Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: F-22 VS. Eurofighter
mike14    2/15/2005 2:24:35 PM
Who would win.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57   NEXT
HERALD1357    Reply to the troll.   12/18/2008 10:49:59 PM
It all happens at the speed of light, cretin.
 
Herald 

 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       12/18/2008 11:00:16 PM
Nope Herald . Your AWACS 's man needs to press on some buttons and switches first . Don 't take me for a fool .
 
Leroy , here is a clue :
h*tp://www.thalesraytheon.com/uploads/tx_templavoila/HA100.JPG
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply

HERALD1357    You idiot.   12/18/2008 11:27:50 PM

Nope Herald . Your AWACS 's man needs to press on some buttons and switches first . Don 't take me for a fool .

 

Leroy , here is a clue :

h*tp://www.thalesraytheon.com/uploads/tx_templavoila/HA100.JPG


 

Cheers .





Trying to TELL ME how telemetry and data sharing works? Go pound sand mama's boy. Look up the definition of NODE.
 
By the way.........   moron;
 
 
The HA-100 was covered in February. I was rolling in the aisles with the lies you tried to post then.
 
One more thing......
 
h*tp://www.thalesraytheon.com/uploads/tx_templavoila/HA100.JPG.
 
See the name? Whatever was done RIGHT in that bi-static multi-NODE [SARCASM AGAIN] low altitude smear track blob detector radar was courtesy of RAYTHEON, an AMERICAN outfit..
 
Which is about as French as French fries; which best evidence shows ORIGINALLY was a Belgian dish by way of SPAIN..
 
Have a nice evening as you choke on your pommes frites.
 
Herald

 
.  
 
 
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

leroy       12/19/2008 1:32:21 AM
Keep on trolling kid... you aren't fooling anyone here.
 
We have all seen your little act before.
 
You come here claiming you want a reasonable discussion, then you make a fool of yourself by misunderstanding everything, demand everyone explain everything to you and "prove" it all... then the next day you "forget" everything people were nice enough to explain to you so that you can return to your original stupidity. 
 
You claim this isn't about France vs the USA, but that is what every single one of these threads turns into because that is exactly what you want to turn it into.
 
If the thread goes on long enough that you get backed into a corner, you just start making up wonderful new technologies and tactics for the Rafale that generally don't even make sense.
 
You are a fanboy and a liar.  I have seen you prove as much countless times.  
 
Grow up
 
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       12/19/2008 10:47:45 AM
What the F-22 should have done was to send to the Prowler in real time :
1) the coordinate of the target (interferrometry)
2) the bandwith used by the SAM site (checked by ECM frenquency hoping from AESA antenas)
3) the type of SAM (from the databank)
 
It's not hard at all to do that verbally.  "Spike, Grumble, two-four-zero at thirty".  That tells you there is an emitter, the type of emitter (SA-10/S-300), and its coordinates (azimuth and distance).  The EA-6B crew knows what frequencies that type of SAM operates at, and link-16 wouldn't tell you things like bandwidth or frequency anyway.  The F-22 has no problem precisely identifying the locations of both the EA-6B and of the SAM site -- they both show up on its situation display and it will tell the pilot everything he needs to know in terms of relative coordinates.
 
Of course, if you were using Link-16, you would be emitting constantly.  The F-22 only emits when it needs to.  Less efficiently?  Perhaps, but it is in total EMCON the rest of the time.
 
But the F-22 talked verbally to the Prowler 's crew about a SAM site being "somewhere there" , Bravo !
Next time , use a Rafale to talk to your Prowler , you won 't be disapointed .
 
No, the F-22 can tell the Prowler exactly where the threat is and what type threat it is.  The Rafale couldn't get anywhere close to the SAM site without being detected, unlike the F-22.  So what the Rafale would say to the Prowler is more like "Sam, sam, engaged defensive!".  Not qute so useful.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       12/19/2008 11:50:04 AM

What the F-22 should have done was to send to the Prowler in real time :



1) the coordinate of the target (interferrometry)



2) the bandwith used by the SAM site (checked by ECM frenquency hoping from AESA antenas)

3) the type of SAM (from the databank)

 

It's not hard at all to do that verbally.  "Spike, Grumble, two-four-zero at thirty".  That tells you there is an emitter, the type of emitter (SA-10/S-300), and its coordinates (azimuth and distance).  The EA-6B crew knows what frequencies that type of SAM operates at, and link-16 wouldn't tell you things like bandwidth or frequency anyway.  The F-22 has no problem precisely identifying the locations of both the EA-6B and of the SAM site -- they both show up on its situation display and it will tell the pilot everything he needs to know in terms of relative coordinates.


 

Of course, if you were using Link-16, you would be emitting constantly.  The F-22 only emits when it needs to.  Less efficiently?  Perhaps, but it is in total EMCON the rest of the time.


 

But the F-22 talked verbally to the Prowler 's crew about a SAM site being "somewhere there" , Bravo !



Next time , use a Rafale to talk to your Prowler , you won 't be disapointed .

 

No, the F-22 can tell the Prowler exactly where the threat is and what type threat it is.  The Rafale couldn't get anywhere close to the SAM site without being detected, unlike the F-22.  So what the Rafale would say to the Prowler is more like "Sam, sam, engaged defensive!".  Not qute so useful.




 
As always, your clear explanations are a delight to read, not to mention I love your wit, too.  "Not quite so useful," indeed!  Herald and Leroy, you're on target as usual.

 
 
Quote    Reply

FJV       12/19/2008 3:09:25 PM
It all depends on who will have the best electronic warfare in my opinion.
 
I have a suspicion/hunch that there are future technologies possible for electronic warfare that could turn out to be more important than stealth.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       12/19/2008 6:12:01 PM

It all depends on who will have the best electronic warfare in my opinion.

I have a suspicion/hunch that there are future technologies possible for electronic warfare that could turn out to be more important than stealth.


 LO/VLO has been about electronic warfare since 1947.  Prior to 1947 LO was about mechanical developments.

There seems to be a view that LO/VLO is relatively recent - it's not it's actually been around since 1912.  ie LO/VLO is a moving and iterative concept and hence why every US publicly released generation of manned platform using VLO concepts has been conceptually different from its predecessors.  A similar pattern can actually be traced against unmanned developments. 

Its why I find comments about Rafales capacity to survive in comparison against even an 18F laughable.  The US is at a 6th generation stage of sensor integration and fusion at a deployed level - and yet France has only just got acces to Link 16 and isn't even on the guest list for the 2014 tech releases (and yet even sweden has recognised that it needs to get onto the boat as it's not going to stay relevant with autonomous tech)

There are a whole pile of other supporting network and fusion tools in the game and BW is talking about Link-16?  "Gee zuz" wept.

 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       12/19/2008 6:42:47 PM
Bash as much as you can I do not care .
 
I see that as soon as Herald spot the name Raytheon , the best part of a radar must come from them and the worse part from the poor french who cannot understand a thing . Well , that 's charming and very clever Herald , not . You really spit on everything as long as it comes from me , forgetting that you will look like a fool to the knowledgeable posters .
The HA-100 radar works as intented , you want it or not .
 
h*tp://www.twine.com/item/11cnb2mvn-48n/defense-technology-international-october-2007
 
Unlike you , I provide links and studies .
Leroy had nothing interesting to say .
 
Phaid , if it was me who said that the Rafale could go ""Spike, Grumble, two-four-zero at thirty"" , you would have jumped on me and ask me in which century I was living ! Radio is nothing new for God sake !
Then , you try to find some poor excuses about the link-16 versus verbal radio , wtf ??!
 
You said :
""The Rafale couldn't get anywhere close to the SAM site without being detected, unlike the F-22""
 
I agree , no argument here . Then you go :
""So what the Rafale would say to the Prowler is more like "Sam, sam, engaged defensive!".  Not qute so useful.""
That is false , untrue and silly to say the least . You know better and I don 't understand why you cannot tell the truth here on SP . US Ego ?
One only have to look at how the Rafales did treat the SAMs at the recent RedFlag . Or they escaped them before to be in the SAM range , or they destroyed it from a passive shot with an AASM .
Back to the F-22 .
 
FJV had it right , ""It all depends on who will have the best electronic warfare"" . There , the F-22 is today in inferiority . Some F-teens are able to brake a missile lock with their ECMs when the F-22 can 't . Some would tell me that EM missiles have little chance to lock on the F-22 , and rightly . But if the F-22 is locked by an advanced radar , the jet has absolutly no means to disapear again through ECMs . All it can probably do is to try to power jam the emiter , allowing all the ECCMs in the vinicity to target the jammer . Of course , if the technology has been implemented on the F-22 through its AESA radar , which I doubt strongly . In any case , the F-22 has no ECM suite so far , bravo again !
 
Really , I don 't fear your futur posts ...
 
Cheers .
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       12/19/2008 6:54:13 PM
gf , we 're in 2008 .
 
Cheers .

 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy