F-22 VS. Eurofighter

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

VelocityVector Ark 4/1/2009 11:50:04 AM

Your Tiffy isn't equipped with Rivet Joint-type sensory capability but Raptor is. If your a/c or its helpers emit, a Raptor flight will sniff you out and cue on you long before you can possibly know that we're there. (The limitations on passive-only attack are discussed, with validated support, in the Rafale threads inter alia.) Raptor also operates several miles above Tiffy, giving the former decisive advantages over the latter. The latest iteration of -120s can home on Tiffy at max range but the radar-guided missile suite that Tiffy carries or will carry cannot home on Raptor except at very short range (consider missile diameter and power, please, vice true stealth attributes of Raptor). You really need to come down from the ether. 0.02

v^2

Quote Reply

Herald12345 I'm satisfied. 4/1/2009 12:45:43 PM

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

Didn't answer the question asked you. Instead a lot of assertions.

1. Not likely to happen in this match up

The Russians will design for the exploit. They have to to compete.

2. F-22 does not have much of a speed advantage, in fact I've not seen official evidence that gives it a speed advantage, its own website seems to say its slower than the Typhoon.

Supercruise sustained a;lmost a 400 knot airspeed edge. Measure that in kinetic energy

3. Explain the point?, both will kill either depending on their defenses and maneuverability.

Nonsense. I don't have to explain. Vacuum. No air. Shoot down as opposed to shoot up. Uphill is always harder. I'm nopt here to teach. Not anymore.

4. Show me the official report on this please, I've not seen this or did you pull that 90% out of a hat? A more maneuverable aircraft with more weapons, better weapons, can detect your stealth and with more defenses would more than likely outclass the opposite.

180 kills to 2 against all comers in wargames. Western pilots including Australians, Canadians, and RAF.

Not out of a hat at all-in fact well publicized in Aviation Week, DID and many other publications. The fact that you do0n't know this about the Raptor shows me that you don't know much about the bird.

A lot of help? not likely, it has the weapons advantage and even the defense and perhaps even speed.

Assertions. I know better because I have cited easily checked facts. Prove your assertions and speculations.. You demanded it of me. Its only fair after you called me a liar that you actually source your claims.

The same arguments can be used for an F-22 with support, the only difference is that the F-22 stealth would be pretty much useless against AWACs or advanced ground radar, its never been known to be invisible and its design

Quote Reply

Softwar 4/1/2009 1:00:20 PM

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

As Djim points out - this is math not guess work. It would appear that your guess work does not add up.

The key to radar return is cross section. The cross section return from a missile - which is designed differently from a manned fighter - can involve a different set of equations. The body of the missile may be stealth but its fin and flight structure may radiate like a beacon. The best example is the SS-N-22 which has a small body footprint but its ramjet cones and 90 degree tail fins are perfect radar reflectors. Exocet is another 90 degree beacon with a nice little radar dish behind a thin nose cone which also lights up when illuminated. The Quail decoy carried by the B-52 was tiny in comparison to the big bomber but its radar return was nearly identical by design.

Your quote of "stealth" missile raises one big of question - which missile are we talking about? So far there has only been one "stealth" missile - deployed by the USAF on its strategic bomber force.

The AESA radar of an F-22 is designed to detect missiles and disable them - which the Typhoon cannot do. The basic principle being that missiles are designed for one way operations - and have many vulnerable access points that a manned fighter would sheild. The AESA can penetrate these vulnerable areas and disable, disorient or even destroy the electronics.

Thus - comparing a thin skinned missile with a sheilded manned jet is not valid. Just as comparing the F-22 AESA to the Typhoon radar is not valid.

The Raptor is able to detect a non-stealth Typhoon with the AESA long before the standard mechanical radar can detect it much less lock on. The reduced RCS of an F-22 would also allow it to maneuver into a shooting position before an opposing non-stealth fighter can detect it - as demonstrated by the USAF in multi-national exercises. I should note that fighter radars with similar capability to the Typhoon were able to detect the F-22 at close range but not lock on long enough for a shot.

Now add in super-cruise - which the Typhoon cannot do - and you have a Raptor.

Quote Reply

JFKY The Margins are busted... 4/1/2009 1:21:49 PM

Making this thread almost unreadable, now...how about a new one, thread that is.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/1/2009 3:41:24 PM

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.

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

Didn't answer the question asked you. Instead a lot of assertions.

1. Not likely to happen in this match up

The Russians will design for the exploit. They have to to compete.

2. F-22 does not have much of a speed advantage, in fact I've not seen official evidence that gives it a speed advantage, its own website seems to say its slower than the Typhoon.

Supercruise sustained a;lmost a 400 knot airspeed edge. Measure that in kinetic energy

3. Explain the point?, both will kill either depending on their defenses and maneuverability.

Nonsense. I don't have to explain. Vacuum. No air. Shoot down as opposed to shoot up. Uphill is always harder. I'm nopt here to teach. Not anymore.

