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: BAE pitching Typhoon as F-22 eludes
maruben    6/12/2009 6:00:08 PM
Friday, June 12, 2009 BAE pitching Typhoon as F-22 eludes Europeans make move amid U.S. export ban on stealth fighter By JUN HONGO Staff writer Japan should consider adopting the Eurofighter Typhoon as its next mainstay fighter jet even if the U.S. lifts its ban on exporting the stealthy F-22 Raptor, representatives of a U.K.-based defense and aerospace company said Thursday in Tokyo. The Air Self-Defense Force is eager to replace about 50 of its aging F-4s with the high-tech F-22 for its agility and high stealth capabilities. But recent reports indicate Washington is unlikely to sell its latest and greatest airplane to just anyone, while others say the ¥25 billion plane is too expensive. Andy Latham, BAE System Inc. vice president in charge of Typhoon exports, told reporters that since the Typhoon costs only about ¥10 billion, it presents "an effective non-U.S. solution" with significant benefits for Japan. The Typhoon, made by a consortium of European manufacturers, is already used by the air forces in Europe. Although export of the F-22 would be strictly controlled to prevent its military technology from falling into the wrong hands, Latham said selling the Typhoon will take a "no black box approach." The biggest difference between the two planes will be the "ability to offer Japan's industry a significant package of work," he said, explaining that the consortium could allow licensed manufacturing of the fighter in Japan and integration with Japanese equipment. As for the Typhoon's lack of stealth capability, however, BAE System's Craig Penrice said stealth technology should not be considered an issue. "Stealth is not the silver bullet answer that some might have you think," the former Royal Air Force pilot said, adding that the Typhoon has overall countermeasures against radar detection, including reduced infrared emissions. By comparison, stealth is "not cheap, not low maintenance and not fully exportable," he said. In total, Tokyo is considering six candidates to replace its F-4EJ fighters, including the U.S. F-35, which is still under development. BAE has been pitching the Typhoon to Japan for years, although Tokyo and Washington have a strong defense alliance that leaves little room for non-U.S. bidders, Latham said. Despite recent reports indicating the U.S. is unlikely to provide the F-22 to Japan, Defense Minister Yasukazu Hamada said Tuesday the fighter "remains an option that will be pursued." Japan's strong interest in the aircraft is based not only on its capabilities but also on its compatibility with the U.S. Air Force, which the ASDF would work closely with in the event Japan is attacked. Some observers also say Tokyo is eager to update its aircraft with the most up-to-date fighter available so it can claim air superiority over China, which is continuing to build its military power. Japan's current mainstay fighter is the U.S.-designed F-15 Eagle. P-3C patrols start Kyodo News A Maritime Self-Defense Force P-3C surveillance plane made its first patrol Thursday over the pirate-infested Gulf of Aden off Somalia, the Defense Ministry said. The aircraft is one of two P-3Cs dispatched last month on the first overseas mission by MSDF patrol planes. They are supporting the two MSDF destroyers that have been patrolling for pirates in the gulf since late March. The P-3Cs will gather information on suspicious ships to pass on to the destroyers and the commercial vessels they escort. The information will also be conveyed to navy vessels from other countries operating in the area, according to the ministry. After arriving in Djibouti late last month, the P-3Cs had been conducting training flights. The aircraft are using the international airport in Djibouti as their operational base. The destroyers have been escorting Japanese-related commercial vessels.
 
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   NEXT
Lynstyne       6/24/2009 4:14:54 PM
sorry forgot to add
 
re japan and derated f22
 
i personally cannot see how thats possible without major structural and material changes;
 
but if we suppose for a moment it is possible im not convinced the resultant aircraft will hold sufficient advantage over its competitors.
 
personally id like the F22  but if the choice was a derated f22 or a competitor -well i reckon id save the money, risk and development time, and just go buy the Typhoon .
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/24/2009 5:05:26 PM


Q for herald   regarding my question about IR + radar  Mica   weeks ago. 
 
I remember.

My understanding of your answer is

IR and radar missiles have different flight profiles  the seeker could be swapped out as simply as i suggested (and i see no reason that wouldnt work) and the flight profile could be modified to suit with software.
 
Uh no..

Each missile should be optimized to use its most energy efficient profile to use its intercept logic. IR missiles use proportional lead logics and CHASE  the target. Radar seeker missiles use a predict lead where they either race to meet or are dropped to meet the target depending on the target's future  predicted position. The missile is either a chaser or a meeter. If it is a meeter it uses its potential energy over time for range and emphasizes pointability at a meeting making it also a lobber. If its a chaser, it has to turn constantly to follow the image in its seeker FoV.
 
The best solution is not to try to take a missile that has a lot of fins and strakes for drag, loses velocity rapidly becaise of its excesasive need for lift and turn, and stick a radar on it as a seeker. That is a stupid solution and shows basically stupid engineering 
 
The problem is that aerodynamically this doesnt work the different profiles require a different missile body so the mica is either optimised for 1 or comprimised for both.

 The MICA as a fat IR chase missile, has two major defects. Its nose gets too hot for the crappy cryp chiller to give a good temperature contrast so that the IR sensor can easily see a hotspot against its actual local ambient background temperature. Bad enough, but the crup-chiller fails completerly after 15 seconds so that the sensor becomes ineffective after about 20-25+ seconds flyout. More or less, this means that the IR MICA goes BLIND about 30,000+ meters out. Shrug, its good enough for a self defense missile against the PRCs and the rock worshippers , but if you rely on that missile against a RUSSIAN or Indian Sukhoi, you DIE.  

As for the radar ATG MICA, I already mentioned that it cannot update worth a damn and it chase to race to meet so it can put the tartget within bthe muopic and narrow cone of the MICA seeker. Three seconds early or late for an AMRAAM in average and the AMRAAM misses. The MICA seeker has propoertionally about half that window for its FoV conic, and it has to chase to meet the target,.since it was designed as a proportional lead chase missile-even with the radar seeker. For the rest of us that actually means to guide a MICA midcourse as it adjusts to a maneuvering target, the only methods, the French could use, was retransmission command guidance; or semi-active radar homing guidance. Since the French never had the first radar missile match that ever worked right, and this was their second real crack at the other (SARH update) its no wonder that Thales, MBDA, and Dassault screwed everything up so badly.  
 
The AdA prefers the IR Mica as their base load A2A missile since they know, (or art least they hope) the IR MICA will work at the self defense ranges against the second rate stuff they expect to fight.
 
The radar ATG MICA missile, they realize, is junk only fit to export to the gullible and foolish. 
 
 Herald


 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       6/24/2009 5:28:55 PM
hence Frances interest in Meteor  
 
- im getting a bit narked at this being hereldad (in various forums and if ive been informed correctly some publications) as a new french weapon
 
We may have a slight cross purpose regarding mica
 
when i say the seeker swap is doable i mean from a completely electronic point of view and that different software would allow the missile to  (attempt to) fly 2 different profiles. again from an electrical point of veiw.
 
scratch that  the thought occurs that the flight profile probably cannot be changed by software as to much is dependent upon the physical charecteristics of the missile.
 
I assure you i thoroughly accept youre argument that in the real world Mica doesnt work  - its a poor comprimise in an area you need an edge
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       6/24/2009 5:31:23 PM


@ gf0012-aust: > again, all this fluffery about the F-22 and japan is not supported by evidence and behaviour coming from within japan
slowman > Behavior coming from within Japan is that Japan is only interested in F-22, and anything else is unacceptable, unless the US pushes Japanese hand into buying Typhoon. This comes all the way up from the defense minister and drumrolled by powerful conservative politicians.

and yet they japanese have made it pretty clear that they don't subscribe to getting a new 4.5 gen aircraft into their orbat which will create a logistics line item nightmare..  again, they have a tight budget - it's not aladdins cave and they're not going to be chucking their readies into an indigenous platform where they have no relevant experience except in DSP - and even that is not going to be useful for a 5th gen manned combat  aircraft.

@ gf0012-aust: >  they also don't want to buy a hotrodded gen 4.5 as they also want to go to 5th gen in a normal procurement cycle (0-15 years from selection)

slowman > Shin Shin is 5th gen.

again, contradicted by their observors in Brussels at the JSF sessions.  The commentary from Okazawa is atypical of their background belief.

- No money for indigenous development to develop that platform in the threat cycle

- No inherent capability to build and deliver a 5th gen without considerable assistance at the systems integration level - and foreign material dependant as they don't have any identified ready capability that could be utilised.  eg radar systems, ewarfare systems, weapons synthesis issues, materials science issues, 

- NO experience in designing or developing flat panel contour arrays, no experience in dealing with titanium structures outside of their submarines, 

- Not one iota of evidence that they have even gone serious outside of fan club commentary on line art drawings dribbled into the public arena.

gf0012-aust: > They will not get any tech sharing on the F-22 even if it was available

slowman > That's fine to them, as lo

 
Quote    Reply

Lynstyne       6/24/2009 5:42:04 PM

hence Frances interest in Meteor  

 

- im getting a bit narked at this being hereldad (in various forums and if ive been informed correctly some publications) as a new french weapon

 

We may have a slight cross purpose regarding mica

 

when i say the seeker swap is doable i mean from a completely electronic point of view and that different software would allow the missile to  (attempt to) fly 2 different profiles. again from an electrical point of veiw.

 

scratch that  the thought occurs that the flight profile probably cannot be changed by software as to much is dependent upon the physical charecteristics of the missile.

 

I assure you i thoroughly accept youre argument that in the real world Mica doesnt work  - its a poor comprimise in an area you need an edge


not trying to be obtuse just trying to understand  an area i have no knowledge of
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    typos.   6/24/2009 6:11:20 PM

Q for herald   regarding my question about IR + radar  Mica   weeks ago. 

 

I remember.




My understanding of your answer is



IR and radar missiles have different flight profiles  the seeker could be swapped out as simply as i suggested (and i see no reason that wouldn't work) and the flight profile could be modified to suit with software.

 

Uh no..




Each missile should be optimized to use its most energy efficient profile to use its intercept logic. IR missiles use proportional lead logics and CHASE  the target. Radar seeker missiles use a predict lead where they either race to meet or are dropped to meet the target depending on the target's future  predicted position. The missile is either a chaser or a meeter. If it is a meeter then it uses its potential energy over time for range and emphasizes pointability at a meeting making it also a lobber. If its a chaser, then it has to turn constantly to follow the image in its seeker FoV.


 

The best solution is not to try to take a missile that has a lot of fins and strakes for drag, loses velocity rapidly because of its excessive need for lift and turn, and stick a radar on it as a seeker. That is a stupid solution and shows basically stupid engineering 


 

The problem is that aerodynamically this doesn't work the different profiles require a different missile body so the mica is either optimized for 1 or compromised for both.



 The MICA as a fat IR chase missile, has two major defects. Its nose gets too hot for the crappy cryo chiller to give a good temperature contrast so that the IR sensor can easily see a hotspot against its actual local ambient background temperature. Bad enough, but the cryo-chiller fails completely after 15 seconds so that the sensor becomes ineffective after about 20-25+ seconds flyout. More or less, this means that the IR MICA goes BLIND about 30,000+ meters out. Shrug, its good enough for a self defense missile against the PRCs and the rock worshipers, but if you rely on that missile against a RUSSIAN or Indian Sukhoi, you DIE.  

As for the radar ATG MICA, I already mentioned that it cannot update worth a damn, and it chases to race to meet so it can put the target within the myopic and narrow cone of the MICA seeker. Three seconds early or late for an AMRAAM in average and the AMRAAM misses. The MICA seeker has proportionally about half that window for its FoV conic, and it has to chase to meet the target,.since it was designed as a proportional lead chase missile-even with the radar seeker. For the rest of us; that actually means to guide a MICA midcourse as it adjusts to a maneuvering target, the only methods, the French could use, was retransmission command guidance; or semi-active radar homing guidance. Since the French never had the first radar missile match that ever worked right, and this was their second real crack at the other (SARH update) its no wonder that Thales, MBDA, and Dassault screwed everything up so badly.  

The AdA prefers the IR Mica as their base load A2A missile since they know, (or art least they hope) the IR MICA will work at the self defense ranges against the second rate stuff they expect to fight.

The radar ATG MICA missile, they realize, is junk only fit to export to the gullible and foolish. 

 Herald

 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345    typos.   6/24/2009 9:43:29 PM




hence Frances interest in Meteor  



 



- im getting a bit narked at this being hereldad (in various forums and if ive been informed correctly some publications) as a new french weapon



 



We may have a slight cross purpose regarding mica



 



when i say the seeker swap is doable i mean from a completely electronic point of view and that different software would allow the missile to  (attempt to) fly 2 different profiles. again from an electrical point of veiw.



 



scratch that  the thought occurs that the flight profile probably cannot be changed by software as to much is dependent upon the physical charecteristics of the missile.



 



I assure you i thoroughly accept youre argument that in the real world Mica doesnt work  - its a poor comprimise in an area you need an edge






not trying to be obtuse just trying to understand  an area i have no knowledge of

The point is that a missile cannot ignore the laws of aerodynamics and physics. I know the idiots now in charge at MBDA (MATRA) wish they could ignore that fact, but the USAF went down that road already with FALCON. It didn't work. Now we use the China Lake solution of SIDEWINDER and SPARROW/AMRAAM. Sometimes you stumble around a bit, until you hit the sweet spots you discover yourself; but you'd really have to be engineering morons  not to see what the other guys do that works and not imitate them while you stumble around..

Maybe one day I will tell you about two missiles THUNDERBIRD (British) and HAWK (American) and how a copied radar turned a dud into a KILLER.
 
 
Quote    Reply

SlowMan       6/25/2009 9:48:28 AM
@ gf0012-aust

> - No money for indigenous development to develop that platform in the threat cycle

That's an odd comment. You have Japanese indigenous replacement for Aegis system partially implemented in Hyuga and fully implemented in 19DD destroyers. You have an assortment of indigenous Japanese  A2A and anti-ship missiles. You have Japanese indigenous replacement for P-3(No, Japanese are not buying P-8 Poseidon) and C-130. You have Shin Shin. See, Japanese like their indigenous stuff even if it costs more than imported weapons and dislike importing unless they absolutely have to.

> - No inherent capability to build and deliver a 5th gen without considerable assistance at the systems integration level

EADS and Boeing say hello.

> Outside of nukes, they can already belt the chinese into machine dust. Thats at a naval and airforce level.  man for man at a landforces level,

Navy, yes. If Japanese fleet manages to avoid 55 Chinese subs lurking around.
Airforce, not so much and this is their motivation for importing F-22.
Army, hell no. Japanese GSDF is the joke of the region.

> No they're not.  They've publicly said that they need to spend smarter

All the while funding indigenous solutions costing twice as much as imported weapons.

In the meanwhile, you win on this one this time because Obama just said he would veto any defense bill that included funding for F-22. EADS can now laugh all the way to the bank with Typhoon sales to Japan.
 
Quote    Reply

Beazz       6/25/2009 1:57:05 PM



In the meanwhile, you win on this one this time because Obama just said he would veto any defense bill that included funding for F-22. EADS can now laugh all the way to the bank with Typhoon sales to Japan.


Got a link to where Obama *just said* this? I find it hard to believe he'd risk such embarrasement over less then $2 billion. He has to know that if a bill with funding for F22's makes it to his desk that means it ALREADY has substancial Democratic support and therefore  the votes are there to over ride his veto the minute it hits his desk.
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Energy efficient or sensor efficient?   6/25/2009 3:00:38 PM
Each missile should be optimized to use its most energy efficient profile to use its intercept logic. IR missiles use proportional lead logics and CHASE  the target. Radar seeker missiles use a predict lead where they either race to meet or are dropped to meet the target depending on the target's future  predicted position. The missile is either a chaser or a meeter.
 
Seems like the reason stated here for an IR missile to chase a target is to take full advantage of that nice hot IR emitting exhaust nozzle on jet fighters. 

Making an IR "meeting missile" should be possible IMHO, but at what costs? An IR seeker can detect a flaming hot jet nozzle from a much further distance, than an airplane 10 to 20 degrees warmer than the surrounding sky.
 
There is not much point in designing an IR missile with a state of the art expensive sensor and then have it's sensor detection range severely limited, because you insist on an predict lead logic. IMHO.
 
 
 

 
 
 

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18   NEXT



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