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
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: F-35 vs. Eurofighter
IAFbestinworld    8/13/2004 11:49:07 PM
Lockheed says that besides the f-22, the f-35 will be the best air to air fighter in the future, is this true? Could an f-35 take a Eurofighter? My opinion says yes since f-35 contains more stealthy characteristics.
 
Quote    Reply

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   NEXT
T800m101    RE:F-35 vs. Eurofighter    8/19/2004 11:01:35 PM
Personally, I think the F-35 is the way to go, I would want to take it into war.
 
Quote    Reply

jjfs2    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter   8/19/2004 11:59:13 PM
"The F-35 is not invisible to radar, it like all stealthy aircraft has lower RCS or lower observerability, this does not mean the AMSAR equiped E/F2000 cannot find it, this is a better argument for the F-22 but certainly not the F-35 JSF. The E/F2000 will probably only have a marginally larger RCS than the bulkier and larger F-35 (It‘s main RCS advantage being internal weapons bays)." I don't much see the logic of this argument. Firstly, the most important aspect of RCS reduction is the airframe, not internal versus external. The F-35 is a Lockheed Martin airframe, designed beginning a full decade after the inception of the F-22 program. And while the cost factors have rendered the F-35 inferior in many respects to the F-22, the shape of the plane, from which it derives most of its stealth, doesn't add anything to its cost. Secondly, the size of a platform has next to nothing to cross section at this stage of the game. Lest we forget the most stealth aircraft ostensibly in existence, the B-2.
 
Quote    Reply

Lasting Damage    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter   8/20/2004 3:06:36 AM
Do you really think the US is going to sell its best stealth tech to all the countries involved in the JSF programme, and if they make a more stealthy version for them selfs then the other partners will scream blue bloody murder about it. The US is already concerned about stealth tech being transffered to other EU contries via the UK industries that have a finger in both the US and EU industry pies.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:F-35 vs. Eurofighter RCS - Rule Britannia/Hellfire    8/20/2004 9:21:21 AM
An aircraft will often only need to be stealthy enough to get within weapons range of its target, on the air or on the ground. Even if it can't do that, having a degree of stealth would cut down the time in which it could be detected by a sweep of an opposing fighters radar, or may mean it can fly closer to air defences un-detected. That is why the stealth measures on the F-18E, the Eurocanards and the F-35 will be worthwhile, irrespective of whether or not they are as good as an F-22 or F-117.
 
Quote    Reply

B.Smitty    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule.B Versatility/Shaken   8/20/2004 9:37:12 AM
Four? IIRC, there's really only two internal stores stations. The other two on the doors are AAM-only. Has this changed? http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0163.shtml Also, IIRC, the F-35 is only fully stealthy over the frontal arc. The big nozzle in back kills its aft-quarter stealth. This is very important for deep penetration Nighthawk-style missions where you have to overfly enemy IADS to get to your target.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    RAFALE   8/20/2004 10:18:49 AM
Rafale RCS is closer to that of a bird than a cruise missile from sure information in pure air to air configuration without external tank. believe it or not! I don't know what will be the exact feature of a F35 but according of what you see in US public document, Rafale is not far in air to air.But Rafale have no internal bomb bay for carrying conventional weapons in air to ground missions. Rafale was completetly redisign to improve stealth feature after first prototype and it is the most advanced for now.But I'm pretty sure that UK have done the best of it can do with EF platform so I bet that EF2000 is better than a F18E.
 
Quote    Reply

Rule Britannia    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter   8/20/2004 12:38:11 PM
“In addition to four internal stations (possibly six, with the added ASRAAM inner door mount).” The F-35 has two internal stations each with two hard points. Two (inboard) are dedicated Air-to-air stations that carry AMRAAM. The outer door mount can carry ordinance up to 2000lbs. There is no added AIM-132 ASRAAM/AIM-9X inner door mount that I have heard of that would increase capacity to six internal hardpoints. “the JSF has seven external hardpoints with carriage weights of up to 5000 pounds.” The JSF has six external hardpoints. I’m not 100% on the 5000lb max capacity. I did not say the F-35 was inflexible but I will certainly agree that the internal bays give the JSF the edge in maintaining a lower RCS. However this will mean it is having to trade off capacity where the Eurofighter will have the edge. If both are similarly configured (i.e. same or similar weapons fit, the F-35 will still only have marginally better RCS in my opinion and this would not be sufficient to achieve a first strike advantage on the Eurofighter in my opinion given it‘s advanced sensory array. My calculations regarding my hypothesis on the F-35’s RCS was based on formula calculations after observing the basic airframe and size similarities between it and the F-16 (notable exceptions including serrated air intakes, angled trailing edges and canted tailfins) and angular differences between it and the F-22 and Nighthawk. The F-35 certainly does not have comparable RCS to the F-22 or Nighthawk, even when clean. Here is a good bit about the E/F2000‘s typical ordinance capacity. http://www.eurofighter.com/Typhoon/SwingRole/ “The first blocks of JSF will (according to plan) be cleared to carry a wider variety of weapons than the Tranche 3 Typhoon.” Could you specify this please? “the program includes "stealthy pylons" which will allow it to maintain a modest signature while set up for external stores.” The Eurofighter Typhoon is fitted with GRP hardpoints, minimising RCS that also feature serrated wings to partly shield the missiles, tanks or bomb’s RCS. Fuselage hardpoints also feature recessed bays. “Manoeuvrability and performance are harder to quantify for the JSF right now, as it is not flying and performance data is sketchy at best. It is tough to compare wing-loading and thrust-to-weight wise because the JSF can be all internal carriage while its opponent will have external weapons and possibly tanks.” Again it’s a question of trade-off, do you want better stealth or increased capacity at it’s expense? Each have their merited advantages. “I'm not contending that the JSF will be more (or less) manoeuvrable than the Typhoon and Rafale, but it certainly will not be a slouch.” Taking into account the purposely unstable aerodynamics of the E/F2000 when compared with the F-35 (also the issue of TVC, more powerful engines, smaller size etc) I would say it is more likely that the Typhoon is the more agile and nimble of the two. “All in all, the F-35 is a beautiful thing” I certainly agree with that. “But, if I understand what you just wrote to mean that your estimate of the F-35 is in the -4 to -7 dBm range you are definitely underestimating its performance” I don’t agree, as I said before, I was taking a scale from between the F-22 and E/F2000 from that website and my calculations regarding my hypothesis on the F-35’s RCS was based on the formula calculations after observing the basic airframe and size similarities between it and the F-16 (Taking into account notable advances including serrated air intakes, angled trailing edges and canted tailfins) and obvious angular differences between it and the F-22 and Nighthawk. It is not particularly different in streamlined form than the E/F2000, both are RAM coated, have a composite structure etc… “Firstly, the most important aspect of RCS reduction is the airframe Yes and that includes the size of the aircraft or more specifically since you bring up the B-2, the size of radar reflective surfaces which ultimately corresponds to the overall size given it is not a flat flying wing concept like the B-2. “not internal versus external” This is a major factor in determining the overall RCS of an aircraft, the more stuff hanging of it, the greater the RCS. “Rafale RCS is closer to that of a bird than a cruise missile from sure information in pure air to air configuration without external tank. believe it or not!” So you are saying that it has almost as good an RCS as the SR-71 Blackbird considering it has a similar RCS to the BGM-109 Tomahawk? “Rafale was completetly redisign to improve stealth feature after first prototype and it is the most advanced for now.” Any proof of this? The Eurofighter is largely considered to have the best RCS reduction features after the F-22 and F-35. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/electronics/q0168.shtml http://www.eurofighter.com/News/Article/default.asp?n=131 http://www.eurofi
 
Quote    Reply

Rule Britannia    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter   8/20/2004 12:41:27 PM
Personally I would say that the F-35 and Eurofighter are pretty evenly matched each with respective advantages and disadvantages in certain areas. I think we aught to reach a mutual consensus because until the Eurofighter and F-35 enter mainstream service this discussion will go on and on and on and on...
 
Quote    Reply

Shaken    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule.B Versatility/Shaken   8/20/2004 1:08:53 PM
>> (B.Smitty) >> Four? IIRC, there's really only two internal stores stations. >> The other two on the doors are AAM-only. Has this changed? (Shaken) Inside each bay there are two stations, one for an A/A store (350 pound carriage) and another A/S or A/A station (2500 pound carriage). There has been talk of mounting a rail on the inside of the actual door (as opposed to inside the bay, attached to the fuselage) for IRM carriage. This would allow the missile seeker to be held out into the jetstream to lock up before launch. I don't know the status of this concept. Of the eleven stores stations on the JSF, four are A/A only (one in each bay and one near each wingtip). >> (B.Smitty) >> http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0163.shtml (Shaken) Isn't this a cool site? >> (B.Smitty) >> Also, IIRC, the F-35 is only fully stealthy over the frontal arc. >> The big nozzle in back kills its aft-quarter stealth. This is >> very important for deep penetration Nighthawk-style >> missions where you have to overfly enemy IADS to get to >> your target. (Shaken) The JSF is reportedly not as stealthy to the rear, but I understand the nozzle is treated for stealth. The question is how much less stealthy the JSF is to the rear aspects. I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was "worse than the Raptor/Nighthawk class, better than the Rafale/Super Bug class". Hopefully you are doing SEAD work at the same time as your initial strikes. In the US model, you are going to have UCAVs and other stealthier aircraft for the deepest, most dangerous strikes. The JSF is the low-price componant of a high-low mix; while quite capable and quite versatile, there are other tailored tools that are better at specific jobs. The JSF is the next generation of the F-16 concept. For many nations, this wil be a great choice as their only fighter. It will be a peer of the next generation Mirage 2000 concept (i.e. Rafale/Typhoon) and you can expect much of the sales to break similarly to the previous generation. If JSF manages to stay close to its cost goals, it will be a very, very tough aircraft to beat in the international arms market. -- Shaken - out --
 
Quote    Reply

Shaken    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter   8/20/2004 1:42:19 PM
>> (Lasting.D) >> Do you really think the US is going to sell its best stealth tech to all the countries involved in the JSF programme, and if they make a more stealthy version for them selfs then the other partners will scream blue bloody murder about it. The US is already concerned about stealth tech being transffered to other EU contries via the UK industries that have a finger in both the US and EU industry pies (Shaken) And? Are you aware that the basic MiG-29 9.12 Fulcrum-A was sold in three configurations, based on how trusted the customer was? The full 9.12 was made exlusively for the Soviet Union. The 9.12A had downgraded radar and other electonics and was sold to Warsaw Pact nations and Cuba, while the 9.12B had greatly downgraded radar, virtually no ECCM and other electrinics downgrades. This is not even talking about the fat-back 9.13 MiG-29s. It is NORMAL for aircraft manufacturing nations to provide less capable versions of their aircraft to other nations, even close and trusted allies. This has been the case for dozens of years. The export JSFs are supposed to use less capable steath materials and will certainly have less capable systems. This is probably true of export Rafales and Typhoons as well. -- Shaken - out --
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics