Scorpion82
New Member
The block 10 & 15 were canceled not long ago. The talk is now about block 8B & 9. Just block 8 remained unchanged.
Eurofighter Typhoon Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Musashi_kenshin
- Start date
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Info on Navalized Typhoon
Sorry if this already been ask before, but I haven't found info/articles/or discussion that really talk through on navalized typhoon.
From the info that I'm able to gather, the one of reasons that QE2 & Prince of Wales Carriers will still be in STOVL due to:
1. UK already commited herself to F 35B
2. Navalized Typhoon deems not feasible for carrier operations.
Can any of you guys confirm this. And why the navalized typhoon was abandoned on conceptual stages since the last Euro's Joint Venture navalized aircraft (not just the pure french ones) the Navalized Jaguar has been seeing through the carrier operational trails before being pushed away (which according to info can be related to underpowered, too heavy or not pure french).
Why the U K chosse F 35 over the fighter which her own industries was and is still major partner and have all data and accesibility to all system and softwares ??
Thanks in advances
Sorry if this already been ask before, but I haven't found info/articles/or discussion that really talk through on navalized typhoon.
From the info that I'm able to gather, the one of reasons that QE2 & Prince of Wales Carriers will still be in STOVL due to:
1. UK already commited herself to F 35B
2. Navalized Typhoon deems not feasible for carrier operations.
Can any of you guys confirm this. And why the navalized typhoon was abandoned on conceptual stages since the last Euro's Joint Venture navalized aircraft (not just the pure french ones) the Navalized Jaguar has been seeing through the carrier operational trails before being pushed away (which according to info can be related to underpowered, too heavy or not pure french).
Why the U K chosse F 35 over the fighter which her own industries was and is still major partner and have all data and accesibility to all system and softwares ??
Thanks in advances
Ananda
The Bunker Group
But Feanor, isn't true that in order to be involve as prime partner in F 35/JSF programs (especially F 35 B), UK also already invest substantial amount that according from some 'internet' discussion mounted the same if they choose to developed navalized version of Typhoon.
I don't want to open debate on how much more 'wonderfull' is F 35 vs Typhoon, but saying F 35 is superior seems also say to the europeans why bother with Typhoon..
However for their industrail perspective point of view, there's still some arguments on using Navalized Typhoon. Isn't that UK has problem on accessing all F 35 B systems even as their status as prime partner ??
I mean that kind of thing won't happen if they used Navalized Typhoon.
Perhaps my curriosity more to if Typhoon deems suitable for carrier operations, since QE 2 still have options for CATOBAR (even though not fitted yet)...could that options still open ?? Off course it will be different if the Typhoon considered unfit for carrriers operations. However how they come up with that conclusions if the navalized Typhoon concept still in the conceptual stage.??
I know I'm just a little bit bias since personally I like to see Navalized Typhoon...rather than F 35B..
AFAIK, developing a naval Typhoon has never been seriously considered. A feasibility study was done years ago which determined that it would be both difficult & expensive, as it had been designed with no thought given to carrier operations, & some of the design decisions would have been very different if it had been expected to operate off carriers. BAe made some proposals of ways to circumvent the problems, but they were thought high-risk.
If the RN builds carriers with catapults, it will buy an existing fighter (F-18E or Rafale) or the F-35C.
Note that not all land-based aircraft are equally difficult to modify for carriers. Gripen, for example, would seem to be easier, & the Russians have successfully done it (but not for catapult launch) - but the potential market for a Sea Gripen is thought too small to justify the development cost.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Thanks Swerve, appreciate if you could elaborate more on why Gripen deem more easier to convert for navalized version than Typhoon ?
They both have Delta wing with canard and singgle tail. Is it because Typhoon have chin inlet like F 16 thus considered not robust enough for carrier operations ?
I thought that as possible reason, but heard from chinese media that they plan to build navalized J 10 (which also more simmilar chareteristic with Typhoon than with Gripen).
Still in my oppinion if UK still want F 35, then F 35 C is the one that should be choose..well I'm just not a big fan for STVOL carriers
Especially if you want to build 60,000 ton carriers...it should be Catobar.Apart from all discussions regarding capabilities and so on you have to keep in mind that despite delays (esp. thanks to my country) the typhoon was in service a full decade before the F-35 will be. The aircraft it replaces were/are in dire need for replacement. So in this respect Typhoon and F-35 weren't contenders at all.I don't want to open debate on how much more 'wonderfull' is F 35 vs Typhoon, but saying F 35 is superior seems also say to the europeans why bother with Typhoon..
ah really?why is that?those blocks where transfered to t3? i think bl10 would have enhanced: preatorian sys.,MMI,gps,ACMI intergration,AIM c5,EGBU 16,paveway IV,ALARM,.and bl 15: GBU 39,KEPD 350,storm shadow,meteor,supersonic intergration for PAVEWAY IV and brimstone.am i wrong?i really want specific info about what about EFs program(concerning new capabilities embeded and when ,but i really cannot find detailed ones.for example i know that there is the HMD system but is it operational and combat ready in all modes?if not in what block?moreover i know that some categories of new capabilities are intergrated in eatch block "base"config.as the numberof blocks go forward,but some others(dont know which) are included in the P1E or P2E and this procedure happens simultaneously.could you brief me
?thanks...!
METEORSWARM
New Member
Typhoon naval no......reason is BPE OTAN,buque proyection estrategic. Only harrier,f 35 b,helicopters.
But others platform dassault rafale is good,no more i+d,full experience,furtive/semistealth,cheap,good aircraft.
Spain in one future change f-18 last life by evolutions Typhoon or f-35,but balance more interesting in typhoon evolution late tranche 3,40% to industry return to country,spain know typhoon inside 100%,f-35 can,t create new weapoms,increment cost integration,more fuel,etc.
ENTREVISTA INFODEFENSA.COM: Teniente General Juan A. Castillo Masete, MALOG: “La suspensión del A-400M supondría un descalabro para la capacidad europea de desarrollo y operación de aviones de transporte militares” - infodefensa.com - Información Def
Simulator asta typhoon.
Alenia ASTA Simulator
But others platform dassault rafale is good,no more i+d,full experience,furtive/semistealth,cheap,good aircraft.
Spain in one future change f-18 last life by evolutions Typhoon or f-35,but balance more interesting in typhoon evolution late tranche 3,40% to industry return to country,spain know typhoon inside 100%,f-35 can,t create new weapoms,increment cost integration,more fuel,etc.
ENTREVISTA INFODEFENSA.COM: Teniente General Juan A. Castillo Masete, MALOG: “La suspensión del A-400M supondría un descalabro para la capacidad europea de desarrollo y operación de aviones de transporte militares” - infodefensa.com - Información Def
Simulator asta typhoon.
Alenia ASTA Simulator
Last edited:
Sorry pal, no offence, but sometimes I have a hard time trying to understand. Do you want to say that Spain too was considering a navalized Typhoon and didn't go further as the BPE vessels are designed as VTOL carriers?
BTW, there was an entry on Ares dealing with navalized Typhoon as some kind of Plan B:
I think that says about all...Ares DefenseBlog said:
I simply don't understand the sentence f-35 can't create new weapons...METEORSWARM;174156 Spain in one future change f-18 last life by evolutions Typhoon or f-35 said:
Scorpion82
New Member
Hi ginov,ah really?why is that?those blocks where transfered to t3? i think bl10 would have enhanced: preatorian sys.,MMI,gps,ACMI intergration,AIM c5,EGBU 16,paveway IV,ALARM,.and bl 15: GBU 39,KEPD 350,storm shadow,meteor,supersonic intergration for PAVEWAY IV and brimstone.am i wrong?i really want specific info about what about EFs program(concerning new capabilities embeded and when ,but i really cannot find detailed ones.for example i know that there is the HMD system but is it operational and combat ready in all modes?if not in what block?moreover i know that some categories of new capabilities are intergrated in eatch block "base"config.as the numberof blocks go forward,but some others(dont know which) are included in the P1E or P2E and this procedure happens simultaneously.could you brief me
I know it's somewhat confusing, especially as much has changed over the years. I put together an overview about the tranches, batches and blocks which I also posted on other forums. Here it is and I hope it helps you to find some answers to your questions.
Quoting myself:
METEORSWARM
New Member
Spain no partner f-35,no software code bus integration weapoms in f-35,with typhoon full software.Need one logistic more for f-35,repair f-35 more problems,no heavy treats near.F-35 no transfered tecnology.Medium stealth to stealth,litle diferent/space.
Typhoon 4500 fuel same range vs 9000 fuel f-35.Typhoon 2 x range same fuel.
Typhoon options Aesa/ tvc/cft/powerup engines/helmet for digital mode iris t/more integration weapoms/arminger,meteor,etc,last t3 producction for 2014.Return 40% to country,power to industry and man power,developed new inteligent weapoms,"more strong,more fast,best",no problem integration.
Equip in t3 producction,no have idea,but Aesa radar you can change easy,CFT is easy ,tvc is strong operation,engines easy to strong vs model engine xx,integration weapoms easy,helmet easy.
Example:tvc,cft,engines in producction,aesa,helmet,integration weapoms,fusion software out producction.
Aesa radar
EADS N.V. - EADS Defence & Security successfully concludes European radar technology research programmes
Spain only 20 f-35b for marines.
Greetings
Typhoon 4500 fuel same range vs 9000 fuel f-35.Typhoon 2 x range same fuel.
Typhoon options Aesa/ tvc/cft/powerup engines/helmet for digital mode iris t/more integration weapoms/arminger,meteor,etc,last t3 producction for 2014.Return 40% to country,power to industry and man power,developed new inteligent weapoms,"more strong,more fast,best",no problem integration.
Equip in t3 producction,no have idea,but Aesa radar you can change easy,CFT is easy ,tvc is strong operation,engines easy to strong vs model engine xx,integration weapoms easy,helmet easy.
Example:tvc,cft,engines in producction,aesa,helmet,integration weapoms,fusion software out producction.
Aesa radar
EADS N.V. - EADS Defence & Security successfully concludes European radar technology research programmes
Spain only 20 f-35b for marines.
Greetings
Last edited:
METEORSWARM
New Member
Armiger
Armiger
The Armiger anti-radar guided missile which is currently being developed within a technology demonstration program has been designed for engaging enemy air defence and ground targets which can be rapidly relocated. Armiger might become the successor to the HARM missile. Small dimensions and low launch mass, high flight velocity (Mach 3) and mission range (up to 200km) as well as precision hit accuracy due to its bispectral seeker and GPS/INS guidance ensure early and reliable elimination of air defence sites. Essential features of this missile are its ARAS seeker head with wide-band radar receiver and IR seeker developed by Diehl BGT Defence in cooperation with EADS for precise terminal attack with direct hit as well as its solid-propellant ramjet for high supersonic flight speed and long range. Armiger can therefore also destroy targets which switch off their radar during the attack or which use electronic countermeasures.
Armiger
The Armiger anti-radar guided missile which is currently being developed within a technology demonstration program has been designed for engaging enemy air defence and ground targets which can be rapidly relocated. Armiger might become the successor to the HARM missile. Small dimensions and low launch mass, high flight velocity (Mach 3) and mission range (up to 200km) as well as precision hit accuracy due to its bispectral seeker and GPS/INS guidance ensure early and reliable elimination of air defence sites. Essential features of this missile are its ARAS seeker head with wide-band radar receiver and IR seeker developed by Diehl BGT Defence in cooperation with EADS for precise terminal attack with direct hit as well as its solid-propellant ramjet for high supersonic flight speed and long range. Armiger can therefore also destroy targets which switch off their radar during the attack or which use electronic countermeasures.
Scorpion82
New Member
The ARMIGER programme was a technology demonstration programme funded by the BWB. It aimed at researching advanced technologies for an ARM, but the programme was concluded a few years ago. ARMIGER will never become operational as the Luftwaffe deemed a dedicated ARM as to costly. The technology might be incorporated into a multirole missile however.
METEORSWARM
New Member
This point is interenting,the new developed USA AND RUSIA in misile bvr is all heat radar,but vs "stealth" no logical system.HIGH SPEED,SHORT RANGE DETECTION WITH RADAR,high % error.
Dual system in one heat,radar silence in weapom,waiting action radar enemy more IR in heat is very interesting.You destroy targets enemys in air and ground.aircraft,cargos,radar.
Enemy down radar,no problem IR.Last localization in memory.
Example
Receive warning in RWR,lauch vs Awacs,in route locate aircraft enemy(su-30)(pakfa) by IR,misille info to Efa,choose awacs or su-30/pakfa.HIGHT SPEED,STEALTH ATTACK,HIGH% IMPACT/MULTIWORK,VERY LOW RANGE.
Greetings
Dual system in one heat,radar silence in weapom,waiting action radar enemy more IR in heat is very interesting.You destroy targets enemys in air and ground.aircraft,cargos,radar.
Enemy down radar,no problem IR.Last localization in memory.
Example
Receive warning in RWR,lauch vs Awacs,in route locate aircraft enemy(su-30)(pakfa) by IR,misille info to Efa,choose awacs or su-30/pakfa.HIGHT SPEED,STEALTH ATTACK,HIGH% IMPACT/MULTIWORK,VERY LOW RANGE.
Greetings
Last edited:
I just read this article:
Procurement: Britain Balks At Eurofighter Buy
The source tends not to be overly reliable and is prone to mistakes. This sounded like one of them to me. Can anyone shed any light on this? I thought an agreement had been reached about splitting the 3rd tranche.
Procurement: Britain Balks At Eurofighter Buy
The source tends not to be overly reliable and is prone to mistakes. This sounded like one of them to me. Can anyone shed any light on this? I thought an agreement had been reached about splitting the 3rd tranche.
It is representing rumour as fact, & matters which are being argued about as already decided. Typical for the source.
What we do know is that the MoD & RAF want to buy T3. The RAF wants the lot, & its head has recently said so. Germany proposed a split buy, to ease it through the British Treasury & Italian Finance Ministry. The RAF, MoD, Spain & Italy are reported to have accepted that proposal, but the Treasury is trying to say no, despite RAF & MoD objections that the penalties would cost us more than the aircraft. Discussions continue . . .
The allocation of part of T3 to Saudi Arabia is rumour, & seems to be pure press speculation.
Thought as much, thanks for clearing that up.
Hopefully the Treasury will pull their heads out of the sand long enough to make the right decision and just buy them in 2 lots. If anything we should be looking to sell our older aircraft so we have fewer to upgrade later.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
What? build a complete production line in the UK and continue to produce them after the original aircraft are delivered and sell off the tranche one and two aircraft at discounted rates to friendly countries in the possibilty they like it enough to buy more? That sounds way too logical
Urgh what?What? build a complete production line in the UK and continue to produce them after the original aircraft are delivered and sell off the tranche one and two aircraft at discounted rates to friendly countries in the possibilty they like it enough to buy more? That sounds way too logical
I meant instead of giving tranche 3 aircraft to the Saudi's (and Oman if that's still on?) we should offer them tranche 1's for a slightly lower price. I didn't say anything about procuring extra aircraft.