View Full Version : Eurofighter Typhoon
The Range
6th Dec 2017, 21:30
Hi guys,
To you military guys:
How good is the Typhoon compared, let's say, to the F-16? I know the F-16 is much older, but I didn't know which other fighter aircraft to compare it to.
msbbarratt
6th Dec 2017, 21:56
The answer is, it depends.
Factors for consideration include: numbers of, armament, range, speed, service ceiling, availability, logistics chain, fuel economy, manufacturing time, field repair-ability, man hours servicing per flight, switch on to take off time, purchase price, noise, air show prowess, ejector seat water immersion certification, fatigue life, etc.
Or you could consult a pack of Top Trumps cards!
Rhino power
7th Dec 2017, 01:40
ejector seat water immersion certification...
WTF?! Assuming the comment wasn't tongue in cheek that is... :ooh:
-RP
The answer is Tornado F3 by the way.
Tornado wins that one; carries twice as many people :E
CatchThePigeon
7th Dec 2017, 07:12
Tornado wins that one; carries twice as many people :E
Wouldn't they also have the higher average IQ?
reds & greens
7th Dec 2017, 09:09
I was going to mention the Typhoon excess baggage capability, until someone brought up the 2-man crew of the F3...
Treble one
7th Dec 2017, 09:19
Hi guys,
To you military guys:
How good is the Typhoon compared, let's say, to the F-16? I know the F-16 is much older, but I didn't know which other fighter aircraft to compare it to.
Gripen and Rafale?
I didn't know which other fighter aircraft to compare it to.well, even staying within the weather phenomena, you'll find a plane to compare it with, the Gust aka Rafale. Or even Lightning, which comes in 2 variants: the one that people (used to) understand how it works, and the one that needs regular software security patches & bug fixes and an occasional reboot.
well, even staying within the weather phenomena, you'll find a plane to compare it with, the Gust aka Rafale. Or even Lightning, which comes in 2 variants: the one that people (used to) understand how it works, and the one that needs regular software security patches & bug fixes and an occasional reboot.
Don't forget Hawker's variant of the Typhoon. Loses a bit in top speed and payload, but carries 4 times the number of guns, and much better rough field capability.
ian16th
7th Dec 2017, 11:46
Don't forget Hawker's variant of the Typhoon. Loses a bit in top speed and payload, but carries 4 times the number of guns, and much better rough field capability.
......and some bl**dy big rockets.
charliegolf
7th Dec 2017, 12:09
So you’re either about seven years old or a Russian troll.....
The answer is Tornado F3 by the way.
BGG
I usually try and give seven year-olds a sensible answer if I have one; or admit that I don't.
CG
If the answer is a Tornado F3 it must have been a very strange question...
PDR
Simplythebeast
7th Dec 2017, 13:38
“ejector seat water immersion certification,”
Perhaps he was thinking of the Russian Typhoon.....
Good job the answer wasn't Tornado F2 either......
McDuff
7th Dec 2017, 17:07
Hi guys,
To you military guys:
How good is the Typhoon compared, let's say, to the F-16? I know the F-16 is much older, but I didn't know which other fighter aircraft to compare it to.
I've flown the F16 and I loved its performance; but I understand that the Typhoon is superior in several ways, not least the excess power.
The Range
7th Dec 2017, 17:19
Not a 7 yr. kid nor a Russian troll either. I just wanted to know how good is the Typhoon.
Buster15
7th Dec 2017, 18:47
Not a 7 yr. kid nor a Russian troll either. I just wanted to know how good is the Typhoon.
I am really surprised that there are not masses of responses to this post.
On the positive side the aircraft seems to do everything that it was designed to do, that primarily being air to air. It has big wings and two very powerful (as well as being highly reliable engines). It has also sold reasonably well given its high price. While there are some obvious benefits in multi national programmes there are some key drawbacks. It has taken far too long to be a true multi role fighter with the 4 nations having differing requirements and that has adversely affected sales prospects.
The primary difficulty is that it is not a 5th generation jet at the time that this is the current flavour of the month.
Having worked on the engine during the development programme I too am interested in comments on how good it really is...
Pure Pursuit
7th Dec 2017, 18:49
It’s very good but, not as capable as a Super Hornet, significantly inferior to the F15C from a radar perspective too.
Great idea, not enough investment and Captor E will be 15 years too late.
glad rag
7th Dec 2017, 20:42
"not as capable as a Super Hornet, "
That can't be right, 'poons pylons are nailed on straight.
:}
Rhino power
8th Dec 2017, 00:02
significantly inferior to the F15C from a radar perspective too...
ECR-90 is 'significantly inferior' to the APG-63, really? How so?
-RP
George K Lee
8th Dec 2017, 01:51
To the OP -
The neutral answer is indeed "it depends". Best fighter for what? Fighter aircraft perform all kinds of missions. For instance, the Frogs designed the Rafale to do everything from carrier-based air defense to nuclear strike. The 'phoon was originally intended to operate alongside the Tornado so it was A2A-optimized.
Both are good at most things, however... but if you don't have the do-re-mi to acquire and operate them, there's JAS 39E.
Pure Pursuit
8th Dec 2017, 06:48
ECR-90 is 'significantly inferior' to the APG-63, really? How so?
-RP
APG 63 v3 is way, way ahead of Captor.
Rhino power
8th Dec 2017, 08:46
APG 63 v3 is way, way ahead of Captor.
Not an equivalent comparison, APG-63(V)3 is an AESA, CAPTOR is a MSA, once CAPTOR-E is fielded by Typhoon operators then you can compare the two on a level(ish) playing field, until then, comparing the 3rd upgrade of an in service AESA with a standard MSA radar is not a fair comparison...
-RP
Not an equivalent comparison, APG-63(V)3 is an AESA, CAPTOR is a MSA, once CAPTOR-E is fielded by Typhoon operators then you can compare the two on a level(ish) playing field, until then, comparing the 3rd upgrade of an in service AESA with of a standard MSA radar is not a fair comparison...
It's a fair comparison if you're comparing in service aircraft. Otherwise the Typhoon is no match for the Bing Aerospace 3000 with it's quantum spectrography sensor fit!
Pure Pursuit
8th Dec 2017, 15:07
I think it’s a completely fair comparison if we are looking at current capabilities. Captor E is quite some way off.
Concur. You can have all the kinematic performance you want - but if your Air System is lacking in sensors and data links you have an inferior Air System. Period.
banterbus
9th Dec 2017, 17:09
It is a very capable fighter, with an ever-improving air to surface capability. The dongs are the best out there, that for one thing cannot be argued...
Pure Pursuit
9th Dec 2017, 17:42
Indeed. I’ve got a mate flying Super Hornets after an exchange here on FGR4. He misses the power and performance of the airframe but, outside of that, doesn’t think that Typhoon matches up.
Perhaps one of the biggest mistakes we made was going single seat?
glad rag
10th Dec 2017, 15:59
"Perhaps one of the biggest mistakes we made was going single seat?"
Didn't the French do just that change from one to two crew for certain Rafale varients..
Heathrow Harry
10th Dec 2017, 17:58
The reasons go wayyy back IIRC
In the early 1980's we were in need of a small, agile, fighter to replace the Lightning and to cover scenarios where the Tornado F2 would be ... embarrassed...... We had Tornado, Buccaneer, Jaguar and Harrier for strike at the time.The British went ahead with a technology demonstrator, the EAP.
This morphed into the EFA (Typhoon) in 1988. After the fall of the Soviet Union and German shenanigans the whole thing stalled for several years until production eventually went ahead in 1996. There was still a lot of pressure to keep the costs down. The choice of radars was a straight political deal between the UK & Germany to keep Ferranti in business.
First deliveries started in 2003.
It's not surprising that as the world has changed the Typhoon we see isn't what we'd spec today. The addition of a ground attack requirement was never really envisioned over 30 years ago. The design is basically over 25 years old and has been in serial production for 20 years.
That's why, in some roles, it's not exactly what we might want - but it's all we have and it could be a lot worse.......