Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 72

Thread: Air Superiority: F-35 vs Typhoon

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Atlanta,GA USA
    Posts
    283

    Air Superiority: F-35 vs Typhoon

    Now I've heard a lot from people on other boards that the F-35 will be second to the F-22 in an airsuperiority role.

    Quotes such as, "In fact, as an air superiority fighter, because of its stealth and better electronics, the F-35 should far exceed the Typhoon in capability. No aircraft except the F-22 will clear the airspace like the F-35." and "Like them, I think Britain, Spain, Italy and Germany screwed up big time by building this white elephant."

    Personally, I think that the F-35 will not be as quick or manueverable as the Eurofighter or the Raptor. It will have very advanced electronics but the Eurofighter seems poised to develop more until the British finally receieve their F-35s in the next decade. It's stealth will prove to be a good advantage but it just doesn't seem suited to role just like F-16.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    101
    Quotes such as, "I think Britain, Spain, Italy and Germany screwed up big time by building this"
    There's nothing screwed up about supporting your own industry, developing its tech levels and creating jobs. If anything, there hasn't been enough of this if you look at various cancelled European projects (TSR.2, Mirage 4000, the stealth projects etc.) that were too expensive for the governments.
    Also keep in mind that the JSF won't reach IOC in those countries until, is it 2016-17? Dumping the EF means over a decade of Italy leasing F-16s, and the other nations having to do life extention programs on ageing airframes.
    Last edited by Emgy; 28th August 2006 at 19:03.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,043
    The F-35 isn't designed as an air superiority fighter, and it shouldn't be expected to be as effective as the F-22 in that role.

    To that end I think the Typhoon will generally be a better fighter than the F-35 as well.

    The F-35 does have stealth and incredibly advanced avionics though and it will be by no means a slouch in air-to-air combat and would be a threat to the Typhoon in the right hands.

    I don't think enough is known right now about the F-35's air-to-air performance to make a clear judgement.

    I think the Typhoon will be a superb fighter and second only to the Raptor in air-to-air combat in an overall sense. This doesn't mean the F-35 is a joke though because I feel that it too will be very dangerous and well able to hold its own.
    Fox-4!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    The EF typhoon is a mighty fine aircraft and definately no White elephant , the thing is very capable 4.5 generation aircraft and is providing good Air superiority at a decent cost ( compared to the f-22 raptor ) to the people that are using it or intend on using it . Furthermore it continues the the establishment of the strong industrial base which is paramount in the advancement of strategic goals of the member nations . As far as its comparisons to the F-35 are concerned , i find the comparisons quite absurd , the F-35 does not carry An Air superiority BVR or WVR ( or combo) in its internal bays ( we hear 4 Aim-120's in belly ) . The load of 2 aim-120's and 2 Aim-9x's will add to RCS and tilt the balance in my opinion ( no longer will the F-35 enjoy full stealth . Furthermore the EF is not stealth by any stretch of the imagination and its load of 6 Aim-120's or Meteors coupled with 2 ASRAAM"S will boost the RCS aswell ( not to mention tanks) , therefore the comparison regarding which is stealthier is a purely academic one when it comes to a pure A2A CAP scenario and at the moment one aircraft has IOC'd while the other is yet to fly ( that is a seperate issue that first flight is due in about 2 months) . The advantages of the F-35 are in its multi role and the people involved with the F-35 ( from USAF/USN/USMC to RAF and other 6-7 partners) know this , where else can you deliver 2 x 2000lb GPS guided bombs ( they are also developing 2x2000 LGB's for the bays) , 16 LOCAAS , 8 SDB's ( am i correct ) etc etc and still carry 2 AIm-120's for self defence and retain full stealth !!! that is where the advantages of the JSF lies , ofcourse there is a capability to project stealth in a multi role aircraft at a reasonable price ( proposed to be cheaper then EF typhoon) and sollutions to multiple problems . This is the essence of the JSF.
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Burpelson AFB
    Posts
    13,191
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on
    at a decent cost ( compared to the f-22 raptor )
    Depends on who you ask and what numbers they choose to make themselves aware of...

    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on
    the F-35 does not carry An Air superiority BVR or WVR ( or combo) in its internal bays
    It does carry the AIM-120 internally. The "side" bays are for AIM-120, the "center" bays are for JDAM. Fit an AIM-120 in place of the JDAM and you've got four AMRAAMs internally, with an internal cannon if you've got the F-35A. Not too bad for a stealthy interceptor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantom II
    The F-35 isn't designed as an air superiority fighter
    It is designed to replace the F-16, which serves in an air defense capability with multiple nations. It was designed to physically outperform the F-16, and with the prospects of sales to F-16 users, one would be wise to give LockMart the benefit of the doubt and not underestimate the air defense prowess of the JSF. Is it an F-22? Of course not. But that doesn't mean it won't be a very capable air defense aircraft.
    Sean O'Connor

    Sean's Blog, now with forum
    ACIG.org Team
    Airliners.net

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    It does carry the AIM-120 internally. The "side" bays are for AIM-120, the "center" bays are for JDAM. Fit an AIM-120 in place of the JDAM and you've got four AMRAAMs internally, with an internal cannon if you've got the F-35A. Not too bad for a stealthy interceptor.
    4 BVR missiles and no WVR missile is hardly an impressive Air superiority loadout in my opinion , atleast 4 BVR weapons ( realisticly 6 are necc. ) and 2 WVR weapons are a must.
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    118
    F-35 will be able to carry internally the best WVR missile available today - ASRAAM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,469
    The key requirements for F-35 were defined by the majority users, USAF and USN, who demanded a strike fighter (primarily A2G with A2A as a secondary priority). F-35's A2A advantage comes from superior stealth, an outstanding F-22 derived ESM suite and LPI datalink that allows first shot against an adversary who is unaware of F-35's presence. ESM is the primary sensor because it doesn't radiate, is undetectable and provides NCTR capability. A pair of F-35s can triangulate targets with enough precision to establish target tracks for missile launch. The adversary pilot becomes aware he is under attack when the missile seeker goes active and his RWR screams in his ear. F-22 has similar capability and uses it to trounce opponents in training exercises. (F-35 A2G attack uses similar techniques with one jet locating targets and datalinking coordinates to another, which executes the attack from an entirely different axis. Meanwhile, the targeting jet executes an electronic attack against air defense radar using his AESA).

    Eurofighter can also get first shot using Meteor, but the adversary will be aware of Eurofighter's presence due to lesser stealth and can execute countermeasures; the element of suprise is lost.

    BTW, anybody who attempts WVR combat deserves to die due to the excellent dogfight missiles on the market today.
    Last edited by djcross; 28th August 2006 at 19:57.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross
    ESM is the primary sensor because it doesn't radiate, is undetectable and provides NCTR capability.
    What's that and how does it work? Is it anything like Typhoon's PIRATE?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,469
    PIRATE is a FLIR and works in the infrared spectrum. It works only where the seeker is pointed.

    ESM = electronic support measures; works in various RF frequency bands. It requires a series of antennas and highly accurate clock that can time incoming RF signals and calculate their bearing using trigonometry. ESM can provide 360 degree coverage if sufficient antennas are used. Modern ESM can detect and classify any emitter within line of sight (hundreds of km).

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    9,973
    HOBS and HMS completely negates the Typhoon's manueverability advantage over the F-35. After that it comes down to avionics and the fact that the F-35 is stealthy and the Typhoon is not. Pretty simple really.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,043
    4 BVR missiles and no WVR missile is hardly an impressive Air superiority loadout in my opinion

    Who said anything about air superiority? Besides, four AMRAAM's and an internal gun times at least two or four depending on the numbers the operating Air Force decides on for its CAP missions.

    That's a sixteen ARMAAM load right there.....what enemy force is going to make it past 16 AMRAAM's....And yes I'm aware the F-22 carries much more (you'd have 24 AMRAAM's plus AIM-9's), but as far as a sufficient air defense capability for its user nations, the F-35 will be a fine airplane.

    And to further emphasize my point I'm going to piggyback on what SOC said......

    First of all SOC I wasn't saying the F-35 isn't going to be a great air-to-air platform. I simply said it wasn't designed to be an air superiority fighter. That doesn't mean it wasn't designed to be able to perform the fighter mission because it will certainly be able to do so.

    As SOC pointed out, the intent of the F-35 is to outperform in all areas the aircraft it is replacing which includes the air-to-air performance of both the F-16 and F/A-18 both are which are arguably two of the best fighters in the world.

    The F-35 will make both pale in comparison.

    I'm still not completely sold on the idea that the F-35 won't be able to carry at least six AAM's in the internal bays.

    Call me an optimist, but I figure a loadout of four AIM-120's and two AIM-9X's will be possible (with two AIM-120's in each main bay along with an AIM-9 on the swingout rail.) This will be identical to the six AAM loadout that would be standard on the Lawndart in the air-to-air mission.
    Fox-4!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Burpelson AFB
    Posts
    13,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Phantom II
    I simply said it wasn't designed to be an air superiority fighter.
    Neither did I
    Sean O'Connor

    Sean's Blog, now with forum
    ACIG.org Team
    Airliners.net

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    Nor did I
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,043
    Then what was the point of quoting my statement where I said it wasn't designed as an air superiority fighter? I never said it was going to be a bad fighter, I was just commenting on the design philosophy behind the aircraft.
    Fox-4!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by PhantomII
    4 BVR missiles and no WVR missile is hardly an impressive Air superiority loadout in my opinion

    Who said anything about air superiority? Besides, four AMRAAM's and an internal gun times at least two or four depending on the numbers the operating Air Force decides on for its CAP missions.

    That's a sixteen ARMAAM load right there.....what enemy force is going to make it past 16 AMRAAM's....And yes I'm aware the F-22 carries much more (you'd have 24 AMRAAM's plus AIM-9's), but as far as a sufficient air defense capability for its user nations, the F-35 will be a fine airplane.

    And to further emphasize my point I'm going to piggyback on what SOC said......

    First of all SOC I wasn't saying the F-35 isn't going to be a great air-to-air platform. I simply said it wasn't designed to be an air superiority fighter. That doesn't mean it wasn't designed to be able to perform the fighter mission because it will certainly be able to do so.

    As SOC pointed out, the intent of the F-35 is to outperform in all areas the aircraft it is replacing which includes the air-to-air performance of both the F-16 and F/A-18 both are which are arguably two of the best fighters in the world.

    The F-35 will make both pale in comparison.

    I'm still not completely sold on the idea that the F-35 won't be able to carry at least six AAM's in the internal bays.

    Call me an optimist, but I figure a loadout of four AIM-120's and two AIM-9X's will be possible (with two AIM-120's in each main bay along with an AIM-9 on the swingout rail.) This will be identical to the six AAM loadout that would be standard on the Lawndart in the air-to-air mission.

    Surely, at some point the F-35 will carry a mix of 6-AAM's internally. (IMO) This combined with Stealth, AESA Radar, IRST, HMCS, DATA LINK16, and the best sensor fit on the planet will make the Lightning a fighter to be respected. Let's not forget that most Aircombat happens at BVR! So, if you want to compare the Typhoon vs the Lightning maybe we should break it down it two parts? (i.e. BVR & WVR)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Irving, Tx USA
    Posts
    259
    Well, here we go.

    The F-35 was intended to replace the F-16/18....neither of which are "air-superiority" fighters even though some nations use them as such. What were the F-16/18 to begin with?

    -The F-16 was a lightweight "day-fighter" with no intended interception capabilities and close air support.
    -The F-18 was a fighter-bomber to replace the A-7 and support the F-14 in a secondary air-to-air role.

    The F-35 definitely does have the ability to be that if asked to do so and do it better than 90% of the aircraft in the air. It will be equipped from the outset for max strike and anti-air roles......neither the Typhoon or Rafale are. It outranges both. It outcarries both. It is more advanced than both.

    I am very eager to see it in service and make the competition blush.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Tampa, Florida USA
    Posts
    11,705

    Lightbulb

    With the exception of the F-22 the F-35 is going to be vastly superior to any of its contemporaries................. :diablo:

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    The F-16 was a lightweight "day-fighter" with no intended interception capabilities and close air support.
    -The F-18 was a fighter-bomber to replace the A-7 and support the F-14 in a secondary air-to-air role.
    The f-35 is not in the same size , weight , of the F-16 , it is bigger , heavier , has greatly superior range . people need to get out of the habbit of calling the F-35 a light fighter when it is clearly not . the F-16A , Gripen are light fighters whereas the F-35 is quite mid sized with a big fighter ROA ( equal to that of the much bigger F-22A)
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    Scooter i really woudnt try to break it down in all these parts , quite simply if given a choice i'd go for the F-35 if it turns out as promised , simply because the F-35 brings a lot of capabilities to the table when compared to those that the EF brings , for example i can reach out in full stealth drop 2 2000Lb GPS or LGB (future) bombs , or 16 LOCAAS , 8 SDB's or a few JASM/JSOW/HARM/SMACM etc still have the ability to protect myself with 2 Aim-120D's or meteor (i think it should be cleared for RAF examples) , JDRADM (future) etc or i can go in aircombat mode with 4 Aim-120's internally , 2 outside with 2 Aim-9X and still pretty much act like the Typhoon acts ( most likely the RCS of F-35 with 4 ext. missiles will be much less then that of the EF with 8 external missiles even though some are so called "semi recessed" which actually has more effect on drag rather then RCS) , in addition to all that i can mix up the loads and carry and haul huge ammount of ordinance on long ranged missions WITH INTERNAL FUEL . DROPABLE JUGS and external weaponry and act like a legacy jet with added benefit of having large internal fuel capacity .

    Where the deffeciencies of the F-35's weapons carriage in airsuperiority are going to be negated is when the NC concepts are fully mastered and some of the technology matures ( around 2015 mark for USAF/USN) , then they'd have a network of stealth assets in F-22A and F-35 aswell as back benched legacy aircraft all tied up in a network where the capability of the entire system outweighs the lack of capability of one jet , therefore in this integrated enviroment a mix of F-22A's and F-35's doing AS missions will really complement each other .
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 29th August 2006 at 06:11.
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,747
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on
    The f-35 is not in the same size , weight , of the F-16 , it is bigger , heavier , has greatly superior range . people need to get out of the habbit of calling the F-35 a light fighter when it is clearly not . the F-16A , Gripen are light fighters whereas the F-35 is quite mid sized with a big fighter ROA ( equal to that of the much bigger F-22A)
    Quite right. It has about the same max T/O weight as that well-known light fighter the F-4.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Linthicum, MD
    Posts
    9,115
    what about size , internal fuel , range on internal fuel etc etc ..?
    Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross
    PIRATE is a FLIR and works in the infrared spectrum. It works only where the seeker is pointed.

    ESM = electronic support measures; works in various RF frequency bands. It requires a series of antennas and highly accurate clock that can time incoming RF signals and calculate their bearing using trigonometry. ESM can provide 360 degree coverage if sufficient antennas are used. Modern ESM can detect and classify any emitter within line of sight (hundreds of km).
    So ESM requires the enemy jet to be emitting?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug97
    So ESM requires the enemy jet to be emitting?
    Yes, and most do 99.99% of the time.
    IFF transponder
    missile approach warning system (RF)
    radar altimeter
    voice comms (UHF and VHF)
    datalinks (jet-to-jet, jet-to-ground and jet-to-weapon)
    fire control radar

    If it radiates, it will be detected and can be killed or avoided.
    Last edited by djcross; 29th August 2006 at 16:27.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    9,973
    Quote Originally Posted by swerve
    Quite right. It has about the same max T/O weight as that well-known light fighter the F-4.
    And the F-16 Block 60 is just 2,000lbs shy of that other well-known light fighter the F-105 :diablo:

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Reading
    Posts
    11,747
    Quote Originally Posted by sferrin
    And the F-16 Block 60 is just 2,000lbs shy of that other well-known light fighter the F-105 :diablo:
    Hmm. Hard to say the F-16/60 is a light fighter. By the time they reached block 50, it had got decidedly tubby.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Irving, Tx USA
    Posts
    259
    The f-35 is not in the same size , weight , of the F-16 , it is bigger , heavier , has greatly superior range . people need to get out of the habbit of calling the F-35 a light fighter when it is clearly not . the F-16A , Gripen are light fighters whereas the F-35 is quite mid sized with a big fighter ROA ( equal to that of the much bigger F-22A

    I didn't call the F-35 a light fighter. No one with eyes and the ability to comprehend the world around them would because it's certainly not.

    I was comparing the aircraft it was intended to replace, their missions, and the missions the F-35 will be intended to perform. No where in their is a reference to size, only roles.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Irving, Tx USA
    Posts
    259
    The f-35 is not in the same size , weight , of the F-16 , it is bigger , heavier , has greatly superior range . people need to get out of the habbit of calling the F-35 a light fighter when it is clearly not . the F-16A , Gripen are light fighters whereas the F-35 is quite mid sized with a big fighter ROA ( equal to that of the much bigger F-22A

    I didn't call the F-35 a light fighter. No one with eyes and the ability to comprehend the world around them would because it's certainly not.

    I was comparing the aircraft it was intended to replace, their missions, and the missions the F-35 will be intended to perform. No where in there is a reference to size, only roles.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    429
    Quote Originally Posted by djcross
    Yes, and most do 99.99% of the time.
    IFF transponder
    missile approach warning system (RF)
    radar altimeter
    voice comms (UHF and VHF)
    datalinks (jet-to-jet, jet-to-ground and jet-to-weapon)
    fire control radar

    If it radiates, it will be detected and can be killed or avoided.
    So the F-35 would be emitting too? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of all the stealth technology?

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug97
    So the F-35 would be emitting too? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of all the stealth technology?
    F-35 enroute to a target has minimal RF emissions as part of its design:
    >IFF transponder - normally turned off, on for traffic management over friendly territory
    >missile approach warning system - 360 degree IR imaging through DAS
    >radar altimeter - typically turned off, also has an LPI mode, 3D nav via GPS is normal
    >voice comms - typically not used except near friendly airbase, also has an LPI mode
    >datalinks - compressed burst transmission using LPI mode (if ORCLE can be made to work, laser DL/Comms will be virtually undetectible)
    >fire control radar - mainly used in recieve mode, can be used in LPI mode to determine target coordinates, can be used for electronic attack

    There are a couple orders of magnitude difference in total radiated RF energy when comparing gen 4 and gen 5 jets.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 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