Jump to content

Eurofighter relative flight performance, feat. Gero Finke


Hummingbird

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't take such articles at face value. We would need to see actual EM charts in order to make a fair comparison. 

I for one very much doubt the F/A-18 being able to match EF in STR. It would go against everything we hear from pilots flying these birds. 

The reason the F-16 is competitive to the EF down low probably comes down to the fact that both jets rather quickly reach their 9 G limit down in the thicker air, and as such dogfights down low are more about pilot endurance than a/c perf. Hence you have to be up in thinner air, where the sustainable G's are lower, in order to see a/c perf start making a deciding difference. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lack of em chart is why I’m trying to collect these. The Eurofighter may very well have the most relevant advantages in its flight model but if it behaves like a UFO I want to bring attention to official figures and for them to be discussed. Alternatively if I’m right and the do have similar STR low down it’s useful to have it on record in case anyone complains. It’s notable in Gero’s post he doesn’t say turn rate is the typhoons advantage over the hornet, it’s thrust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, F-2 said:

The lack of em chart is why I’m trying to collect these. The Eurofighter may very well have the most relevant advantages in its flight model but if it behaves like a UFO I want to bring attention to official figures and for them to be discussed. Alternatively if I’m right and the do have similar STR low down it’s useful to have it on record in case anyone complains. It’s notable in Gero’s post he doesn’t say turn rate is the typhoons advantage over the hornet, it’s thrust.

 

Considering they all agree that its STR is higher than that of a clean F-16, and every F-16 pilot I've ever talked to says the Viper absolutely dominates over the Hornet in a rate fight, I think it's safe to say the Hornet is not going to be able to rate with the EF if performance is going to be remotely realistic.

Remember:

Quote

I am -TITS- and flew the Typhoon for a about 10 years in real-life together with Gero in the famous Jagdgeschwader Richthofen. I am now Lead Testpilot for TrueGrit and I will compare the Questions against a clean F-16

 

1.) Higher [STR]

2.) Higher [ITR]

3.) Way higher [Climb rate] 

4.) Way better [Level flight acceleration]

5.) Less, due to the FCS limiting the AOA. [AOA limit]

6.) Clean F-16 vs. Eurofighter with 2 Tanks (I won)

 


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2022 at 12:25 AM, Hummingbird said:

Considering they all agree that its STR is higher than that of a clean F-16, and every F-16 pilot I've ever talked to says the Viper absolutely dominates over the Hornet in a rate fight, I think it's safe to say the Hornet is not going to be able to rate with the EF if performance is going to be remotely realistic.

BUT our DCS Hornet has 404 engine and therefore higher STR than our DCS Viper. Even after the recent Viper flight model update, Hornet still dominates Viper in a 2 circle fight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SCPanda said:

BUT our DCS Hornet has 404 engine and therefore higher STR than our DCS Viper. Even after the recent Viper flight model update, Hornet still dominates Viper in a 2 circle fight. 

 

Haven't tested the STR since the update, so can't comment on that. I did hear a higher AoA than before is now required for level flight though, which is curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Quote

Alright, i can translate what the guy talking in the video said: he basicly said that the f-16 was only doing 2/3 of its capabilities, and was at a position where he could shoot down the typhoon (meaning he won the fight). But the fight had to broken off at the end because the had reached too low of an altitude.

Quote

Btw, this footage is just taken from a danish fighter pilot lesson video, where he breaks down what is going on, and how the f-16 is performing compared to the typhoon.

Interesting comments, not a danish speaker so I have no idea of the accuracy. Obviously the Typhoon is on the defensive but I was surprised by the 2/3rds number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People should get beyond the point believing that any aircraft is "undefeatable". Different aircraft have different strengths and weaknesses, if exploited properly the one doing this is going to win the fight. Brief video sequences without any particular context mean little as well. It certainly lets get enthusiasts excited when suposedly superior A/C X is in the crosshairs of suposedly inferior A/C Y.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Spectre11 said:

I mean to remember that it was along the lines of greater maneuverability at low speeds. The video is quite old.

Yea it was supposedly an instruction video and I was hoping they might have said something of interest. I saw it years ago not even thinking anything of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm Danish so can understand what is said. What narrator is saying is that as the video shows the F-16 still can have a good chance against the EF in a dogfight, esp. at low speeds. But like Spectre kind of alluded to, it's not evidence of anything. Infact all it is is a Danish F-16 pilot narrating two pieces of HUD footage to a civilian audience (explaining what the different symbols in the HUD mean along the way), and probably with the main intent of showing that the RDAF's F-16 is still (early 2000's video) a potent fighter that isn't helpless in a DF against the newer ones out there. 

 

Update: Also just to be clear, the narrator at no point says the F-16 has better maneuverability than the EF at low speeds, just that it [F-16] has a good chance, esp. at low speeds. Once again though, early 2000's video, for a civilian audience.


Edited by Hummingbird
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Haha, nice ! We are experiencing a community of faith here trying to find and produce evidence that the F-16 is better in a dogfight than the "F-16 on steroids".

Can the F-16 beat the "F-16 on steroids" in a dogfight ? Yes

Is this the rule or the exception ? Exception

Remark: "F-16 on steroids" is a term for the Typhoon used by a british fighter pilot who flew both types (F-16 as exchange pilot).


Edited by Lynnux
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were quite a few cases of F-5s kicking F-15s' asses. The Viper can win if it can get the Typhoon driver to do something dumb. Against a Typhoon driver who thinks he doesn't have to put in any effort because he's got a better plane, a competently flown Viper will win every time. Against a Typhoon driver who respects his opponent and knows the strengths and weaknesses his aircraft, as well as that of his enemy, the Viper should lose consistently. Most encounters will likely be somewhere in between. Typhoon should win more often, but not without having to work for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
8 hours ago, F-2 said:

So apparently this is from the Indian MMRCA

 

 

IMG_8591.png

interesting...  i was expecting the turn rate to be closer to the f-16

 

 

also: engine failure on the Gripen???


Edited by Zahnatom

image.png My beloved ❤️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Zahnatom said:

interesting...  i was expecting the turn rate to be closer to the f-16

I wish I knew the exact load and could figure out how the block 50 would do under similar circumstances. Block 60 is heavy but with a Saturn V engine so I’m not sure if it’s better or worse then the DCS jet we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, F-2 said:

I wish I knew the exact load and could figure out how the block 50 would do under similar circumstances. Block 60 is heavy but with a Saturn V engine so I’m not sure if it’s better or worse then the DCS jet we have.

well we can guess from the TWR. 1.14 would mean that there was roughly 5000Kg of stuff on it(including fuel).... which is just about its full internal fuel load lol

image.png My beloved ❤️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, F-2 said:

So apparently this is from the Indian MMRCA

 

 

IMG_8591.png

 

Who's the source of the picture?  That the F-16 Block 60 is rated better than both the EF and Rafale in STR on that list is a bit perculiar, even when considering the upgraded F110-GE-132 powerplant (144 kN vs 131 kN of -129) 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

 

Who's the source of the picture?  That the F-16 Block 60 is rated better than both the EF and Rafale in STR on that list is a bit perculiar, even when considering the upgraded F110-GE-132 powerplant (144 kN vs 131 kN of -129) 

 

 

A Chinese defense blogger I found.

https://www.zhihu.com/people/wangbinse-er/posts
 

they have some interesting stuff like a Mirage 2000 performance manual and excerpts of the J-10 manual. Some of these figures like the super hornet and Eurofighter have been reported elsewhere, along with the Block 60 with CFT being the worst.

https://carnegieendowment.org/files/Force_June_2011-Ashley_J._Tellis.pdf
 

the figures are also consistent with other F-16 performance figures. The declassified F-16 block 15 SAC from 1984 gives a similarly loaded viper a 16 degree a second turn rate at 5000 feet (the Italian Air Force claims the two are similar under 10000 feet which is consistent with this number).

IMG_8604.png

As for the thrust rating that can de misleading especially since the F110 has tremendous Dynamic thrust

HFFM data, simulated by Mav-JP and Raptor one:

IMG_6006.jpeg
 

M88 thrust curve from this paper

http://elodieroux.com/ReportFiles/ModelesMoteurVersionPublique.pdf

IMG_7777.png
you can see at a lot of the envelope like the critical mach .9 the F110-ge-129 has much more thrust then it’s 29000lbf rating would suggest and even has more thrust then two M88 engines. The F110-GE-132 is more powerful then that and it’s official brochure says it should be more accurately categorized as a 34000lbf class engine.

the drag polar for the F-16 is publicly available and thrust curves for every engine other then the F110-GE-132, so it’s possible to test to see how close other F-16 variants are are a judge of credibility.

pdfslide.net_f110-ge-132-enhanced-power-through-low-risk-derivative-technology.pdf

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...