Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: F-35 vs. Eurofighter
IAFbestinworld    8/13/2004 11:49:07 PM
Lockheed says that besides the f-22, the f-35 will be the best air to air fighter in the future, is this true? Could an f-35 take a Eurofighter? My opinion says yes since f-35 contains more stealthy characteristics.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46   NEXT
interrested 2    passive   8/22/2004 3:40:21 AM
And can't command instructions to a missle be picked up?
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian    RE:passive   8/22/2004 4:45:31 AM
"And can't command instructions to a missle be picked up " You mean to jam or for RWR purposes? They can be quite difficult to jam as they use a digital datalink/databus. Also, any aircraft jamming them would give away its postion. And IIRC the R-77PDT has home on jam, like all R-77 variants. If you mean for threat detection purposes, then remember, once you detect the datalink the missile is already on its way. If you're an F-35 driver, chances are that it's already within 50km of you (the probable, practical tracking range of the IRST at high altitude), which would make evasion more "interesting". And if you use your radar, there's a really good chance the Flanker driver will pick you up, as the Israeli RWR gear is pretty top notch.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    RE:ex-98   8/22/2004 9:31:34 AM
"almost universally reviled" What means reviled (I don't find the word) If F111 can have still a 15 year life: its proposal to have a mix of F22 and F111 make sense due to Austalia range requirement.And it have the advantage to maintain Australian technological competencies with F111 work. Obviously , he is taken serioulsy enought to get money from Australian parlement to review defense issues. Its data correspond to mine of F35 and I guess he add access to confidential info provided to australia on it if he had made a review on Australian procurement for defense commission. Nederland which have reviewed F35 procurement ranked it inferior for pure air to air perfomance vs Rafale and it gain a very very slightly superior ranking on Rafale only because of unproven assessment on procurement cost,potential upgrade capability and maintenability costs.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    Boris the Romanian   8/22/2004 9:44:49 AM
If you rank a SU30 above a RafaleF2 especially fited with the 9t M88-30 and the active antenna (testing today) you are discrediting yourself. Rafale has superior instantaneous turn, much better systems especially in ECM and HMI, and a RCS MORE than ten time lower of a SU30. Contrary to you I had access to confidential data on Rafale vs others.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    Addendum   8/22/2004 9:45:33 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    Carlo Kopp's Homepage   8/22/2004 11:46:34 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:Carlo Kopp   8/22/2004 12:12:33 PM
Nice to see that one of you has stumbled upon Australia's resident know-nothing loud mouth, when it comes to military affairs. I thought I'd show you all the link to the good Dr Kopp's homepage, to enlighten you to how he is "qualified" to call himself a Defence Analyst. Basically Kopp is a part-time computer engineering academic, with an interest in military affairs that has led him into a reasonably high-profile freelance writing career. His web site makes no mention of any military service, nor service as a defence civilian. I don't have a problem with people becoming freelance journalists and specialising on a topic. I have done freelance writing myself and will say that it takes a lot of energy and balls to make a success of it, characteristics that Kopp obviously possesses. I would also say that having the title "Dr" in front of your name would also help, as would a lack of understanding of defence affairs amongst community at large, including in the Australian parliment. What I do take umbrage at though, is when journalists start calling themselves analysts. Journalists should mainly stick to reporting other peoples opinions, because they are essentially lay people. If they want to editorialise, it should be under the pretext of them being a journalist, not an analyst.Analysts are experts, with specific qualifications and experience in their field. Kopp simply doesn't make the grade. Honestly, look at his web site and tell me that this man isn't a joke. I find his references to his widely spaced flights in warplanes hilarious. In particular, I like where he has written "Has flown the F-111 simulator on three occasions". He flys a big-boys computer game, then he goes on to give us a brief on how lovely the "aircraft" is to fly. LOL!!! Anyway, crux of Dr Kopp's agenda is that he has an ongoing love affair with big, fast aeroplanes like the F-111 and F-22, and thinks he can wield influence to get the government to buy/keep them. On this count, he is pushing Sh1t up hill, with our current governement. I remember all the public hoo-ha about our tank purchases, which the government and defence officials studiously ignored, and just did what they thought best anyway. I think Kopp and other "analysts" are thought of with the same high regard by our government, as the former generals analysts that Dick Cheney spoke of being embedded in TV stations, during the invasion of Iraq. I could go into specifics, to attack Dr Kopps arguments with publicly available information(the only sort that he is likely to have had), the man will make anything up to argue his cause, so it would take all night. I'll just leave you with this one point though. One of Kopp's central problems with the F-35 is that the US may not allow Australia the best stealth and software capability available. Consequently he thinks we should be considering F-22's, (in combination with F-111's of course). Now, do you think that if the US won't sell us the full-featured version of their second best fighter, that they will be selling us their best one? A convieniant little point Kopp forgets to ever mention, that might demonstrate to you the nature of the beast.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:ex-98   8/22/2004 12:21:26 PM
"Obviously , he is taken serioulsy enought to get money from Australian parlement to review defense issues." Anybody can make a submission to the Australian parliment, but you don't necessarily get paid to do it. Why do you think that he did? Does it say so in the report? I'm afraid I don't have time to read it all, nor the inclination to be honest, because I have heard so many his arguments before. In any case, if he was paid it only goes to prove that politicians know sweet FA about defence. Additonally, he may have been called to submit by an opposition dominated Senate enquiry, with political point scoring and not accuracy being the name of the game in that forum.
 
Quote    Reply

french stratege    RE:ex-98   8/22/2004 1:12:45 PM
It seems that in this submission , he got a cowriter. However I think that F22 would better suit to Austalian requirements if US accept to provide it with stealth capacities and software maintenance access. F35 is also a potential choice but depending airthreat.As Rafale could have been also or EF2000. That F35 will be below Rafale and EF2000 for aircombat, is obvious while not far.See nederland analysis.Or Australia could afford a mix of F22 and F35 later to replace F18. To make a strategic analysis is not a privilege of hight rank military officers which lack often understanding of technologies and industrial base and opportunities on technologies.It is why US hire civilian in think tanks as Rand corporation. Churchill had a civilian military techno advisor in WW2. I will not discuss on Kopp abilities as I don't care.But the document is correct. Do Australian have a strategic defense think tank and industrial/science commitee independant from military high command?
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim    RE:A good report and the best summary to end endless discussions   8/22/2004 1:16:03 PM
"In the initial phase of its launch the R-77PDT is command+inertial guided, you know that, right? I thought the R-27T RDM-3 was the same. With a sensor of 8km, you can launch before you have a lock and "command" the missile to the general vicinity (datalink), which the Flanker would have via IRST. He would have this passively, I might add." -- Boris --- No, which is exactly why I mentioned that as a possibility, and also why I said I'm not aware of any operational Russian missiles with that capability. Again, I'm not foremost an air-to-air missile guy, so I realize there may be a datalinked LOAL capability for R-27T/ET and for the (to me still hypothetical) R-77PDT that I haven't heard of. I still fall back to the detection range issue, and even if some future development of the FLANKER gets some future development of an IRST that has a significantly increased detection capabilty, we're still talking 100NM v. 25NM. That has got to be a huge advantage in air-to-air combat. Displacedjim
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics