EuroFighter Tycoon

[Mr Dave]

Bosshogg76 said:

The real Apache said:

Mr Dave said:

pretty much as good as the Tornado (which are all falling to bits as it happens).

Really?, could you explain?

I'd be quite interested as well, Tornado F3's have been consistently semi reliable over the 12year period I've worked on them. including an unprecedented 100% serviceability rate during Op Telic. The current serviceability levels are more down to the lack of spares (contracts terminated etc) and a lack of man power in both the shed and on Tremblers. However taking all this into account Tremblers are still the only SQN in the RAF to be hitting the required flying hours.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

One jet was delivered to the SQN, promptly went state on it's first flight and sent back to Warton for them to try again.

Edited by Bosshogg76 on Sunday 18th July 20:19

All I know about them is from a sooty mate of mine who worked on them at Coningsby a while back, just down to the fact that they are getting old, problems with the radars and corrosion in the wings, definately not suggesting that they are unsafe or not reliable or anything of the sort, just that they are getting more labour intensive. Could be just moaning though.

Also 100% servicability on Telic is very impressive! Must have taken some effort behind the scenes, cannot have been easy.

As for the MRA4s, Ive been thinking about it all day and perhaps it is because that is about the only capability that isnt making headlines, Typhoon is taking over a lot of roles, the air transport fleet is pretty busy as is support helicopters, training cant really be cut either, E-3s and Sentinals are pretty much untouchable, the communications aircraft again are untouchable as that would mean the higher ups and politicians catching easyjet. Nimrod doesnt have the big bad Soviet navy to fight anymore,what use is there for that? To suggest there is a need for it must make you a cold war dinosaur! (While Nimrod is one of the most useful and needed aircraft in the inventory)

[aeropilot]

Mr Dave said:

As for the MRA4s, Ive been thinking about it all day and perhaps it is because that is about the only capability that isnt making headlines

Until the next shipping etc emergency way out at sea beyond the range of helo's and the Nimrod's extended time on station is needed for search and rescue etc.etc. Imagine the press reaction if lives are lost..... and how stupid and short sighted (again) Govt will look.

[Eric Mc]

Nomrods have done all sorts of things besides look for subs. How many more sailors would have died in the 1979 Fastnet dissater without the Nimrods?

[Mr Dave]

aeropilot said:

Mr Dave said:

As for the MRA4s, Ive been thinking about it all day and perhaps it is because that is about the only capability that isnt making headlines

Until the next shipping etc emergency way out at sea beyond the range of helo's and the Nimrod's extended time on station is needed for search and rescue etc.etc. Imagine the press reaction if lives are lost..... and how stupid and short sighted (again) Govt will look.

Nimrods aren't just useful outside the range of helos, they are very good at searching large areas at sea or overland during a rescue and co-ordinating rescue efforts between other aircraft and boats etc.dropping life rafts and so on and getting on target quickly are also very useful. Getting 11 of them is unbelievably short sighted, getting none is unbelievable. We are an island nation and they are already paid for.

Fair play for the Hercules crews doing over water SAR, especially in the Falklands but it really isn't ideal, let alone how stretched the Hercules fleets are anyway.

Lives aren't important to the govt, foreign aid is however, got to be seen to help little Africans learn to read, or paying for the Indian space program.

[aeropilot]

Mr Dave said:

let alone how stretched knackered the Hercules fleets are anyway.

EFA

Mr Dave said:

Lives aren't important to the govt, foreign aid is however, got to be seen to help little Africans learn to read, or paying for the Indian space program.

Yup.

[AlexS]

Jonny671 said:

Eric!

I think, after seeing the F22 do it's thing at Farnborough then the Eurofighter, they'd kick us all over the court if we ever had to go up against each other.

What was the Eurofighters primary role when it was commissioned?

The Raptor and Typhoon are designed for different manoeuvre envelopes. The American plane is very manoeuverable at low speeds which looks impressive at airshows, the Typhoon is very capable at supersonic turning, hence the reason it doesn't have vectored thrust as it doesn't need it for this.

No one knows which is the best design for future dog fighting.

It is telling however that the Americans tried to sell Eurojet their weapons system, not because of any desire to save us money or because of the goodness of their hearts, but because it would enable them to control who the plane could be sold to. If the Americans didn't like the country buying the plane they would refuse to supply the weapons. They are worried about the planes capability.

[ninja-lewis]

Could the MRA4 rumours be the usual defence review bluff? Offer to cut a capability (such as the Red Arrows) in the knowledge that the politicians wouldn't dare cut it therefore making the cuts fall on the other services instead. Works right up until the government calls your bluff and suddenly you've lost half your destroyers!

[Penguinracer]

With Russia exporting (or at least potentially exporting) MiG 1.42s, MiG 1.27s & Sukhoi (T-50) PAK-FAs to all & sundry plus the Chinese J-XX program in full flow - there can be no complacency in the West. Indeed large forces of thrust vectoring, stealth capable fifth-generation aircraft in India, China, Pakistan & Russia are rapidly becoming a reality - and a leveller.

[Mr Dave]

Jonny671 said:

Eric!

I think, after seeing the F22 do it's thing at Farnborough then the Eurofighter, they'd kick us all over the court if we ever had to go up against each other.

What was the Eurofighters primary role when it was commissioned?

The requirement was for a multirole aircraft, air to air and air to ground.

The air-to-air role was brought up to speed first because it was easier (huge amount of different air to surface munitions to be cleared and trialled) and the Germans needed it first to replace the f-4 phantom in the interceptor role. Despite many what many say, it is as good at air to ground as it is in air to air.

Oh and if you are judging air to air capability by high agility airshow stunts, I take it you haven't seen the Mig 29 ovt display? That was a lot more impressive than the Raptor.

Edited by Mr Dave on Monday 19th July 12:56

Edited by Mr Dave on Monday 19th July 12:58

[Jonny671]

Mr Dave said:

Oh and if you are judging air to air capability by high agility airshow stunts, I take it you haven't seen the Mig 29 ovt display? That was a lot more impressive than the Raptor.

Edited by Mr Dave on Monday 19th July 12:56

Thats how I judged it, I'm a newbie at planes/airshows though so just thought the F22 looked alot more impressive than the Typhoon.

Do the Russians (I assume operators of the Mig?) do Airshows anymore?

[Mr Dave]

Jonny671 said:

Mr Dave said:

Oh and if you are judging air to air capability by high agility airshow stunts, I take it you haven't seen the Mig 29 ovt display? That was a lot more impressive than the Raptor.

Edited by Mr Dave on Monday 19th July 12:56

Thats how I judged it, I'm a newbie at planes/airshows though so just thought the F22 looked alot more impressive than the Typhoon.

Do the Russians (I assume operators of the Mig?) do Airshows anymore?

The F22 display was superb wasn't it? Stunning really, the Typhoon display was not as good this year as previous years but again neither was showing off it's full abilities. One other thing the Typhoon has to it's advantage is the G protection for it's pilots, the Luftwaffes' Lebelle g-suit is very very good. It's great when the plane can pull sustained high G but it is worthless if the pilot can't.

For a while there the Russians weren't appearing at European airshows because some of it's aircraft could have been taken by the Swiss to pay off debts. The Mig was over here as a yech demonstrator from the company rather than Russian military.

[Jonny671]

Mr Dave said:

Jonny671 said:

Mr Dave said:

Oh and if you are judging air to air capability by high agility airshow stunts, I take it you haven't seen the Mig 29 ovt display? That was a lot more impressive than the Raptor.

Edited by Mr Dave on Monday 19th July 12:56

Thats how I judged it, I'm a newbie at planes/airshows though so just thought the F22 looked alot more impressive than the Typhoon.

Do the Russians (I assume operators of the Mig?) do Airshows anymore?

The F22 display was superb wasn't it? Stunning really, the Typhoon display was not as good this year as previous years but again neither was showing off it's full abilities. One other thing the Typhoon has to it's advantage is the G protection for it's pilots, the Luftwaffes' Lebelle g-suit is very very good. It's great when the plane can pull sustained high G but it is worthless if the pilot can't.

For a while there the Russians weren't appearing at European airshows because some of it's aircraft could have been taken by the Swiss to pay off debts. The Mig was over here as a yech demonstrator from the company rather than Russian military.

I was slightly disappointed as I saw the Typhoon last year, and thought it would be just as good, and it wasn't. Though I guess that was at an airfield with masses of room around it, where as Farnborough is very busy around it, so it had to be more restrained.

The F22 was brilliant though, I'd have said the F16 was second best though rather than the Typhoon.

[rhinochopig]

Can anyone answer the following questions?

At the start of the Eurofighter project I remember having a looksee at one of the optioneering studies for the HMI. Two technologies considered where voice activation for some of the avionics and weapon systems, and the ability to user record warning / alarm voices - the theory being that pilot was more likely to respond to an out of context voice during high cog workload situations. For example, your wife or child telling you that your opponent has missile lock.

