Dog Fighter

[NutherA2]

This one seems to have even more thrust than the Javelin had drag! Didn't BAe advertise the Eurofighter as a world class dog fighter? :O

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2002313961490667235 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2002313961490667235)

[Brat]

Pretty eyeopening stuff. Haven't seen the Typhoon demonstrate that sort of agility yet, but then perhaps they feel that sort of manoevering is simply showboating?

[Wycombe]

The Mig29OVT pulled off similarly spectacular airshow stunts at Fairford and Farnborough a couple of months ago.

[Backwards PLT]

Very impressive. Shows how far FCS, thrust vectoring etc has got.

Pretty much useless for actually fighting, of course, but looks great at airshows!:cool:

[SASless]

Perhaps it cannot imitate the 29 and is a dog of a fighter in reality?

[dakkg651]

Important question is what BVR capability has it got compared to the Typhoon?

[soddim]

Nice party trick - could be quite useful against a Spitfire.

Didn't we replace them on the front line?

[Tourist]

Very easy to be smug about russian kit.
They think differently than the west, but their kit is spectacular in its way.
I used to mock their Helos till I flew one.
I suspect that one of these days some nation flying US kit is going to get a big surprise.

[Foxthreekill]

Backwards PLT, What makes you say that it wouldn't be much use in real combat? It would certainly make eyes water!

[FormerFlake]

I can not imagine rules of Engagement allowing BVR these days, especially for the RAF.

[alex_holbrook]

See here (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-1349697433246487433&q=mig+29+display) .
New Mig 29 has 3D OVT as opposed to 2D like the Sukhoi. Alot of us would have seen this at Farnborough or Fairford, but this is for those of you that haven't.

[Conan the Librarian]

And quite a few stills of the OVT here too. Think they are mainly on page 7.

http://s5.photobucket.com/albums/y192/zorbathegeek/RIAT%202006%20-%20not%20happy/

Conan

[SASless]

If the ROE ban BVR engagements....then why have that capability? Seems like a lot of expense for nothing. If the other side does....it makes getting into position to knife fight a bit risky. Seems it is easier to change the ROE to favor the Home Team vice the Visitors.

I have been involved in one of those self-inflicted wound deals....that is not the way to fight a war.

[BombayDuck]

New Mig 29 has 3D OVT as opposed to 2D like the Sukhoi. Alot of us would have seen this at Farnborough or Fairford, but this is for those of you that haven't.

All the latest Indian Sukhois have 3D TVC. ±30° vertical plane and ±15° in the horizontal plane.

[NoseGunner]

Formerflake

I hope your wrong about the RoE - otherwise pretty much all western fighter philosophy / design is a complete waste of money and time. The senate/house wont be happy to hear it, thats for sure! Not to mention that all current training is pretty much pointless. I dont really think that all the western air forces are completely wrong. Maybe they know something??

In reality I think BVR decs are now more likely than ever - not less.

[Low Ball]

Tourist,

Interesting response, I did an ACM famil Brit Hels v Sov Hels with shed loads of conclusions . The main 'get you home for breakfast' rule being the opposite to Top Gun - 'You can run but you can't hide'. With hels its the other way round - 'You can hide but you can't run' Sov hels have an eye watering top speed but a three counties turning circle.

Low Ball

[mustflywillfly]

Ahhhhhhhh.....the true fighter jet. Surely what we need these days is a nice multi-purpose jet, able to deliver smart ground attack munitions and also capable of mounting a good modern air-to-air missile and making the odd supersonic intercept (bring on the JSF). Until then what have we got? An overdue, out of date, pointless, sickeningly expensive aircraft (86 million each and rising) that needs a tanker unless it is to do anything other then patrol the skies around it's own airbase. If it is fitted with a ground attack role then you can bet the price will rise and then it probably wont be any good at that, certainly no better then the Jaguar or Harrier. We don't need a super agile dog fighter, if there is some fantastically brave opponent willing to have a pop in their rusting Mig then they would just get shot down by a long range missile. Why on earth did we persue such a project? And what aircraft could I be talking about I wonder???

Yes, the Eurofighter. Probably the most expensive and pointless British military aircraft since the Anti-sub Merlin!! Designed to fight the wars of yesterday. We could have replaced our entire fighter force with F-15s for the price of two or three Eurofighters. Buy British and sod the consequences! Why does the Government insist on keeping BAe afloat buy purchasing cr*p at stupid prices? Jobs for the UK workers?? PLEASE!! If all BAe's staff end up in the dole queue that's no worse then what happens to a lot of ex-servicemen (many of which end up homeless).

Controversial I know and I am sure that there are a few pilots out there who have flown the Eurofighter and rate it as an excellent aeroplane. But really hand on heart can you say that it is a necessary expenditure. It may be a great aircraft, but maybe it has already had its day??

MFWF:ugh: :ugh:

[NutherA2]

IIRC Eurofighter/Typhoon's and Raptor's agility has been stressed as a plus in their performance; if you limit your aspirations to BVR engagements was there any point in improving on F14/Phoenix or even (for our older viewers) F101/Genie?

[Roland Pulfrew]

Controversial I know and I am sure that there are a few pilots out there who have flown the Eurofighter and rate it as an excellent aeroplane. But really hand on heart can you say that it is a necessary expenditure. It may be a great aircraft, but maybe it has already had its day??
MFWF

Not contraversial, just naive! Suggest that you go and do the sums and that you talk to the chaps who are flying it. Sloghtly more capable than you suggest. Furthermore to cancel it would cost about as much as to buy it. For once they got the contract right, at least to lock the other partner nations into agreed workshares and numbers.:E

[Vifferpilot]

Ahhhhhhhh.....the true fighter jet. Surely what we need these days is a nice multi-purpose jet, able to deliver smart ground attack munitions and also capable of mounting a good modern air-to-air missile and making the odd supersonic intercept (bring on the JSF). Until then what have we got? An overdue, out of date, pointless, sickeningly expensive aircraft (86 million each and rising) that needs a tanker unless it is to do anything other then patrol the skies around it's own airbase. If it is fitted with a ground attack role then you can bet the price will rise and then it probably wont be any good at that, certainly no better then the Jaguar or Harrier. We don't need a super agile dog fighter, if there is some fantastically brave opponent willing to have a pop in their rusting Mig then they would just get shot down by a long range missile. Why on earth did we persue such a project? And what aircraft could I be talking about I wonder???

Yes, the Eurofighter. Probably the most expensive and pointless British military aircraft since the Anti-sub Merlin!! Designed to fight the wars of yesterday. We could have replaced our entire fighter force with F-15s for the price of two or three Eurofighters. Buy British and sod the consequences! Why does the Government insist on keeping BAe afloat buy purchasing cr*p at stupid prices? Jobs for the UK workers?? PLEASE!! If all BAe's staff end up in the dole queue that's no worse then what happens to a lot of ex-servicemen (many of which end up homeless).

Controversial I know and I am sure that there are a few pilots out there who have flown the Eurofighter and rate it as an excellent aeroplane. But really hand on heart can you say that it is a necessary expenditure. It may be a great aircraft, but maybe it has already had its day??

MFWF:ugh: :ugh:

What newspaper do you read m8?

[mustflywillfly]

Not contraversial, just naive! Suggest that you go and do the sums and that you talk to the chaps who are flying it. Sloghtly more capable than you suggest. Furthermore to cancel it would cost about as much as to buy it. For once they got the contract right, at least to lock the other partner nations into agreed workshares and numbers.:E


I am not suggesting that it isn't a capable aeroplane. I used to work at the monster that is BAe and know from a "desk" point of view how capable it is. My point is that I believe (of course people will have different opinions, naive or not) that it is the wrong capability for now. It was designed in a different world for a different world to the one we live in now. As for the contract, I'm sure I remember at least one country pulling out and all the others lowering their order numbers thus pushing up the unit cost.

[mustflywillfly]

What newspaper do you read m8?

Hmmm.. I'm struggling to understand the relevance of your point Viffer. I too belong to an overstretched armed service and believe that we should be investing a h*ll of a lot more in the forces, but into the right areas. And if you really are interested I read several newspapers when I have the time and am not as left wing as I think you may be trying to imply m8.

[Archimedes]

Ahhhhhhhh.....the true fighter jet. Surely what we need these days is a nice multi-purpose jet, able to deliver smart ground attack munitions Tick in box for Typhoon. Will carry up to six EPW (as a for instance)
and also capable of mounting a good modern air-to-air missile Another tick for Typhoon there, then - up to 6 AMRAAM and (eventually, usual procurement caveats applying) Meteor, plus ASRAAM
and making the odd supersonic intercept (bring on the JSF). Our version of JSF might not be able to do that...
Until then what have we got? An overdue, out of date, pointless, sickeningly expensive aircraft <snip> No, we've retired the SHAR :E ... (sorry, couldn't resist...)
that needs a tanker unless it is to do anything other then patrol the skies around it's own airbase. I thought we were talking about the Typhoon, not the STOVL variant of JSF (Dave B)?
If it is fitted with a ground attack role then you can bet the price will rise and then it probably wont be any good at that, certainly no better then the Jaguar or Harrier. Have to wait and see on that one.
We don't need a super agile dog fighter, if there is some fantastically brave opponent willing to have a pop in their rusting Mig then they would just get shot down by a long range missile Unless the ROE require a visual ID, and the pilot then finds himself in knife-fighting range where a spot of agility might come in handy...
We could have replaced our entire fighter force with F-15s for the price of two or three Eurofighters. We'd get enough aircraft to replace three squadrons of F3s (and the OCU, and the attrition reserve) for less than £258,000,000 (using your figures for Typhoon unit cost, which I'm sure Jackonicko will be along to dispute in a moment;) )?

Unit cost for the F-15C in FY98 was estimated at $43m, for the F-15E in the same year at $55m, so replacing three front-line F3 units with a UE of 12 and an OCU with a UE of, say, 18 = $2,322,000,000 for F-15Cs (plus the extra cost of the attrition reserve of, what, say, 20-30 aircraft?) without spares, etc. That works out at £1,222,105,263 in today's money, which is, I'd suggest, rather more than the cost of three Typhoons... (NB my maths ability has exceeded its structural limits here, so multiplications may be wrong - point remains the same, though)

And the F-15 wouldn't come with the contractual requirements regarding MMH per flight hour that Typhoon has, and would (if I've understood the figures correctly) cost more to operate.

But apart from those small points, you may have a case.

And anyway, at the moment it'd almost cost more to cancel the Typhoon than it would to purchase and scrap them on the runway, thanks to the penalty clauses in the contract.

[mustflywillfly]

Tick in box for Typhoon. Will carry up to six EPW (as a for instance)
Another tick for Typhoon there, then - up to 6 AMRAAM and (eventually, usual procurement caveats applying) Meteor, plus ASRAAM
. Our version of JSF might not be able to do that...
No, we've retired the SHAR :E ... (sorry, couldn't resist...)
I thought we were talking about the Typhoon, not the STOVL variant of JSF (Dave B)?
Have to wait and see on that one.
Unless the ROE require a visual ID, and the pilot then finds himself in knife-fighting range where a spot of agility might come in handy...
We'd get enough aircraft to replace three squadrons of F3s (and the OCU, and the attrition reserve) for less than £258,000,000 (using your figures for Typhoon unit cost, which I'm sure Jackonicko will be along to dispute in a moment;) )?

Unit cost for the F-15C in FY98 was estimated at $43m, for the F-15E in the same year at $55m, so replacing three front-line F3 units with a UE of 12 and an OCU with a UE of, say, 18 = $2,322,000,000 for F-15Cs (plus the extra cost of the attrition reserve of, what, say, 20-30 aircraft?) without spares, etc. That works out at £1,222,105,263 in today's money, which is, I'd suggest, rather more than the cost of three Typhoons... (NB my maths ability has exceeded its structural limits here, so multiplications may be wrong - point remains the same, though)

And the F-15 wouldn't come with the contractual requirements regarding MMH per flight hour that Typhoon has, and would (if I've understood the figures correctly) cost more to operate.

But apart from those small points, you may have a case.

And anyway, at the moment it'd almost cost more to cancel the Typhoon than it would to purchase and scrap them on the runway, thanks to the penalty clauses in the contract.


Don't disagree with any of your points and indeed it would now cost more to cancel. It is here and it is here to stay. BUT my point is that it has cost an awful lot of money for a super agile fighter ( a little agility may be needed - granted as you point out) that we could have bought off the shelf and saved a lot of money, we just seem to get procurement disastrously wrong in this country and it is very frustrating! Money may have been better spent equipping our ground troops better. The cuts we are seeing in the Armed Forces at the moment (which I am indeed a part of) are in part due to settling the Eurofighter bill. As for the numbers I'm sure the yanks were flogging F15s for around £4 million per jet. I am not suggesting we had bought new ones.

[alex_holbrook]

All the latest Indian Sukhois have 3D TVC. ±30° vertical plane and ±15° in the horizontal plane.

Because the IAF recently completed a deal with the same company that fitted the OVT's on the 29.
My bad.
Al

[BombayDuck]

Not a "bad" by a long shot, alex :) You were obviously right in the fact that the Su-37 (was this thing called the Terminator or something?) had only two-dimensional vectoring....

Incidentally, the Sukhoi is the only bird in the inventory that has given IAF Fulcrums (vanilla ones, A and C - no TVC) a hard time. But yet (I hear) the Fulcrums still rule the air, partly because their training is purely for air-to-air as opposed to the Multi-and Swing-role MKI. Also, the Fuclrum pilots are quite happy with the fact that the Sukhoi is a huge beast, and can be spotted easily. Which is why all MKIs are painted a dull grey.

A Fulcrum pilot once quoted that the "nearer she gets to bingo fuel, the meaner a bitch the Sue becomes". Second set of eyes in the cockpit too help :)

[Roland Pulfrew]

Don't disagree with any of your points and indeed it would now cost more to cancel. It is here and it is here to stay. BUT my point is that it has cost an awful lot of money for a super agile fighter ( a little agility may be needed - granted as you point out) that we could have bought off the shelf and saved a lot of money, we just seem to get procurement disastrously wrong in this country and it is very frustrating! Money may have been better spent equipping our ground troops better. The cuts we are seeing in the Armed Forces at the moment (which I am indeed a part of) are in part due to settling the Eurofighter bill. As for the numbers I'm sure the yanks were flogging F15s for around £4 million per jet. I am not suggesting we had bought new ones.

MFWF

No country pulled out once the contracts were signed and since signature no country has reduced its order (you may be thinking of the Tcherman reduction in their A400 order (from 73 to 50 IIRC)) and France pulled out long before we ever got to that stage. Once the contracts were in the penalty clauses for reducing our numbers were to recompense the other nations for the increase in price of their aircraft. Or we pay as much for fewer aircraft - NAO would love that!!!

We could not have bought anything off the shelf with the agility and capability of the Typhoon for anything less than the Typhoon itself. F15 - not as agile, and not that cheap. F16 close in agility but not in capability. Rafale not close in capability. Su 30 and Mig 29.............! Just what could we have bought that has the capability (or planned capability) with the agility for that price? So you would have us flying around in second hand F15s? Not even Malaysia/Singapore/Korea does that to their air forces!!!

The EP bow wave is not just caused by Typhoon either, its also caused by Astute, CVF, FRES, AJT, MFTS, FSTA etc etc etc!! Actually what it is caused by is the Treasury not paying for what we actually need and new aircraft fit into that as much as anything else. Who else would say we want a carrier of this size, and this capability, capable of carrying this number of aircraft, but if you charge us more than this we won't buy it. Not because we don't need it but because the Government who signed up to 2 x 65000 ton carriers wont actually pay the bill!!!