.. is based upon the fact that the year the Typhoon went into service I was in the service. I was a pretty good jet mech (crossrated troubleshooter) so I did a lot of transient maintenance on birds of many services and countries where there were mysterious problems that caused people trouble finding a solution. This was mostly during Operation Desert Storm. Military Aviation, at the time, was the pinnacle of all advanced technology. In 1992 I saw things that would leave the average person speechless even today. Assuming that trend of innovation has continued, I'm confident that we'll learn of capabilities of the F-35 twenty years from now that will still seem wondrous to us. The question was asked; "typhoon vs f-35, who is win?".. I was conveying my educated opinion that, although on the surface these aircraft are nearly an even match, the superior technology of the F-35 will tip the scales significantly.

 

I've worked on the F-16, C-130, and U-2.. so I have a lot of confidence in Lockheed Martin. BAE is a good company too.. I'd be anxious to see what kind of 5th gen aircraft they could build.

[Emu]

BAE is a good company too.. I'd be anxious to see what kind of 5th gen aircraft they could build.

With sufficient funding and no partners interfering and think they could build a pretty good one.

 

This was a pretty revolutionary idea that they gave up for the F-35, seeing it as too risky:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Aerospace_P.125

 

[StrongHarm]

Agreed! Imagine what BAE or LMC could do with proper funding and no interference.

 

The RAND Corporation has recommended that the U.S. military services avoid joint programs for the development the design of a sixth-generation fighter. Studies by RAND have found that in previous joint programs, different service-specific requirements for complex programs have led to design compromises that raise costs far more than normal single-service programs. In a comparison between four recent joint service programs (F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, T-6A Texan II Joint Primary Aircraft Training System, E-8 JSTARS, V-22 Osprey) and four recent single-service programs (C-17 Globemaster III, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-22 Raptor, T-45 Goshawk), costs for joint programs rose 65 percent nine years after a Milestone B decision to move into engineering and manufacturing development compared to 24 percent for independent programs during the same timespan.[

[shagrat]

Well an aircraft designed primarily as a strike craft usually doesn't end up the world's best air superiority fighter, which is what Strongharm seems to believe the F-35 represents.

 

I'll say it again though: if the F-35 is to beat the EF then it'll have to beat the F-22 first.

 

I'm not so sure about the F-22 vs. the Eurofighter (as sure as we can be with virtually no reliable facts and data around these aircrafts).

 

From what I understood the superiority of the F-22 realies pretty much on its 'stealth' against radar. Now if we consider that the reason to develop the PIRATE in additon to the CAPTOR E, was also to identify and track stealthy fighters to a 'similar' range than the CAPTOR it might not be so easy as one thinks.

Ok, we do not know how good the PIRATE actually is after the latest updates, but if the first results from software optimization is an indication, I can see it working on quite a distance...

 

The idea is, that even the stealthiest F-22 at Mach 1+ heats up through friction and can be recognized by the PIRATE sensor, now that alone would leave a lot of false positives, and together with the software reducing the false positves quite impressive on long range, yet not enough to reliably target a stealth fighter.

Now some brilliant idea was to combine the erronous reflections from the CAPTOR AND(!) the PIRATE IR picture and calculate glitches that match and get a very precise tracking of something that would be considered a radar glitch if it wouldn't have a matching IR glitch at the exact same position...:smilewink:

 

OK, ok, all 'internet' and media ressource, not much facts to really know, so it might be better or worse than it looks, who knows!

 

Next thing to consider is the armament, if the METEOR is actually licensed to the US military for the F-22 it might be an even match, but if the newest AIM120 AMRAAM hasn't got a RamJet and a considerable distance boost, the F-22 may needs to close enough to get in weapons range.

 

It seems from public info the datalink and FCCs are not so much different in terms of capability, nor is the radar. So if we assume the 'stealth' part not being as effective as it was when the F-22 was designed and introduced, I wouldn't rely too much on the F-22s superiority.

In the end it might still be a combination of tactics, experience gut feeling and luck that makes one plane win the fight...:D

 

A lot of theoretical assumptions though, as it is pretty unlikely we ever see an Typhoon fighting F-22s and F-35s for real.

Edited June 8, 2015 by shagrat

[Basher54321]

They will be flying in Red Flag type exercises you would expect.

 

The RAF will no doubt run evaluations when they have both.

 

CAPTOR E is being funded but no idea when it might be integrated into Typhoon operationally.