Did any of this tech make into production - I'm assuming the warning voice stuff didn't but did the VR capability?

[disco1]

AlexS said:

No one knows which is the best design for future dog fighting.

Only one or two people have flown both F22 and Typhoon. The pilot (Amercian) basically said the F22 is the best BVR fighter but Typhoon is proper tasty at in close dogfighting. According to specialist press the Typhoon shocked the F22 a few times in combat scenerios. The F22 isn't that far ahead as we're told.

Something to note is the size of the Typoon in flight when compared to F15s/F22s, on youtube theres a clip of them coming back from training missons in the states and the typhoons are tiny little agile wasp things next to them. It is pretty hard to pick up the size differences when on the ground. Think twin engineed F16 with 4.0 gen software. It can carry serious payloads and they'e pretty cheap for what you get. Far better than anything else flying (bar F22 which will prob get shelved anyway!!).

I think we've got it right with the Typhoon. I personally would like to see navalised versions on the QE class carriers but it will never happen.

[Mr Dave]

rhinochopig said:

Can anyone answer the following questions?

At the start of the Eurofighter project I remember having a looksee at one of the optioneering studies for the HMI. Two technologies considered where voice activation for some of the avionics and weapon systems, and the ability to user record warning / alarm voices - the theory being that pilot was more likely to respond to an out of context voice during high cog workload situations. For example, your wife or child telling you that your opponent has missile lock.

Did any of this tech make into production - I'm assuming the warning voice stuff didn't but did the VR capability?

British pilots respond best to a calm female voice telling them what is happening, ze Germans responded best to an authoritative mans voice shouting at them. Says it all really.

[Jonny671]

disco1 said:

Something to note is the size of the Typoon in flight when compared to F15s/F22s, on youtube theres a clip of them coming back from training missons in the states and the typhoons are tiny little agile wasp things next to them. It is pretty hard to pick up the size differences when on the ground.

Some specs;

Eurofighter

* Crew: 1 (operational aircraft) or 2 (training aircraft)
* Length: 15.96 m (52 ft 5 in)
* Wingspan: 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in)
* Height: 5.28 m (17 ft 4 in)
* Wing area: 51.2 m2[185] (551 ft2)
* Empty weight: 11,000 kg (24,250 lb)
* Loaded weight: 16,000 kg[185] (35,300 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 23,500 kg (51,800 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan
o Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 90 kN (20,250 lbf) each

* Maximum speed:
o At altitude: Mach 2 (2,495 km/h, 1,550 mph)[186][187]
o At sea level: Mach 1.2[184] (1,470 km/h / 913.2 mph)[188]
o Supercruise: Mach 1.1–1.5[182][189]
* Range: 2,900 km (1,840 mi)
* Combat radius:
o Ground attack, lo-lo-lo: 601 km (325 nmi)
o Ground attack, hi-lo-hi: 1,389 km (750 nmi)
o Air defence with 3-hr CAP: 185 km (100 nmi)
o Air defence with 10-min loiter: 1,389 km (863 nmi) [190]
* Ferry range: 3,790 km (2,300 mi)
* Service ceiling: 19,810 m (65,000 ft)
* Rate of climb: >315 m/s[191][192] (62,000 ft/min[193])
* Wing loading: 312 kg/m2[185] (64.0 lb/ft2)


Raptor

* Crew: 1
* Length: 62 ft 1 in (18.90 m)
* Wingspan: 44 ft 6 in (13.56 m)
* Height: 16 ft 8 in (5.08 m)
* Wing area: 840 ft² (78.04 m²)
* Airfoil: NACA 64A?05.92 root, NACA 64A?04.29 tip
* Empty weight: 43,430 lb (19,700 kg[2][190])
* Loaded weight: 64,460 lb (29,300 kg[191])
* Max takeoff weight: 83,500 lb (38,000 kg)
* Powerplant: 2× Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 Pitch Thrust vectoring turbofans
o Dry thrust: 23,500 lb[192] (104 kN) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 35,000+ lb[2][192] (156+ kN) each
* Fuel capacity: 18,000 lb (8,200 kg) internally,[2][190] or 26,000 lb (11,900 kg) with two external fuel tanks[2][190]

* Maximum speed:
o At altitude: Mach 2.25 (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h)[88]
o Supercruise: Mach 1.82 (1,220 mph, 1,963 km/h)[88]
* Range: 1,600 nmi (1,840 mi, 2,960 km) with 2 external fuel tanks
* Combat radius: 410 nmi[189] (471 mi, 759 km)
* Ferry range: 2,000 mi (1,738 nmi, 3,219 km)
* Service ceiling: 65,000 ft (19,812 m)
* Wing loading: 77 lb/ft² (375 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.08 (1.26 with loaded weight & 50% fuel)
* Maximum design g-load: -3.0/+9.0 g[88]


So yeah, theres quite a difference in size.. 3 metres just widthways. They're matched quite well through the whole thing really.

