Typhoons export chances?(Merged)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typhoons export chances?
(From Western Daily Press)
In a recent competition run by Singapore to find a replacement for its F16 fighters, Typhoon was up against the American F15E and the French Rafale. Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests. According to one observer, neither competitor aircraft could claim the same (Defence Analysis August 2004).
In a recent competition run by Singapore to find a replacement for its F16 fighters, Typhoon was up against the American F15E and the French Rafale. Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests. According to one observer, neither competitor aircraft could claim the same (Defence Analysis August 2004).
Has anyone else heard of export possibilities to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, and what do you think its chances are in each.
I would love some comments from pilots on the aircrafts performance.
Cheers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Be interesting to see whether the engagement was BVR or "up close and personal". Typhoon I feel will have excellent export capabilty, as long as the project is not further delayed. I suppose you would also have to take into account of what block F-16's they were, and whether AWACS was involved.
MBGA
MBGA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would imagine that it would have been BVR, WVR doesn't tell you as much with regard to system/performance as a BVR Exercise.
I would also think that three F-16's against one Typhoon WVR is a bit of a lottery.
From the WWW it seems the Singaporeans have
8xF-16A/Bs, Block 15 OCU standard.
30xF-16/D's, Block 52
12xF16C/D's, Block 52
and possibly another
20xF16C/D's Block 52+
It would seem sensible to pit the contenders against a later Mk aircraft, to really test out the future aircraft.
Can anyone guess the varient that was used against the Typhoons.
Cheers
I would also think that three F-16's against one Typhoon WVR is a bit of a lottery.
From the WWW it seems the Singaporeans have
8xF-16A/Bs, Block 15 OCU standard.
30xF-16/D's, Block 52
12xF16C/D's, Block 52
and possibly another
20xF16C/D's Block 52+
It would seem sensible to pit the contenders against a later Mk aircraft, to really test out the future aircraft.
Can anyone guess the varient that was used against the Typhoons.
Cheers
Join Date: May 2004
Location: england- up north (where it's grim)
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NICE ONE
hurrah for the typhoon.
did it have an english driver too? always nice to hear us get one over on american equipment.
you never know we may fall out with them one day and get our independance back !!!
did it have an english driver too? always nice to hear us get one over on american equipment.
you never know we may fall out with them one day and get our independance back !!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft were flown out to Singapore by no 17 squadron aircrew, and two BAE pilots, Archie Neil and Brian Kemp flew the evaluations with Singaporean pilots in the cockpit.
and from the excellent Air Forces Monthly:-
Cheers
and from the excellent Air Forces Monthly:-
AFM understands, however, that the evaluation, which was the first time Typhoon had flown outside Europe, was a resounding success. Though BAE and Eurofighter will not confirm any details, it is believed that the two aircraft flew 28 missions, totalling 35 flying hours, during the course of which the aircraft convincingly demonstrated its air-to-air capabilities, first against a pair of F-16s and then against a package of six F-5S and F-16C/D aircraft. It also demonstrated its ability to 'supercruise' (fly supersonically without reheat), achieving Mach 1.21 on a normal, hot Singapore day. This impressed the Singaporeans - and Typhoon's rival bidders, whose aircraft require reheat for supersonic flight.
"They didn't wait for the cool evening, they didn't wait for a cooler day - they just went out and did it in a hot, daytime, tropical environment," one Rafale programme insider told AFM, with grudging admiration. "The Singaporeans were astonished ask asked why they hadn't advertised that they could do it. The answer was that these RAF jets weren't weighed down with a tonne of flight test instrumentation, so they could do it where the Development Aircraft ere probably a little slower!"
"They didn't wait for the cool evening, they didn't wait for a cooler day - they just went out and did it in a hot, daytime, tropical environment," one Rafale programme insider told AFM, with grudging admiration. "The Singaporeans were astonished ask asked why they hadn't advertised that they could do it. The answer was that these RAF jets weren't weighed down with a tonne of flight test instrumentation, so they could do it where the Development Aircraft ere probably a little slower!"
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK; so what happens if they're flying against, say, Indonesian Su-30s, and the Indonesians let off an EMP bomb obtained from their large neighbours to the north, and it fries the Typhoon's computers, and they can't control the leading edge anymore?
At least the F-16 will still be controlable.
Unstable airframes = not a good idea, IMHO. A bit like warships made from combustable alloy, or armoured vehicles with rubber tyres.
Or do we have absolute faith in this unproven concept based on untried theory and falible technology?
At least the F-16 will still be controlable.
Unstable airframes = not a good idea, IMHO. A bit like warships made from combustable alloy, or armoured vehicles with rubber tyres.
Or do we have absolute faith in this unproven concept based on untried theory and falible technology?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK I'll bite...
1. Just how big an EMP bomb are you talking about?, you really want to be pretty selective where you pop those off.
2. Just how is the F-16's 4 channel digital fly by wire system immune?, does it have reversionary controls, how does that work with a side stick?.
3. Even if the F-16 were to be fully controllable in flight , what are you going to do with it, ram something?.
Just wondering.
Cheers
1. Just how big an EMP bomb are you talking about?, you really want to be pretty selective where you pop those off.
2. Just how is the F-16's 4 channel digital fly by wire system immune?, does it have reversionary controls, how does that work with a side stick?.
3. Even if the F-16 were to be fully controllable in flight , what are you going to do with it, ram something?.
Just wondering.
Cheers
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Curious sort of bite, but nevermind;
1) Why does the size of the EMP device matter? Simple answer in two parts, first, large enough to be effective, and second, they're not selective, that's the whole point of them.
2) Fly by wire and fly by light are both controlled ultimately by a human. The leading edge in an unstable airframe is controlled by a computer. The computer is susceptible to EMP. Humans aren't, at least not in the sense of the pulse emitted by the devices under discussion.
3) Your gun will still work even if your missiles don't, but the important distinction is that your airframe will remain stable and controllable long enough for you to a) point it away from anyone on the ground, and b) get out of it and survive. Your unstable Typhoon airframe won't allow either of these things.
Everyone thought magnesium ships were the best thing since sliced bread, till they went to the Falklands.
Just a thought.
1) Why does the size of the EMP device matter? Simple answer in two parts, first, large enough to be effective, and second, they're not selective, that's the whole point of them.
2) Fly by wire and fly by light are both controlled ultimately by a human. The leading edge in an unstable airframe is controlled by a computer. The computer is susceptible to EMP. Humans aren't, at least not in the sense of the pulse emitted by the devices under discussion.
3) Your gun will still work even if your missiles don't, but the important distinction is that your airframe will remain stable and controllable long enough for you to a) point it away from anyone on the ground, and b) get out of it and survive. Your unstable Typhoon airframe won't allow either of these things.
Everyone thought magnesium ships were the best thing since sliced bread, till they went to the Falklands.
Just a thought.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bluewolf
There is an answer to your question that would knock your concerns on the head. Trouble is, if anyone gave it to you, they'd be shot.
There is an answer to your question that would knock your concerns on the head. Trouble is, if anyone gave it to you, they'd be shot.
Last edited by jindabyne; 26th Sep 2004 at 10:44.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First the reference to the EMP device is to be careful where you pop them off, such a large device over your own soil will cause more havoc than a Typhoon, so its got to be delivered somehow if its a small device.
BTW modern military aircraft are hardened to EMP, you'd have to be pretty close to pop off a small device, a large device would cause all sorts of problems.
Can you explain a couple of things to me,
How can a digital FBW aircraft not use computers, 'Fly by wire and fly by light are both controlled ultimately by a human' thats fine and dandy, but the pilots commands are collected by the side stick, then what?, it has to be quantised, transmitted and acted apon. How if not electronically?.
IS the gun on an F16 physically linked to the fire button, hope its not through any semiconductors!!, and your fire control isn't going to help with leading the shot.
As for the loss of control, your absolutley right, the Typhoon would start to lose control about 1/50 of a second after the FCS went bang!, leading to a rapid departure and probabely airframe breakup, not an ideal situation for an ejection. but then again the auto stab on the F-16 would seem to be at risk too.
In short how does the pilots commands in an F-16 get from the side stick to the flight control surfaces?.
Cheers
BTW modern military aircraft are hardened to EMP, you'd have to be pretty close to pop off a small device, a large device would cause all sorts of problems.
Can you explain a couple of things to me,
How can a digital FBW aircraft not use computers, 'Fly by wire and fly by light are both controlled ultimately by a human' thats fine and dandy, but the pilots commands are collected by the side stick, then what?, it has to be quantised, transmitted and acted apon. How if not electronically?.
IS the gun on an F16 physically linked to the fire button, hope its not through any semiconductors!!, and your fire control isn't going to help with leading the shot.
As for the loss of control, your absolutley right, the Typhoon would start to lose control about 1/50 of a second after the FCS went bang!, leading to a rapid departure and probabely airframe breakup, not an ideal situation for an ejection. but then again the auto stab on the F-16 would seem to be at risk too.
In short how does the pilots commands in an F-16 get from the side stick to the flight control surfaces?.
Cheers
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
EMP works by inducing voltage in the boxes and connecting cables. You prevent it by putting the boxes in faraday cages and connecting them by fibre-optic cables which are, effectively, not susceptable to EMP.
"Since fly-by-wire without manual reversion requires the highest integrity, the Typhoon is fitted with a quadruplex FBW flight control system. Each of the four FBW units comprises eight 68020 processors, as well as several application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) for handling critical tasks. Each box connects to the main avionics system via a STANAG-3910 high-speed optical data bus.
Avionic Systems Standardisation Committee
"Since fly-by-wire without manual reversion requires the highest integrity, the Typhoon is fitted with a quadruplex FBW flight control system. Each of the four FBW units comprises eight 68020 processors, as well as several application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) for handling critical tasks. Each box connects to the main avionics system via a STANAG-3910 high-speed optical data bus.
Avionic Systems Standardisation Committee
Last edited by ORAC; 26th Sep 2004 at 19:53.
Oh goodie - EMP
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 79
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the_flying_cop,
Don't wish to appear petulant/pedantic but............
" did it have an english driver too? "
No................but he/they were probably British !!
Don't wish to appear petulant/pedantic but............
" did it have an english driver too? "
No................but he/they were probably British !!
Last edited by Echo 5; 26th Sep 2004 at 17:57.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 79
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lightningmate,
Don't know the guy but the name does have a certain Celtic flavour. Not wishing to appear presumptuous I thought the generic term of " British " would be appropriate.
Don't know the guy but the name does have a certain Celtic flavour. Not wishing to appear presumptuous I thought the generic term of " British " would be appropriate.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I had always thought that the F-16 was unstable (good for agility) and had no manual FC backup."
F-16 is most certainly unstable and does not have a manual backup. If the Typhoon were to depart controlled flight 1/50th of a second after being fried, the F-16 would be right with it.
Magoo
F-16 is most certainly unstable and does not have a manual backup. If the Typhoon were to depart controlled flight 1/50th of a second after being fried, the F-16 would be right with it.
Magoo
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F-16 is most certainly unstable
There is a world of difference between stability that is relaxed below the standerd used for ordinary aeroplanes and instability which is just that.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
"When you start looking at the F-16 from the aerodynamic standpoint, one particular fact immediately stands out: This (the F-16) is the first operational aircraft intentionally designed to have a negative static margin. In subsonic flight, the F-16 is negatively stable (read, unstable) in pitch."....
F-16 Aerodynamics By Joe Bill Dryden — Senior Experimental Test Pilot
Code One
F-16 Aerodynamics By Joe Bill Dryden — Senior Experimental Test Pilot
Code One
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats interesting!
Now we can have a scrap between 'my' F-16 tp (who told me what I quoted) and yours!
Should be good to watch
Mind you it may be a block number issue which would be dull....
Now we can have a scrap between 'my' F-16 tp (who told me what I quoted) and yours!
Should be good to watch
Mind you it may be a block number issue which would be dull....