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
Rule Britannia    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule   8/16/2004 4:25:21 PM
“The commonalist (?) is in parts and substructure. In fact, the F18E uses FEWER parts, over a larger fuselage, than the C/D models. This was intentional, and for obvious reasons: it keeps costs down. However, essentially the aircraft on top of these pieces is a brand new, state of the art machine.” The fact is that the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is an aircraft predominantly based upon the earlier F/A-18C/D Hornet. It shares most fundamental characteristics like 90% of it’s avionics and electrics and airframe shape with this model (though there are some modifications like the air intakes and wing leading edge), it is not an entirely new design, it is a design built upon the F/A-18C/D Hornet. That is the point I am trying to make. “As for the engines, your source is wrong, it has always used the F414, model 400 variant designed specifically for the F/A18E.” Fair enough, but it doesn’t detract from my original point, the source I had was an Air Forces Monthly issue but it seems to have the engine types muddled up after looking at some other online sources. I interpreted your post as saying that each engine was rated at 44,000lbs, it wasn‘t an intentional misquote.
 
Quote    Reply

T800m101    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 4:29:30 PM
What's 22,000 + 22,000? 44,000
 
Quote    Reply

Rule Britannia    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 4:32:22 PM
"What's 22,000 + 22,000? 44,00" No it's 44,000 actually.
 
Quote    Reply

T800m101    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule   8/16/2004 4:33:18 PM
"The fact is that the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is an aircraft predominantly based upon the earlier F/A-18C/D Hornet. It shares most fundamental characteristics like 90% of it’s avionics and electrics and airframe shape with this model (though there are some modifications like the air intakes and wing leading edge), it is not an entirely new design, it is a design built upon the F/A-18C/D Hornet. That is the point I am trying to make." But see dude, that's where you're entirely wrong. It is a virtually differnet aircraft than its predecessors. Like the EF, the Super Hornet is a 4.5 generation aircraft, however, you CAN make an argument to make the EF fifth gen, however, like most people, I disagree.
 
Quote    Reply

T800m101    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 4:34:21 PM
I swear to god i had 44,000 typed in. I even double-checked it.
 
Quote    Reply

Rule Britannia    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 4:40:49 PM
"But see dude, that's where you're entirely wrong. It is a virtually different aircraft than its predecessors." I have just written at considerable length where it is fundamentally similar to it's predecessors. How about you show me where it is so strikingly detached from it's predecessors? "Like the EF, the Super Hornet is a 4.5 generation aircraft" It is not and again I have previously written at length explaining why. "you CAN make an argument to make the EF fifth gen, however, like most people, I disagree" Is that right? “I swear to god i had 44,000 typed in. I even double-checked it” I know, I was only kidding.
 
Quote    Reply

T800m101    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 4:50:38 PM
do you have AIM or MSN?
 
Quote    Reply

Shaken    Super Bug AESA - T800 RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Lasting Damage   8/16/2004 7:53:15 PM
>> (T800) >> The Super Hornet's AESA radar is probably the most >> powerful radar on the planet, compared to the Eurofighter's >> X-band pulse Doppler radar. (Shaken) No. The APG-79, when it is introduced in 2007 (?) will definitely _NOT_ be the most powerful fighter radar in the world. The Raptor and its APG-77 will already hold that title and is not threatened by the set going into the Super Bug. The Super Bug radar is a real battle for getting enough power and cooling into the avionics bay. It cannot be refit into pre-block 26 aircraft (about a hundred aircraft) because the older nose structure can't support the cooling needs. -- Shaken - out --
 
Quote    Reply

Shaken    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter lasting damage   8/16/2004 9:00:18 PM
>> (T800) >> "The Eurofighter is not a fifth generation aircraft, it is not on >> the same level as an F35 or an F-22" > > (R.Brit) > Yes it is, perhaps not on quite the same level in regards to > stealth due mainly to US experience in this field though it is > pretty close to the F-35 in this regard if you would look at my > links and in pretty much every other area it had the same or > better capabilities. My link has already stated it's capabilities > in comparison to other aircraft, why do insist in blatantly > ignoring this fact, it is becoming tiresome. (Shaken) At some point we need to realize that manufacturer's websites, quotes touted by the aircraft manufacturer's marketing team, the air forces purchasing the aircraft and fan sites for the aircraft _ARE NOT CREDIBLE SOURCES_. The marketing team at Eurofighter have spent the last five years buffooning their credibility away through a series of ridiculous and obviously contrived camparison documents to cast Typhoon in the best light possible. It is pretty obvious that "built by a European consortium not involving France" is the highest weighted value in there comparisons (and they still lose to Raptor). To be frank, only MoG OKB is less believable than the Eurofighter organization at this point. [MiG OKB brought an aircraft touted as a new Fulcrum variant, which was only an earlier domonstrator hauled out of storage and with the tail repainted]. I'm not trying to let Boeing off the hook here. All of the manufacturer's are unreliable reporters of relative aircraft capabilities. It is my opinion that Eurofighter has simply handled themselves worse than most, by bandying about unlikely sailor stories and trading in obviously contrived comparisons. Try going to reputable third party sources when you come to a discussion group like this. I recommend Aviation Week & Space Technology () and Janes Defense Weekly (jdw.janes.com) as well informed and minimally biased resources. As an example, Aviation Week claims the Super Hornet is the best aircraft not purely designed as a stealth aircraft (i.e. F/A-22, F-35, F-117 and B-2) in terms of RCS. They claim its RCS is smaller than Rafale and Typhoon. Based on the calibre source) this is the most reliable publically available data on relative RCS performance. Another tiny thing. Generations of aircraft are really vague and pretty close to meaningless. Eurofighter and Dassault will claim their aircraft are fifth generation because it is good marketing, no matter what the reality is. The MoD wants to justify its budget, so it is happy to go along with the fifth generation claim. What I consider reputable sources only put the F-22 and F-35 in this class, but I'm not hung up about it. It just doesn't mean much. The exchange rate between a late model fourth generation Eagle versus a four and a half generation Rafale or Eurofighter is not necessarily going to be heavily weighted towards either and has more to do with off-board influences (AWACS, ROEs, training, intel on opposition) than the relatively small differences in technical merits of the platforms. -- Shaken - out --
 
Quote    Reply

Hellfire    RE:f-35 vs. Eurofighter - Rule....   8/16/2004 9:16:08 PM
The F-18E is not superior to the typhoon. Continuing to argue that it can be is quite tiresome.. The typhoon - and the rafale - has significantly better performances. The SH has roughly the same performances as an F-18C, and the EF-2000 easily out-performs an F-18C. It is more maneouvrable, and can reach M1.3 in supercruise. What's more, a TVN is in development for the EF-2000. The F-18E is for the most part a scaled-up F-18C with reduced RCS. It is a cost-effective program for the navy, no doubt about it. It corrects the deficiencies of the previous versions and brings the LO capability. But that's about it. What's more the typhoon has an IRST, not the SH. As for the datalink, they all have the same datalink, that is link 16 - F-16 CCIP, M2000-5, F-35, F-22, rafale, EF-2000, F-18E.. Others have commented on other aspects of comparison between the 2 aircraft.. no need to repeat the same things one more time...
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics