Europe and 5th generation aircraft

[JWCook]

Then I'm in very distinguished company because several major defense chiefs had a chance to make a direct comparison of the Typhoon next to its peers and they are flying F-15s now. The Saudis saved the Typhoon from being the EUROfighter. But then again they are not the best example to use since they tend to buy a bit of everything. So in fact reality does agree with me to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars.

17% of $142 Billion? Thats like admitting to stealing when you consider that there are about ~87 Typhoons on order outside of partner nations with 72 of those being Saudi. A testament to how overpriced it is and how rich the Saudi's are.


-DA

Ah the F-15's, Direct comparisons with no politics?? ;-).... its like saying there were no politics in the Saudi buy.. nfloorl:

The 17% was before the Saudi buy was factored in, heres a quote from forecast international that hopefully puts paid to your odd outlook.

The Eurofighter consortium is projected to lead the market (2006-2015) in terms of sales revenues, and will be trailed by Lockheed Martin, Boeing, the Lockheed/Boeing F-22 team, Russia’s Sukhoi, and relative newcomer Chengdu from China.

Now surely you can't still assert the view "the market is treating it harshly", (I wish someone would treat me that harshly..) hmmm whats your description on how lockheed/boeing/sukhoi are being treated if they are lagging behind Eurofighter GmbH


So how many export customers does the F-35 have?, be careful now because you didn't count the partner nations in the Typhoon program as exports.. thats 82 export Typhoons vs how many export F-35 s???, funny how some people pick and choose what to count, I'm sure the argument will now shift like a 'LM supercruise definition' to total production numbers.

So far the Typhoon has orders for 707.

BTW That "the costs are under control" statement is going to haunt you.. having said that I'd agree LM is in a good position - provided that cheap expendable UAV's don't muscle in on the JSF in the next decade, its unlikely that the price and delivery match up to expectations, if the F-35 program does manage it it will be the first of its kind to manage it, IMV it won't be on time or budget.


Cheers

 

[Feanor]

A potential Russo-Georgian conflict is not going to happen. The Georgian leadership is not dumb enough to go to war before they're part of NATO, and they can't join NATO until their territorial problems are dealt with. Given that Abkhazia continues to refuse any consideration of becoming part of Georgia again, Georgia's only option for solving the problem is to recognize Abkhaz independence, which would eliminate the main source of conflict with Russia in the first place. A much more likely conflict zone is Ukraine, especially if the Crimean issue is aggravated further.

 

[DarthAmerica]

No I'm not counting a plane designed, paid for and built in a country as an export. F-15 direct comparison, absolutely. Politics involved, always ON BOTH SIDES. Bottom line is the better plane won the contract. Dispute this as much as you like. The reality is flying in those air forces. As I've said, the Typhoon offers nothing special especially considering the price. We can rationalize thing all day and night about this. We can make percentages and guestimate how much the F-35 will cost. Bottom line and this in indisputable...

• Typhoon is not a 5th Gen fighter and lacks the performance, range, avionics and survivability associated with them.
• Typhoon does not offer overall capabilities beyond what other 4th Generation Jets offer and is currently behind in Range and Avionics options.
• Typhoon is not competitively priced when compared with alternatives.
• If Europe needs capabilities typical of 5th Gen fighters prior to about 2025 then it will have to either build a new fighter or purchase more F-35s.
• UCAV technology is not yet mature enough in Europe to seriously be an option in the near term.

-DA

 

[DarthAmerica]

A potential Russo-Georgian conflict is not going to happen. The Georgian leadership is not dumb enough to go to war before they're part of NATO, and they can't join NATO until their territorial problems are dealt with. Given that Abkhazia continues to refuse any consideration of becoming part of Georgia again, Georgia's only option for solving the problem is to recognize Abkhaz independence, which would eliminate the main source of conflict with Russia in the first place. A much more likely conflict zone is Ukraine, especially if the Crimean issue is aggravated further.

The Russians know that NATO without US leadership will can/will-not resist aggression in Eastern Europe. Russia knows the USA is preoccupied in the Middle East with OIF/OEF with the bulk of its ground combat power. Russia is trying to reassert itself as a major regional power by securing it's periphery. Russia was angered and embarrassed by Kosovo and is using that as Casus Belli. Russia wishes to demonstrate that it can stand up to NATO and the United States without actually having to do so in order to undermind Orange Revolutions and NATO expansion. To do this it needs decisive action. Georgia is the best option for a guaranteed victory that avoids a direct confrontation with NATO. Georgia also lacks the energy significance of Ukraine to western Europe which is less incentive for Europe to get involved. Knowing this, Russia is being very blatantly aggressive with the Georgians...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfRHMbz2nuU"]YouTube - Russian Jet shoots Georgian UAV[/ame]

...The Russians are itching for a fight here. Do you think that Europe would/could deploy Typhoons here to monitor the airspace? Knowing what the Georgians are doing here I almost feel guilty...


-DA

 

[Feanor]

First off what you stated is opinion not fact. It is your interpretation of the recent events. Russia has absolutely no need to go to war with Georgia. Consider several things: the state of the Russian military is still atrocious. While contract soldiers make up 40% of the military, the problem of discipline and training still remains. Most of the armored fleet is still outdated, with only a few new vehicles appearing in the Kantemir and Tamansk. divisions in the Moscow MD. These are parade divisions that are unlikely to be sent into Georgia. The VVS still only gets about 40-60 hours annually per pilot (in the air). This is laughable. The majority of the fighter fleet is early 4th gen. planes with only a handful of more modern vairants delivered. Finally the nightmare of Chechen style guerilla warfare has not yet been forgotten. There is no way that Russia will get involved in the war, unless Georgia directly attacks Russia or Russian forces (peacekeepers in the region).

Secondly Russia is satisfied with the status quo of the breakaway republics. They are de-facto independent, completely reliant on Russia, completely opposed to re-integration with Georgia, and willing to fight tooth and claw against the Georgian military. Why Russia needs to get involved is beyond me. If a conflict does occur it would have to be a Georgian aggression with Russia funneling arms and money to the rebels, and possibly flying some air support missions. As for Typhoon deployment to the region, I don't think that's even remotely possibly. On what grounds would it be done?

 

[DarthAmerica]

First off what you stated is opinion not fact. It is your interpretation of the recent events. Russia has absolutely no need to go to war with Georgia. Consider several things: the state of the Russian military is still atrocious. While contract soldiers make up 40% of the military, the problem of discipline and training still remains. Most of the armored fleet is still outdated, with only a few new vehicles appearing in the Kantemir and Tamansk. divisions in the Moscow MD. These are parade divisions that are unlikely to be sent into Georgia. The VVS still only gets about 40-60 hours annually per pilot (in the air). This is laughable. The majority of the fighter fleet is early 4th gen. planes with only a handful of more modern vairants delivered. Finally the nightmare of Chechen style guerilla warfare has not yet been forgotten. There is no way that Russia will get involved in the war, unless Georgia directly attacks Russia or Russian forces (peacekeepers in the region).

Secondly Russia is satisfied with the status quo of the breakaway republics. They are de-facto independent, completely reliant on Russia, completely opposed to re-integration with Georgia, and willing to fight tooth and claw against the Georgian military. Why Russia needs to get involved is beyond me. If a conflict does occur it would have to be a Georgian aggression with Russia funneling arms and money to the rebels, and possibly flying some air support missions. As for Typhoon deployment to the region, I don't think that's even remotely possibly. On what grounds would it be done?

Intel Briefs are always opinions in the end. Especially the MPCOA. The only part about what I wrote that is opinion is how Russia could react to the situation I described. But it is a fact that this is an opportunity for them if the deem it in their interest to take it. The Russian Military is capable of taking Abkhazia from Georgia. That is also a fact.

I said that Europe probably would not send any military help to Georgia and why. The Typhoon deployment was merely a hypothetical to illustrate the extreme danger a modern fighter could find itself in. In this case flying an unstealthy fighter in close proximity to some very lethal IADs and fighters and how unenviable that would be when you could be in an F-35 if it were in service. It's not leaving only Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen, F-16 or F-18 as options which because of the risk would be highly unlikely.

-DA

 

[JWCook]

No I'm not counting a plane designed, paid for and built in a country as an export. F-15 direct comparison, absolutely. Politics involved, always ON BOTH SIDES. Bottom line is the better plane won the contract. Dispute this as much as you like. The reality is flying in those air forces. As I've said, the Typhoon offers nothing special especially considering the price. We can rationalize thing all day and night about this. We can make percentages and guestimate how much the F-35 will cost. Bottom line and this in indisputable...

So that the JSF will have less export orders than Typhoon if you count it that way.. its a funny old world huh... btw newsflash today - Isreal want 25 JSF, but would you count them as exports?

Indisputable...? some very broad sweeping and incorrect statements,

• Typhoon is not a 5th Gen fighter and lacks the performance, range, avionics and survivability associated with them.

Do you know what the Typhoons range with internal fuel is??, compared with the F-22 with 595nm I'd say that was competitive. avionics and MMI are all world class, survivability has been measured in simulations and DACT and has been found to be excellent I'll return to '5th gen' later..

• Typhoon does not offer overall capabilities beyond what other 4th Generation Jets offer and is currently behind in Range and Avionics options.

laughable.. OK challenge for you, which one of the 4th gen fighters are you comparing it to??. and I'll show you the benefits

• Typhoon is not competitively priced when compared with alternatives.

707 orders says your wrong.

• If Europe needs capabilities typical of 5th Gen fighters prior to about 2025 then it will have to either build a new fighter or purchase more F-35s.

Correct, but 5th gen means LM products, its another marketing term that excludes anything not LM.. answer this can the F-35 supercruise @M1.5.. and I bet thats not a criteria for 5th gen.. just googled and found its not a requirement lol see http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/corporate/press-kit/5th-Gen-Brochure.pdf

As you can see the Typhoon has it all apart from broad spectrum VLO..

1. VLO - Typhoons has 'reduced observables' and so is beaten by F-35 and F-22, (stealth on its own doesn't make it 5th gen as per the F117.)

2. Extreme fighter performance, Typhoon matches the F-22 and beats the F-35.

3. Information Fusion for Net-Centric Operations F-35 beats the Typhoon and Typhoon is the equal of the F-22.

4. Advanced Sustainment ie Maintainabilty the Typhoon beats the F-22 easily by a factor of 2 and matches the F-35.

So the difference in 4th and 5th gen is really subjective, and lo and behold only LM products fit the description.. wow How lucky was that!, <cough> supercruise <cough>
I'm beginning to see a pattern with LM here... are you?

• UCAV technology is not yet mature enough in Europe to seriously be an option in the near term.

Yes but consider this will it have matured by ~2015-18 remember the JSF isn't exactly near term either.. re the time frame of the JSF.. is it too little too late..


cheers

 

[Feanor]

Intel Briefs are always opinions in the end. Especially the MPCOA. The only part about what I wrote that is opinion is how Russia could react to the situation I described. But it is a fact that this is an opportunity for them if the deem it in their interest to take it. The Russian Military is capable of taking Abkhazia from Georgia. That is also a fact.

russia doesn't need to take Abkhazia from Georgia. Georgia doesn't control, or really own for that matter, Abkhazia and S. Ossetia. Both are de-facto independent and have their own militaries. Both won guerilla resistance conflicts against Georgia (albeit with Russian support).

I said that Europe probably would not send any military help to Georgia and why. The Typhoon deployment was merely a hypothetical to illustrate the extreme danger a modern fighter could find itself in. In this case flying an unstealthy fighter in close proximity to some very lethal IADs and fighters and how unenviable that would be when you could be in an F-35 if it were in service. It's not leaving only Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen, F-16 or F-18 as options which because of the risk would be highly unlikely.

-DA

Just how LO is the F-35? Or is that classified?

 

[windscorpion]

These fighter generations are marketing terms, i think people get too excited about them. And then you get nonsense like 4.5 gen 4.75 gen et cetera.

 

[simdude97]

Isreal want 25 JSF, but would you count them as exports?

What else would you call them? Israel does not get all of it's defense dollars from the US. They are free to buy elsewhere as is Europe whom the US supports as well.

Do you know what the Typhoons range with internal fuel is?

Do you? Most figures either explicitly or implicitly quote air superiority combat radius with external tanks. Do you have a number and a reliable source such as an operator's website? I think if you dig deep enough you will find that when comparing apples to apples ie, full A2A load out, Tiffie will come up short on range.

OK challenge for you, which one of the 4th gen fighters are you comparing it to

Oh, any one of a variety of upgraded F-15s that have been bought by say Singapore or Korea. Recent models of Super Hornet. Some of the hotter versions of SU-30s...etc, etc., etc.

707 orders says your wrong.

Subtract UK, Italy, Germany and Spain and you have 90 orders, 72 of which where obtained by outright bribery.

answer this can the F-35 supercruise @M1.5

We don't know yet, but then production Tiffies only does M1.2 according to the only reliably published source the German Luftwaffe. Lets take it a bit further, for how long, at what altitude band and what is the external loading of Tiffie when it does M1.2? Do you really think that an aircraft that can carry a very usable war load and all of it's fuel internally will not have a huge aerodynamic advantage over one that carries external stores?

Typhoons has 'reduced observables' and so is beaten by F-35 and F-22

As well as the Super Hornet.

Information Fusion for Net-Centric Operations F-35 beats the Typhoon and Typhoon is the equal of the F-22

Says who?

The fact of the matter is that the Typhoon is the most over hyped aircraft of recent times. In fact Carlo Kopp sums up it's disadvantages quite well.



"The Typhoon's weaknesses are its F/A-18C class weight and thrust and the implications of this in combat at extended operational radii, and the longer term sensitivity of its BVR weapons advantage to equivalent technological developments in opposing fighters."

"Its design incorporates none of the features seen in very low observable types, nor does the EJ200 incorporate the unique design features of the F119 and F120 powerplants."

 

[DarthAmerica]

So that the JSF will have less export orders than Typhoon if you count it that way.. its a funny old world huh... btw newsflash today - Isreal want 25 JSF, but would you count them as exports?

Indisputable...? some very broad sweeping and incorrect statements,

Incorrect by your standards? OK.

Do you know what the Typhoons range with internal fuel is??, compared with the F-22 with 595nm I'd say that was competitive. avionics and MMI are all world class, survivability has been measured in simulations and DACT and has been found to be excellent I'll return to '5th gen' later..

Just can't get over DERA can you?

laughable.. OK challenge for you, which one of the 4th gen fighters are you comparing it to??. and I'll show you the benefits

I'm comparing it to all of them. Don't bother showing me benefits. It's a waste of time. All of these fighters are similar and have their pro's and con's. Get over your dedication to this fighter and be objective and this will make sense to you.

707 orders says your wrong.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion.

Correct, but 5th gen means LM products, its another marketing term that excludes anything not LM.. answer this can the F-35 supercruise @M1.5.. and I bet thats not a criteria for 5th gen.. just googled and found its not a requirement lol see http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/corporate/press-kit/5th-Gen-Brochure.pdf

As you can see the Typhoon has it all apart from broad spectrum VLO..

Who cares if it can supercruise or not. Wasn't a design requirement. But you are going to be surprised once some of the data gets into the public domain. In any event I'm not devoted to promoting unverifiable data. Amazing what a clean airframe that makes more thrust dry than most others can do wet.

1. VLO - Typhoons has 'reduced observables' and so is beaten by F-35 and F-22, (stealth on its own doesn't make it 5th gen as per the F117.)

So does F-16, F/A-18, Mig-35. This is a common mid life update for 4th Gens.

2. Extreme fighter performance, Typhoon matches the F-22 and beats the F-35.

You must be drinking. Very well if this is you serious opinion.

3. Information Fusion for Net-Centric Operations F-35 beats the Typhoon and Typhoon is the equal of the F-22.

Opinion. But on this I would be willing to see how you are coming to your conclusion.

4. Advanced Sustainment ie Maintainabilty the Typhoon beats the F-22 easily by a factor of 2 and matches the F-35.

Just make sure not to forget to check for the landing gear...

So the difference in 4th and 5th gen is really subjective, and lo and behold only LM products fit the description.. wow How lucky was that!, <cough> supercruise <cough>

The differences are subjective which is what I've been telling you people for years especially when that 4.5 generation crap comes up. Generations have nothing to do with particular features. Thats why I always say "Typical of". As a general rule but not always, aircraft of the same generation share features in common because they are made to do similar things. But sometimes manufactures through in a technological curve ball and build something like the F-117. Generations are simply successive aircraft regardless of features.

I'm beginning to see a pattern with LM here... are you?

Yes but consider this will it have matured by ~2015-18 remember the JSF isn't exactly near term either.. re the time frame of the JSF.. is it too little too late..

Yes, the pattern is EADS has a "me too" complex. Understandably so considering the market!

Also, if you think that Taranis and nEUROn will be yielding operation UCAVs capable of replacing an F-35 by 2018 then you are dreaming.

-DA

 

[DarthAmerica]

russia doesn't need to take Abkhazia from Georgia. Georgia doesn't control, or really own for that matter, Abkhazia and S. Ossetia. Both are de-facto independent and have their own militaries. Both won guerilla resistance conflicts against Georgia (albeit with Russian support).



Just how LO is the F-35? Or is that classified?

Who said anything about needing to take? Its an opportunity to take and Russia NEEDS a foreign policy success to offset Kosovo domestically as well as to stop the erosion of FSU states. Again, this is the MPCOA and is actually happening. When Migs start firing missiles over your airspace and small arms exchanges become an everyday thing...you probably have a good indicator of a conflict. Well see where it goes...


...I don't know the F-35 RCS and its classified. With what little OSINT the USAF provided and my rough math I guess ~.001 sqm.

-DA

 

[Dr Freud]

It is my understanding that 4.5 gen vs 4 gen is that 4.5 gen allows each aircraft formation to constantly share sensor and radar data with the others via a secure jam-proof digital radio network. (like other fighters and AEW) + 1 of 2 capabilities, 1) Supercruise, 2) VLO.
If it has both Supercruise and VLO, its 5 gen.

 

[DarthAmerica]

It is my understanding that 4.5 gen vs 4 gen is that 4.5 gen allows each aircraft formation to constantly share sensor and radar data with the others via a secure jam-proof digital radio network. (like other fighters and AEW) + 1 of 2 capabilities, 1) Supercruise, 2) VLO.
If it has both Supercruise and VLO, its 5 gen.

Wow. A jam proof radio network. Anything with an antenna can be jammed. ANYTHING. Trust me folks, stay away from this generation nonsense. It's really not linked to specific features.

-DA

 

[swerve]

What else would you call them? Israel does not get all of it's defense dollars from the US. They are free to buy elsewhere as is Europe whom the US supports as well....

Israeli arms imports are almost 100% US-financed. The only major exceptions in recent years were financed, or subsidised, by Germany, e.g. the purchase of submarines. US aid has to be mostly (ca 75%) spent on US equipment, & the residue may not be spent outside Israel without specific US permission.

These constraints led in the past to Israel examining the possibility of having Israeli-designed weapons & German submarines built in the USA, so they'd be able to use US aid to pay for them. Those schemes fell through, partly due to US objections, partly because the Germans coughed up some aid, & partly because the USA agreed to let the Israelis spend ca 25% of their aid money in Israel.

In that context, do you really think it's possible for Israel to buy anything except US fighters? European states aren't going to subsidise a Typhoon or Rafale buy, & without such a subsidy, Israel can't afford to buy non-US fighters, even if the manufacturers would sell them, without a huge increase in the Israeli-financed part of the military budget, which would obviously be difficult.

 

[Scorpion82]

It took me quite some time to go through this thread and there are a lot of posts I would like to directly reply t, but there are way to much of them and I'm not willed to browse this long thread again to search for specific claims. Therefore I will limit my efforts to comment on the topics which arose during this discussion.

I would neither put the ECDs in the same generation as the teen/teenski series nor would I call them legacy. Legacy by the definition of the word means old or in relation to combat aircraft older/earlier designs which has been succeded or superseded by new designs. The ECDs are as new as the F-22 is and no operator plans to replace them with the F-22, F-35 or any other new fighter in the foreseeable future.

If the ECDs would belong to the same generation as the teen/teenski series, to which generation does the Mirage 2000 or Tornado belong then? Fact is these european aircraft were designed around the same time as the teen/teenski series and they featured similar technologies. It is just logical to see them as the european counterparts to the teen/teenski series generation wise. If you compare the early Eurofighter or Rafale to the early F-16 for example you can easily see significant differences in all major areas such as airframe design, flight controlls, engines, cockpit or avionics and these differences are at least as great as that between the early F-4 and the early F-15 or F-16 for example. It is well known that these aircraft were classed into different generations for good reasons and I see no justification for the ECDs not being a full generation ahead of the teen/teenski series. As mentioned above the Mirage 2000 compares much better to the F-16 in terms of technologies being used. The ECDs are simply much newer designs which were developed from a time when the teen/teenski series had all entered service. Some argue with stealth, but why wasn't the F-117 classed a full generation ahead of other combat aircraft of its time? The answer is simple, stealth is in the end nothing else than the result of very specific requirements, very much like the Tornados low flying altitude qualities or the F/A-18s carrier suitability were just characteristics related to specific requirements and it is no different with the F-22. As JwCook said the so called 5th generation definition is entirely built around LMs latest fighters and their specific capabilities and technologies. A perfect example for the misleading nature of this approach is supercruise. While it was considered as a must have for a 5th gen fighter by LM in the 90s it suddenly disappeared from that must have list when the F-35 became more recent. Another interesting fact is that all the technologies not available to the F-22 were never counted in as a must have (DVI, HMD i.e.).

Speaking about the ECDs or in particular the Eurofighter in this case as a relict of cold war, while claiming the F-22 is suited to the 21st century is just biased and narrow minded. The F-22 might be more survivable but it is much more unflexible than any of the ECDs. Most people forget about the requirements for which the ECDs has been designed. The ECDs were supposed to replace a number of types in different roles and they had to be affordable what includes operating costs as well. The Eurofighter to take an example was designed as a more defensive weapons system for air defence and local air superiority. Stealth was not required as the aircraft wasn't supposed to operate deep over the enemies territory. The F-22 on the other site was designed as an offensive weapons system to replace a single type in a single role and costs didn't matter at all. Both sides get what they paid for...

For now and the foreseeable future the ECDs are much better suited to the needs than the unflexible and very expensive F-22 is. A high intesity conflict with a well equipped enemy is more than unlikely in the next 10 years or som maybe even beyond. Russian fletches its muscles, but there is more hot air than strong cold power behind that. China is no threat for Europe and all, so what is left? BTW how were wars fought without stealth in the past? Some do so as if stealth is an absolute must to be successful, it isn't! It's definitely helpful for the fighter's effectivness, but not the all deciding factor to win a war.

About Typhoon's range according FlugRevue (may 2006 or so) max range on internal fuel is 2600 km, a german military magazine (don't know if publically available) states 2500 km. So you can expect it to be in that range. The F-22's max range on internal fuel is ~3000 km, not very impressive if you consider that it's fuel load is twice as high!

 

[Dr Freud]

well, scratch that jam-proof thing then, i just pasted a phrase.
It is my understanding that 4.5 gen vs 4 gen is that 4.5 gen allows each aircraft formation to constantly share sensor and radar data with the others via a digital radio network. (like other fighters and AEW).
+ 1 of 2 capabilities, 1) Supercruise, 2) VLO.
If it has both Supercruise and VLO, its 5 gen.

 

[Scorpion82]

Wow. A jam proof radio network. Anything with an antenna can be jammed. ANYTHING. Trust me folks, stay away from this generation nonsense. It's really not linked to specific features.

-DA

So why do you call the Eurofighter 4th generation though it was designed at the very same time as the F-22?

 

[Dr Freud]

Some do so as if stealth is an absolute must to be successful, it isn't! It's definitely helpful for the fighter's effectivness, but not the all deciding factor to win a war.

Survivability comes in 3 flavors.

1)Speed
2)Visibility
3)Manouverbility

And in that order.

The first pilot axiom is "speed is life"
2nd axiom is "loose the sight-loose the fight"

Personally i dont hold top speed=afterburner in high regard, ~10 minutes before empty fuel is next to nuffing

 

[DarthAmerica]

So why do you call the Eurofighter 4th generation though it was designed at the very same time as the F-22?

No it wasn't. The Eurofighter design goes back a decade further. Due to inefficiency it took a decade longer to get into service however. But it's design goes back to the 1970s about when the F/A-18 and F-16 were being created. It's also Europe's multirole successor to the F-4 which was the previous platform.

-DA