The F-35 is supposed to have 3/4 stealth, versus only front quadrant for the EFA. Also, only the RAF Eurofighters will have Lockheed Martin stealth technology, so the rest will be significantly inferior to the F-35 in that regard. Finally, the F-35 has internal weapons, vs external for the Eurofighter, but, Detection ranges for both will be significantly reduced, compared to today's engagements. That may only mean the F-35 detects a Eurofighter ten or twenty of kilometres before the latter detects the F-35. That is not very far, when jet speeds are considered. Also, don't forget the Eurofighter has a modern IR tracker on board. It may be able focus the unit down the path of an F-35's active radar signal, using ESM, to detect the F-35 for a shot much earlier than the latter expects. Finally, the Tranche 2 and 3 Eurofighters will have vectored-thrust, making them very manouverable. That means if well flown they might be able to break a radar lock, or dodge AMRAAMS, and close rapidly for an IR tracker guided shot or a WVR engagement. Up close, things would equal out a lot, perhaps with the odds going slightly in the Eurofighter's favour, due to better manouverability. In short, the F-35 has some advantages, but its pilots would be well advised not to underestimate the EFA.

The Eurofighters will not have thrust vectoring engines, however, the F-35A and Naval F-35C will have 2D TVC nozzles.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/13/nplane13.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/08/13/ixnewstop.html ================================================ Attempts by the Ministry of Defence to save money will leave all 232 of the RAF's new Eurofighter/Typhoon aircraft with a gun they cannot fire. The MoD decided five years ago that it could save £90 million on the £105 billion project by not having a machine cannon in the British version of the Eurofighter. The Eurofighter project has been bedevilled with difficulties Senior RAF officers defended the decision by saying that the use of guns on aircraft was outdated and would be a waste of money. It was too late to stop the first tranche of 55 British aircraft being fitted with the Mauser BK27 gun, but the rest would have a lead or concrete weight in its place. But engineers found the only way to preserve the aircraft's aerodynamics was to have something that not only weighed the same as the gun but was also shaped exactly the same. To make matters worse, each individual part of the makeweight's shape also had to weigh exactly the same as the real thing. In short, the cheapest option was to fit the cannon. So all 232 of the RAF's Eurofighter/Typhoon aircraft will be fitted with the gun at a cost of £90 million - but in order to save what is now a mere £2.5 million they will have no rounds to fire. "This is old thinking, not to have a useable gun on a fighter," said Air Commodore Andrew Lambert, one of the RAF's leading air power strategists and a former commander of a fighter squadron. "If you are only going to go up against other combat planes then, OK, you use your missiles. But when you are dealing with terrorists and other unpredictable situations you want all the flexibility you can get and a gun gives you a lot of utility. "We were prepared to use gunfire against helicopters breaching UN rules over Bosnia in the 1990s. You could also use it for strafing targets like pick-up trucks in the desert." Air Chief Marshal Sir Brian Burridge, the chief of RAF Strike Command, said eight aircraft had already been delivered to the RAF and he expected the first Eurofighters to begin quick reaction air defence in late 2007. Asked about the gun, Sir Brian said the decision had been "discussed endlessly" and that "nothing is being closed off". The Eurofighter project has been bedevilled with difficulties. Feasibility studies began in 1984 with production expected to start in 1992. It was 2002 before the first aircraft even flew. There were a series of production slippages. But these were as nothing compared to the political difficulties. The collapse of the Warsaw Pact led to the aircraft being described as an obsolete piece of Cold War equipment. The Germans immediately cut the number of aircraft they needed, largely because they inherited a lot of fighters from East Germany. The British response was to tie all four partners into a tightly controlled contract in which anyone who pulled out must pay the same amount of money in damages as they would if they took the aircraft. That has come back to haunt Britain, which alone among the four nations has no money to pay for the Eurofighters it ordered and is resisting calls to sign up for its second tranche of 89 aircraft.

The F-35 is superior in terms of stealth, manueverability (if the thrust vectoring reports are true), avionics, fuel load, range, and probably overall aerodynamic character, while the Eurofighter has a better thrust to weight ratio, and carries a larger number of air to air missiles. I'd say the F-35 has the advantage.

You're exactly right dude, but the only really significant advantage the Eurofighter has is supercruise, which i love, btw.

Thrust Vectoring Control for the Eurofighter has been developed by ITP and MTU. It includes both 2D and 3D TVC nozzles... http://www.eurofighter.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/engines.html In regards to the Mauser cannon. The Telegraph or 'Torygraph' is a ridiculously biased source to quote from for a start. The notion that the MoD cannot afford the aircraft is utter nonsense. The RAF plan not to initially fit the MauserWerke BK-27 cannon to the Tranche 2 and 3 of the E/F2000 because they plan to remove the existing cannon from the Tornado F3 and fit them to the later batches saving some £2.5 Million that can be invested in 27mm ammunition stocks, that has been common knowledge in the general press for some time. This possible saving was highlighted by the MoD?s Equipment Capability Organisation (ECO). Does anyone have the link to that site where you are able to compare combat aircraft over certain performance categories?

According to Nederland evaluation F35 rank below Rafale for air combat.I think it will be the same for Eurofighter, F35 will be slightly below.Its trust to weight ratio and manoeuvrability is not very good.Its advantage in stealth is overexagerated vs Rafale and EF in stealth caracteristic when Rafale or EF use only air to air weapons.And I suspect F35 ECM will be less sophisticated than Rafale and EF. I think integration in networking environement, missiles performance and pilot skills will matter more than differences in performance.

The F-35 does not have thrust vectoring. It was left off to save money. With modern combat emphasising BVR engagements and with the use of high-off boresight missiles in WVR combat, it probably isn't that important in a steatlhy aircraft that will usually get the first shot, but is a significant advantage for a less stealthy type, in dodging missiles. Re French Strategies comments about the stealth advantage, manouverability and electronic warfare suite of the F-35. With regards to stealth, none of us really know anything beyond the fact that the Americans have a significant lead on steatlh over the rest of the world, which combined with the F-35's internal weapons mean it probably has a significantly better stealth performance. However, how much that translates into a real advantage, given the stealth characteristics of the other types, the use of IR trackers with ESM and the speed of air to air combat, remains to be seen. Nobody here can really comment on the comparitive performance on the EW systems, apart from observing that the US has a great deal of combat experience in that area and that the F-35 will be entering into service 5 years later than the Eurocanards. Draw your own conclusions. As for manouverability, the F-35 team were only aiming to better the F-16 and F-18. See my above comments re: BVR and high off boresight shots.

I will reserve my judgement on the Air to Air missile issue. If the F-35 is being used as a fighter, I think that we will see multiple racks in the bomb bay, as well as the current missile spots being used. I can't see it going into battle without at least six missile spots.

"Its trust to weight ratio and manoeuvrability is not very good." According to Jane's, the F-35A and F-35C will have TVC, whereas the Rafale will not, and only the Tranche 3 Eurofighter will. "Its advantage in stealth is overexagerated vs Rafale and EF in stealth caracteristic when Rafale or EF use only air to air weapons." I tend to doubt this. According to estimates on this website, the Eurofighter and Rafale will be somewhat less stealth than the superhornet, and considerably less stealth than the F-35. The F-35's airframe was designed by lockheed martin, after the F-22, so it's logical to conclude that it has equal or better stealth, with the exception of the rear quadrant. "And I suspect F35 ECM will be less sophisticated than Rafale and EF." Why? "I think integration in networking environement, missiles performance and pilot skills will matter more than differences in performance " I agree. However, I suspect the European pilots would be the underdogs.