[rhinochopig]

Mr Dave said:

rhinochopig said:

Can anyone answer the following questions?

At the start of the Eurofighter project I remember having a looksee at one of the optioneering studies for the HMI. Two technologies considered where voice activation for some of the avionics and weapon systems, and the ability to user record warning / alarm voices - the theory being that pilot was more likely to respond to an out of context voice during high cog workload situations. For example, your wife or child telling you that your opponent has missile lock.

Did any of this tech make into production - I'm assuming the warning voice stuff didn't but did the VR capability?

British pilots respond best to a calm female voice telling them what is happening, ze Germans responded best to an authoritative mans voice shouting at them. Says it all really.

[sultryvoice]"Hi I'm unbuttoning my blouse to reveal my ample cleavage, and oh, yes, there's a missile lock[/sultryvoice]

So did voice regognition make it then?

[Mr Dave]

rhinochopig said:

Mr Dave said:

rhinochopig said:

Can anyone answer the following questions?

At the start of the Eurofighter project I remember having a looksee at one of the optioneering studies for the HMI. Two technologies considered where voice activation for some of the avionics and weapon systems, and the ability to user record warning / alarm voices - the theory being that pilot was more likely to respond to an out of context voice during high cog workload situations. For example, your wife or child telling you that your opponent has missile lock.

Did any of this tech make into production - I'm assuming the warning voice stuff didn't but did the VR capability?

British pilots respond best to a calm female voice telling them what is happening, ze Germans responded best to an authoritative mans voice shouting at them. Says it all really.

[sultryvoice]"Hi I'm unbuttoning my blouse to reveal my ample cleavage, and oh, yes, there's a missile lock[/sultryvoice]

So did voice regognition make it then?

I believe it did, the avionics, defensive suite and all the other electrickery is truly advanced, helmet cued targeting and ASrRAAM means that if you can see something you can fire a missile at it, and with how quickly it can point it's nose in other directions means it is pretty lethal up close. You can use one aircraft to passively look for targets using IR and datalink that to other wingman, tell the airplane what targets you want to kill and then the computers will only release the weapons when it is likely you will get a kill, leaving the pilot free to manoeuvre, with the aircraft firing the missiles at the best point. Very very clever stuff.

Up against the F22 we are at a major disadvantage, but compared to everything else out there except maybe the Su-30MKIs we are very well placed to achieve air superiority. Against Argentinian Daggers it would be a slaughter.

[Bosshogg76]

Mr Dave said:

[
All I know about them is from a sooty mate of mine who worked on them at Coningsby a while back, just down to the fact that they are getting old, problems with the radars and corrosion in the wings, definately not suggesting that they are unsafe or not reliable or anything of the sort, just that they are getting more labour intensive. Could be just moaning though.

Also 100% servicability on Telic is very impressive! Must have taken some effort behind the scenes, cannot have been easy.

I appreciate what you have said about the aircraft being safe, and there being more work involved keeping them airbourne as with all aging platforms.

The bit of your post I highlighted is more the case. We Techies do love a good moan. I've worked both first, and second line as a Rigger. I've never changed a set of wings for corrosion, I have however for them being out of FI (fatigue index). Any corrosion that has been found the Design Authority has been informed and the offending area blended. Radar snags are the bane of any aircraft Tonkas to Typhoon, a Fairy with his chicken bones and a plentiful supply of LRU's is usually the cure.

I would love to say oh it was all hard graft on Telic, however the month before on Resinate (south) was the hard work, and for some reason the Telic bit all went swimmingly.

Edited by Bosshogg76 on Monday 19th July 19:10

[Mr Dave]

Bosshogg76 said:

I've never changed a set of wings for corrosion,

Can you just swap on a new set of wings if need be? (obviously it is a lot easier said than done!) How are they attached? Spar through the middle of the aircraft with two big pivots either side? What all has to come off to do that if its the case?

Sorry for so many questions just curious.

And yeah I thought there was probably a lot more moaning about actually having to do work than anything else. Although the wings being built in Italy in the 1980s and corrosion didnt seem unpossible. So its good news about Tornado servicability then, getting rid of another useful aircraft type with plenty of life left.