Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 5 of 64 FirstFirst 1234567891555 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 1919

Thread: Eurofighter Typhoon discussion and news 2015

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    I wasn't talking about budgets. Indeed most of the defense budget is to serve as a US puppet in "wars" that are both useless & detrimental to our image in the world. If half the money we spend on OPEX was used to maintain a credible defense the point would be moot, whatever your twisted analysis of present day Russia.

    If we have to defend against something in the future it will be against the consequences of our blind allegiance to NATO, not against Russia or Poutine. NATO builds enough enemies for itself, you don't even need real ones.

    Nic
    Can't agree with your opinion on NATO. Don't necessarily disagree with your analysis of the US, your thoughts re Russia are concerning.

    In my opinion the US is a power commencing decline, i suspect many students of history will be able to identify that. How long that decline takes is a rather more uncertain element and how much damage the US does in it's attempt to prevent it's decline is again uncertain as is whether we in Europe, manage to extract ourselves from the sinking vessel and stand on our own feet.
    However Russia and those such as putain are dangerous in that they seek power and prestige and do not care about the ordinary people who will die to achieve those simply because they have a sense of entitlement.
    Your thoughts re other threats are interesting and I have an element of agreement that they exist; in contrast however I think that the "Wests" actions to date have not been strong enough and the weak and somewhat ineffective military actions have actively encouraged those enemies, as you note. If stronger action had been taken, acknowledging we are indeed at war with elements of the muslim world for example and taking the political decision to fight the war to the upmost of our abilities, I think those threats could have been eliminated by now or certainly reduced to a level where they were no longer a long term issue.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
    Bertrand Russell

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    LOL.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Cemetery Junction
    Posts
    13,381
    Quote Originally Posted by snafu352 View Post
    People are once again confusing "Don't want to" with "Can't."

    Austria is perfectly capable of fielding a fully equipped air force suitable for her needs, if she decides to do so.
    To date the politicians have not seen the benefit of running under a ticket that says full funding for the armed forces and the people have not created any demand for such. Thus the funds are not allocated to support such.
    Absolutely right.

    Austria is spending about 0.5% of GDP on defence. It has the fourth (out of 28 countries) highest GDP per head in the EU, at purchasing power parities.
    Juris praecepta sunt haec: honeste vivere, alterum non laedere, suum cuique tribuere.
    Justinian

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,291
    A fascinating RUSI report on the Typhoon, now and into the future. It is a must read for anyone debating Typhoon in my opinion.

    https://www.rusi.org/downloads/asset..._Air_Power.pdf

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,247
    +1

    A fascinating doc and a fantastic pedagogical material to sweep away dogmas and unicorns.

    An extract related to a recent discussion around CAPTOR and ESM:

    In terms of sensors, the CAPTOR-M radar currently mounted on the
    Eurofighter is widely recognised as one of the most powerful and precise
    of its kind. It can be used to detect and track targets at ranges of over
    100 nautical miles. However, AESA types outclass it in terms of multiple
    simultaneous target tracking, high resolution SAR mapping, low probability of
    hostile intercept and electronic-attack capabilities. Therefore, the CAPTOR-E
    AESA radar is being integrated into the platform as a priority agreed by all
    partner states in November 2014.7
    This new radar offers a very wide field of
    regard compared to standard fixed-plate arrays and will offer improvements
    in range, tracking resolution and fidelity, stealth, tactical options, electronic
    attack and ground mapping over the current CAPTOR-M. Since almost all
    modern combat aircraft carry radar warning receivers to detect hostile radar
    signals, passive operation is an important capability for the Eurofighter. To
    this end, and to provide a limited stealth-detection capability, the Eurofighter
    is equipped with a powerful IRST scanner called PIRATE, except in Luftwaffe
    service. This is entirely passive in operation, producing no emissions which
    could be detected by hostile threats. Due to the fact that PIRATE works by
    detecting the heat generated on an aircraft’s skin by air friction – rather
    than radar returns – it also offers significant potential capabilities against
    low-observable (LO) aircraft.8
    However, due to funding priorities and the fact
    that the Luftwaffe does not use it, it is only in the past two years that the
    sensor has started to move towards an operationally useful level of capability.
    Prior to this, shortages of spare parts and immature software – which was
    incapable of dealing with the sheer number of false positives inherently
    generated by such a sensitive sensor – hampered its operational use. Since
    PIRATE operates in the infrared (IR) region, it must be used in conjunction with
    other sensors to allow kinetic engagements of targets substantially BVR using
    missiles such as the AMRAAM and Meteor that use radar to track targets.9
    Italy has made some progress with PIRATE/CAPTOR sensor fusion, but this
    is still a work in progress. The UK’s version of CAPTOR-E (Radar 2 Extended
    Assessment Phase) is being developed to take advantage of some of this work
    and build on it to incorporate inputs from PIRATE and the DASS much more
    than the current sensor suite centred on CAPTOR-M.10 BVR armament is the
    AIM-120C AMRAAM radar-guided missile and this will soon be boosted by the
    much longer-ranged Meteor with full two-way datalink allowing midcourse
    guidance updates. The two-way datalink (not available for the Rafale due
    to platform limitations) is crucial for realising the full performance of the
    missile, in particular for expanding the no-escape zone given the long flight
    time and potential for significant target course changes at long range.

    Notice that each partner nation are going their own way for the Avionics suite.


    Source:
    see above link
    Last edited by TomcatViP; 4th May 2015 at 20:07.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    There are nation specific developments, but much of this is being integrated at quadrinational level at a later stage and sometimes other partners buy in. An example for this are the UKDE and R2P which were funded by the UK and introduced around the same time as Drop 1. Italy f.e. has introduced the R2P separately as has Germany, obtaining the software and some support from the UK for use on their SRP 4.3 standard aircraft. R2P is on the other hand the baseline for the T1EP1 which itself is the Eurofighter managed "internationalisation" programme for Drop 3.

    These are just some examples how it works these days.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Even when you're proved wrong, you deny ever saying something LMAO.
    There is no "proven wrong" here, you are unable to find a single quote of mine.. try harder..

    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    You made the claim, you go ask.
    Why would I bother? I am pretty satisfied with their findings..
    Last edited by MSphere; 4th May 2015 at 21:36.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    The back end of Captor-E will be incrementally developed as is the whole radar. The basline proposed for export retains receiver and processor of the present Captor-M, but core nations and potentially prospective export customers opt for something better to have a more future proof design that can fully exploit the capability of the AESA technology over time.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    I have originally called it Captor-E Mk2, officially it seems to be called Radar 2 Captor-E. Anyway, so far it looks that only UK have secured finances for such version, with other EF nations staying with "Captor-E Mk1+" which is the Captor-E with the original back-end from Captor-M enhanced with features like SAR mapping.

    Wonder how long it takes for the Mk2 to reach service, though..

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    There are a couple of iterations on the roadmap with progressive hardware and software growth. Particular configurations that end up in-service remain to be seen. Development will certainly take some time, especially on the software front.

    I think the RAF or so has outlined its timescales for the AESA introduction.

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    964
    France: "Keep outlining......No hurry.....The more time you four countries waste for anticipation and painting the bright future, the more Rafales I may export "
    Last edited by toan; 5th May 2015 at 03:07.

  12. #132
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Therefore, the CAPTOR-E
    AESA radar is being integrated into the platform as a priority agreed by all
    partner states in November 2014.7
    This new radar offers a very wide field of
    regard compared to standard fixed-plate arrays and will offer improvements
    in
    range, tracking resolution and fidelity, stealth, tactical options, electronic
    attack
    and ground mapping over the current CAPTOR-M.

  13. #133
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    There is no "proven wrong" here, you are unable to find a single quote of mine.. try harder..
    Except the original post already linked where you directly argued with that point. You were wrong, deal with it.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Why would I bother? I am pretty satisfied with their findings..
    Exactly, so you're happy to misrepresent them without any context.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    I have originally called it Captor-E Mk2, officially it seems to be called Radar 2 Captor-E. Anyway, so far it looks that only UK have secured finances for such version, with other EF nations staying with "Captor-E Mk1+" which is the Captor-E with the original back-end from Captor-M enhanced with features like SAR mapping.

    Wonder how long it takes for the Mk2 to reach service, though..
    Please, if you bothered to read it you'd note they suggested a new architecture. There's a lot more to the 'back-end' than sensor fusion with other systems.

    Progressive
    enhancements to PIRATE and the accuracy of passive location and electronic
    warfare capabilities through the DASS, coupled with the radar 2 CAPTOR-E
    being developed for the RAF, together offer a boost to situational awareness
    and detection capabilities, which should make RAF Typhoons formidable
    opponents against even LO designs from the early 2020s.8 Other partner
    states are not yet signed up to such a comprehensive sensor-suite upgrade,
    although Italy has showed interest, particularly in the radar 2 version
    of CAPTOR-E. Spain and Germany are currently committed to the radar
    1+ version of CAPTOR-E, which offers standard air-to-air AESA capability
    as well as limited air-to-ground search functions including high-definition
    SAR mapping. However, it does not imply the same level of commitment to
    develop the sensor-fusion, electronic warfare and communications potential
    of the CAPTOR-E architecture.
    Does the Captor-M have comms and EW potential? No, therefore architecture is new, i.e. new back-end.
    Last edited by lukos; 5th May 2015 at 08:52.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    +1

    A fascinating doc and a fantastic pedagogical material to sweep away dogmas and unicorns.

    An extract related to a recent discussion around CAPTOR and ESM:




    Notice that each partner nation are going their own way for the Avionics suite.


    Source:
    see above link
    So it looks like the all-singing all-dancing suite will be on UK aircraft.

  15. #135
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Near Paris (France)
    Posts
    1,499
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Except the original post already linked where you directly argued with that point. You were wrong, deal with it.
    Lukos, I took time to read the post you talk about, and I didn't find a sentence supporting your accusation. Be more accurate, please.
    Rafale news blog by Kovy :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,382
    Quote Originally Posted by toan View Post
    France: "Keep outlining......No hurry.....The more time you four countries waste for anticipation and painting the bright future, the more Rafales I may export "
    A very decent description of the situation.

  17. #137
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,880
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Well it's debatable. Storm Shadow has a range of 300nm on a lo-lo flight profile, the Typhoon has a range of 2900km with just AAMs and internal fuel. Add a central drop tank and you're still be looking at circa 2500km even with the Storm Shadows, giving a strike radius of at least 1811+km with no aerial refuelling even if you send the missile on the lowest flight profile and easily over 2000km for higher flight profiles. For many nations that is enough, it's only really in fairly exceptional circumstances that one requires a longer range than that. In 1991 over Iraq, most airstrikes took places over <1000km in radius and the range offered with Storm Shadow and a central drop tank is enough to hit Baghdad from Yemen for comparison's sake and more than enough to reach Tehran from Riyadh, without even entering Iranian airspace. In fact in 1991 the longest cruise missile strike was 1500km with a Tomahawk from the Gulf of Oman, strikes from the Persian Gulf were about half that range. For many an airstrike from more than 1800km away with 3 drop tanks isn't really too realistic (or even necessary), unless the enemy is a) useless or b) thoroughly crippled wrt air power and air defence capacity, in which case mid-air refuelling becomes an option. It's an easy fit and the potential is there though should there be any weird export requirements.
    er, 2900km range... it is one way only. Take your weapons that far and you'll have to walk back home

    combat range is half of that at best (depending on what time you spend in combat zone)

  18. #138
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    Such range figures are nonsense anyway. Every mission is planned with emergency and combat reserves in mind. Let alone that the 2900 km figure with a complement of AAMs is rather doubtful.

    Typhoon has a good range performance and endurance with some limitations wrt external fuel load. For everything other than missions requiring carriage of weapons on the CWP it's ok and often enough, but that depends on the mission.

  19. #139
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Except the original post already linked where you directly argued with that point. You were wrong, deal with it.
    I repeat, show me that specific quote of mine.. Right, you can't bcos there is none..

    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Exactly, so you're happy to misrepresent them without any context.
    It's vice versa. You're unhappy with the outcome so you're trying to spoil it with any self-invented crap that fits your theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Please, if you bothered to read it you'd note they suggested a new architecture. There's a lot more to the 'back-end' than sensor fusion with other systems.
    Sure they have. But that is for Radar 2 (call it Captor-E Mk2), not for current Captor-E. That's exactly what me and others were claiming from the very beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Does the Captor-M have comms and EW potential? No, therefore architecture is new, i.e. new back-end.
    Read above.

  20. #140
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    er, 2900km range... it is one way only. Take your weapons that far and you'll have to walk back home

    combat range is half of that at best (depending on what time you spend in combat zone)
    I'd worked it out as a radius if you read the whole text. 2500km range with drop tank and 2 Storm Shadow (based on 2900km range on internal fuel) = 1250km radius. Add 561km range of Storm Shadow on a lo-lo profile = 1811km, and considerably more if a hi-lo or hi-hi profile is used for the missile.

    Now perhaps you'd care to list all the fighter strikes which have taken place over a greater radius. I'm waiting for this extremely long list so that we can all see how short the Typhoon falls in this area.

  21. #141
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    I repeat, show me that specific quote of mine.. Right, you can't bcos there is none..
    So why were you arguing with someone who only said just that? Next time, if don't disagree with something, don't argue with it and we can all save a lot of time.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    It's vice versa. You're unhappy with the outcome so you're trying to spoil it with any self-invented crap that fits your theory.
    So everyone's investing tons of cash in a useless technology again? Just like with stealth? And missiles, because Pierre Sprey says they'll all miss and we should stick to guns. I know the advantages of AESA, that's why when someone says it doesn't offer significant mission advantages, I immediately question what the details of those missions were, and so far you have come up blank.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Sure they have. But that is for Radar 2 (call it Captor-E Mk2), not for current Captor-E. That's exactly what me and others were claiming from the very beginning.
    Scheduled for 2019, with Mk1 in 2017.
    http://forum.keypublishing.com/showt...16#post2223316

    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Read above.
    Just read.
    Last edited by lukos; 6th May 2015 at 13:44.

  22. #142
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by TMor View Post
    Lukos, I took time to read the post you talk about, and I didn't find a sentence supporting your accusation. Be more accurate, please.
    I didn't find any evidence suggesting he was arguing with something else either and the main context of the post in question was that the RBE2-AA had the original back-end, which was all I picked him up on, never mentioned anything else for like a dozen posts or more, and he never mentioned anything until the point was lost.

  23. #143
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Near Paris (France)
    Posts
    1,499
    Ok, thanks. Awesome.
    Rafale news blog by Kovy :
    http://rafalenews.blogspot.com/

    The Rafale international forum :
    http://rafale.freeforums.org/

  24. #144
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    Lukos, I thought only Chuck Norris was able to debunk a claim before I have made one..
    Last edited by MSphere; 6th May 2015 at 18:57.

  25. #145
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,227
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Lukos, I thought only Chuck Norris was able to debunk a claim before I have made one..
    Because sometimes in life we need a bit of fun

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

  26. #146
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    200
    Boeing, Kuwait Said Near Deal for Up To 40 Super Hornets

    In Kuwait, Boeing had been up against the Eurofighter Typhoon. Kuwait tentatively agreed in early 2014 to go with the Typhoon, but subsequently backed off.
    http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...tate/70906542/
    Kuwait also considered buying the Rafale a few years ago with Sarkozy but the deal was hard fought by the Islamist-led opposition in the Kuwaiti parliament.

  27. #147
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,291
    First I have heard of Typhoon nearly getting the Kuwait deal.....

    I would think that the US would have a little sway when it came to Kuwait but if I were Kuwait I would make these SH very special because they are likely to be the last ones flying.

  28. #148
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,762
    Quote Originally Posted by MSphere View Post
    Lukos, I thought only Chuck Norris was able to debunk a claim before I have made one..
    So why argue with someone when you agree with them?

  29. #149
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    So why argue with someone when you agree with them?
    I find it almost impossible to agree with you on anything regd. Typhoon vs rest of the world. I do like Typhoon a lot but IMHO it isn't the aircraft you're claiming it to be..

    At the same time, I do agree on most geopolitical views you have provided on this forum. I rest my case here...

  30. #150
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,658
    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    So everyone's investing tons of cash in a useless technology again? .../... I know the advantages of AESA, that's why when someone says it doesn't offer significant mission advantages, I immediately question what the details of those missions were, and so far you have come up blank.
    As BIO has pointed out, the main driver for AESA was not performance, but reliability. This thing just saves tons of cash on maintenance of the repositioner/swashplate (not the Captor-E, though). I vaguely remember a claim that the calculated reliability of a fixed AESA antenna was so good that they could simply seal the radome for the life time of the aircraft as the few failed T/R modules throughout the service life would not affect performance in any way.

    Quote Originally Posted by lukos View Post
    Scheduled for 2019, with Mk1 in 2017.
    There won't be a single AESA Captor in service anywhere in 2017. There are no fixed contracts, no orders, no budgetary commitment from partner nations, nothing.. All you got is a request for integration on a Typhoon, right.. One functional prototype with old back-end flying on IPA5, that's nice.. But it's 30+ AESAed Typhoons in LW or AMI service what really counts..

    Similarly, I cannot see any Captor-E Mk2 in RAF service by 2019. This radar doesn't even exist as we speak. There is not even a BAC plane with that thing onboard, let alone a Typhoon testbed. How do you want to finalize development, apply software for new announced capabilities, do the testing, integration, integration with weapons, and produce those in four years is beyond me.. My best bet is 2023 service introduction, 2026-7 full spectrum of capabilities.

    And please, restrain from quoting the same ARMADA article again, I have already read it and made my own opinion about the dates presented there. Thanks..

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)

  1. APRichelieu

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