F-22 VS. Eurofighter

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

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 NEXT

warpig 4/3/2009 8:48:47 AM

Oh, I reread, and I see that was covered too. Well, then I'll just say that I certainly agree with what's been said! Ooops.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/9/2009 5:01:16 AM

Don't use Wiki unless you have too. I didn't discuss the hardpoints situation (you did) because it was not relevant to the aircraft mission. When you can carry eight BVR and two WVR missiles and cannot hit me at all with any of them, to my six and two and each one of mine will in pairs guarantee 100% kills, then I am of the opinion that a 4-0 kill statistic is more important than the 10-8 carry one. I'm also of the opinion that if you called me a liar, I'd at least like you to back it THAT claim up.

The American general's claims have been dealt with by others.

I can detect low observables with the Mark 1 eyeball and have done so. What you failed to understand is what low observable is and MEANS. Its an electronic warfare (light actually) strategy that exploits the characteristics of light to our (American) advantage so that when you see us, there isn't anything you can do about it. Low observable has, as GF likes to say, been with us forever since the first days when the first human dressed up like a tree to ambush another in the woods.

Surely you know your Shakespeare.

But I'm not here to educate you. I already have one Blue Wings fluttering around and I know how that goes.

. .

I could sit here and claim that the Eurofighter can make 500km shots on the F-22 while launching rocket propelled breadsticks but its useless without sources or evidence, your words are not evidence, please show me the sources/evidence for your claims ive asked for.

Want evidence? Rather you want understanding. Then do what I did and as others have done, work in the industry, or school yourself. I rather think the evidence I supplied was MORE than sufficient if you understood what I showed.

Couple of tidbits. There are some mistakes that others made when they talked about CAPTOR Its a good radar. It can see far and it is adequate to current threat. It cannot see heat because heat's light frequency is wrong for the receiver.

It also as a mechanical scan track radar is not inherently range inferior. What it is compared to AESAS is target discrimination inferior. It can see, as in detect blob returns as far as many AESA or PESA radars, *Fewer tracks than an AESA) It just cannot see the target DETAIL as well. It cannot be used as telemetry link as easily as it doesn't have multiple beam redundancy, It surely can be detected by a radar warning receiver since to my knwledge it neither frequency hops nor strobes.

And interestingly enough while it will get radar returns off a missile (By the way SMART-L is a naval AESA a bit more advanced than the standard AEGIS, way to mix apples and rocks) it cannot SEE the missile because the signal returns are too course detailed for its receiver array. That is actually why people say that AESA sees farther, when it sees better. AESA being multi-beam can generate a sharper image return off the object headed at you. It can also act like a microwave cooker at infinite focus and burniut the missile's seeker of the missile trying to kill you..

Looking at it from a simplifed explanation, CAPTOR behaves like a simple motion detector. it sends out a beam and then when it gets a positive return, it alerts you to bearing and range of a blob (Flanker?) based on time delay and where you point. You have to radio interrogate or get a visual before you shoot to be sure. Meanwhile an AESA like an AN APG 80n on an F-16, if you have the threat library takes a snapshot radio picture and tells you there's also an R-77 at X kilometers bearing, so and so speed such, with impact merge at so many seconds and you better do something like decoy or burn out its seeker, dodge it, or outrun it. That is just a little beyond the current run of the mill state of the AESA radar artilect computer art, but its not that far off.

Anyway...... Before you can talk about light at all you have to know something about it. Do you play the piano? If you do you realize that the high notes are located at the end with the short strungs, and the low notes are located at the end with the long strings Guess which end of the analogy has the radio waves? Now heat is more energetic than radio! Shorter frequency. That matters when you build a detector. Heat is towards the middle of the piano.

Anyway a radio apparatus does not detect heat wrong frequency.

EM spectrum.

Before you can even begin to discuss rocketry, aircraft, or electronics with me we have to get you started on the BASICS.

Herald

Wiki unlike you has its own sources and direct information. I would rather use Wikia rather than your sourceless statements ime afraid. Yes well, if you changed that around and I could hit you at any time 100% with my 10+ missles and you had a lower chance of hitting my plane with your 6 missles then you will be equelly worthless. Ime asking you to back up your own claims, your under the burdon of proof fallacy, do you not debate much or are you a lazy debator who makes statements without evidence?

They cant be "dealt" with, the guy stated they were both top notch, quality planes and he could not put one above the other, his opinion is far above your own at the moment, since he is more official and has flown both.

As ive shown, the Eurofighter can use PIRATE to see Stealth, simple fact.....youve claimed yourself the Captor already has similiar range and ability in most areas compared to the Raptors, combine that range with the fact the PIRATE system can combine with the radar to track heat and the F-22 is screwed stealthwise.

No I want evidence, you can beat around the bush and toss some supposedly clever statements by yourself as much as you want, until youve shown me evidence for your claims I may as well do the same thing, otherwise this is not a debate, its me debating with you, you tossing in statements that could have been clever or not.

Also as an extension of any of this, what possible chance does an F-22 have using its own tactics? I assume the F-22 is going to think it has the element of surprise anyway, considering this battle is about tactics as well as weapons/the plane the F-22 tactics do not work against a Eurofighter. The F-22 will spend its time making sure its stealth keeps it hidden so it can fire a missle but missles do not have the same range as their radar not to mention the range of the F-22 lack of obserability distance. Problem with that tactic is that the Euro can use its PIRATE to find the F-22 and this battle will be over before it had begun. The first shot fired by the F-22 will not be the Eurofighters last....it will be the F-22's because the Eurofighter would now know where it is, then it can screw it over with WVR boresight weapons, look and shoot as well as its own missles and in the future superior Meteor missles.

Late in the game, to what? 3 years? were not in a world war or any major aerial combat yet chuck so hold your horses....maybe by then the F-22 will have some decent weapon systems,look and shoot and an almost worthwhile price, then again...maybe America will put their thinking caps on and ignore the whole project and concentrate on JSF.

<<Of course by then the Eurofighter will have lost all export bids and become obsolete until its radar is upgraded. In order to keep things going for the Typhoon - exports must take place. Again, as the AV Week article pointed out - the AESA for the Typhoon is not a sure thing - Italy opposes it outright and the funding is simply not available at the moment. Meanwhile, 2012 turns into 2013, 2014 etc... The F-22 is not designed for export so we don't have a problem. The AESA meanwhile is installed on the F-22, F-15 and F-18 in action now - and please note the competitors in the India deal. Those without AESA are falling behind.>>

I like how this gave you a hissy fit, "zomg you sedz radar wich is wrong!", your like a whimpering child whos found something they can hold on to, stop grasping at straws please, the fact is, F-22 stealth is blown out of the basket and the Eurofighter can track it, stealth means very little, especially when you do not have the right weapons to use it with.

<<Once again - and do open a science book - IR signature is NOT in the same physical spectrum as radio waves. Thus your comment about stealth, heat signatures and the Typhoon radar is gibberish. I take it you have no clue what IR detection and radar detection means so further comment on this is lost on you. This is kind of like debating how to race cars with someone who has no drivers license. However, it does serve as a clear example of exactly how well versed you are about the physics of nature much less air combat.>>

The Euro had like one crash and that was an old prototype in spain years ago, its hardly comparable to things like pilots getting stuck in their cockpits for 5 hours, or very recent crashes that kill their pilots.

<<Hey - you gotta fly it to crash it. These are the risks you take with cutting edge technology. As far as aircraft history goes - the F-22 has a much lower accident rate compared to previous generations. So we are well satisfied with the result. Of course, if you avoid the risk of cutting edge technology - build it with low risk technology - you also risk becoming obsolete and an overpriced hanger queen even before you are out of the box.>>

Ofcourse its not in the F-22 class,its a class above, sure itsn ot got the same radar but it does not need it, its just swapped that for more weapons and the ability to carry high level A2G ordanance such as cruise missles.

<< The F-22 was designed to be an air superiority fighter first. It meets that specification - anything else is just an extra add on due to the versitility of the design. I dare say a Typhoon is not going to face down an SA-20 and survive - but the F-22 can.>>

Lost bids? there is far more Eurofighters in production and in requirement (over 700?) in comparison to the USA's requirement for the F-22 (180?) so the Euro is not losing anything. Also have a look at what Herald says, the range nad the ability of the Captor already is not much behind the F-22, considering missles do not have their radars range and the fact that the PIRATE of the Euro can find the F-22 through its equally ranged radar, it does not really require enhancements to defeat the F-22.

Not gibberish, as I said before go read my damn source and stop trying to go crazy over any typo I make, PIRATE gives the Euro the ability to find the F-22 stealth, end of story.

Not face down an SA-20? it will do it far easier than the F-22 by launching a cruise missle from long range.....

While the F-22 pilot is hoping for dear god that his plane does not crash by itself and that his stealth is up to standard with all the many ground radar insallations.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Contradicting yourself eh? 4/9/2009 9:03:46 AM

You cannot dismiss me as a source and then claim me as a source, Arklight.

If you respect my observation about CAPTOR then you tacitly concede ALL of my expertise. I come as a bundle, guy.

You are cooked.

New Scotsman News Article.

That is why you should use REPUTABLE sources or know what you are talking about.

Me? I try to at least know what I am talking about.

Now let's deconstruct the rest of you.

Wiki can be modified day to day. It has lies and propaganda posted in it, (Read the articles on the RAFALE or the Black Eagle for example) Some of its so called scholars are intellectual buffoons grinding axes.

Article.

I never said that a radar has a range. I said and you didn't read this right that a radar has a detection threshhold. That is a radically different concept. And I never said that the CAPTOR is equal to the RAPTOR'S AN/APG-77. It isn't What I said was that CAPTOR was equivalent in many respects to early AESAs and that it doesn't have sidelobe issues like many pof the early AESA radars did and do. The US is into its fourth generation airborne AESA fighter radar (hundreds of sets). The EU has fielded exactly two experimental set series one which didn't and doesn't work. (Guess which one). But at least you figured out that PIRATE cannot range gate (look it up-AVIAPEDIA is good.). I also told you what an AESA can and a MST cannot do, which is target discriminate small objects in the mid intervals of detection threshhold.

Here is something for you to consider with what I just told you:

Radio propogation and RADAR.

That is called a TECHNICAL MANUAL. Pay particular attention to the chapters on how radio waves propagate and how interference by such things as a thermal inversion can degrade RADAR. Range my left foot!

Another fact. Most radars have 2x to 5x the flyouts of the missiles matched to them. That is because you have to have a chase cushion. You have to see the target well before you can launch a chase weapon to run it down.

Crude example:

Suppose the MICA missile actually worked and you faced off against a Sukhoi? The R-77 equipped Sukhoi has a radar detection threshhold that is optimistically 2x that of the R-77 flyout against the referent target which is the Rafale.

The RBE2 has a detection threshold that is claimed that is 1.5x that of the MICA flyout against the referent target which is the Sukhoi Flanker.

Noiw the MICA is exercise climed at a PK of 80% when fired in pairs through 75% of its flyout. Never mind that that is a joke, that is what MBDA claims. The R-77 (SARH) version has a proven PK of 40% when fired in pairs throughout 100% of its NEZ in COMBAT which makes it a respectable and formidable weapon by Russian standards.

Now fanboys want fixed numbers instead of percentages and ratios, but experts and the informed stick with the ratios and the percentages because there is no such thing as a fixed value in a dynamic variable situation (look the terms up, I don't have time to teach this to you). What that means roughly is that the Russdian will see the Frenchman first with his own Zhuk M series radar about twenty seconds before the Frenchman will see him. Depending on aspect and altitude the Flanker should get off the first launch since that Vympal has a greater engagement cone than the MICA.(the R-27 is a bigger rocket, and all chemistry being equal has a better fuel fraction to object mass [means that the candle burns two seconds longer and imparts more kinetic energy than the MICA-and thus longer flyout)

That is called first see, first shoot. Now did I mention that there are clouds? Clouds do funny things to IRSTs as in make them not work at all. Clouds also do funny things to radar. Has soimething to do with the fact that clouds are charged particle traps (look it up). Anyway, the Russian will still be pointoing at the Frenchman because he has to use his Zhuk to paint the Rafale to provide reflected radio waves that his Adder missiles can home in on. The Frenchman carrying either active radar seeking MICAs or infrared seekers has yet to detect much less acquire track or engage because his own radar has not reached detection threshhold yet-even though radio waves are bouncing off that Sukhoi. What does twenty seconds detection advantage translate to in missile flyout at Mach 4? That is about 25,000 meters that the Rafale will fly toward the Flanker before he detects the Russian aircraft. Now you know why the French installed SPECTRA. They have to have some kind of radar warning and local self protection jammer suite to survive the twenty-twenty five seconds they need to close before they can launch their own weapons.

In fraction terms the Russian has about a 1.5x radar detection threshold advantage under most conditions over the Rafale.Actually its worse simce the RBE2 has been know to fail off boresight at WVR.

Now, the detection threshhold relationship fraction wise between the F-22 and the Typhoon is worse, much worse. The CAPTOR will not radar detect WVR a Raptor with enough discrimination to establkish a track. PIRATE cannot range gate for a launch solution. the Raptor has already established a track with its own radar at a an interval that gives the Raptor a comfortable 150+ seconds to maneuver to set uo the engagement parameters, that is from what dorection and height the Raptor will come at the Typhoon. Being hioogher and faster, the Raptor pilot looks down and circles around for the six o clock shot and its goodbye. The AMRAAM is a MACH 4 chase missile with a kill you dead PK reputation in COMBAT of 90% single launch.

METEOR isn't out of testing yet.

Most BVR missile launches occur at around 1/3 separation of the missiles' flyout or less so that their chase cushion is in the NEZ. For a MICA that usually means around 15,000 to 20,000 meters under IDEAL conditions in a had on pass same altitude . For the ADDER it is about 25,000 to 30,000 meters. The AMRAAM is similar to the ADDER. He who sees first will maneuver to exploit his position to choose an aspect where his missile flyout coverage cone will be better than the guy he's chasing.

Notice the word CHASE.

Thus endeth this lesson.

Herald

Quote Reply

Softwar 4/9/2009 9:19:04 AM

First - if you care to actually read both open source and Heralds comments - there is no comparison between AESA and the current Captor. The difference is like being able to log into a computer network and viewing a black and white TV from the 1950s. AESA can penetrate networks and the F-22 has the computing power to do so. It can also knock down missiles in flight - as demonstrated during the last tests. So AESA is both and IW and EW asset while Captor is a simple radar. AESA is also a weapon while Captor is a simple detection system with poor resolution.

If - as you claim with so little backing or evidence - that Captor does not need to be replaced - then why spend billions of Euros on Caesar? Even then - it appears that Caesar may not make it because some of the partners don't fell like shelling out the cash needed to make it operational. Thus, once again, your ignorance on the subject is clearly evident. The RAF and Luffewaffe is staffed by pros - not armchair amatuers such as yourself.

Finally, the Eurofighter has funded 148 air frames so far - out of a potential contract of 800. Whether it goes beyond that is a question related to purchases of a 4th gen fighter with all its weapons hanging outside - versus a 5th gen fighter with AESA and stealth - e.g. JSF.

Not gibberish, as I said before go read my damn source and stop trying to go crazy over any typo I make, PIRATE gives the Euro the ability to find the F-22 stealth, end of story.

You may think its end of story but it hardly accounts for much. IRST technology is well known and there are various countermeasures that can be employed to confuse or even blind such systems. IRST is also akin to looking through a straw as compared to a search and track radar. The IRST in Pirate (on the Italian Eurofighters) is hardly new and not much of an advancement over similar systems employed on the F-14 decades ago. So to place your trust in a pipe to view the whole sky is to force your pilots to function in the blind. This is the reason why other nations in the Euro consortium may not even purchase PIRATE. I suggest you look beyond wikipedia for a source ( try Janes or Aviation Week).

Not face down an SA-20? it will do it far easier than the F-22 by launching a cruise missle from long range.....

Hardly - the SA-20 outranges any cruise missile the Eurofighter can mount. Besides it is designed to destroy cruise missiles - even Storm/Shadow are ineffective against a double digit SAM. The only way to fly and fight inside the SA-20 kill envelope is with enough stealth to avoid detection and destroy the site. Right now a Eurofighter would be dodging the SA-20 at 300+ mile ranges. The SA-20 is also mobile - thus defeating a cruise missile that is pre-programmed to attack a single point. You need someone to search and destroy - the F-22 qualifies.

While the F-22 pilot is hoping for dear god that his plane does not crash by itself and that his stealth is up to standard with all the many ground radar insallations.

Of course you still believe this is some sort of fan-boy game. Too bad for you. I suggest you take a course in the physical sciences and come back after graduating high school.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/9/2009 2:05:05 PM

You cannot dismiss me as a source and then claim me as a source, Arklight.

If you respect my observation about CAPTOR then you tacitly concede ALL of my expertise. I come as a bundle, guy.

You are cooked.

New Scotsman News Article.

That is why you should use REPUTABLE sources or know what you are talking about.

Me? I try to at least know what I am talking about.

Now let's deconstruct the rest of you.

Article.

Here is something for you to consider with what I just told you:

Radio propogation and RADAR.

Crude example:

The RBE2 has a detection threshold that is claimed that is 1.5x that of the MICA flyout against the referent target which is the Sukhoi Flanker.

In fraction terms the Russian has about a 1.5x radar detection threshold advantage under most conditions over the Rafale.Actually its worse simce the RBE2 has been know to fail off boresight at WVR.

METEOR isn't out of testing yet.

Notice the word CHASE.

Thus endeth this lesson.

Herald

I can cut up your posts and use various pieces of information your provide against other members, if you dont like it then to be honest I dont really care, I am well within my right to claim some of your sourceless essays and likely assumptions as nonsense as well as use other pieces to my advantage against people who do see you as an intellectual source.

Erm....so you find a arcticle about how a lot of information on Wikia is false? good for you, a lot of your nonsense is likely false or speculation along with most publically known information on classified military aircraft, fact remains Wikia has its sources and information, a lot of this information can be found on other websites, news arcticles or "Aviation week" and its a vast margin better than you imo.

Yes there are Clouds and sometimes there are not, so your assuming that in this combat the F-22 will just happen to be hiding in a cloud or? the F-22 has two massive engines bursting out heart, PIRATE is made for finding said heat and according to the source I provided a couple of pages back, can do so on the JSF which is not much less stealthier than an F-22.

Can you show me the official information on how the F-22 will be higher and faster please, as well as the information on how the F-22 first shot will somehow kill the Eurofighter despite its many defensive aids and decoy?

Meteor is not out of testing true...but then again the F-22 is still crashing so obvioulsy its not a fully tested and reliable piece of junk.

Not gibberish, as I said before go read my damn source and stop trying to go crazy over any typo I make, PIRATE gives the Euro the ability to find the F-22 stealth, end of story.

Not face down an SA-20? it will do it far easier than the F-22 by launching a cruise missle from long range.....

While the F-22 pilot is hoping for dear god that his plane does not crash by itself and that his stealth is up to standard with all the many ground radar insallations.

Of course you still believe this is some sort of fan-boy game. Too bad for you. I suggest you take a course in the physical sciences and come back after graduating high school.

Ok just a bit of blabbering here....."whimper whimper Captor=1950 comp whimper whimper", please show some sources that AESA is so vastly superior please, the Captor as Ive shown with sources can have PIRATE used through it to find F-22 heat.

For the same reason as America builds Raptors, you dont need them but they are "better", as is the Ceaser, but you dont need it.

JSF? a slower aircraft with less payload and not as much functionality.......the JSF is nothing compared to the Eurofighter, the tag of 5th gen is redundant on both F-22 and JSF.

Your blowing out more hot air here and just making statements, once again, the PIRATE as ive shown in previous sources is capable of finding JSF, the F-22 has no more protection against PIRATE.

outranges? show me evidence please, the information ive read on the SA-20 is that its maximum range is 195km

I suggest you go and find some sources before posting again....your getting quite boring, at least Herald is now trying but you are worthless in this discussion....

Quote Reply

warpig 4/9/2009 2:24:36 PM

Guys, I suggest you don't even bother. This one is all throttle and no stick.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/9/2009 2:45:09 PM

Guys, I suggest you don't even bother. This one is all throttle and no stick.

As I said, please dont troll this thread, and dont be ridiculous, me with my real sources and evidence compared to a few crummy statements and patriotic fanboyism for the F-22.......fortunatley for them guys however, this is obviously an American bias F-22 (or any American plane) bias site from the looks of the people and its members so even if official evidence and videos could be shown of the Eurofighter destroying the F-22, it would simply be considered a lie...I mean seriously, who could possibly defeat the lightspeed flying, invisible super plane that is the F-22!? especially with its American buddies backing it......

Quote Reply

Herald12345 4/9/2009 2:45:28 PM

My sourceless essays use data you can find written in Avipedia, Aviatiom Week or if you have access to Jane's. I don't publish classified data. What I use you can check. I don't have to justify myself to you. You on the other hand have very much to justify, period. If you are going to use my technical knowledge, then you must respect what lies behind it. "I can use it if I want to when it supports me and reject it when it does not" is frankly DISHONEST.

If its nonsense, prove it, otherwise your assertion is meaningless much like the rest of your assertions to the rights to MY knowledge. My knowledge, got that, kid?

You might also crack open that tech manual I supplied you, gratis. It contains everything you need to verify what I told you.

See that funny white sworl? What is that?

That is Montan, kid.

Why? Do you want to spend the next twenty years in prison?

Meteor is not out of testing true...but then again the F-22 is still crashing so obvioulsy its not a fully tested and reliable piece of junk.

A stupid co0mment that has no0 bearing on the question at hand. 3.5 crashes per 100,000 hours is not that bad comparewd to 4.7 crashes per 100,000 hours flown. You lost several Typhoons from memory, Last one at China Lake last year when it bellied in. Total Loss of Aircraft.

Loss of aircraft

The other one was Spain?

Loss of aircraft.

Whoops! another one.

Landing accident.

So we do have quite a history of landing accidents and crashes. Wonder why?

Herald

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/9/2009 3:03:41 PM

If its nonsense, prove it, otherwise your assertion is meaningless much like the rest of your assertions to the rights to MY knowledge. My knowledge, got that, kid?

You might also crack open that tech manual I supplied you, gratis. It contains everything you need to verify what I told you.

See that funny white sworl? What is that?

That is Montan, kid.

Why? Do you want to spend the next twenty years in prison?

Meteor is not out of testing true...but then again the F-22 is still crashing so obvioulsy its not a fully tested and reliable piece of junk.

Loss of aircraft

The other one was Spain?

Loss of aircraft.

Whoops! another one.

Landing accident.

So we do have quite a history of landing accidents and crashes. Wonder why?

Herald

I can find? burdon of proof fallacy remember? go and find your sources and provide them, otherwise ill simply ask you to do the same and look through Aviation weekly and other sources to find the fact that the Eurofighter turns the F-22 to scrap.

Prove what exactley? I dont have to prove anything, youve provided a source that states Wikia is responsible for some bad grades, this is not evidence that the info on the Eurofighter or F-22 is not invalid, regardless, Wiki is a source, unlike you. You dont have to justify yourself? ofcourse you do, otherwise you may as well leave and have pretty thoughts of the F-22 beating thousands of Typhoons with its infnite super loadout or whatever you F-22 fans dream of, fact is, youve not got the evidence in this thread. Also thats very amusing, you add kid at the end, it seems your assuming age and showing your own insecurities thus outlining your lack of faith in your own knowledge to have to go so low as to use antagonistic language, although ill have to ignore that last bit "chief"

Sorry sport but showing pictures of clouds does not help your assumption of the F-22 always being hidden in Cloud cover.....its engines are balls of heart, own up and admit that the Euro finds the flying heap of junk.

So you cant show me the evidence that supports your claim? ok, well the Eurofighter can actually go lightspeed and fires proton topedos, it even has the ability to fly to other galaxies when promted....but sorry, I cant show you the information otherwise we will be breaking the law....shoot!

okie first one was pilot error so thats not any fault of the plane....

Test prototype was the one in Spain, not a fully tested version like the F-22 which crashed what? a month or so ago? if not less and actually killing its pilot....

Among the many F-22 crashes and mess ups most of them are pretty pathetic tbh, youve managed to dig up a few real problems with the Eurofighter, all of which quite old, when theres many F-22 cock ups including its very recent crash. When the Eurofighter crashes this year, then you can actually try and defend crash rates.

Quote Reply

Softwar Ark - Cluess Fan Boy 4/9/2009 3:30:17 PM

Meteor is not out of testing true...but then again the F-22 is still crashing so obvioulsy its not a fully tested and reliable piece of junk.

For the same reason as America builds Raptors, you dont need them but they are "better", as is the Ceaser, but you dont need it.

JSF? a slower aircraft with less payload and not as much functionality.......the JSF is nothing compared to the Eurofighter, the tag of 5th gen is redundant on both F-22 and JSF.

Your blowing out more hot air here and just making statements, once again, the PIRATE as ive shown in previous sources is capable of finding JSF, the F-22 has no more protection against PIRATE.

outranges? show me evidence please, the information ive read on the SA-20 is that its maximum range is 195km

I suggest you go and find some sources before posting again....your getting quite boring, at least Herald is now trying but you are worthless in this discussion....

Resorting to BS again because you don't understand what is going on here. PIRATE is an IR based system that you can use in conjunction with the CAPTOR radar. However, it is dependent on the pre-targeting of the sights to give it something to look at. By the time Captor sends its second pulse out of the 4th gen electronics blue box - the AESA radar will scramble the return and focus a pulse through its emitter arrays to turn the Captor electronics into a puddle of pudding. So very sorry to bust your bubble here but the differences are like using a flashlight versus a laser. Sure the both emit light but one can burn your eyes out, tell the exact distance to you, and render a 3d image of your entire face in detail.

AESA can also detect the Captor from a greater distance than the effective range of its return pulses. Thus, the F-22 can feed the ancient electronics several false targets long before it can even pick up the Raptor - luring the Eurofighter into a perfect dying position. Captor cannot do that since it is not AESA nor does it have the computing power to do so.

Do you even know what Caesar is? By your posting here I can assume you have not even read up on the subject much less know that its still very much an unfunded option - with the Italians opposing it and the UK supporting it because of export potential. When you get an AESA operational on the Eurofighter (and a degree from middle school) let me know.

The prime attack position of the F-22 is from 65,000 feet at full burner. So far - no aircraft has been able to match that short of an SR-71. Again, you need to read up on tactics and the tactical engagements conducted so far. Pirate is not going to do you much good if you if I am above you and firing.

As for the SA-20 and other double digit SAMs - the S-300/S-400 class of missiles are very well known.

link />

Here is a link to the S-400 variant which has a range in excess of 400 km.

Here is a snip of an Aviation Week article (I suggest you put out for a subscription seeing as you 1 - have no clue and 2 - seem to get more info here by challenging than actually doing your own research).

Israel Air Force Draws Lessons From Gaza Campaign
Aviation Week & Space Technology Mar 30 , 2009 , p. 31

An additional specter for future IAF operations is the confirmation that Russia is selling advanced, long-range SA&S209;20 Gargoyle air-defense systems armed with the S-300PMU1 missile to Iran. The interceptor has a range of at least 120 mi. There is concern in Israel that just as Iran provided unmanned aircraft, missiles and signals intelligence to Hezbollah during the Lebanon fighting in 2006, Tehran could position its mobile surface-to-air missiles in Syria in support of Hamas or Hezbollah, thereby threatening Israel?s national airspace.

The SA-20 can be upgraded to host even higher-performance, strategic-range S-300PMU2 missiles with a range in excess of 300 mi. Syria has already fielded the SA-22 Greyhound, which was designed to protect SA-20 sites.

Finally - Ark - you are really so very poorly schooled at this as to be hardly a chore to deal with. I suggest you put on some pants and get rid of the fan-boy attitude. Flaming you is not even fun anymore since you are so wet as to not even light up after being bathed in facts.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/9/2009 4:13:25 PM

As for the SA-20 and other double digit SAMs - the S-300/S-400 class of missiles are very well known.

link />

Here is a link to the S-400 variant which has a range in excess of 400 km.

Israel Air Force Draws Lessons From Gaza Campaign

Aviation Week & Space Technology Mar 30 , 2009 , p. 31

An additional specter for future IAF operations is the confirmation that Russia is selling advanced, long-range SA&S209;20 Gargoyle air-defense systems armed with the S-300PMU1 missile to Iran. The interceptor has a range of at least 120 mi. There is concern in Israel that just as Iran provided unmanned aircraft, missiles and signals intelligence to Hezbollah during the Lebanon fighting in 2006, Tehran could position its mobile surface-to-air missiles in Syria in support of Hamas or Hezbollah, thereby threatening Israel?s national airspace.

Show me this capability to scramble as actual evidence please, as well as to stop the PIRATE from finding it, if it can find and track an JSF, it can do so to F-22 as shown in actual source evidence.

Some more hot air claims without evidence.

Above me and fireing? fireing your big hot missle while my maouverability and countless defences stop the single shot while tossing a missle in your face off-boresight?

Obviously youve got your figuires mixed up:

link

The S-300PMU2 Favorit variant is a new missile with larger warhead and better guidance with a range of 200 km, versus the 150 km of previous versions.

Quote Reply

Softwar AV Week - 800-525-5003 4/9/2009 4:27:49 PM

Show me this capability to scramble as actual evidence please, as well as to stop the PIRATE from finding it, if it can find and track an JSF, it can do so to F-22 as shown in actual source evidence.

Some more hot air claims without evidence.

Above me and fireing? fireing your big hot missle while my maouverability and countless defences stop the single shot while tossing a missle in your face off-boresight?

Obviously youve got your figuires mixed up:

link

The S-300PMU2 Favorit variant is a new missile with larger warhead and better guidance with a range of 200 km, versus the 150 km of previous versions.

Get your own subscription to Aviation Week pal and look up the current working history of the AESA systems in the F-22. Or at least try and read some of the other postings about what an AESA can do to CAPTOR and the other 4 gen electronics (Pirate is just an IR camera idiot). I just posted a good couple of links in the F-22 thread on AESA.

The specs you cite are out of date as compared to the MARCH 2009 issue from Av Week - which is a McGraw Hill publication with a 60 year history. That is why I posted the latest info - the S-400 (another variant) is even longer ranged.

Of course I will fire my BIG HOT MISSILE at you - from above and behind - because you will never even see it coming until your tail warning reciever goes off. By the time you think of getting out of the way - the AMRAAM or Sidewinder will splatter your 4th gen Eurofighter into many tiny little pieces.

Do keep in mind - that your Captor radar will not detect a stealth aircraft at the rated 100 miles - again trying to explain simple physics to you is like trying to pound sand into a rathole. Your radar will be worthless beyond 1/2 that at minimum for detection only. The F-22 AESA will tell me how you are armed, and what you had for breakfast.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Burden of proof fallacy. 4/9/2009 4:28:10 PM

Its on you, Arklight. I've given you tons of data.

If its nonsense, prove it, otherwise your assertion is meaningless much like the rest of your assertions to the rights to MY knowledge. My knowledge, got that, kid?

You might also crack open that tech manual I supplied you, gratis. It contains everything you need to verify what I told you.

See that funny white sworl? What is that?

That is Montan, kid.

Why? Do you want to spend the next twenty years in prison?

Meteor is not out of testing true...but then again the F-22 is still crashing so obvioulsy its not a fully tested and reliable piece of junk.

Loss of aircraft

The other one was Spain?

Loss of aircraft.

Whoops! another one.

Landing accident.

So we do have quite a history of landing accidents and crashes. Wonder why?

Herald

I don't have tpo respond to your pleas for an instant education. I told you in the beginning if you wanted to know you'd have to do what I did for decades. Learn it.

Wiki has to justify itself and it so admits in the articles cited. If you are unable to draw the correct conclusions that is your problem. As for "kid" I usually put people like you through something called a grammar analyzer.

Example.

The one I use tells me about what mental age the writer is based on his communications matrix idea concepts and thought chains he expresses.l There is dense context and then there is sparse. The readback I got was teenager.

Sorry kid but the F-22 will usually operate ABOVE cloud cover. At 17,000 meters which is official US Air Force published data there are no clouds.

The Typhoon has a service ceiling air to air of about 20,500 meters. That is after a zoom climb. You should be able to calculate absolute ceiling if you know wingloading and engine thrust as opposed to drag coefficient. Good check on your math skills kid. How much lift does a Typhoon have compared to the Raptor?

okie first one was pilot error so thats not any fault of the plane....

A crash is a crash. Ded pilots are dead pilots. You claimed there weren't any, now we find we lose two and you lose three. This is why yoiu are a kid. You fantasize, while I check my recall to make sure I have ot correct. I was surprised by the number of Typhoon landing accidents.; I thought it was a safer bird. Apparently the RAF still has pilots who like to belly whomp. Look it up, kid, a lot of Spitfires and Hurricanes were lost in the same way.

Test prototype was the one in Spain, not a fully tested version like the F-22 which crashed what? a month or so ago? if not less and actually killing its pilot....

The F-22s were test and eval birds, kid. The first Tiffy you lost was a proof of concept, every one since as far as I can determinejhas been a combat bird.

Name the F-22 incidents and causes, kid. The Tiffy crash last May is not old and it was a bad one.

(SARCASM) You have to prove yourself to me, kid. As Warpig said you are all flash and no bang. Claims don't cut it.

Herald

Quote Reply

Softwar AV Week - 800-525-5003 4/9/2009 4:54:06 PM

As I noted earlier - Ark - get a subscription - another 10 years - and a degree from high school - then post some more....

F-22 Design Shows More Than Expected

Aviation Week & Space Technology Feb 09 , 2009 , p. 24

When coupled with the electronic techniques generator in an aircraft, the radar can project jamming, false targets and other false information into enemy sensors. Ranges for electronic attack equal the AESA radar plus that of the enemy radar. That could allow electronic attack at ranges of 150 mi. or more. The ability to pick out small targets at a long distance also lets AESA-equipped aircraft find and attack cruise missiles, stealth aircraft and small UAVs.

Radar Upgrades

Aviation Week & Space Technology Nov 03 , 2008 , p. 22

The active electronically scanned array radar—a combination of the APG-79 AESA radar married to the latest computer, processing and software packages—will be the sensor and ?gun.? New software-driven electronic warfare packages could be integrated with the radar to produce the non-kinetic bullets. While air-to-air missiles have ranges out to about 100 mi., special electronic techniques routed through the powerful AESA radar produce weapons effects and jamming of enemy radars and missiles at ranges up to 200 mi.

F-22 Deployments Show Advances, But Many Capabilities Still Undeveloped

Aviation Week & Space Technology Sep 03 , 2007 , p. 62

That may be the greatest combat capability revealed by the F-22 so far. Because of its extensive electronic-surveillance array, the Raptor can instantaneously assemble the electronic order of battle—what devices are emitting and from where. It can identify concentrations of anti-aircraft defenses and quickly determine which emitters are high-priority for attack by missiles and bombs or by electronic means.

It also paints a realistic picture of the air battle that ensures the complaints of the Red Air opponents will continue. ?I was the Red Air for some F-22s and F-15s working together against F-15s and F/A-18s,? says Col. Douglas Carney, the 18th Wing?s operations group commander. ?I don?t know what their plan was, but as Red Air, I didn?t see the Raptors on my radar all day, so I think their stealth works. We saw the F-15s pretty clearly, but I never knew where the Raptors were.?

The Raptor?s altitude advantage—up to 65,000 ft., often directly over a ground target—also makes an impact. ?There?s not a lot of places to hide, even behind mountains, with our look angles,? Tolliver says. ?We can see where AWACS and fighters can?t. We have very good low-altitude coverage. We can pass real-time data and not have to rely on the intelligence report we walked out [of the pre-flight briefing] with two hours ago. If a SAM pops up, the fact that I know his location, in real time, is huge.?

Quote Reply

Lynstyne 4/10/2009 4:52:07 AM

Is this a wind up

all the OSF claims regarding stealth are now being a applied to tiffy and pirate. - is this BW having a laugh or is this a genuine british fan boy.

radar cannot detect heat

IR signitures can be masked and reduced

Radar signatures can be masked and reduced

Typhoon appllies this in limited amounts F22 in shed loads.

Typhoon is an excellent fighter and is being developed into a good bomb truck.

The F22 thanks to thermal and radar signature managment, is the best BVR fighter out there Typhoon is arguably 2nd (perhaps meteor dependent)

WVR ill defer to others judgment the lack of HMS is a definate disadvantage.

iim ignoring support such awacs elint etc since both will have the same support if there operating together and im not aware of any huge advantage in the F22 for data processing and managment.

Arklight please refer to scources other than Wiki - and accept that the Tiffy is a very good aircraft the F22 is better in BVR even BAE accept this.

In fact the argument is not if its better but how much better.

Quote Reply

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 NEXT

	News As History - November 24, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us