Tornado vs Typhoon

[Hooli]

Pickled said:

Well it has swing wings so it 'must' be cooler - see also F-14 Tomcat

This is the correct answer

[whiteonyx]

is it in the museum of on the tech site?

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

EAP is in the Test Flight Hangar.

[ecsrobin]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

EAP is in the Test Flight Hangar.

Hopefully one day that hangar will get upgraded I always feel like the aircraft there are some of the most interesting yet the hangar feels like they've been forgotten about.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Don't even get me started that the Belfast is indoors in the Cold War hangar (and with a totally spurious MSP in the Freight Bay - Medium Stressed [airdrop] Platform), while Albert is outside and with the props incorrectly aligned.

[perdu]

I suppose you could always give them props a swing when you go next GG

Do they need any procedure to get them lined up proper like?

And should they be north south east west or angled at forty five degrees from the perpendic?

You see GG only you experten know this stuff

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Props should be straight up No1 blade uppermost. It prevents oil draining through the beta feedback tube.

And before you ask, No1 Blade has a yellow dot.

[Mojocvh]

Plenty to come from the GR yet.
Plus having two crew is a great benefit when things evolve on operations
The Typhoon has phenomenal performance but the Tornado was designed to operate on the deck: from the fuel burn of the engines to the tfr/csas and High wing loading giving the crew a better ride at low level under the weather under the radar...

Edited by Mojocvh on Thursday 15th January 04:02

[jamieduff1981]

The irony of the MRCA concept is that the Tornado is now excellent at what it's good at. That may sound a bit dim, but despite being intended as multi-role it's somewhat focused on being good at flying extremely low and rather fast.

If you're not flying very low and very fast at the same time, then the Typhoon will be the better aeroplane.

Even the F3 was a decent enough interceptor in the classical Cold War sense, but offered very little in terms of air superiority fighter capability. The Typhoon has been developed the other way around. It's got the air superiority fighter aspects pretty well sorted and the strike capability is being developed afterwards (probably because there was a hole in the overall RAF capability for a fighter but the Tornado has the strike needs fulfilled - so they've prioritised the order in which to develop Typhoon's capabilities).

It's ALMOST as if someone thought about it and made a conscious decision?

[Halmyre]

Simpo Two said:

ecsrobin said:

Crazy to think this photo was taken 29 years ago at Farnborough.

That's my model! (Though mine doesn't have an undercarriage and two missiles seem to have been 'fired' over the years...)

I wonder how many there are?

The missiles on the EAP were dummies, only there to investigate their effect on the aerodynamics and handling.

jamieduff1981 said:

The irony of the MRCA concept is that the Tornado is now excellent at what it's good at. That may sound a bit dim, but despite being intended as multi-role it's somewhat focused on being good at flying extremely low and rather fast.

If you're not flying very low and very fast at the same time, then the Typhoon will be the better aeroplane.

Even the F3 was a decent enough interceptor in the classical Cold War sense, but offered very little in terms of air superiority fighter capability. The Typhoon has been developed the other way around. It's got the air superiority fighter aspects pretty well sorted and the strike capability is being developed afterwards (probably because there was a hole in the overall RAF capability for a fighter but the Tornado has the strike needs fulfilled - so they've prioritised the order in which to develop Typhoon's capabilities).

It's ALMOST as if someone thought about it and made a conscious decision?

The F3 was the ADV (Airborne Defence Variant), although I've seen it referred to as the Air Display Variant!

MRCA has also been intepreted as "Must Refurbish Canberra Again", referring to the delays in development.

I always think of the Tornado as a big bruiser of a thing and the Typhoon as light and nimble, but size-wise there's not much in it; Typhoon a wee bit smaller and much lighter.

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

jamieduff1981 said:

The Typhoon has been developed the other way around. It's got the air superiority fighter aspects pretty well sorted and the strike capability is being developed afterwards (probably because there was a hole in the overall RAF capability for a fighter but the Tornado has the strike needs fulfilled - so they've prioritised the order in which to develop Typhoon's capabilities).

It's ALMOST as if someone thought about it and made a conscious decision?

Not exactly.

Our European partners did not have a requirement for a Swing Role a/c hence why the Air to Ground capability for the RAF was developed much later.

[Eric Mc]

The EAP was not a prototype of the Typhoon. It was always referred to as a "Proof of Concept" aircraft and was used to test the basic overall shape and some of the Fly By Wire control systems.

I saw it flying at Farnborough in 1986 and it was quite impressive. It's quite a bit smaller than a real Typhoon.

[AlexIT]

Eric Mc said:

I saw it flying at Farnborough in 1986 and it was quite impressive. It's quite a bit smaller than a real Typhoon.

I was looking at the picture and wondering if it was the angle of the shoot or if it actually was the case.
The fin seems also larger than the Typhoon's, although that could be a proportion thing.

[Halmyre]

AlexIT said:

Eric Mc said:

I saw it flying at Farnborough in 1986 and it was quite impressive. It's quite a bit smaller than a real Typhoon.

I was looking at the picture and wondering if it was the angle of the shoot or if it actually was the case.
The fin seems also larger than the Typhoon's, although that could be a proportion thing.

I think it was a Tornado fin, which is massive.

[CrutyRammers]

Halmyre said:

I think it was a Tornado fin, which is massive.

I believe so.
Remember it being at Boscombe during testing, the old man got us on to a car bomb awareness course which happened to be being held in the same hanger, just so that I could get a closer look at it

[Dr Jekyll]

The entire Tornado tail is massive, is that due to a rear C of G or something to do with swing wings? Or a bit of both?

[gifdy]

Not sure yet, will let you know




( Brewery is across the road from RAF Lossiemouth )

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Dr Jekyll said:

The entire Tornado tail is massive, is that due to a rear C of G or something to do with swing wings? Or a bit of both?

Aft CofG requires a larger fin for Directional Stability, however the large fin is also a major player in providing Lateral Stability (which would tend to decrease as the wings move forward).

[scubadude]

Everytime the shine is off the new toys people start wondering if the old one was better, a friend of my father worked on Buccaneers then went onto work/moan about Tornado's, I wonder if this is a universal constant? :-)

[mph1977]

scubadude said:

Everytime the shine is off the new toys people start wondering if the old one was better, a friend of my father worked on Buccaneers then went onto work/moan about Tornado's, I wonder if this is a universal constant? :-)

the most dangerous military personnel are those who aren't moaning, whinging and chelping about anything ... that's the moment to send for the trick cyclist