NATO Depends on the Typhoon

[@superflyguy4488]

Military planners should really visit the KZbin comments section more often, what with everybody being such an expert.

[@SkyGlitchGalaxy]

😂

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

... you might wanna take a different perspective: they and military intelligence are quite happy, that YT & the internet help to offload them for spreading such a - let's say - `variety´ of information & rumours themselves 😈

[@karlbrundage7472]

Your comment might have had some validity prior to 9/11, but the events of that day exposed the "experts" for what they are...................................

[@superflyguy4488]

@@NRZ-3Pi10 You missed my point completely, you must be a DCS pilot.

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

@@superflyguy4488 Slightly amused about your feedback. Rest assured I got the message of your comment; mine just added a slight tongue-in-cheek undertone for some subtle traces of spicy flavour.

[@bobthebomb1596]

Only one RAF squadron is equipped with the F35 and that is currently dedicated to carriers ops (809 NAS is just about ready to begin operations). The RAF has aircraft from one of its Typhoon squadrons based in Cyprus as part of ongoing operations over Syria. It makes sense to use the assets already in place.

[@jefffranklin4894]

Good ol' dambusters

[@Rose.Of.Hizaki]

​@@jefffranklin4894 sadly this is a historical fact that 90% of the UK population wont know about. The Squadron of F-35s being flown by the UK is indeed 617 Squadron that flew Operation Chastise in 1943. 👍👍👍 _'Après moi le déluge'_

[@jefffranklin4894]

@@Rose.Of.Hizaki i only know it as i'm an RAF History buff. Grandad was in the RAF for national service (1951-54), and i was in RAFAC for 7 years with me now currently in the recruitment pipeline for RAF Logistics with 606 Squadron. Proud of my heritage and history

[@teddypicker8799]

There are 2 combat squadrons now

[@teddypicker8799]

I believe 1 testing and 1 training squadron too. We can deploy 24-36 f35bs anywhere in the world right now

[@JoJo-vm8vk]

You are late on the news guys, Eurofighter/ Typhoon have been patrolling on Eastern Europe for 2 years now: UK, Germany and Italy are rotating…

[@millennialtrucker6435]

Definitely been doing it for more than 2 years….

[@electricaviationchannelvid7863]

Yeah ,but they did not need to launch anything, so they (aircraft/crew/logistics) have never been really tested....it was a huge investment to develop this airframe, it was a great collaboration of many EU countries so now it is time to see some action out of it...

[@KevinS47]

Yup, heard it multiple times mentioned on the airforce news channel in Italy over the past few years (I think more than 2, more like 5-8 years now)!

[@sparrowlt]

@@millennialtrucker6435 yep..one of our Typhoons fired an AMRAAM by mistake while patrolling Estonia 6 years ago..and they had been rotating to patrol the area since way before.. i think even before the whole Ukraine thing started

[@karlbrundage7472]

I recall there was a short period during the prior Chancellorship that very few, if any of the Typhoon fleet was airworthy, due to budget shortfalls for defense.

[@fexyem5798]

Well, regarding the Air Policing, an argument for the Typhoon over the F35 could also be that the current mission requires a visual identification of the intercepted aircraft. Therefore the Interceptor needs to get close enough so that the stealth capabilities of the F35 become mostly irrelevant. Instead, the dogfight capabilities of the Typhoon are of significantly more benefit in this situation, in case it escalades.

[@robshirewood5060]

The only ones who want escalation are the idiots in western governments, nobody else, including Russia wants escalation or indeed to invade Europe, its all a scam to boost the MCI and all its greedy degenerates who do not value human life "its a great investment in Ukraine because not one American life has been lost" to quote Cameron recently, but what about the lives of those they waste by pursuing this insanity that the west started in 2014. They put us all in danger.

[@KevinS47]

Hearing you talk well about my absolute favourite fighter of all time really put a smile on my face. Had I been able to join the airforce as a pilot in Italy, that's likely what I would have ended up flying.. Sadly I never even got the chance due to a recurring problem with pressure compensation in my ears. Studying my masters in Physics now. Thanks for the vid Mover, greetings from Italy :)

[@Rosaslav]

Can you do a quick summary of Mirage vs Typhoon vs Gripen or point me to some good place? I am not that much into planes, so I don’t care about technical details that much, but I still would like to know how these compare to each other, which is good at what.

[@KevinS47]

@@Rosaslav I won't go into details, you can do your own research based upon available info. With that said they are quite different jets. The Mirage is a very old jet and doesn't compare to the others two you mentioned. The Rafale was born out of the initial plans for the Eurofighter Project as France took part in it, but decided to back out before production of the Eurofighter begun (thus stealing the initial plans from the Eurofighter project.. not exactly the most friendly move). Needless to say the Rafale didn't turn out as well as the Eurofighter did, both in regards to avionics and kinematics, but with that said they are somewhat similar. The Eurofighter was designed for air superiority and later on modified as a multirole, so it's very competent for air-to-air stuff. Please take what I said with a grain of salt, it's always better to do your own research, I'm just a guy on the internet!

[@Rosaslav]

@@KevinS47 Thanks! I find it nicer to hear from enthusiast who knows interesting details and can put it in context, rather than some cold numbers comparison:) You even told me about Raphale and about Typhoon being repurposed Air to Air. It is surprisingly difficult to find interesting info like this.

[@Arleq1]

@@KevinS47 Well this is complete nonsense to say France stole the plans of the Eurofighter for many reasons: - Rafale was inspired by the Mirage 4000 from Dassault with the canard which flew for the first time in 1979. Well before, France Germany, uk and spain start the Eurofighter project. - Dassault was supposed to be the project manager on the Eurofighter project before it left the project so it was there know-how that was stolen by the other countries not the other way around. -The first Rafale "Rafale A" first flew in 1986, when the eurofighter first flew in 1994. - France was the only to want a multirole aircraft carrier capable jet, when every other countries wanted an only landbased Interceptor jet that they later tried to turn into a multirole to copy the rafale. The englished even tried to navalized the eurofighter afterward but it's impossible due to the air-intake placed on the belly of the Eurofighter where the Rafale have air-intake designed to get around this problem. When I read "needless to say the rafale did not turn out as well as the eurofighter did".... I want to laugh. The Rafale is way above the Eurofighter Typhoon. Rafale is a true Multirole that have many records of successfull operations when the eurofighter have almost no records on operation despite being used by 4 countries. Rafale also regularly compete against others jets, eurofighter include for arming foreign Air force and the Rafale often stand out. Thefact that rafale is exporting itself better, is just a coincidence to you?

[@KevinS47]

@@Arleq1 You are mostly speculating here. Useless information for the most part, for example when each first flew is irrelevant since it depends on hundreds of variables and requirements imposed by the project specifically at hand. The Eurofighter project did NOT start from the Dassault Mirage (also they don't even look alike). Moreover, it was initialized by multiple countries at the SAME TIME, so stop telling lies, as if France had it all put together beforehand... France left not long after the project started due to the requirements they wanted to satisfy as you stated, and ended up with a similar jet (with its own advantages disadvantages compared to the EF2000). Now these are facts. Don't argue with facts.

[@finenavaljewelry5798]

It's Europe's F-15 equivalent really - missile truck that flies high and kills everything

[@alexs.4340]

F15 on steroid. In WVR the f15 is no match for a Typhoon

[@KevinS47]

It's far more capable in terms of kinematics compared to the F-15C, so I wouldn't exactly label the two as equivalent of one another; certainly not a "missile truck" (and the F15C isn't an missle truck either haha what?!) !

[@appa609]

​@@KevinS47In its day, 8 fox-3's was considered a lot.

[@appa609]

​@@alexs.4340 Well the F-15 is a full 20 years older. Americans engineered another jet in the late 80's for the same role called the F-22. In almost every way that matters it blows EF out of the water.

[@KevinS47]

@@appa609 ding ding ding, I smell yet another m braindead F-22 fan right here!

[@forgeofknowledge9309]

1:01 Not sure why you missed Great Britain from the Typhoon's development, when it's written on the article. The British were the primary design group, having created the British Aerospace EAP, which the Typhoon is based on.

[@Axispaw1]

Yeah that annoyed me too. Missing out UK involvement in EF is like missing out the US in F35s development.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

Indeed, Typhoon is British in the same way F-35 is American. Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) is the British led 6th gen fighter.

[@gregs7562]

Sometimes I wish we'd just gone on with the EAP ourselves & not fanny'd around with the Europeans.

[@tonysadler5290]

​​@@gregs7562My father was a Hawker Sidley project engineer, formerly with the RAF 1936 to 1946. He always said we needed a European Aircraft Industry, as it was the only way we'd be able to compete. He left the aviation indusry after the TSR2 fiasco. We couldn't afford it on our own as the TSR2 proved. We were too reliant on the US. It was McNamara the US secretary of state that blocked UK loans with the IMF at the time that ultimately caused the demise of the project. The USA needed western countries to buy the F111. That, and Mountbatten running about decrying TSR2 saying he could have 5 Buccaneers for one TSR2. Had we been fully in with the rest off European aircraft manufacturers we might have had both. We would have pulled out of concorde (which insidently used pretty much the basic engines as TSR2) had it not have been for the French government holding the UK to its contract, and the then EEC standing up to to USA who banned concorde from their air space on exaggerated allegations of environmental pollution etc. The EEC retaliated and threatened a similar ban on US airlines which led to opening airspace. It is also notworthy that US industry set up offices in UK after TSR2 and offered a "new" beginning to former members of the project to go and work in the USA aircraft industry! No, I am glad of all cooperation with european engineering projects. It keeps us independent. As much as I have for many Americans (and I served with a few) I don't want that way of life. See you tube where US citizens compare there life to europeans - they all preferred the European way. Defence needs a successful economy. A successful economy provides everything, health, schooling development, investment. That's why the UK has had to rejoin european science and research bodies. If we want modern defence, then we have to integrate. Just think, if the merlin engine had been developed with fuel injection - how much more it could have been, eventually it had pumps. Injection is better. The eliptical wing was first developed by a German engineer. One of Mitchell's apprentices had an article about it for a project of his. He took it to Mitchell who recognised it's potential the rest is history. Collaboration between the european nations yealds world beating inovation and products. Together, we have the political clout and funding to bring them to market. We in the UK used go make stuff, good stuff. It was in the 80s that our own government sold our manufacturing industry and utilities to the international markets. Now we are asset stripped and alone.

[@josephmarkey9096]

​@@gregs7562 Indeed. It was a fine aircraft. Beautiful lines. Loved it's cranked arrow wing.

[@falconeaterf15]

I remember playing F15E Strike Eagle sim back in the 90s. There was a mission where you are hunting down a large flight of cruise missiles over mountainous desert terrain. Hours of amusement!

[@user-ho1yn6ms7y]

I remember that sim back then too! ❤

[@falconeaterf15]

@@user-ho1yn6ms7y I remember the backseater would occasionally make puking sounds during extreme maneuvering, and once excitedly blurted out “ We blew that up bigger than Dallas!” after a strike on a oil refinery. Years later I heard that same phrase repeated on a combat HUD tape from desert storm. Strangely cool.

[@stephenhogg2472]

I may be wrong but I thought the UK had the F35B for the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy.

[@Steamthrower1]

they do.

[@Xenomorphine]

Yes. RAF has them, too, but the Royal Navy exclusively operates those.

[@mp40submachinegun81]

they do, it was airforce, not navy. UK has an airbase in cyprus to fly from near israel. dont need naval aviation there, assuming thats what you're reffering to.

[@Bob10009]

@@Xenomorphineno,the F35b fleet is a joint force of RAF and RN aircraft ,squadrons and crews.

[@Bob10009]

RAF and FAA both have the F35b.

[@titaniummechanism3214]

As I understand it, a big part of why Germany has ordered F-35s is to replace their aging Tornado fleet. The Eurofighter can fill some of the roles the Tornado was used for, but not all of them. Carrying the american "loaned" nukes for example. And the F-35 won't replace the Eurofighter either, I think there is a new program in the works to develop a european 5th gen fighter along the lines of F-22 and SU-57.

[@babalonkie]

There are two different 6th Gen European fighters being worked on, there are zero 5th gen. Europe is completely bypassing 5th gen. Instead it's just buying F-35's (5th Gen) and upgrading 4/4.5's to plug any gaps. FCAS (France, Germany and Spain) and GCAP (UK, Italy and Japan) are the 6th gen. Owners of the Typhoon (Gen 4.5) have a upgrade contingency plan in place should a large war be declared but will not go ahead until then. It features better stealth and more powerful thrust vectoring engines for the Typhoon. Making it a "5th Gen" upgrade. Typhoon is here to stay. To quote the RAF... "Tempest is designed to complement F-35 and Typhoon, not replace them". Owners of Typhoon are investing more in Typhoon than the F-35... especially since it now costs as little as a F-16 to build a Typhoon now, it's just it's logistic to none operators is bad as it's a specialised aircraft, requires much more training to use and is not globalised.

[@hoghogwild]

German F-35s wont be B-61 capable? Interesting. US F-35A is B-61 capable. Fat Amy with a couple B-61's in her belly is a terrifying proposition. Almost what I imagine Israel can do with their F-35I. UK is also involved in an international 6th Gen fighter effort, on the level of the US NGAD.

[@everypitchcounts4875]

F-35 will also be certified to carry AGM-181A LRSO nuclear-capable stealth cruise missiles

[@bluefox9436]

​​@@hoghogwildthey will be - in fact that's one of the main reasons why we're actually getting them

[@Adwaenyth]

@@hoghogwild since they're to replace the Tornado's B-61 capabiliities, which the Typhoon doesn't have, they will be F-35As or an updated or customized variant of those.

[@sven.schepers]

Actually Belgian Air Force took up Baltic Air Policing the day the Baltic states joined NATO and have been rotating in and out of Lithuania and Estonia amongst the NATO air force units. With regards to Typhoon doing policing.. it's purely dependent on which Air Force is doing the policing. Norway and Netherlands have been operational with F35 and have done active intercepts of SU-30's over the Baltic (plenty of video available on KZbin). They do have the radar deflectors on them and they also carry external AIM-9's on rails.. I'm guessing that's in order to downgrade stealthiness and not give away

[@tomriley5790]

I wonder if the Baltic air policing mission will become redundant now, with Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia putting up their budgets they might actually be able to afford their own aircraft and you have Finland (F18s and Sweden - Grippens) which are more than capable fighters.

[@Robert-xy4xi]

Turkey wanted to purchase 40 Eurofighter Typhoons but, Germany blocked the deal. Much to the displeasure of UK BAE Systems that had negotiated the deal.

[@garethhughes5745]

Thankfully Germany are not as dumb as UK.

[@delfinenteddyson9865]

what? why? Germany did sell them Leopards, why did they block the planes?

[@noir1923]

not very friendly with germany anymore, even though our largest diaspora is in germany. strange.@@delfinenteddyson9865

[@enisun5839]

Gsrmany is only selling us sea vessels for long time.

[@SbrGrendel65]

Turkey is only NATO aligned when it benefits them. Otherwise they are a pita! Erdogan is a dictator and no way he’s running a democracy

[@JasmineNuchbua-yg6nm]

You mentioned all the development countries except the main one, UK? When shooting down drones do you need stealth? No far lower operating costs for the Typhoon, more availability and a larger weapon load with greater endurance.

[@keithlillis7962]

RAF pilots have been known to call the Typhoon: "A homesick angel that wants to fly back to heaven".

[@MrRjsnowden]

I wonder if the Meteor missle is really the advanced tech on the Typhoon. Its a great airframe, but I think it carries an even better missle.

[@RT42069]

Well, having a missile that can outrange an AIM-54 and maneuver like an AMRAAM definitely helps quite a bit

[@denniskrenz2080]

What impressed me much more is how small the Meteor is relative to the AMRAAM. Its just a bit longer than a IRIS-T, if you just stand next to all three missiles.

[@henrikerdland578]

Air patrolling and quick reaction alert is all about speed. The eurofighter Typhoon has one of the fastest reaction time and with the ability to supercruise, it is probably the best aircraft for the job.

[@davidmacdonald1695]

Typhoon was a British Aerospace developed airframe with Rolls-Royce derived engines.

[@jhdix6731]

Not fully, even the British Aerospace EAP demonstrator incorporated elements proposed by MBB during the ACA project, but yes, the EJ200 engine is largely based on the XG-40.

[@mazking1366]

Really makes me proud to work on the typhoon here in the UK.

[@tomislavvukelic8897]

We croatians just got first 6 Rafale F3R version. Next 6 planes next year. Gret fighter jets.

[@Xenomorphine]

Typhoons have longer range and are able to carry external fuel tanks. Those are probably the requirements the RAF thought would be more advantageous, considering they were just shooting down missiles over a wide area and not going up against enemy fighters. Plus... Does the RAF even have any F-35s based in Cyprus? Because that seemed to be where they ferried the Typhoons out from at short notice. It also hasn't been fully declared in a statement what the Ministry of Defence flew. It's possible RAF F-35s were also flying there.

[@nsatoday]

F-35’s have stealth drop tanks, see F-22 upgrade program. F-35C has some long legs. Anyway, frame it however you like

[@Xenomorphine]

@@nsatoday As I understand it, the F-22 does, but they have not yet been put into production for the F-35, no. The UK does not have the F-35C. We have tthe F-35B.

[@nsatoday]

@@Xenomorphine the drop tanks are interchangeable by design. As far as the UK only buying the B model, that’s their mistake 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Xenomorphine]

@@nsatoday Where is your evidence for htem being interchangeable? To the best of my knowledge, they are not and the F-35 is still waiting on some. Exactly how was it a "mistake"? We can't operate Cs because the EMALS didn't function by the time our carriers had to go online. Isntalling steam catapults was looked into, but turned out to be horrendously expensive. We had to revert to ski jumps and the B was the only option. The RAF could have got As, but doing that would have doubled the logistics train (spare parts and more), making future F-35 operation far more expensive over the long time. Therefore, it was decided to use Bs for both services, to be as efficient as possible.

[@nsatoday]

@@Xenomorphine the C’s can launch from the same facilities that launch A’s. As far as the tanks go, after 21 years of service let’s just say it’s a witnessed fact.

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

RE: „The Typhoon is the aircraft that’s ready now” … and it’s also opportunity to further prove its capabilities and testing latest enhancements in live environment. When thinking of air policing & QRA at NATO borders by European countries, there’s perhaps also some tactics by doing this `show of force´ with `non-stealth´ fighters “only”. Kind of “we’re not gonna show you everything of what we already have and how we will operate it”. Who knows, maybe there’s also F-35s up in the sky but acting in the back, already coordinating missions using their Gen 5 capabilities (e.g. direct plane-to-plane network / grid communication)…

[@sergarlantyrell7847]

"Developed by Germany, Italy, Spain..." Excuse me... The initial prototype was made by BAE in Britain.

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

To be fair and precise: true, Britain and BAE has big share in studies, development and finally also production. However, for those who are interested, please also check articles on Wikipedia (keywords `Typhoon´ and `Rockwell - MBB X-31´), too. They're quite comprehensive and accurate wrt history of this joint development.

[@gandalf6923]

Cost per hour is a factor - about $40,000 for F35, about $20,000 for Typhoon

[@JagdgeschwaderX]

I don't think our aircraft carriers are in the Med so the RAF was flying their Typhoons out of Cyprus for the drone stuff.

[@AtomicBuffalo]

It’s not just OpSec, but cost per flight hour, other demands, and in which team do you want to bank that experience.

[@matsv201]

Stealth is a really good feature. But i kind think its overhyped a bit. But there is a other advantage. The loaded plane is really sleek making it more fuel efficent at high speed. Thinking about domething like J20, or even su57... with internal bays still give a aerodynamic advantage.

[@callofduty611]

Engagements are always likely to be beyond visual range, so I'd say stealth makes a far larger impact compared to any aerodynamic advantage. Also obviously depends on what missions it'd be sent on and the amount of time it may be required to loiter.

[@matsv201]

​@@callofduty611 "Engagements are always likely to be beyond visual range," That might not always be true. "I'd say stealth makes a far larger " That only matters for radar guided missiles. The issue is that stealth fighters (but much less so stealth bombers) are really not invisible in the lower band. This have until fairly recently been really not a issue because that will prevent a missile from getting radar lock, hence no fire solution. This is no longer the case. Since 2016 this is no longer applicable (and possibly before that). While multi head missiles did exist prior. Modern link guided missiles probobly came around then (with the possible exception that there was some lesser known missile being able to do that prior) If the missile is link guided being stealth don´t matter. They can be guided via long wave, short wave, IR, visual or theoretical even satellite. Notching missiles is also a thing of the past. For instance would there be a new Denmark-Sweden war (very likely, already been 35 of those), Sweden would actually be better armed with Gripen and metior than Demark would be with F35 and AIM-120 AMRAAM becasue Gripen would both outrange and get a fire solution faster, even if the F35 have stealth... Of cause, this is only true for this and next year. When F35 got meteor integration gripen would have it far harder.

[@khulgarulfsson8067]

I think it depends on the aircraft and how stealthy it is. In war games, the F-22 and F-35 are capable of complete domination against non-stealth fighters. For these two, I think the hype is justified. I would expect it to be the same for other US stealth aircraft. They have stealth and it actually works. For the J-20 and especially for the SU-57, I'm not nearly as convinced.

[@matsv201]

@@khulgarulfsson8067 I do think the stealth of the F22 and F35.. specially so the F35 that is a bit worse, is getting dated. Both the radar are getting much better and so are the missiles. Go back just 10 years and the missiles had to lock on to the target. Today the missiles can be guided to the target with a longer wave radar, and lock on just in the last few seconds. Its really hard to make a aircraft so stealthy it will not be able to lock on if its like a km away or so. France, Germany and Sweden is pretty much there already. China probobly need 5 more years, and Russia probobly lack the capability to develop that during current situation. But i would say the F35 will probobly lose most of its stealth advantage with in a decade. F22 may last a few more years. Granted.. still there will be a advantage of stealth, but much smaller one

[@khulgarulfsson8067]

@@matsv201 I think stealth hasn’t come under nearly enough pressure to reveal how extensible it is with decoys, etc. I don’t think it’s going to become dated as much as it’s going to become a minimum requirement.

[@slezyorla]

I found the really interesting DERA study "Future Offensive Air System" today. The Eurofighter had a kill ratio of 4.5:1 against Su-27 Flankers and Su-35 Super Flankers, whilst obviously the (for EU expensive and heavy) YF22 had the best with 10:1, the Rafales had 1:1 with Su-35s, in a 4v8 against Mig-29s and Su-27s it managed a 2:1. Sadly I cant find an english version though and as I am german there's only the wikipedia article on the Eurofighter page as a source. Theres one more article from 2005, the classic "Eurofighter wins over 2 US jets" but that doesnt talk about the study. The closest one to a good informing read - after translating to english - is the article on the german website flugzeug-lexikon "ILA_2008 Luftwaffe Eurofighter Typhoon"

[@TheGreatAmphibian]

I find it very hard to believe that the Rafale would perform very differently to the Typhoon - flight characteristics are almost the same and the Rafale is currently packing a better radar to compensate for the Typhoon’s datalink to Meteor. Can you explain their reasoning? What was the date on the study?

[@slezyorla]

@@TheGreatAmphibian let me first clear up: the study doesnt "really" exist. These are multiple studies test results all over west europe, each based on the similar conditions The beginnings date back to 1998, theres another article about "it" in 2000 and the whole story somehow concludes in 2005, thats the first year there are mentionings of the eurofighter being the "decision" (i guess) where again the FOAS "Future Offensive Air System" is mentioned. It was mainly to find an alternative to the F22, like i said Europe likes it cheaper

[@slezyorla]

its easier to refer to the "DERA" or "FOAS" study. To me it seemed interesting that the Eurofighter than its competitors (other than the YF22) had better results under apparently SIMILAR circumstances.

[@nobleman-swerve]

​@TheGreatAmphibian Strictly speaking for air policing/supremacy, the Eurofighter was superior, especially when this study was done in the late aughts. It's basically a European F-15, able to get to altitude absurdly fast and keep that speed to grant immense kinetic benefits to any missle it lobs. Rafael is by no means bad, but it's just not as good as Eurofighter, and certainly didn't have an operational AESA in 2008 either. The Eurofighter just has an absurd level of thrust, 1.15 T/W in an air policing configuration to a Rafale's .98. That really matters for BVR when nobody has stealth to lean on.

[@TheGreatAmphibian]

@@nobleman-swerve If we’re talking about an old version of Rafale without AESA, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks!

[@robbos3245]

You're right, Europe does know how to build a great looking Jet, which makes me proud to be European, but I cannot deny, there's nothing quite like the silhouette of an F22 Raptor. Now that is art. Functional art, but art nonetheless.

[@d_lollol524]

Eurofighrter Typhoon has greater range than F35 .

[@NiSiochainGanSaoirse]

ANYTHING the US weapons industry manufactures is primarily about enriching the executives. Weapons suitability is a distant second priority. The priority, as always for the US, is profits. That's why Europe doesn't have scams like dragonskin armour etcetera.

[@jhdix6731]

F-35 is designed for US tactics, assuming that at any time you have enough tanker aircraft in place to make up for that lower tank volume (and enough fighters available to protect them, so they would always exist within their own bubble of Air superiority, even if they needed to enter contested airspace ). The Eurofighter is designed with European requirements in mind, not necessary only for a full NATO conflict, where you wouldn't always have those luxuries available.

[@ptranchand52]

@@jhdix6731no, it’s not the reason, the F35 is just fuel hungry, when you have an aircraft who can’t do super cruise with a nearly 20T of thrust engine, yeah there is definitely a problem

[@iain8837]

For those that have never seen the RIAT 2016 Typhoon display, have a look, it is fully loaded with weapons, very impressive. I love the Typhoon, they have flown over me…and under me when driving north Lossiemouth in Scotland. 100ft limit, what a sight!

[@Schokelmei]

From a German POV it's pretty clear why the country went all in with the Typhoon. It replaced the F-4F in 2004 and became the multi-role fighter of the German Luftwaffe because it was an European project and there wasn't much competition on the market at that time. With the latest generation of the Typhoon and the new Meteor rocket it's an effective and cheap to operate plane. Not to forget the whole logistics that has been build up for 20 years makes maintenance really easy. The F-35 in Germany will replace the old Tornados designed for the "Nuclear Sharing Program" of Nato, so they will carry the American Nuclear Weapons stationed in Germany. Not to forget that a new Typhoon model (ECR) is planned to replace the other batch of Germanys Tornado fleet. The RECCE and ECR versions. There was a long discussion going if those should be replaced by EA-18G Growler or something else. There is a good channel about all the discussions from German perspectives of Super Hornet, Growler, F-35 and the decision making behind it from a German historian kzbin.info/www/bejne/a36oi5Stdq-ggMk

[@stupidburp]

Typhoon is good for high altitude air to air but less well suited for ground strikes. It can do air to ground adequately and is getting better at it but it is outside of the core strength of the platform. The observability level is somewhere close to Rafale and Super Hornet with some measures taken to reduce radar cross section but nowhere near full stealth. Agility, speed, weapons available, and situational awareness are all good. Against a Flanker it should have the advantage and that is what matters most.

[@KevinS47]

From what I know it was mostly intended to be an air superiority fighter, with some elements of stealth (not full on coating though), over the years they modified the initial project so it could be also suited for air-to-ground with multirole capabilities. So while it's not the best suited for air-to-ground compared to something like an A10, I still have the feeling that it's good at it.

[@bluefox9436]

Tbh "full" Stealth doesn't really exist anymore. Radars have improved as well and the times you could just fly over a hostile radar installation wirhout it noticing you are pretty much over. Though it certainly does reduce the spotting range and most importantly the lock on range.

[@dogsnads5634]

@@KevinS47 In short you're wrong. Typhoon was always multi-role. The RAF requirement was to replace Phantom AND Jaguar. In the 1990's due to German budgetary pressures some of the emphasis on air to ground was delayed, not cancelled, just delayed. The reason was Germany desperately needed to replace F-4F as its main air to air platform, and had hundreds of Tornado for air to ground and integrating East Germany was hugely expensive. When Typhoon entered service in its Tranche 1 guise it was initially air to air only, but rapidly gained the ability to use Paveway II and targeting pods. Its long forgotten about but Rafale also arrived as air to air only, and contrary to popular belief Rafale has gained additional air to ground capabilities at the same pace that Typhoon has. In terms of air to ground weaponry Typhoon carries more varied munitions than Rafale can, a platform everyone thinks of as more multi-role. Cruise Missiles - Typhoon and Rafale both carry Storm Shadow/SCALP...but Typhoon can also carry Taurus PGM's - Typhoon and Rafale can both carry LGB's, Rafale carry's AASM, but Typhoon carries Paveway II and IV, GBU-12, SDB1 and JDAM/LJDAM..again a far greater selection Small PGM's- Typhoon carrie Brimstone (and LaGS), Rafale has no equivalent munition Anti-Shipping - Typhoon carries Marte ER for anti-shipping, Rafale carries Exocet Air to Air - Rafale carries MICA and Meteor, Typhoon carries Sidewinder, IRIS-T, Asraam, Amraam and Meteor (in greater quantities as well) Targeting Pods - Rafale carries Damocles, Typhoon carries Litening III and V (both of which are superior to Damocles) Typhoon will also gain an anti-radiation munition and small cruise missile way ahead of Rafale (AARGM/ER and Spear variants) The only advantage Rafale has is the ability to carry a nuclear missile.... As I think you can see now that the idea that Typhoon is not multi-role (especially in relation to Rafale) does not stack up...I should also note that Typhoon has performed far more combat missions than Rafale and dropped many times more munitions in combat.... The range and quality of the weapons is also far in excess of Rafale's capabilities and compares well with any other platform out there...

[@dogsnads5634]

Just to add....pretty much everyone agrees that Typhoon has a much lower RCS than the Rafale. It was incorporated into the design from the get go. Rafales RCS improvements were far more modest. How it compares to SuperHornet I'm not sure however...

[@Marlow8]

​@@dogsnads5634 In short you're wrong. Typhoon wasn't always multi-role. The Typhoon project always had anair-superiority fighter as the final goal, however before production had started, the plans were modified as best as possible to make it more versatile/multi-role. Modifying already perfected plans ins't an easy task, so they had to settle with some drawbacks on its multi-role air-to-ground capabilities. Regarding how it compares to the Rafale, the Typhoon has clearly shown to be more capable both in BFM, kinematics (and so BVR) and avionics. With that said, while both aircraft have a lower RCS than your average 4-Gen fighter, the Rafale has a SLIGTHLY lower RCS than the Typhoon (on a clean configuration). As Kevin said, the Typhoon was designed with some elements of stealth in mind, but these are mostly implemented as electronic warfare technologies, rather than physical aspects of the airframe. Either way, both aircrafts are excellent at what they do, with the Rafale being more multi-role oriented and the Thyphoon being more Air-Superiority oriented.

[@Philistine47]

The Typhoon has been in service about as long as the F-22. Whether you call that "a lot" longer than F-35 depends on what you consider "a lot." As far as Typhoon being "Generation 4.5" or whatever... If so, then presumably the F-16V and F-15EX are as well. If those are still 4th Gen, then Typhoon is also 4th Gen.

[@everypitchcounts4875]

Everyone knows the F-16V & F-15EX are still 4th gen. No reason to get upset about the Typhoon being 4th gen as well.

[@mikedittsche]

If the Eurofighter is 4th Gen, then so is the F35. Eurofighter is not a stealth fighter. F35 can't supercruise which was originally a requirement for 5th Gen. But since the whole Generation classification is a marketing tool to better sell US aircraft abroad, they retrofitted the requirements to make the F35 5th Gen.

[@simongeorge2505]

The Typhoon can deploy the Meteor missiles (it can carry 4) where as the F35B can’t (yet). That gives it a lethal reach beyond the AIM120D’s. The Typhoon also has a much longer loiter time than the F35 as it can carry tanks.

[@DWillis7]

I believe it can carry 8 (4 on the belly and 4 on the wings) but they usually operate with 6 meteor + 2 IRIS-T + bags.

[@simongeorge2505]

@@DWillis7 RAF does not have IRIS-T (unfortunately) we have ASRAAM. You are correct it can in theory carry 6 but I've never seen one (operational/QRA) with mor e than 4 Meteor plus 4x ASRAAM and 2x tanks.

[@dogsnads5634]

@@simongeorge2505 Just in theory with Meteor. No Meteor has ever been launched from a wing station on Typhoon, or in fact carried into the air. It would need a prolonged testing campaign.

[@simongeorge2505]

@@dogsnads5634 That's probably true, as I said I've never seen one with more than 4 (on the body mounts). Its certainly been (wing) plyon launched from Gripen and Rafale and the Typhoon inner pylon can stand the weight (it will take a Stormshadow) and has the right data links. I am very much ***guessing*** but the reason its not been done is because it would require a different mounting kit for the body plyons vs. the wing rails. The Typhoon body mounts 'push' the missle clear to ensure seperation and there is no 'rail' to launch off. Wing mount would obviously use a rail system. Not a biggy as standard rail mounts must exist for it for Gripen etc. but there is probably no seen operational requirement to carry more than 4

[@dogsnads5634]

@@simongeorge2505 Gripen and Rafale both have to carry on pylons as they either have no conformal carriage (Gripen) or limited (Rafale with 2). It's going to be a draggy store...Gripen with any weapons loaded is going to not have great performance...

[@Husker5454]

Typhoon is still the go to for QRA operations . Not only do we have the experience with them so we understand how long they can be airborne and how fast but also the number of them . We also have high snag rates with F35 being a new platform , they are busy learning how to absolutely dumpster everything during OCA while our typhoons are taking up evolving mission sets to support that and be a reliable backbone .

[@alexs.4340]

Now Tranche 4 and 5 incoming. The Typhoon is a beast.

[@feliscorax]

I mean, as an interceptor/air superiority platform, this thing’s the best aircraft flying that isn’t a Raptor, so I can definitely see why it is so trusted and relied upon by NATO in Europe. As a Brit, I say thank goodness she’s ours and not our potential adversaries’ weapons system. Everything else is moot.

[@artyombeilis9075]

Look-wise Dassault Rafale and Saab Gripen are one of the best looking aircraft around. Typhoon does not lag much below but still little bit more "square".

[@appa609]

Ridiculous. The typhoon is far prettier than the rafale. The gripen is somewhere in between.

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

The Typhoon’s shape is optimized for maximizing agility at trans- and supersonic speeds. No other plane can compare in those regimes.

[@artyombeilis9075]

@@RichelieuUnlimited I'm talking about looks, not performance

[@RichelieuUnlimited]

@@artyombeilis9075 I think the Typhoon is better looking due to its more aggressive shape that also leads to its superior performance. Then again it will wipe the floor with a Su-27, but nothing compares to a Flanker in looks. De gustibus non est disputandum sed solum de gustibus est disputandum.

[@artyombeilis9075]

@@RichelieuUnlimited from soviet I actually like the look of mig 29 the most

[@dariuszrutkowski420]

That is the reason Poland bought fighters from Korea. They are the Low end in the mix that does the day to day patrols and air policeing and close air support (replaces the Su-22). And lets pilots get air time for less cost. The F-16 is the shaft of the spear that after upgrades is the main jet for most missions. The F-35 will be used sparingly to save the airframes lifespan and will get the most important missins that involve taking out radars and SAMs in case of war to lear the way for the non stealth jets (remember Poland is buying the stealth cruise missile that can be paired with the 35 (less risky to send the stealth with a stealth missile to take out the target without riskig the jet too much)

[@FabrizioGalbiati72]

Italy uses both Eurofighters and F-35A for air policing over the Baltic states and Romania. Actually many intercets of Russian aircraft were carried out over the Baltic Sea near the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

[@TheGreatAmphibian]

RUSI published a study on how to use the F35 in air to air. Their conclusion was that the F35’s ungreat energy manoeuvrability and excellent radar meant that it should hang back and act as a mini awacs for Typhoon - very much like the Raptor/Viper pairing in Battlestar Galactica, so it’s a shame those two aircraft nicknames have already been used.

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

I'd expect actual air policing at NATO borders is used for training of such scenario to quite some extent.

[@sparrowlt]

Its funny as in the spanish air force one of the first things they did when they got the Typhoons was to learn to use the datalink so the Typhoons superior radar could paint targets and the Hornets act as missile trucks firing AMRAAMs at then without engaging the radar

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

@@sparrowlt Sounds like the `radar food-chain´ - ".. and who is next going to be the bait?" 😉

[@TheGreatAmphibian]

@@sparrowlt Also smart!

[@TheGreatAmphibian]

@@NRZ-3Pi10 Well, if you need bait, then that’s one of the things the new wingmen drones should handle.

[@joro148]

In the case of RAF Typhoon is the only jet armed with a canon. Maybe a topic for you guys to talk if this is going to be important in the future? Apart from that the jet is pretty amazing specially when it gets AESA radar and maybe in the future move the pod on the eyebrow to free more options.

[@Steamthrower1]

europe and usa use different doctrine regarding a-a gun employment. USA believes it is better for a smaller caliber, but much faster rpm gun to shred a target when it hits it. Europe uses a larger caliber cannon, with a slower rate of fire, that will destroy an aircraft with a single hit.

[@Xenomorphine]

So far as I know, RAF Typhoons have a full array of air-to-air options.

[@minthouse6338]

Pretty sure cannons don't have a lot of ammo rounds. It's not going to be anything like a P-51 shooting down Me 109s.

[@johanmetreus1268]

@@minthouse6338 Typically between 60 and 150 rounds, as the gun is more or less a backup weapon if things gone wrong. Then again it is fully possible to make a gun pod with far more ammunition should the need arise.

[@everypitchcounts4875]

One could also use perdix micro drone swarms as a counter measure

[@timgosling6189]

For the QRA air defence mission Typhoon is the clear choice. As you say it can carry a bigger load out and get there much faster than F-35. It's a Mach 2+ jet with supercruise. RAF pilots love it, especially as it was designed specifically for the AD role and then later became a bomber, unlike the unhappy Tornado story. The only problem was how long it took to come into service. The Eurofighter programme was coming along nicely when I joined the RAF in '79 and we were expecting it to have full ISD in '92. Eventually it got a limited ISD in 05 and what would have been the finest fighter of the nineties was suddenly a generation behind. But if you don't need the stealth it's still a fabulous platform.

[@BasedF-15Pilot]

We used to heavy-lift the Icelandic and Baltic air policing in the 493rd. The 492/494 took over (E-models) after our jets (the C-models) got re-distributed to guard units in MA and CA. I dont think the F-35's have the legs to air police properly without tanker support and they are winchester pretty much immediately. E-model guys were probably complaining about policing in bombers and asked the Euros to pick up the slack.

[@thoreberlin]

Eurofighter seems like a strange development where multiple teams don't talk to each other. It's build for dogfighting, but with the standard IRIS air to air missile loadout it doesn't need to dogfight at all, because you can send missiles to targets behind you. So stealth would have been the better option for that weaponry.

[@inwedavid6919]

Also the F35 is still not available in operational version on the few countries who has it, In Belgium we still are waiting for it and recently know that the software is not up to date to be usable as a front line fighter for now, we have to wait for update. Note that in Romania Rafal french fighters are also located there.

[@mercboy111]

Good points. Let’s also not forget the Rafale M and Saab Gripen E 😊

[@Husker5454]

Excellent QRA aircraft . Those rafales can fkin SHIFT

[@weirdbritishperson9542]

@@Husker5454the Rafale is a good aircraft but tbf it was practically made off of the ideas of typhoon, of course changed but yk. Still a good jet and a good looking jet

[@Husker5454]

@@weirdbritishperson9542 Yeah this is true they did leave the EF program for rafal its flight performance tho is better than typhoon although im not sure on range id had to look that up .

[@mro9466]

​​@@weirdbritishperson9542 bullshit. Rafale is basically a mirage 4000 with bigger and moving canards

[@izziomelis]

Just from an historical perspective. NATO has a multinational an IADS system running since the early 60s. These deployments are either to support nations that do not have own fighter type aircraft to stand QRA, or to supplement other NATO countries in sensitive places like Romania or Poland. Thanks to the NATO IADS, called NATINAMDS, NATO countries have a fully integrated and standardized Air and Missile defence system to ensure all allies are protected. This is the equivalent of NORAD, but getting together 32 nations, is a huge achievement.

[@posmoo9790]

why did Russia annexing Crimea cause NATO to change it's posture? 1:20 The Russian's have been in Crimea & the Russian Black Sea fleet has been in Crimea since well before the USA was even an idea. Seems like that alone tells you it wasn't the Russians who didn't create this confrontation.

[@solreaver83]

Show of force role like this you want to be seen for starters is my guess. Then the typhoon is faster, longer range, heavier loads and wider range like meteor missiles which I believe f35 still not ready for and cheaper running costs I've heard. All these things make the aircraft more versatile in a show of force mission and more efficient financially and force wise.

[@blacklake13]

For F-35 opsec don't they just fly with the radar reflectors? It seems letting people know what it looks like in "pointless mode" with bombs dangling would also be giving away opsec.

[@tomriley5790]

Perhaps becasue they don't want to be shot down... Also if you're flying an F35 with radar reflectors, why not fly a typhoon?

[@nonamenameless5495]

Think for most European nations it makes a lot of sense, the Eurofighter could be the more relevant one than the F-15EX. When teamed up with F-35s, they ll be either the payload carriers with the reconnaissance benefit of the stealthier F-35s whilst on other missions, they can be either dogfighters, long range missile platforms or simply multi-role... and that at a price point that s far more attractive than the F-35s. It should be a good workhorse compliment in addition to F-35s.

[@keepingcalm6469]

I really really want one.

[@ajkulac9895]

Maybe buy a Cessna and name it "Typhoon"?

[@keepingcalm6469]

@@ajkulac9895 I can call my wife that

[@FoxKhan30]

About the airbase in Romania, you can just use: RoAF 57th Air Base.

[@tomfuller4473]

Could it also be that the Typhoon is less likely to be mistaken as an Israeli jet by Iran?

[@lordsqueak]

Brings up an interesting problem with Stealth. It's designed for the kind of missions that you don't want to use them for. Because if you do, you will show the adversaries what the planes are capable of, weaknesses etc. So they don't get used for the kind of work it's designed to do. A bit of an identity crisis for Stealth. At the same time, the F-35 is being adopted by so many different nations, that you can't really avoid it. Is it really worth keeping it secret, if you can't use it until you have something better. (or until the cats out of the bag so to speak.)

[@MultitrackRecords]

Well, as a hungarian (but that could be said about any european I think), I am more comfortable listening to proficient pilots using european made fighterjets than US made ones. The tech specs are not that important in this case as You just pointed it out. But the fact that it is created here, makes me less scared when listening to Trump not adhering to NATO.

[@deltaforceshuttles3749]

The typhoon is just such a nice jet / with the meteor and the iris ts the thing is a beast! I just love the simplicity of it

[@user-aero68]

Those 1970's-style air intakes though are pretty ugly

[@hrvojegrgic5111]

The thing is also how much Combat ready pilots, there are much more of those in Europe already Combat qualified on Typhoon because it is 20+ years in use, while the F-35 is just starting to be ready in that sense. Also, Eurofighter Typhoon has a constant improvements program, latest batch includes a very capable AESA radar.

[@danielhardman234]

sadly those improvements can only go so far, hence the current intention to replace the typhoon

[@joshman531]

Eurofighters are all good generally at air to air as that is what they were designed to do but I think a lot of RAF Eurofighters have now been upgraded with a lot more air to ground capablility.

[@RamblingRodeo]

I am concerned by the mentioning cost of shooting down the cheaply made ratio on drone vs. whatever is being used to take them down, it all seems like a massive DEBT trap in a lot of what is going on in terms of these little flare up conflicts all seem to be coordinated. As for the Typhoon, that is awesome to see them stepping up and using domestic aircraft to patrol the skys.

[@minthouse6338]

Well hopefully energy weapons will be deployed by then. You know - like them phasers on the USS Enterprise NCC-1901

[@rbrtck]

@@minthouse6338 NCC-1701.

[@rbrtck]

It's being worked on--at least economical ground-based anti-drone systems, initially. It'll certainly be interesting to see what forms they eventually take, especially if/when aircraft are equipped with such systems. Maybe the solution will be for drones to take out other drones. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@slezyorla]

i love our eurofighters.

[@richardsarcheryreviews]

Hi mover the RAF has 107 Eurofighter Typhoon and only 34 F35 lightnings so the number speak for themselves we just don't have the enough F35's plus our airbase in Cyprus has a squadron of Eurofighter Typhoon in place for Syria operations

[@dun0790]

Im curious what will end up replacing the typhoon as there's a lot of projects on going but none seem to fill all of its rolls and things like our tempest i haven't got confidence it gets past a technologies demonstrator unless it basically turns into another Euro fight with multi national help and support

[@KennethWood-r7n]

Another reason gen 4 could be used, the defenses don’t require gen 5 aircraft.

[@creativeearthian1702]

Fun fact..Rafale burns less fuel in low afterburner mode than Typhoon burns in the high subsonic mode

[@MultiVeeta]

Oh rely? What are the figures? I think you'll find them somewhere up your backside just post them up here.

[@creativeearthian1702]

@MultiVeeta For some reason yt doesn't let me comment with links. Anyway, read the interview with Rafale pilot Pierre-Henri ‘Até’ Chuet on hushkit

[@MultiVeeta]

@@creativeearthian1702 the views of someone promoting the Rafale, how funny. Plenty of play on words in that article. You can find the data at Jet-engine net. Fuel use Typhoon EJ200- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.667 lb/lbf hr. Rafale M88- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.765 lb/lbf hr. As you can see the Typhoon actually burns less fuel in afterburner than the Rafale in afterburner. Now as for the article the pilot plays with words or the editor plays with his words. If any Jet engine was flying low it would burn more fuel in non after burner than a Jet engine would burn at very high altitude in afterburner. This is the play on words.

[@MultiVeeta]

@@creativeearthian1702 the views of someone promoting the Rafale, how funny. Plenty of play on words in that article. You can find the data at Jet-engine. You need 'net' at end of Jet-engine. YT doesn't allow links. Fuel use Typhoon EJ200- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.667 lb/lbf hr. Rafale M88- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.765 lb/lbf hr. As you can see the Typhoon actually burns less fuel in afterburner than the Rafale in afterburner. Now as for the article the pilot plays with words or the editor plays with his words. If any Jet engine was flying low it would burn more fuel in non after burner than a Jet engine would burn at very high altitude in afterburner. This is the play on words.

[@creativeearthian1702]

@MultiVeeta your numbers don't take into account the thrust to drag ratio. But okay, I'm happy to stand corrected so I hope you're right

[@bowser515]

Outside of the F-22, the Typhoon is up there as one of the absolute best fighters in the world. What I wouldn't give for a ride in one. But I'm happy to see them in out skies keeping us safe.

[@nukerock2451]

I think Typhoon is the right aircraft to use for these missions for all the reasons discussed, especially OPSEC. In addition, it's the F35B that's used by the RAF/RN so (allegedly!) it can only go supersonic for several 10s of seconds otherwise factory repairs are required for some of the stealth components. For missions where you're over largely uncontested skies (e.g, policing) I'd rather have the ability to get there in a hurry at supercruise and be very "dynamic" if needed.

[@mikesmith-wk7vy]

the f35 was always going to compliment not really replace. like they said , stealth its best attribute is gone when you add external weapons it doesn't have the agility of other platforms either its strengths are its stealth and electronics systems but now even the electronics of 4.5 gen are almost equal . countries are just all flocking to the f35 because it checks the boxes to work with the American systems and weapons and for Us things like the f22 and f15ex are in such small numbers we dont have any other choice but to use more f35s

[@LRRPFco52]

If you’re only using stations 1 & 11 external on F-35s, it doesn’t affect frontal or frontal oblique RCS that much, especially for A2A, so that’s 6x AAMs, which is a pretty typical loadout for the Typhoon and no need for EFTs on F-35. Sure, you can load a Typhoon and F-35 with more AAMs, but it isn’t common for the squadron munitions distribution. The main birds historically that have maxed out A2A load were the F-4 and F-15A/C. Most other fighter interceptors would/ still do 2x2, 4, 2x4, or 2x2x2 AAMs. Tomcat was like that, Flankers are configuring like F-14s, and not many are loading to max. Typhoon, SH, and Flankers have impressive weapons load capacity though. Typhoon in A2A will often do: 4 AIM-120C or Meteor 2x ASRAAM 3x EFTs We’ve seen Su-35S with: 2x R-27 2x R-77-1 2x R-73 or 1x R-37M hypersonic LR BVRAAM 2x R-77-1 or K-77M 2x R-73 F-35 in A2A: 4x AIM-120D3 2x AIM-9X or ASRAAM Biggest difference is F-35s can pull into NEZ parameters and not much the targets can do other than die. The others have to play the BVR timeline game with mutual detection.

[@dogsnads5634]

Standard RAF QRA loadout is 4 x Meteor and 4 x Asraam....has been for years now.

[@LRRPFco52]

@@dogsnads5634 No EFTs? Which one has more stowed kills? Typhoon w/4x4 F-35 w/4x2 In 4th Gen BVR metrics, your first shots are usually posturing shots that don't connect.

[@dogsnads5634]

@@LRRPFco52 They carry 2 EFT's as well. Standard loadout from Lossiemouth. Not sure a Meteor engagement comes into the realms of a posturing shot...

[@LRRPFco52]

@@dogsnads5634 If you are detected and tracked at pretty extreme BVR distances, then whoever shoots first will have an upper hand in posturing for the follow-on set-up shot. It’s why the Flanker was made with 10 weapons stations, so they could hopefully out-last the F-15 in a BVR exchange. (This was countered with AESA in the F-15C+ and improved 6x AIM-120C.) F-35s don’t play by those rules because they get first-look, first-shoot/unobserved shoot within NEZ, as well as coordinated sim shots unobserved. Because of that, they have more stowed kills. Typhoon can step-up in capability in this area with the CAPTOR-E Mk.II, but those still aren’t upgraded into the fleet. Against another 4th Gen opponent, it would allow continual mid-course guidance while offsetting/beaming, but a semi-competent opponent flight would expect launch at certain distances and counter as well. Su-35S has a repositioner right now with their PESA, so it can do the offset with mid-course guidance and employ Extreme LR BVRAAMs, pushing legacy 4.5 Gen fighters off more in the first-shoot fight.

[@NRZ-3Pi10]

@@LRRPFco52 … need to `use´ this comment here since the other thread with 50+ somewhat doesn’t work properly; at least it fits here since topic to some amount is also about demolition … Getting back to `scientific exchange´ and transporting to what we can observe on KZbin. It’s remarkable once it comes to YT clips dealing with technical topics, there’s always a certain portion of comments where one can notice also experts sharing their knowledge & experience, which I really appreciate and enjoy. I could imagine this must also have been the spirit during the early days of the Internet (with DARPA being one the initiators as far as I know, possibly also other scientific institutions). These days there’s been update from MS Dali and the corresponding Francis Scott Key Bridge incident with preliminary report from the NTSB, which I’m quite interested in and following. There’s also quite good technical discussions, too. Partly some `educated guessing´ of course, but some very knowledgeable people from various disciplines around. Common attitude going towards “what could have been the series and root causes of issues observed?” - like trying to commonly put together pieces of a puzzle. So even when raising hypothesis with bit of speculation included, there’s always some beneficial, general info and interesting things to learn (at least for anyone with some technical & engineering mindset). Bit of a pity that YT software team doesn’t spend bit more effort by e.g. introducing more than one indent level. But of course, primary YT target of the `comment section´ is to simply create `clicks & likes´ rather than `deep-dive forum discussion´…

[@TheShowdown16]

There is an interview with a Thyphoon pilot here on KZbin and I think he said that this aircraft can pull 9g with bag(s?).

[@Micha-qv5uf]

Yep that's true.

[@PsychRian]

Its as simple as the typhoon being in interceptor

[@sugandesenuds6663]

In my country F35 (we just bought a few) and eurofighter will work together until our 6th gen FCAS program is done that will replace the eurofighter

[@EricPalmerBlog]

If they can get good MC rates (still a challenge) with the F-35, you would think the spherical DAS would be great for starting a visual during an intercept for an air sovereignty mission. Some day?

[@thelmaviaduct]

Typhoon has a carbon fibre wing and much of the fuselage/tail. How much lighter and agile would the F-15EX/F-16 be if made with modern materials?

[@tomriley5790]

RAF is retiring 26 of the 30 Tranche 1 Typhoons (keeping the 107 Tranche 2s) likely keeping 4 for the Falklands QRA. It has several advantages over the F35, much cheaper to operate, Higher speed/acceleration and can launch Meteor so for interception and air defence the Typhoon is the best aircraft currently available. It can also launch stormshadow (stand off cruise missile - I don't think this can be launched from an F35) and is approved for lgbs All in all it does the job... Why the Tranche 1 is being retired and not replaced/upgraded is a good question.

[@ScratchyYard]

cost cuts

[@robinwhitebeam4386]

Stealth is not required when you want to show the enemy that you are there. Stealth and non stealth aeroplanes work best when used together.

[@d_lollol524]

Typhoon sensors and radar are outdated when compared to the latest Chinese jets such as J10C . I hope there are upgrade plans for eurofighters .

[@AKlover]

Is A low-costs heat seeker tailored for swatting drones possible or would "Contractors" just refuse to make it? I mean the guided missile equivalent of spam email?

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

Already covered by APKWS. At 30k a pop, it is a precision guidance kit for unguided rockets and it can shoot down cruise missiles.

[@Matt-mt2vi]

​@ChucksSEADnDEAD it's a good developing system and inexpensive compared to AIM9X. But it is limited on what platforms that can deploy it. Tested so far only by ground vehicles, which is fine for limitedcoverageif a small base. The APKWS system itself is certified on slow moving jets and helos. Maybe buy a few A-29 Super Tucano. Maybe put M203LF gun it as well. Cheap drone interception/overwatch compared to jets. Better to destroy the drones before they get close

[@Xenomorphine]

Drone swarms are better countered by electronic warfare and high-powered microwave devices, which can neutralised thousands of them in one go.

[@johanmetreus1268]

@@Xenomorphine Microwaves are easily protected against with Faradays cages and hardened electronics, and jamming only works if there are no navigational backup systems onboard. These measures drives the cost per drone up though, so there would be fewer where hardkill is the *only* option... but one can not evade the need entirely.

[@Xenomorphine]

@@johanmetreus1268 That's not what recent US military tests demonstrated. I imagine it's a matter of power.

[@johnn1250]

Maybe the RAF plans are to use the Typhoon in a similar way as the USAF will use the F-15EX.

[@flixri726]

The inability of congress to provide aid over the last months really caused some loss of trust on the European side. If you make strategic decisions like what fighters you deploy, you want to rely on your partner, congress broke that trust because suddenly things that weren't partisan became partisan.

[@Steven-p4j]

It makes sense for the UK to use the Typhoon, for their current mission. Firstly, they want to keep the heavy hammer close to hand, and any potential for an F-35 loss would be embarrassing. For the purposes of dealing with Russian incursions, they have no peer.

[@dltafrc17]

How come the us doesnt make any delta wing aircraft?

[@hoghogwild]

Good discussion Gents. Pretty amazing aircraft.

[@wayneprice2737]

The RAF have a base in Cyprus that covers the east of the Mediterranean sea.

[@PlugInRides]

I hear lots of complaints over the acquisition and operational costs of the F-35, but the Eurofighter Typhoon is more expensive and less survivable. I'm not saying the Typhoon isn't a very capable 4.5 Gen fighter, but it's very telling that the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen guys get so excited if they manage to score one 5th Gen kill at Red Flag, despite numerous losses. Sure an F-35 would be somewhat outmatched in a dogfight, but in BVR, the kill rates vastly favor the F-35.

[@bluefox9436]

In the long run the EF is much cheaper than the F35. Also keep in mind that the PIRATE system of the EF is already able to spot even the F22 at up to 90 km of range. So I wouldn't overrely on stealth for the future since it might be a helpful tool, but building a whole plane around this feature might be a fatal mistake.

[@Floren_Andro]

If you are an F35 pilot... I hope you never have to face an EF with Aesa radar and Meteor missiles...

[@PlugInRides]

@@bluefox9436 The F-22 can be seen at ~65 km with IRST, compared to ~220 km for the Typhoon. Stealth is also optimized to reduce IR signatures. Both the F-35 and the EF Typhoon cost around $40,000/per flight hour. The EuroFighter has a very high cost to operate. Italy concluded that the Eurofighter cost 60-65,000 € (US$ 79,700) per hour, including the financing and writeoffs.

[@PlugInRides]

@@Floren_Andro Unlikely to ever happen since the F-35 will find the Typhoon first, especially since it has a much larger IR profile.

[@Floren_Andro]

@@PlugInRides May I remind you that the F35 are NOT invisible. They are just harder to detect. In the same way, the EF do not have the same stealth capacity as the F35 but they have enough so that the F35 systems take longer to detect it than a common aircraft. This means that the F35 may detect the EF before, but due to the limited range of its missiles it would have to approach the EF to fire, at which point the EF would have already detected the F35, launched its meteors and returned home... The only thing that what you mention is valid is to flee before being detected.

[@dansegelov305]

Patrolling airspace is only a useful deterrence measure if your adversary knows that you're doing it. Stealth is the opposite concept to what these patrols are for.

[@apparition13]

The F-35 should be the AF-35, since it's primarily a strike aircraft. Typhoon was designed for air superiority, and if you don't need stealth I'd take it over pretty much everything else.

[@CWLemoine]

That's a Navy thing. The Air Force doesn't put A in anything except the A-10 which is solely an attack aircraft. F-16, F-15E, etc.

[@apparition13]

@@CWLemoine Oh, I know that. I'm just saying that by role it's more A than F.

[@CWLemoine]

@@apparition13 nah, it’s almost identical to a Viper. SEAD, DEAD, OCA, DCA, etc.

[@electricaviationchannelvid7863]

@@CWLemoine SEAD, DEAD with what payload?? There are only a few dozen anti-radiation (HARM) missiles in stock in Europe...I am just reading Wikipedia which says most of the orders future deliveries...The Brits have the ALARM...The Turks ordered a lot of HARM but in the EU almost nothing...we could launch Taurus/Storm shadow against the fix sites but the most of the eastern SAMs are mobile...

[@svenhaheim]

America by far makes the best looking planes if there was ever a beauty contest.

[@beniyashasama8327]

I don't know about other countries but my country, Spain currently has a fleet of F-18s and Eurofighters Tranche 3 and 4, most of which are still Tranche 3 are going to be upgraded to Tranche 4, and it also has a Harrier squadron at the LHD Juan Carlos I. The plan to update my country's air forces is diverse. First objective is to obtain 6 generation fighters through the FCAS program in which Spain contributes to the project together with Germany and France, second is to update the fleet of Eurofighters tranche 3 to tranche 4, and at least 20 Tranche 5 Eurofighters will be acquired. Third point is to retire the F-18 fleet and replace it with at least 4.5 generation fighters such as the Tranche 4 Eurofighters or 5th generation fighters such as the F-35 and finally remove the harriers and replace them with F-35 B.

[@0cu0]

If you look at the development stage of the FCAS, I would think this objective will be finalized after the Eurofighter update or even the retirements of the F-18. Is there a Back-up plan for the FCAS?

[@beniyashasama8327]

@@0cu0 As far as I know, regarding sixth-generation fighters, my country only has the FCAS project. I'm not aware that my country has any back-up plan in case the FCAS fails for any reason. But I suppose if the case arises I only see two scenarios, the first is that my country, after having lost billions of euros in the FCAS project, ends up giving up the acquisition of 6th generation fighters, or the second scenario would be to try to enter in other 6th generation fighter projects such as the Tempest together with Japan, the United Kingdom and Italy.

[@0cu0]

@@beniyashasama8327 My guess is, Spain will update its existing Eurofighters with Tranch 4’s and gets some Tranch 5. Replaces its F-18 fleet with second hand Superhornets and ditches its Harriers for F-35Bs. The FCAS project will take to long (2050’s) or will fail altogether. Trying to incorporate some drone wingman with the F-35 would be a sensible stopgap solution till the Tempest has sufficient numbers to export.

[@beniyashasama8327]

@@0cu0 I agree with everything except when you say that the FCAS will be operational in 2050, as far as I know, the first prototype with flight capacity will be no further than 2028 and by 2035 at the most the first fully operational units will already exist. As for the Tempest, I don't think my country is interested in simply acquiring 6th generation fighters. They are also interested in an industrial economic return and the development of technology. My country has decent defense companies that are growing in the global market and in order to guarantee their future it is vital for these companies to partner in such important high-tech projects as the FCAS or the Tempest. The acquisition of sixth generation fighters is not important only from the point of view of the defense of my country but also from an economic and development point of view.

[@0cu0]

@@beniyashasama8327 The 2050s prediction is by Dassault (Trappier), my guess for the FCAS is less optimistic. If participation is important, I would look into S. Korea (or Turkey) Korea will likely go, after the KF-21, directly for a 6th Gen. Fighter production.

[@josephmarkey9096]

The concern is a Typhoon being shot down Vs F-35. An F-35 goes down in Gaza, Eastern bloc, its parts will find its way back to Russia. Typhoons tech is probably well known to Russia.

[@edwardwilcox6606]

No expert here but I like that Typhoon has 2 engines.

[@jeffslade1892]

I do not believe americans understand the use of an interceptor, quick reaction alert (QRA) such as the Typhoon as opposed to the multirole combat and strike F-35. Britain has the F-35B VTOL, which is considerably slower than the Typhoon. The top speed of a jet is largely determined by its intake, what is important is how quickly it gets there. This it where the power to weight ratio gives the Typhoon the advantage.

[@CWLemoine]

Why wouldn’t we, who did this for a living and actually sat alert, understand it? 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@Cymruambyth2]

Typhoon is multi role but a very good interceptor

[@DasIllu]

Showing presence and being stealth is a bit self contradictory i'd say 😀

[@RossSnyder78]

I think the F35 has a very high cost of operation per flight hour, a problem shared by other 5th gen fighters. Also the limited range and weapons capacity are problematic for certain missions. The US made a mistake by trying to go all in on stealth. Not every mission requires stealth. This is why you see them trying to extend the life of 4th gen fighters. Better cost of operation, better range, more weapons, and the lack of stealth isn't a problem in uncontested airspace.

[@arnaudgerard1971]

I really don't see why you would want a stealth for policing. You don't do policing from 100 miles away. You have to show your craft to the enemy visibly that's not 100 miles away.

[@jackwardley3626]

whats wrong with depending on the Typhoon only problem is we don't have enough of them maybe cause they cost a bloody fortune I think we should make a cheaper fighter like the U.S. did with the f-16 to build up numbers see even the U.S. didn't want to pay to operate 2,000 or so f-15's at the time

[@mikedittsche]

Why do NATO countries that have F35 and EF Typhoon use the EF for that kind of mission? Because it is a much more capable interceptor than the F35. It is MUCH faster, climbs much better and can supercruise unlike the F35. The F35 is a much newer plane and has stealth capabilities and a better, more modern way to display sensor data to the pilot. But for an interceptor role it is crucial to start, get to high altitude, get to the threat and either shoot it down or convince it to fly home. And the EF excells at that, it will be having russian flankers locked on with its Meteor missiles long before an F35 would be there to meet the threat.

[@glynnwright1699]

The moment he said 'developed by Germany, Italy and Spain' I stopped listening, because he clearly had no idea what he was talking about. It came out of Air Staff Target 403, issued by the British Ministry of Defence and first demonstrated in the EAP. I watched its first public flight at Farnborough, having previously worked on AST 403.