Eurofighter Cost At 20 billion pounds and growing

[Big-E]

ALL A2G capability has been stripped from F-22, leaving it unable to fill most air combat tasks.

Absolute rubbish! Not only have they made a JDAM pod that is stealthy but F-22 still has external pylons when necessary. Research on stand off weapons continues. The USAF knows if they want to get more Raptors then they have to expand her capabilities, not downgrade them.

Give the Typhoon a quarter of the development period the teen fighters have had, when it hits full operational capability and then you'll have a reason to criticise if not up to speed. By 2012, the full Block II capability will be in place, AIM-9L/M, AMRAAM, Meteor, ASRAAM, IRIS-T will be integrated, Litening III, Enhanced Paveway II/III/IV will be integrated, Storm Shadow and Tauras long range standoff weapons and others such as JDAM, JDOW and HARM will also be integrated.

Look at the list of what the Super Bug can and will carry and compare it to the EF... what looks more impressive? Also don't forget the Meteor project is risky basing a missile on an unproven ramjet engine. If that program flops it's going to leave EF very vulnerable until they reprogram her to hold AIM-120s. The Super Bug can carry 8032kgs of ordinance, the EF is only proven to hold 6500. (they say possibly 7500 but have yet to prove it). The radar cross sections are virtually identical (Super Bug with a slight edge). While EF takes SH in a dog-fight I ask which is better in multi-roles. Is CAPTOR going to last in rugged high-threat environs? APG-73 has proven pretty reliable in all conditions.

Big-E have you flown the Typhoon? You might be surprised. John Jumper certainly was...

I await the inevitable response...

I flew my first Super Hornet this month as an FA-18 SFTI w/ SWATLANT. I must admit I was pretty impressed with it still being a fourth gen. Situational awarness points scored thru the roof. Weapon selections and loadouts are topnotch. I still think it's underpowered just like the Cs, it needs more speed. The new AESA kicks ass, I now hate my old 73. I don't see how CAPTOR can compare to this beautiful easy to use and even easier to maintain system. This bird was made for rugged flight, a true workhorse that will be around for a good while. EF is playing with a brandnew platform that will be obsolete in the next 5 years, waste of time on brand new technologies that would be better spent on 5th gen platforms. At least Hornets have been flying for decades.

Considering Gen. Jumper hasn't flown a single combat hour since before I was born I would be skeptical if he knows the difference b/w BVR and SR missiles. j/k. My point still stands that the man can't appreciate the real attributes of the aircraft.

 

[Giblets46]

Absolute rubbish! Not only have they made a JDAM pod that is stealthy but F-22 still has external pylons when necessary. Research on stand off weapons continues.

Look at the list of what the Super Bug can and will carry and compare it to the EF... what looks more impressive? Also don't forget the Meteor project is risky basing a missile on an unproven ramjet engine. If that program flops it's going to leave EF very vulnerable until they reprogram her to hold AIM-120s. The Super Bug can carry 8032kgs of ordinance, the EF is only proven to hold 6500. (they say possibly 7500 but have yet to prove it). The radar cross sections are virtually identical (Super Bug with a slight edge). While EF takes SH in a dog-fight I ask which is better in multi-roles. Is CAPTOR going to last in rugged high-threat environs? APG-73 has proven pretty reliable in all conditions.



I flew my first Super Hornet this month as an FA-18 SFTI w/ SWATLANT. I must admit I was pretty impressed with it still being a fourth gen. Situational awarness points scored thru the roof. Weapon selections and loadouts are topnotch. I still think it's underpowered just like the Cs, it needs more speed. The new AESA kicks ass, I now hate my old 73. I don't see how CAPTOR can compare to this beautiful easy to use and even easier to maintain system. This bird was made for rugged flight, a true workhorse that will be around for a good while. EF is playing with a brandnew platform that will be obsolete in the next 5 years, waste of time on brand new technologies that would be better spent on 5th gen platforms. At least Hornets have been flying for decades.

I agree that not all the a2g systems have been taken off the F-22, though this will still be uinferior to virtually all other systems in temrs of loads out ( and increase its RCS.

Missiles, well the first test firing of the Meteor took place on the 9th of this month!

The RCS of the Typhoon and the F-18E/F may be comaprable now, however, whent he Typhoon gets CAESAR, it will reduce the RCS of the Typhoon by a huge amount ( as according the DA its THAT much better ! ). In terms of usage, the singaporeans were impressed enough by its performance.

In terms of usability and maintenance, the Typhoon is streets ahead of anything else (certainly in the RAF), aiming for 9 man hours of maintenance per flying hours (and has beaten this by 13% according to Hansard), compared to 16.8man hours per flying hour for the Superhornet (figures from AIRPAC). (though this might be expected with carrier ops.).

In terms of userbility/ situational awareness, this has been the prime aim of Eurofighter, and is said to be its ace of spades, and includes such things as DVI ( there is a post about it earlier on this discussion.)


And in terms of the superhornet, am sure most poeple on here would agree with me that it is a virtually new aircraft from top to bottom, as opposed to a design that has been round a while as you put it.

 

[Scorpion82]

Darth it's becoming more and more ridicolous with you. You PROVED NOTHING. While others brought up reasonable arguments backing them up with facts and data, you come up with crappy statements in the way of "You are wrong and I'm right". That's far away from any serious discussion. You never answer specific questions and dance around with your vacuousness statements.

The Eurofighter Typhoon has nearly reached it's basic configuration for AA-combat with all systems. Full multirole capabilities will be available around 2010 (including the weapons integration). As a fighter the Eurofighter will outperform all the US teen series and as a multirole platform the Eurofighter will at least be compareable if not better either in the not to distant future.
In contrast to you I will also explain why.

In air-air combat the Eurofighter Typhoon will primary benefit from its superior flight performance, sensor fusion and its more advanced self defence suit. Additionally the aircraft has an advanced IRST/FLIR system not available for the F-16E or F/A-18E. The Captor is at least good enough to detect, identify and track multiple targets at a sufficient range. Additionally with 10-12 AAMs, plus 3 drop tanks the Eurofighter Typhoon has a significant better Endurance than the US teen series fighters.

In AG combat the Eurofighter Typhoon will benefit too from it's advanced DASS and avionics at all. Sensor fusion and the capability of the single sensors/systems gives the Typhoon as superior situational awerness and the possibility to carry 5-6 AAMs plus tanks and AG stuff enables the aircraft to defend its self against airborne threats much better while flying an attack mission.

If required I can go even deeper into detail, but before doing that I await a serious response.

 

[Big-E]

And in terms of the superhornet, am sure most poeple on here would agree with me that it is a virtually new aircraft from top to bottom, as opposed to a design that has been round a while as you put it.

If it was virtually a new aircraft it would be a F-22. 75% of the original design structure still exists.

 

[Scorpion82]

If it was virtually a new aircraft it would be a F-22. 75% of the original design structure still exists.

As well as 90% of the avionics. But meanwhile with the Block II aircraft there will be at least some new systems like AN/APG-79, ALE-214, MMC or full coloured displays. So if you are really an SH driver Big-E does the Block II feature a new RWR or does it still use the AN/ALR-67V2?

 

[Giblets46]

As i understood it the wing, centre and aft fuselage, tail surfaces and powerplants are entirely new, as well a a new radar.
However, i don't relaly think that is an argument worth getting into there!

 

[Aussie Digger]

Absolute rubbish! Not only have they made a JDAM pod that is stealthy but F-22 still has external pylons when necessary. Research on stand off weapons continues. The USAF knows if they want to get more Raptors then they have to expand her capabilities, not downgrade them.




Look at the list of what the Super Bug can and will carry and compare it to the EF... what looks more impressive? Also don't forget the Meteor project is risky basing a missile on an unproven ramjet engine. If that program flops it's going to leave EF very vulnerable until they reprogram her to hold AIM-120s. The Super Bug can carry 8032kgs of ordinance, the EF is only proven to hold 6500. (they say possibly 7500 but have yet to prove it). The radar cross sections are virtually identical (Super Bug with a slight edge). While EF takes SH in a dog-fight I ask which is better in multi-roles. Is CAPTOR going to last in rugged high-threat environs? APG-73 has proven pretty reliable in all conditions.



I flew my first Super Hornet this month as an FA-18 SFTI w/ SWATLANT. I must admit I was pretty impressed with it still being a fourth gen. Situational awarness points scored thru the roof. Weapon selections and loadouts are topnotch. I still think it's underpowered just like the Cs, it needs more speed. The new AESA kicks ass, I now hate my old 73. I don't see how CAPTOR can compare to this beautiful easy to use and even easier to maintain system. This bird was made for rugged flight, a true workhorse that will be around for a good while. EF is playing with a brandnew platform that will be obsolete in the next 5 years, waste of time on brand new technologies that would be better spent on 5th gen platforms. At least Hornets have been flying for decades.

Considering Gen. Jumper hasn't flown a single combat hour since before I was born I would be skeptical if he knows the difference b/w BVR and SR missiles. j/k. My point still stands that the man can't appreciate the real attributes of the aircraft.

I never said the F-22 lacked ANY A2G capability, you selectively quoted me there, Big-E. I said virtually all capability...

The F-22A has the ability to carry INTERNAL GBU-38 JDAM's. Presumably it can also carry Mk 82 un-guided versions, however I'm not sure about that. However I AM sure that NO OTHER A2G weapon system HAS been integrated on it as yet.

That may happen in future, but as I pointed out earlier, the pre-planned Block upgrades designed to achieve a TRUE A2G capability have been canned.

As to A2A weapons, AIM-120C AMRAAM has ALREADY been integrated on the Eurofighter as has AIM-9L/M AND ASRAAM. From that point of view it's somewhat ahead even of F-22, which only has AIM-9M and AMRAAM capability. Typhoon has successfully guided AMRAAM missiles in live firing, controlling said missile with Eurofighters own Datalink system - MIDS.

Here's a link about a guided AMRAAM firing from 2005:

http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk/Eurofighter/news.html#news_1051

The Meteor as pointed out has already conducted live firings, so is significantly advanced in it's development, far moreso than the next-gen AIM-120D which is supposed to address the range performance gap between current gen AMRAAM and "Russian" equivalents.

I never said the SH wasn't a capable aircraft. I think it is and I wished Australia had placed an order or negotiated a lease for them 5 years ago and retired the F-111 straight away AND not gone ahead with our Hornet upgrade program, it would have given us far more flexibility with timeframes as far as a JSF buy goes and greater capability in the meantime, but anyway...

I just think that Darth, and yourself to a lesser extent are not giving the Typhoon it's due. Most of it's operators are teen series fighters (or equivalent) operators already. Air Forces like the RAF, Luftwafte, Spanish/Italian air arms are amongst the most professional and capable air forces in the world. They are not foolish enough to be investing in this aircraft purely for political reasons. It HAS to provide greater capability over and above what they already operate.

I fail to see how SH will be around for decades, but Typhoon will be obsolete in 5 years. Typhoon will only be coming into it's true promise in the next 5 years. As I've already pointed out Spain uses APG-73 radar's in it's upgraded Hornets. IT says CAPTOR provides a 50% range increase.

As to the warloads it can carry, I can only repeat my earlier statements, it IS a new aircraft still undergoing the majority of it's development. It HAS a pre-planned upgrade path that IS funded and getting closer all the time.

Germany for instance is conducting carriage trials with GBU-10's right now. All Typhoon partner nations have different timelines for the development of capability, but most have already planned the weapons fits, targetting sensor (most opting for Litening III pods) and incremental platform upgrades including, improved radar, engine thrust/TVC nozzles and conformal fuel tanks.

Now I'm not saying it's a better radar than the AESA radar in the SH, but it's obviously not completely outdated, as Darth would have us believe...

 

[DarthAmerica]

The Meteor as pointed out has already conducted live firings, so is significantly advanced in it's development, far moreso than the next-gen AIM-120D which is supposed to address the range performance gap between current gen AMRAAM and "Russian" equivalents.

Meteor is still in development and will not be IOC until after 2010

Now I'm not saying it's a better radar than the AESA radar in the SH, but it's obviously not completely outdated, as Darth would have us believe...

It most certainly is outdated compared to the state of the art. Thats a fact.

http://www.c4isrjournal.com/story.php?F=1579207

It also mentions the Eurofighters ability to climb to 40,000ft only a minute, 40 seconds AFTER brakes release, implying a considerably greater performance advantage over it's existing F/A-18 and Mirage fighters... Each Spanish Hornet driver, will also have to have a minimum of 2000 hours on the Hornet, prior to converting to Eurofighter.

I hardly think they'd "rave" about their new "mounts" if they are as in-capable as you THINK.

Irrelevant. First of all this discussion is not about flight performance. Flight performance of all operational modern fighters short of the F-22 are so close that it would be up to the pilot ot exploit the advantages of his/her particular platform while minimizing the disadvantages. Avionics, survivability and platform flexibility are what determines the advantages today.

Would you like to compare this to the level of capability provided by F/A-18, F-16 with 2 years of service under it's belt??? Neither could lase their own LGB's and F-16 had no BVR missile capability at that point whatsoever and couldn't even fight at NIGHT...

LMAO...you arent serious are you? You are comparing 1982 to 2006 without temporal references and doctrine?

As to the 2012 capability issue. I beg to differ, I believe for the reasons stated above, that Eurofighter WILL achieve a greater level of capability than ANY teen series fighter by 2012. In certain roles, it is more capable NOW (WVR A2A combat for instance) than the majority of teen series fighters and it's NEW. Given the development time it will achieve far greater capability.

No I'm sorry but you are wrong in both content and context. We are comparing the EVOLVED F-Teens and not F-Teens in general so please stay on topic and lets focus on this discussion. EVOLVED F-Teens all exceed the WVR a2a capability of the Eurofighter just if we consider radar alone! And in a2g there is no comparison. By the time the Eurofighter is even near where F-Teens have been for 2 decades(2012) the F-Teens will have started to leave service mostly except the Evolved types. And those Evolved F-Teens are superior and have more growth potential which is why they have been chosen by premier airforces to be their 21st century fighters.

If you want to argue semantics, than teen series fighters are also MORE capable than JSF and probably F-22 right NOW, as they are obviously more mature.

Sigh...you could not have chosen a more poor example to make your point. F-Teens and F-22/35 are designed to operate under completely different doctrine.

The RCS of the Typhoon and the F-18E/F may be comaprable now, however, whent he Typhoon gets CAESAR, it will reduce the RCS of the Typhoon by a huge amount ( as according the DA its THAT much better ! ). In terms of usage, the singaporeans were impressed enough by its performance.

Currently the F/A-18E has the edge in RCS. But both types are going to use external stores so I wouldnt lose any sleep over how much of an edge there is assuming the Eurofighter is in the RCS class of the F/A-18E to begin with. The effects of RCS reductions are non linear:

New Range=Old Range x (New RCS/Old RCS)^.25

GO ahead and throw in a few numbers. You will see that it takes a 16 time difference to even half the detection range. RCS reductions toward the sub 1m^2 level are extremely expensive and get diminished toward the extreme end of the spectrum. So say we had a 5m^2 RCS target at 160km which is a figure that I've seen tossed around for CAPTOR. If that target is reduced to 1m^2 that 160km range becomes approx 107km for example. But lets see the difference between a 1M^2 RCS and .5m^2 RCS. Your detection range will go down to about 90km. So as you can see there is a big difference between the 5m^2 RCS and 1M^2 RCS and while there are differences with the 1m^2 RCS and .5m^2 RCS. The difference isnt as great but hey I'll take an extra 17km!

One of the current problems for non AESA fighters though is the noisy emissions of their radars which will tip the enemy off about their presence. No to mention some AAM's could potentially home of the source of those emissions in the not to distant future or even worse, a DEW could be fired automatically and instantaneously! Scary indeed. Stealth has to be applied through out the whole system to be truly effective and that includes emissions.

Many will argue that PIRATE/IRST/SNIPER*/PANTERA offer alternative stealthy means of seeking prey and they will! But at a much greatly reduced seach area and range. Against an LPI radar there will simply be no contest as Radar is and will be the most efficient way to cover large volumes of airspace. To make a long story short the Eurofighter needs an LPI capable AESA...badly.


*Its a common myth that US fighters do use IRST. We have been doing that for decades. But just like our EW we have prefered pods vs internal mounting because it offers more configuration options and easier upgrade. Its like the different between an external DVD drive and internal.

 

[Giblets46]

Currently the F/A-18E has the edge in RCS. But both types are going to use external stores so I wouldnt lose any sleep over how much of an edge there is assuming the Eurofighter is in the RCS class of the F/A-18E to begin with. The effects of RCS reductions are non linear:

So after spending weeks and months telling us what a huge advantage having AESA is because it reduces the radar return, you are now tellling us that it is minimal!
Please make up your mind!

 

[DarthAmerica]

So after spending weeks and months telling us what a huge advantage having AESA is because it reduces the radar return, you are now tellling us that it is minimal!
Please make up your mind!

OMG thats what you got out of that last post? Lord Help you. I said its one of the benefits, it is a significant reduction go back and read this time without the blinders. I also said assuming the Eurofighter is in the same class as the F/A-18E. Look, if you are going to pick and chose only part of the arguement to make some point an an internet forum then let me know and I'll be happy to leave you to your opinions. If however you would like a chance to discuss and understand these concepts with a professional who is intimately familiar with this subject matter then please calm down.

 

[Scorpion82]

@Darth,
you still haven't answered my questions or even countered my arguments with your own reasonable arguements.
What exactly makes you that sure that F/A-18E has a lower RCS than the Typhoon? In fact you won't know it for sure.

 

[DarthAmerica]

@Darth,
you still haven't answered my questions or even countered my arguments with your own reasonable arguements.
What exactly makes you that sure that F/A-18E has a lower RCS than the Typhoon? In fact you won't know it for sure.

You havent made any arguement that I havent fully countered in the opening post of this thread. In fact I already told you that I'm not interested in an "arguement". So if there is anything specific you want to discuss, one point at a time, bring them up. Fully source or explain your point of view and we can discuss it. You see I'm not partial to any design and would discuss the merit of any platform. Eurofighter, Rafale, Flanker or whatever it really doesnt matter to me. These machines are only the "tools" of war. Some tools work better than others and I know that from experience.

 

[Giblets46]

If you are interested as to whats in the Typhoon cockpit, this translation of a german site is pretty insightful

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/cockpit.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwww.airpower.at/flugzeuge/%2Beurofighter/cockpit.htm%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DSUNA,SUNA:2005-47,SUNA:en


F-18E/F is here: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/aigledefer/Images/Avions/F18/F18_cockpit.jpg

 

[Scorpion82]

You havent made any arguement that I havent fully countered in the opening post of this thread. In fact I already told you that I'm not interested in an "arguement". So if there is anything specific you want to discuss, one point at a time, bring them up. Fully source or explain your point of view and we can discuss it. You see I'm not partial to any design and would discuss the merit of any platform. Eurofighter, Rafale, Flanker or whatever it really doesnt matter to me. These machines are only the "tools" of war. Some tools work better than others and I know that from experience.

Wrong you spoke about radar, costs and super cruise, I countered that basically and brought up some additional points which rose over the time in this thread here. It doesn't matter for me either if you would talk about russian, american or european designs as I deal with all of them, that was my hobby since years and meanwhile it has even become my professy. I haven't the time now for further postings, but at the end of the week I'll be back. And then we can discuss speicific topics more detailed.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Wrong you spoke about radar, costs and super cruise, I countered that basically and brought up some additional points which rose over the time in this thread here. It doesn't matter for me either if you would talk about russian, american or european designs as I deal with all of them, that was my hobby since years and meanwhile it has even become my professy. I haven't the time now for further postings, but at the end of the week I'll be back. And then we can discuss speicific topics more detailed.

Thats fine I look forward to it. Take care and enjoy the rest of your weekend.

 

[DarthAmerica]

If you are interested as to whats in the Typhoon cockpit, this translation of a german site is pretty insightful

Nice links Giblets

 

[Magoo]

What exactly makes you that sure that F/A-18E has a lower RCS than the Typhoon? In fact you won't know it for sure.

I can tell you on good authority but without revealing sources that the Super Hornet, in clean config has a considerably lower RCS than the Typhoon, certainly in the front on, underside and plan aspects, and marginally so in the rear aspect. However, the argument is irrelevant as neither aircraft has any internal weapons carriage, and once you start hanging pylons and weapons off them, any advantage is lost.

If it was virtually a new aircraft it would be a F-22. 75% of the original design structure still exists.

In fact, not one structural component is carried over from 'classic' to Super Hornet. There are some commonality of systems, although the Super enjoys a much higher level of integration that the classic (or the Typhoon at this point in its development), thus providing much better SA for its crews and more robust networking capabilities.

Guys - this thread has developed into a 'mine's bigger than yours' contest again! :ban

If the choice came down to Rafale, Super Hornet, Typhoon TII, Su-30MKX, F-16E/F and F-15K/SG, you wouldn't just weigh up which is the better airplane. There are acquisition, life of type and support costs to consider. When can your fleet be delivered and to what standard? Which type can generate the most sorties in a given period? Which will be the easiest to transition to from your current fighter fleet? Which has the most potential for systems and capability growth? Are there in-country manufacturing and support opportunities for your aerospace industry?

If Australia had to make such a choice tomorrow, I suspect the Super Hornet would be a logical choice for all the reasons above, i.e. all the reasons why the 'classic' was the right airplane 25 years ago, and then some. The Super is far, FAR more than just a 25% scaled up 'classic', but then again, our 'classics' will soon be almost everything a Super is except for the radar, and the size and the benefits that brings.

Re Singapore, my understanding is the reason Typhoon was dropped was because Tranche II hadn't been completely defined and was still some way off from being fielded. Rafale fell short in most areas compared to Typhoon and F-15SG, and cost more as well! I don't know why Super Hornet was not on the shortlist for Singapore - perhaps because Malaysia has been talking for years about getting Supers?!

Magoo

 

[Big-E]

So if you are really an SH driver Big-E does the Block II feature a new RWR or does it still use the AN/ALR-67V2?

I only flew the thing twice two weeks ago and it was Block I. I never said I was a SH driver, just a C man. What I can tell you is that the Block I doesn't even use AN/ALR-67V2 but rather uses AN/ALR-67V3. . . Yet why do I think you knew that?

 

[Big-E]

I can tell you on good authority but without revealing sources that the Super Hornet, in clean config has a considerably lower RCS than the Typhoon, certainly in the front on, underside and plan aspects, and marginally so in the rear aspect.

I know the RCS is better but how much is "considerably"?

In fact, not one structural component is carried over from 'classic' to Super Hornet. There are some commonality of systems, although the Super enjoys a much higher level of integration that the classic (or the Typhoon at this point in its development), thus providing much better SA for its crews and more robust networking capabilities.

You are correct that the actual components themselves were not carried over but the Super is a bigger version of the classic. Everything was made bigger with better integration but it is not a TOTALLY new plane IMO. The EF from the ground up was a new plane... that's my point.

 

[Magoo]

I know the RCS is better but how much is "considerably"?

Well, I guess I could tell you, but...well, you know the rest...

But seriously, I'm told by someone who has evaluated from the pilot's seat just about everything out there that the Block II Super is, apart form the F-117 and F-22, the "stealthiest fast jet flying."

It uses quite alot of RCS reducing material in key areas, its compressor face is well shielded, its actuators are shrouded, its APG-79 is much stealthier than a conventional antenna and has LPI 'properties', it's other antennae are mostly conformal, rivet heads are flush, and most panels that open or shut have faceted 'sawtooth' edges.

However, it is not a true 'stealth' fighter as it's still constructed primarily of conventional materials, has conventional engine outlets, varying leading edge angles, a curved fuselage, and no internal weapons carriage.

So, in this sense, like I said it can only shoot its gun at you, or perhaps the pilot can give you the bird...
"You know, the finger..."
"Yes Goose, I know the finger..."
"Sorry, I hate it when it does that!"
...in a clean configuration where RCS is an issue.

Magoo