Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 58 of 67 FirstFirst ... 848545556575859606162 ... LastLast
Results 1,711 to 1,740 of 1981

Thread: Eurofighter Typhoon discussion and news 2015

  1. #1711
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    AESA will definitely help -- but will they fix the sensor fusion? And the EW suite? Currently Typhoon is far behind the Rafale, and Gripen NG in these important areas.
    It is?
    Do we have literature in the open public comparing the systems in those aircrafts wich is not a decade old?

  2. #1712
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    It is?
    Do we have literature in the open public comparing the systems in those aircrafts wich is not a decade old?
    The second part of the Swiss eval compared the systems in their 2015 config, which was 2 years ago. Unless there have been significant changes in the plans then it should still be relevant.

  3. #1713
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    The second part of the Swiss eval compared the systems in their 2015 config, which was 2 years ago. Unless there have been significant changes in the plans then it should still be relevant.
    The 2008/2009 Swiss eval looked at a paper version of P1E, wich doesnt have a lot in common with what the Eurofighter consortium is testing and offering today. In other words, yes, the aircrafts that Kuwait will start receiving less than two years from now are a vastly diferent proposition than P1E, never mind the aircrafts that the Swiss actually tested.
    Using the 2008/2009 Swiss Eval to evaluate the Gripen E (described in that document has "MS21") will also means that it lags behind Typhoon P1E across the board... Wich is a bit ludicrious.
    Just to remind, P1E, the "2015 Eurofighter" in that report, was implemented in late 2013 and had a full AIM-120/IRIST/AIM-132 capability, an integrated Litening pod, the EPIV and... nothing else.

    The entire report is here:
    https://pt.scribd.com/doc/81390363/S...and-the-Rafale

    Cheers
    Last edited by Sintra; 12th April 2017 at 23:57.

  4. #1714
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    Yes. Hold on to the Swiss evaluation if you like (as a way of measuring Typhoon's inferiority), but don't compare a 2009 vintage Typhoon with a Gripes NG which is yet to fly (and I'm sure it will be a lovely aircraft).

    In what way is sensor fusion and EW a weakness of Typhoon? People say sensor fusion is a weakness for Rafale, but I understand that all of the upcoming upgrades will add even more to the Rafale, so why can't we apply that same use of context to Typhoon (which has been flying operationally with it's multiple sensors working together admirably)?

    On lots of levels, the British have been so happy with Typhoon that the once mandatory upgrades that we all knew would be necessary (tvc, cft, engine improvements) have all gone the way of the Dodo.

  5. #1715
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    266
    Eurofighter delivers 500th Typhoon.

    Eurofighter has delivered to the Italian air force its 500th Typhoon, 14 years after it handed over the first example to the UK Royal Air Force.
    Name:  eurofighter.jpg
Views: 1185
Size:  42.5 KB

  6. #1716
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    The 2008/2009 Swiss eval looked at a paper version of P1E, wich doesnt have a lot in common with what the Eurofighter consortium is testing and offering today. In other words, yes, the aircrafts that Kuwait will start receiving less than two years from now are a vastly diferent proposition than P1E, never mind the aircrafts that the Swiss actually tested.
    It seems you are right, I stand corrected.

    Does the Typhoon now use AESA radars for it's EW stuff?

  7. #1717
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    It seems you are right, I stand corrected.

    Does the Typhoon now use AESA radars for it's EW stuff?
    Radar? You mean using its main radar has an offensive/Defensive EW asset?
    If that was the question, the answer is no, the only "operational" fighter that i am aware that is described publicly has having such a capability is good old Dave (there are a few old slides from Boeing touting the APG-79 has having the potential to do such a role).
    If the question is "does the Praetorian DASS uses active arrays in its ECM/EW suite" the answer is yes.

    Cheers
    Last edited by Sintra; 13th April 2017 at 10:40.

  8. #1718
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,575
    there are a few old slides from Boeing touting the APG-79 has having the potential to do such a role
    Raytheon had it as an upgrade path but they have demonstrated to the USAF EA capability on the F-15 AESA a while ago.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  9. #1719
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    Radar? You mean using its main radar has an offensive/Defensive EW asset?
    If that was the question, the answer is no, the only "operational" fighter that i am aware that is described publicly has having such a capability is good old Dave (there are a few old slides from Boeing touting the APG-79 has having the potential to do such a role).
    If the question is "does the Praetorian DASS uses active arrays in its ECM/EW suite" the answer is yes.

    Cheers
    Wasn't it the aim of program "Bright Adder" for future Uk AESA? I'm going to be slaughtered to say that, but calling Dave operational is a language abuse to me µi thought AP 79 had some capabilities in this field?

  10. #1720
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by halloweene View Post
    Wasn't it the aim of program "Bright Adder" for future Uk AESA? I'm going to be slaughtered to say that, but calling Dave operational is a language abuse to me µi thought AP 79 had some capabilities in this field?
    - Yes, one of the main areas of "Bright Adder" was looking into the EW possibilities of a future AESA set for the RAF Phoon fleet.
    - On the "operational" bit, i did include "comas"
    - On the AN/APG-79, like BIO stated above it was part of the upgrade path, and years ago i´ve seen severall slides stating some sort of a "future capability", but AFAIK there´s no recent description/confirmation that a "EW module" went into active service

  11. #1721
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,439
    Without going into quantative or qualitative comparisons, the sensor fusion deficiencies reported from the Swiss evaluation were valid at that time. The primary reason being deficiencies of the sensors itself, the fusiin simply didn't work as well which was very much a software/firmware issue. Meanwhile the reliability and performance of radar, IRST and ESM has improved considerably and MD fine tuning further helps to improve the sensor fusion. There are still some caveats, but the improvements are noticable. Drop 3 for T1 and P1Eb for T2/3 have both introduced further improvements in the SF area. At P2E the SF is considerably improved and a next big leap is targeted for P4E. It is noteworthy that P3Eb is essentially a cut down version of P4E. Note everything will be available for P3Eb as is considered for P4E, however. How it will work out at the end of the day remains to be seen. The devil is in the details and there might well be a discrepancy between shiny public advertisers and reality. You'll most likely not get a complete picture anyway for any of these aircraft, at best snippets. So talking about superiority in this case is a far stretch for anyone without actual inside. It can be concluded that the Rafale had a noticable edge at that time over both Gripen and Typhoon, it may still have that edge, but this can't be reasonably concluded without any specific details which you won't gather from public sources, apart from a few snippets.

  12. #1722
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,439
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    Radar? You mean using its main radar has an offensive/Defensive EW asset?
    If that was the question, the answer is no, the only "operational" fighter that i am aware that is described publicly has having such a capability is good old Dave (there are a few old slides from Boeing touting the APG-79 has having the potential to do such a role).
    If the question is "does the Praetorian DASS uses active arrays in its ECM/EW suite" the answer is yes.

    Cheers
    EW capabilities are definitely part of the CAPTOR-E conception, but will be phased in in a staged manner and won't be available from day 1.

  13. #1723
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorpion82 View Post
    EW capabilities are definitely part of the CAPTOR-E conception, but will be phased in in a staged manner and won't be available from day 1.
    Welcome back Scorps!

    Thanks for the update.

  14. #1724
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    As I understand it the Kuwait Captor-E in 2018 will be a basic AESA with no EW. So far only the UK 'radar 2' version arriving in the early 2020s will feature EW. It is a combination of both Selex's AESA work and QinetiQ's Bright Adder EW AESA research. At the same time I believe there is a DASS P4E update that will merge the EW and radar functions.

  15. #1725
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Excellent news; so Typhoon will finally grow up.

    It is a bit curious though that it seems Switzerland will invite Rafale and Gripen but not Typhoon for their next eval... how come?

  16. #1726
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    Excellent news; so Typhoon will finally grow up.

    It is a bit curious though that it seems Switzerland will invite Rafale and Gripen but not Typhoon for their next eval... how come?
    Ueli Maurer made a comment two years ago, when asked what aircrafts could answer the Swiss Luftwaffe needs he said precisely this "le Gripen, peut etre le Rafale, peut etre un avion Americaine, le Eurofighter n´est plus le favori".
    This does not translate into "it seems Switzerland will invite Rafale and Gripen but not Typhoon for their next eval".
    Last edited by Sintra; 13th April 2017 at 19:30.

  17. #1727
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    Ueli Maurer made a comment two years ago, when asked what aircrafts could answer the Swiss Luftwaffe needs he said precisely this "le Gripen, peut etre le Rafale, peut etre un avion Americaine, le Eurofighter n´est plus le favori".
    This does not translate into "it seems Switzerland will invite Rafale and Gripen but not Typhoon for their next eval".
    "This does not translate into..."? you probably mean "this does translate into..."???

    Interesting that they are dropping Typhoon -- perhaps because of the high cost?

  18. #1728
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Eurofighter Continues Hunt For Orders As Production Ebbs
    Full story (behind paywall) http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/...roduction-ebbs

  19. #1729
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    Excellent news; so Typhoon will finally grow up.

    It is a bit curious though that it seems Switzerland will invite Rafale and Gripen but not Typhoon for their next eval... how come?
    Because it lost the last one. But then the translation is, "The Eurofighter is not the favourite," not, "we will not invite it."

  20. #1730
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,148
    Germany also plans to add air-to-ground*antisurface*ship attack and suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) capabilities to its*Eurofighter*Typhoons in the coming years.
    http://aviationweek.com/farnborough-...pean-countries

    Anybody who has further info on the German Typhoon SEAD plans?

  21. #1731
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    http://aviationweek.com/farnborough-...pean-countries

    Anybody who has further info on the German Typhoon SEAD plans?
    Probably a tweaked variant of SeaVenom/ANL missile. No clue.

  22. #1732
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    Nowhere near long enough in range, that's a heli-ASuW missile designed for patrol boats and fast attack craft. The original plan was an ARM version of Meteor called ARMINGER.

    http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogs...n-hostile.html

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-K1q5E99TUM.../Armiger+2.jpg

    Marte ER was tipped for the anti-ship role but Storm Shadow MLU could also add a more advanced ASuW capability.

  23. #1733
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    Nowhere near long enough in range, that's a heli-ASuW missile designed for patrol boats and fast attack craft. The original plan was an ARM version of Meteor called ARMINGER.

    http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogs...n-hostile.html

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-K1q5E99TUM.../Armiger+2.jpg

    Marte ER was tipped for the anti-ship role but Storm Shadow MLU could also add a more advanced ASuW capability.
    ARMINGER is based on Meteor. Incredibly expensive. About Marte ER or SS, you may be right.

  24. #1734
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,439
    ARMIGER was not based on Meteor, but used a ramjet engine based on that of the Meteor, not more, not less. If the GAF employs Typhoon in the SEAD role the AGM-88E AARGM is the most likely candidate for a dedicated ARM.

  25. #1735
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    Quote Originally Posted by Scorpion82 View Post
    ARMIGER was not based on Meteor, but used a ramjet engine based on that of the Meteor, not more, not less. If the GAF employs Typhoon in the SEAD role the AGM-88E AARGM is the most likely candidate for a dedicated ARM.
    The first concept was but if you read the link, which is admittedly a blog, post 2001 they moved to a Meteor based concept, with ARH swapped for passive+IIR. Another option would be passive+MMW, possibly reusing the proven Brimstone seeker. I don't know about German plans, but the UK will likely adopt the AARGM-ER path IMO.
    Last edited by Ryan; 16th April 2017 at 17:55.

  26. #1736
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    Where are the plans for any ALARM replacement for the RAF might I ask?

  27. #1737
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,233
    Quote Originally Posted by mrmalaya View Post
    Where are the plans for any ALARM replacement for the RAF might I ask?
    None so far, I believe vague mention by the MOD of using other capabilities...Brimstone/Storm Shadow/Tomahawk/Spear-III etc.

    It is a gapped capability, if a crisis came up that required the capability then expect a rapid UOR and integration of AARGM on a platform.
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNAp3mKepc

  28. #1738
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,575
    Integrating it externally on the F-35B will probably be a lower risk and cost since the USN is already paying for the software portion. Although with Italy as an AARGM partner it would make sense to integrate it on the Phoon if another operator also decides to procure it.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  29. #1739
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,379
    [QUOTE=Fedaykin;2385569]None so far, I believe vague mention by the MOD of using other capabilities...Brimstone/Storm Shadow/Tomahawk/Spear

    Is it perhaps because they see the role of FCAS (or its operational successor) as clearing the way for manned aircraft with things like Spear3? Anyway, like you say, there are no plans to fill the gap, and that makes me wonder what the broader thinking is rather than look for a weapon that will go after missile sites.

  30. #1740
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,161
    [QUOTE=mrmalaya;2385601]
    Quote Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
    None so far, I believe vague mention by the MOD of using other capabilities...Brimstone/Storm Shadow/Tomahawk/Spear

    Is it perhaps because they see the role of FCAS (or its operational successor) as clearing the way for manned aircraft with things like Spear3? Anyway, like you say, there are no plans to fill the gap, and that makes me wonder what the broader thinking is rather than look for a weapon that will go after missile sites.
    Definitely yes. Strategists tend to consider ARM missiles as a single tool in a vast networked panoply. Considering couple vector/weapon isolated is porbably a vision of the past (at least it is my uneducated position)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES