Typhoons go supersonic

[dudleybloke]

What stand-off range does the typhoon's weapons systems have?

[maffski]

doogz said:

Simpo Two said:

From the same paper - I don't understand this:

'In spite of a range (on paper) of 4,000 km, according to the Interfax news agency, the four bombers refueled twice during the flight, performing air-to-air refueling in pairs. The flight of Fullback planes covered a total distance of more than 50,000 km in three days; each Su-34 spent about 20 hours in flight during the trip.'

Why do jet bombers take three days to get from Russia to the North Pole and back (not far)?

http://theaviationist.com/2014/08/14/su-34-mig-31-...

They didn't.

The Russians have built some really nice looking aircraft. The Su27 and 'spins offs' are a great looking machine.

Considering the time zones/longitude they could have flown a couple of loops and come back the Tuesday before they set off. So maybe they just turned in the wrong direction?

[ecsrobin]

djc206 said:

ecsrobin said:

I don't see a requirement for them to be any closer they can make london in 6 minutes once airbourne.

I do. London is very close to the Southern and Eastern edges of the London FIR which means very little notice/time.

I don't, having previously worked in a QRA role I don't see the need. The aircraft can get to the target in good time no problem. you do have one possible situation that could result in an incident prior to an intercept but I'm not the daily mail / sun so will keep that off the Internet or for others to guess.

[Simpo Two]

doogz said:

Simpo Two said:

From the same paper - I don't understand this:

'In spite of a range (on paper) of 4,000 km, according to the Interfax news agency, the four bombers refueled twice during the flight, performing air-to-air refueling in pairs. The flight of Fullback planes covered a total distance of more than 50,000 km in three days; each Su-34 spent about 20 hours in flight during the trip.'

Why do jet bombers take three days to get from Russia to the North Pole and back (not far)?

http://theaviationist.com/2014/08/14/su-34-mig-31-...

They didn't.

OK I missed the 'in flight' bit. But they spent 20 hours in flight, so the rest of the three days (52 hours) was on the ground. But they covered more than 50,000km. So if we assume the cruising speed is 1,000km/hr, then they covered 20,000km in the air... and the other 30,000km on a low loader perhaps?

[Mr Cooper]

I work for a company that's pretty much under the landing approach to Stansted, aircraft are no more than a few hundred feet up. I heard the sonic boom and colleagues saw/heard the Antenov being escorted in by a Typhoon.

[williamp]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

Benson and Brize, to the West, Odiham and Boscombe to the South West, Wattisham to the North East. Northolt is less than ideal owing to its short runway.

Manston?? Long enoug rounway. They could be based there during the day, then fly back to 12 group during the evening. Maybe those in 10 group cover the evenings?

[Hooli]

williamp said:

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

Benson and Brize, to the West, Odiham and Boscombe to the South West, Wattisham to the North East. Northolt is less than ideal owing to its short runway.

Manston?? Long enoug rounway. They could be based there during the day, then fly back to 12 group during the evening. Maybe those in 10 group cover the evenings?

We couldn't afford the fuel costs! too busy wasting the RAF's money bombing places we don't need to bomb.

[Simpo Two]

williamp said:

Manston?? Long enoug rounway. They could be based there during the day, then fly back to 12 group during the evening. Maybe those in 10 group cover the evenings?

And don't forget to head north after take off so you can get enough height to intercept

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

AFAIK Manston is no longer owned by the MOD.

[frodo_monkey]

dudleybloke said:

What stand-off range does the typhoon's weapons systems have?

Yeah, loads of people will give you classified on t'internet! 'Enough' is the answer...

[Mr_B]

How many Russian aircraft does it take to swamp the Coningsby QRA ?

[baldy1926]

2

[Mr_B]

baldy1926 said:

2

And the response time is a sneaky third plane is incoming ?

[mph1977]

Mr_B said:

How many Russian aircraft does it take to swamp the Coningsby QRA ?

given that QRA South does not operate in isolation , there iarwe also the QRA north resources and there will be aircraft not allocated to QRA at a high state of readiness, plus of course the QRA facilities of Nato /EU Neighbours who pull their weight ( Belgium, Denmark, Norway , the Dutch) and of course the Swedes who aren;t friends with Putin although technically neutral.

Not forgetting to to mention the USAF 48FW at Lakenheath whose F15-Cs are air superiority only versions and the F15E is a multirole version

[Squawk1066]

Mr_B said:

How many Russian aircraft does it take to swamp the Coningsby QRA ?

I think you will find there are more than 2 armed Typhoons ready be deployed if needed. Radar would spot a larger group of planes heading our way and the powers at be would launch accordingly.

[Burrow01]

Mr_B said:

baldy1926 said:

2

And the response time is a sneaky third plane is incoming ?

I think its called a capability gap...

Reality is there are potentially quite a few fighters scattered around that could respond, but not that many actually loaded up and ready to go at a moments notice.

If we need more aircraft they would need to be readied before they could launch. Its not the Battle of Britain though, and so the assessment is that the current number of aircraft on QRA is sufficient to handle the likely threat - there are a similar number of aircraft available on QRA now as at the height of the Cold War, when the number of intercepts was higher.

Also remember that each Typhoon has more than one missile

[Burrow01]

frodo_monkey said:

dudleybloke said:

What stand-off range does the typhoon's weapons systems have?

Yeah, loads of people will give you classified on t'internet! 'Enough' is the answer...

RAF gives some stats here pretty freely...

http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/amraam.cfm

[Mojocvh]

Burrow01 said:

frodo_monkey said:

dudleybloke said:

What stand-off range does the typhoon's weapons systems have?

Yeah, loads of people will give you classified on t'internet! 'Enough' is the answer...

RAF gives some stats here pretty freely...

http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/amraam.cfm

Meteor. According to MBDA, Meteor has three to six times the kinematic performance of current air-air missiles of its type.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_%28missile%29

[maffski]

Mojocvh said:

Meteor. According to MBDA, Meteor has three to six times the kinematic performance of current air-air missiles of its type.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_%28missile%29

Meteor does look very good, although the MBDA marketing department don't exactly do subtle - http://youtu.be/sIYc694Os_w?t=2m7s

[si-h]

How true are the stories of typhoon airframes being limited to 1500 hours due to a BAe mess up ?