180 kills to 2 against all comers in wargames. Western pilots including Australians, Canadians, and RAF.

Quote Reply

warpig 4/1/2009 4:02:19 PM

Newbie, since you've been posting here all of a couple days, why don't you just read a lot and post a little, since you are not going to find *ANYONE* here who thinks you are right, could find a dozen regular posters here who have demonstrated a knowledge and grasp of the subject of fighters who would completely disagree with you, and you ought to consider that in itself to be reason for prudence and circumspect behavior rather than demanding what amopunts to a complete (re)education.

Or you could just say, "I say I'm right, I made a case, now you prove me wrong with citation and verse, or else I've run circles around you logically and won the game"... and learn nothing, since no one here is likely to consider putting all the time and effort into explaining the whole litany of errors to you to be worth it to them to do so.

We already have one Bluewings on this site, and by *ALL* accounts (except for his own), one is already too many.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/1/2009 4:09:16 PM

We already have one Bluewings on this site, and by *ALL* accounts (except for his own), one is already too many.

Ime wrong because a few forum goers know more about planes than me? I should stop posting just becaus of that? this is a debate, as such you seem to be making several fallacies, and some crude claims all rolled into one.

Ill sit and ask myself a question, should I belive a few F-22 fans without any information or linked evidence, or should I belive the General of the United states who has flown both?...hmmm toughie

Quote Reply

warpig 4/1/2009 4:14:26 PM

Yeah... that's what I figured. Have a nice day.

Quote Reply

Arklight 4/1/2009 4:17:41 PM

Yeah... that's what I figured. Have a nice day.

I will, thank you very much

Also do you troll these forums or something? you tried to have a jab at a guy called blue wings as if your waiting for an amused crowd to pat you on the back, although this does indeed say volumes about your "maturity" and possibly "age" but would you please stop spamming this thread at least, at least Herald has an argument or two and sounds like he knows what he is talking about despite his arrogance nad lack of evidence, your just trying to "get" at someone (Bluewings).

Quote Reply

Softwar 4/1/2009 4:29:21 PM

US radars are most advanced? irrelvent tbh although ive not seen evidence for said claim its unimportant, what is important is your evidence for the F-22 being tested against the most advanced US radars please.

Clearly you do not know enough about fighters to make an intelligent comment.

The Typhoon needs an AESA radar and all four nations know it. Thus, the reason why they want to leave Captor and go on to Caesar. Captor is nice but it is a mechanical radar that lacks the power and EW/IW capability of current AESA radars. Without an AESA the Typhoon will not make any more export sales. As it is - the Eurofighter is outclassed in this critical area by F-15s, F-18s and the F-22. As it is - it does not look like the Eurofighter will have AESA until Tranche 3 - some time from now.

Nations To Trade Typhoon Numbers To Secure a Deal
Aviation Week & Space Technology Mar 23 , 2009 , p. 33

A further area yet to be resolved is drawing a road map for the introduction of an active, electronically scanned array radar. The availability of an AESA will be a key factor in some export campaigns, including to India, while the RAF is also eager to secure an upgrade path.

Levels of support for an AESA to replace the mechanically scanned Captor differ among the partners. Italy is not particularly keen at present, since the radar would not likely be available until late T3A aircraft, and the country is disinclined to operate two Typhoon standards.

F-22 Design Shows More Than Expected
Aviation Week & Space Technology Feb 09 , 2009 , p. 24

The F-22?s newly revealed areas of overperformance include a radar cross section that officials will only characterize as ?better? than what was asked for. Pentagon officials have said privately that the desired signature from certain critical angles was -40 dBsm., the equivalent radar reflection of a steel ?marble.?

Supercruise is at Mach 1.78 rather than Mach 1.5. Acceleration—although company officials would not say from what speed or at what altitude—is 3.05 sec. faster than the requirement of 54 sec. In nonafterburning, full military power, the Raptor can operate at slightly above 50,000 ft. However, it is known that the F-22 opened its aerial battles at about 65,000 ft. during its first joint exercise in Alaska, apparently using afterburner. There is also a mysterious admission that the range of the Raptor?s Northrop Grumman/Raytheon active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar has a range 5% greater than expected. That means a cushion of an additional 5-6 mi. of detection range against enemy aircraft and missiles.

Ranges of the new lines of AESA radars are classified. But they are estimated at about 90 mi. for the smallest (aimed at the F-16 radar-upgrade market). The F/A-18E/F and F-35 (with radar ranges of 100 mi.) are followed by the F-22 (110-115-mi.). The largest is carried by the upgraded F-15Cs and Es (125 mi.). By comparison, the range for a mechanically scanned, F-15C radar is 56 mi. according to Russian air force intelligence. U.S. aerospace officials agree that an AESA radar ?at least doubles? the range over standard military radars.

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.

Quote Reply

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