It's another one of those multinational jobs.
Originally Posted by RKSL-Rock
Which is both a recipe for construction problems and also a one size fits all solution rather than a custom fit for the job we want. It's trying to please a hell of a lot of people all at the same time.
I'm not sure about Rafale, but the other alternative, the one the yanks currently use is the one I am in two minds about.
It's proven and probably competatively priced but the range is no great shakes I thought.
But I don't think we need to buy the higest tech plane EVAR.
The point about carrier based air power to my mind is that you deploy where the enemy isn't defending. At his weakest point.
Any solid workhorse will do.
The tactical advantage of a naval air arm is in the manouvre phase rather then the combat phase.
And lets face it, given that we currently have nothing at all, even a Fairey Swordfish would be a significant improvement. A navalised Apache is another serious option in my mind. I'm not unconditionally married to the concept of fixed wing at all.
I have the uncomfortable feeling that it's fighting the last war and not the next, or in this case, WW2.
Almost like how building dreadnoughts in the carrier age was.
F-35 would be sweet, but I'd ditch it on the spot if it isn't going to be ready in time for the carriers.
A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.
Last edited by Baff1; Mar 5 2012 at 03:30.
yeah, as even USN Admiral admitted than all "stealth"-related in aerospace is actually WAY scam/psyops/corruption-related, more than with anything PRACTICALY handy for national security:
and urge to roll-back concept to similar to employed by SU/Russia for long time
Supreme Emperor of Nigeria
Yea but now the F-22 pilots will figure how to beat the EF and next time round be all "Oh we knew the raptor was the best blah blah etc."
I shall not insult moderators
ROE = visual range exercise with 1v1 merge combat. Typhoon would probably win most of the time under those circumstances. Is that a full and correct assessment of how the F-22 would fight a real war?
The F22's strength is supposed to be in the high altitude BVR arena. I guess in real life it's a question of how survivable the Typhoon is in BVR combat as in theory the F22 will usually be able to fire 1st, if it survives, can the F22 be engaged with the MBDA Meteor missile which is superior to even the AIM-120D in performance, provided the F-22 can be detected in time?
The Typhoon is estimated to have a frontal RCS of 0.75sq m in clean config Vs Raptors 0.0001 sq m. These engagements are often a game of chicken as you have to fire, then turn away to avoid running into your opponents missiles which changes the RCS. There are other factors such as mid course guidance for missiles being provided by datalink from other aircraft such as AWACS.
It's a very complex debate as there are so many things to consider.
IIRC, the Meteor has similar range to AIM-120, and the Raptor would have to reveal itself while launching the missile by locking onto the Typhoon (having no IRST). Also, I don't know how long the Meteor requires external guidance, but the Raptor would have to keep Typhoon locked on until the AMRAAM is in terminal phase. If the Meteor has a better on-board radar than the AMRAAM, the Typhoon would be able to drop the lock earlier than the Raptor, and focus entirely on ditching the ARMAAM. Also, we don't really know if the Meteor would be able to keep it's lock on Raptor once it's in the terminal phase and after the Raptor turns off it's radar. Also, keep in mind that the Typhoon, while not very stealthy, could not turn it's radar on at all, thanks to having IRST. If the Meteor can be guided from it, and if the Raptor is caught on IRST (a very big if), the Meteor would essentially turn into a heatseeker, and the Raptor would be notified about it when it turns on it's own radar and enters terminal phase (at which point, it's usually a bit late for starting evasive maneuvers).
My view, counter measures will make missiles less effective then it's back to the good old days of the Dogfight.
Not locked, but in track-while-scan mode.
Originally Posted by Dragon01
Please use the CWR2 CBT to help us provide a better experience.
Well, tracking a target in TWS mode is sometimes called "locking", even though it's not (and at least in F-16, the interface for doing both is somewhat similar). That's what I was referring to. Anyway, the result in this situation is the same: Raptor lighting up like a Christmas Tree on Typhoon's RWR. The point was, without IRST or AWACS uplink, the Raptor has to use it's radar to guide the missile, which compromises it's stealth.
If you were referring to Typhoon dropping the lock on Raptor to evade the AMRAAM, it's radar antenna isn't omnidirectional, so even in TWS mode, it has to keep it's target somewhere in the general "forward" area in order to guide the Meteor. When the Meteor goes autonomous, the Typhoon can turn away and stop thinking about tracking the Raptor.