I dont understand the joke  

 

The F-22 is an overpriced failure of a plane who nt only is not required for the current technology of any enemies in the near future but is inferior to the Typhoon type Jets in many areas.

Thank you, it's about time someone pointed out the obvious that we all knew but were afraid to admit to ourselves--and you did it so concisely yet convincingly, too!  USAF clearly should have bought Eurofighters instead of those F-22 lemons; your argument proves it!

 

To True What an inciteful observation how stupid of you Yanks to build an aircraft so advanced it out classes everything else in the sky. where would we be without school holidays to guide defence strategy.
 

I mean what possible reason could you have for building such a worthless piece of crap. mind you its clear some of youre english Ancestry creeps through, that curiosly british sense of fairplay is obviuos.

 

Its clear that you want to give youre enemy a slim chance otherwise you would have bought Rafales.

 

Sarcasm Off

 

I can see value in The USAF operating the Tiffy,  i suspect the Typhoon will be cheaper to operate (smaller) and possibly a wider A2G capabillity.  The Typhoon will be good enough in most situations and given the F22s limited production run will give the USAF a cheap(ish) multi role fighter , perhaps air defence  and   limited A2G leaving the F22 as a silver bullet or perhaps offensive air superiority.

 

F22 Expensive - yes,

 extremely advanced compared to its rivals - yes,

Inferior to the Typhoon in some areas -  possibly (WVR, A2G -however id take my chances in the F22)

failure  - nothing so far has given me that impression

 

Exportability  - catch 22 most the world would have it if they could afford it. but Uncle Sam aint selling.

 

Fan boys aside - i think most people believe the f22 to be the best thing since sliced bread.   I hope the Typhoon is the next best thing.

 

 

If your not going to take any professional bearing on the situation and only want to create an unamusing sarcastic remark then dont post, I dont think this thread is meant for trolling with such things, the guy who posted after you at least made some kind of worthwhile assessment.

 

 

 

 

Its not proven that at all, it does not outclass everything in the sky by any credible evaluation and most of its specific advantages leave it badly wanting in most other areas.

 

What the British use is not fairplay, the Eurofighter is arguably the best plane created so far since regardless of whether its better than the F-22 in an A2A role, its built for many many roles and is cheaper by far, to say were playing fair is a little too much, what is fact is that suggesting I did actually agree that the F-22 is superior in the air by such a margin to the Eurofighter, its obvious its not required because its often seen that the Eurofighter is also the next best in the air and greater than most future concievable threats by a fair margin, what then can you see in the use of the F-22 which is vastly more costly and not as useful in half as many roles?

 

If they operated the Typhoon they would not only have a plane that could defeat fairly easily the opponents the F-22 would ever likely face but also a multi-role platform that in the future will have a far superior BVR missle to the F-22 and the use of A2G cruise missles and a variety of bombs. Your own mentioned advantages also apply, cheaper, easier to maintain etc.

 

The F-22 is not "extremely advanced" compared to its rivals, ime not sure if there have been many more that have flown both aircraft but the American general (I think that was his rank) who flew both planes claimed the Eurofighter is top notch even in comparison to the Raptor and he even went as far to say it was the best plane he had flown.

 

The onl

I could not find an edit feature on the forum but heres the sources from where I got my information on:

 

"The Eurofighter can detect low observables"

 

 

 

 

 

"The Eurofighter has also received praise from unexpected quarters, which makes it even more significant: General John P. Jumper, Commander-inChief of the US Air Force, said after flying the Eurofighter that he was impressed with it. Right after his flight on the Eurofighter on 20 July 2004, Jumper said, "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter." In particular, Jumper praised the Eurofighter's agility, manoeuvrability, acceleration and precise navigation."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some things.

1. He who sits above you, sees first and kills first.

2. Refusal of engagement means that the guy with the speed and altitude advantage picks when. .

3. A cruising ramjet air to air missile is better than a tandem burn rocket boosted air to air missile but not by that much and not at 25000 meters altitude.

4. A. Low observable super-cruise with altitude and fuel endurance and LPI radar advantage versus B. non low observable  after-burning (reheat) relying on an easily degraded non range finding IRST and a conventional radar means the guy in the B. DIES 90% of the time without even knowing he's been painted and locked up and SLAMMERED.

That is the technical discussion in brief.

 

Now the Typhoon can compete, but it won't be a joust, and it can't be alone. It has to have a lot of help from the ground, in the air, and from orbit.    

 

I already discussed in the RAFALE thread why an IRST doesn't work. I won't repeat it here. Go there for the tech discussion.

 

What I would be interested in, would be to see how you would use the Typhoon with support to defend against something like the F-22 with support?

 

Let's see what you got?

Herald

 

Once the enemy air force is blasted out of the sky or is scrap on the ground, it doesn't matter what kind of multi-role paperweights it had. the skies will be clear for the Sparkies and presumably Typhoons to do their thing.

 

The Typhoon is a very good aircraft, but it is not used the way you think it will be.  At least you mentioned that it will need AWACs and other off platform support. But you don't realize just how much support you need. Fortunately the RAF and the Luftwaffe do.  

 

Going the other way, the Raptor has much the same problems the Typhoon faces and much the same solutions. There will be EW out the wazoo, and all kinds of decoys and spoofs to help it do its job of hiding at altitude to humpo the unwary.

 

The question was raised about towed decoys and the claim thatn the Sparky won't carry any. This is a tactical and technical decision. There is a place for towed decoys (F-16s) and there is a place for expendables (F-35s). If the radar seeker needs to see a noisy radar return and its intended victim is a low-observable aircraft, then the LAST thing you want is a cable towed radar reflector. An expendable is better..   . 

 

Jetpipes can be masked. You'd be surprised at hard it is to see a cooled jet exhaust at forty miles and get any optical lock to establish any  kind of drop basket (YOU CAN'T) bercause you cannot range with a camera. 

Herald

 

 

The F-22 is that part of the US air fleet that kills an enemy air force in the air and maybe do a lirttle weasel work on the sode. It is an air superiority fighter.

Here is a pretty good summary of AWACS vs. F-22 as posted before by DJim:

How far away an AWACS or any other radar could get a detection of an F-22 or any other target depends on the RCS of that target under the conditions at that moment.  If the radar can detect a 3m2 target at 400km (like an F-16 with some stores), then it can detect a 0.3m2 target at about 235km, a 0.03m2 target at about 135km, a 0.003m2 target at about 80km, and a 0.0003m2 target at about 45km (assuming the radar is even capable of detecting such a small return at all).  I think most people figure 0.003m2 is probably about the "worst case" ballpark-guess for the average frontal aspect RCS of an F-22 to a radar operating in the >1Ghz range, which basically covers all AWACS aircraft.  Sounds like someone's guess of 200km or even 100km like you later reference is probably pretty much just bullcrap.

 

Ive not seen that official information myself, can you show it to me please? that the AWACs detects the F-16 at 400km and all this just sounds like a member making calculations, not an actual official test of the F-22 against an AWACs.

 

The SMART-L can detect stealth missles which are a lot smaller than fighter aircaft at 85km and there is the more updated version of that called the S1850M