What actually happened? (Typhoo versus F15)
None but a blockhead
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What actually happened? (Typhoo versus F15)
From my brothers in text on Scotland on Sunday
"IT might be over budget and years late but the Eurofighter Typhoon has shown that it can shake off America's best fighter plane and shoot it down.
A chance encounter over the Lake District between a Eurofighter trainer and two F-15 aircraft turned into a mock dogfight, with the British plane coming off best - much to the surprise of some in the RAF. The episode was hushed up for fear of causing US blushes.
For a project 10 years late and $8bn over budget, it is a welcome piece of good news.
The 'clash' took place last year over Windermere when the two-seater RAF Eurofighter was 'bounced' from behind by the two F-15E fighters.
The US pilots intended to pursue the supposedly hapless 'Limey' for several miles and lock their radars on to it for long enough so that if it had been a real dogfight the British jet would have been shot down.
But much to the Americans' surprise, the Eurofighter shook them off, outmanoeuvred them and moved into shooting positions on their tails.
The British pilots themselves were almost as surprised at winning an encounter with an aircraft widely regarded as the best fighter in the world."
Err... right. Was this just a chunk of banter fed to some hapless hack in a bar, or was there really a dogfight with the septics?
R
"IT might be over budget and years late but the Eurofighter Typhoon has shown that it can shake off America's best fighter plane and shoot it down.
A chance encounter over the Lake District between a Eurofighter trainer and two F-15 aircraft turned into a mock dogfight, with the British plane coming off best - much to the surprise of some in the RAF. The episode was hushed up for fear of causing US blushes.
For a project 10 years late and $8bn over budget, it is a welcome piece of good news.
The 'clash' took place last year over Windermere when the two-seater RAF Eurofighter was 'bounced' from behind by the two F-15E fighters.
The US pilots intended to pursue the supposedly hapless 'Limey' for several miles and lock their radars on to it for long enough so that if it had been a real dogfight the British jet would have been shot down.
But much to the Americans' surprise, the Eurofighter shook them off, outmanoeuvred them and moved into shooting positions on their tails.
The British pilots themselves were almost as surprised at winning an encounter with an aircraft widely regarded as the best fighter in the world."
Err... right. Was this just a chunk of banter fed to some hapless hack in a bar, or was there really a dogfight with the septics?
R
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
F15E should have an advantage over the F15C. I once controlled an F15C in a 1v4.
He went Judy on a 4-ship of Buccs. The final score was 1 - 1 with 3 Buccs exiting stage left!
He went Judy on a 4-ship of Buccs. The final score was 1 - 1 with 3 Buccs exiting stage left!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Typhoon was designed to outperform aircraft not yet in service so it's not really surprising that this is quite possible.
These days we are often too good at believing we should be second best in everything.
These days we are often too good at believing we should be second best in everything.
RJ,
I can assure you that the 48th TFW weren't playing to lose.
It should hardly be surprising that Typhoon, with its thrust, big wing, powerful canards and well-sorted FCS should be able to outmanoeuvre any F-15 (if that's what happened), regardless of whether it was a C, a D or an E, and whether it was 30 years old or brand new off the line.
What was much more surprising was Typhoon's performance in 'one versus many' engagements during the Singapore evaluation. I understand that Captor's parametrics are already absolutely extraordinary, and once the full-up DVI, helmet, PIRATE, and DASS are up and integrated, it will be a great AD aeroplane.
Moreover, we should remember that both Windermere and Singapore involved Block 1 jets, with a previous incarnation of the FCS, DASS, and when the aircrew were still getting used to the jet. Block 2 is a further step forward, and Block 5 will be a further 'leap'. And that's before we get to Tranche 2.
I don't want to sound like a PR man for Eurofighter - there are plenty of things to kick the programme for - the timescales are still hopeless, the A-G capabilities are still too far off, and why haven't they integrated an interim helmet (like Jaguar's, say?) if Eurofighter's all-singing, all-dancing model is going to take so long? And while some problems are in the past, they have resulted in the aircraft being years late, and have added millions to the bill. Still worth a kicking, in my view.
It's going to be 2007 before the aircraft's declared for QRA - and then with only a handful of jets and with barely more capability than the F.Mk 3.
The company can be complacent beyond belief - having thrown away Singapore with a mix of incompetence and not having a robust plan for A-G it is doing nothing to bring forward the interim A-G capabilities required by some existing customers, and likely to be deal-breakers for potential users, nor to make the A-G timetable more credible. It's hard not to see further disappointments on the export market if they don't sharpen up.
The only comfort is that all fifth Generation fighter programmes are doing just as badly or worse - F-22, Rafale, JSF and the stillborn Russian Gen 5 jets. And once Typhoon is fully in service, the RAF will be in the unaccustomed position of having a truly world class aircraft in service. Only the F-22 will better Typhoon's capabilities, and you can afford two or three Typhoons for one Raptor.
If you're going to kick Typhoon then kick it for the right reasons, where a kick is fair and well deserved. Most of the criticism is ill-founded, or is based on concerns from the early development programme that were addressed and put to bed long ago.
I can assure you that the 48th TFW weren't playing to lose.
It should hardly be surprising that Typhoon, with its thrust, big wing, powerful canards and well-sorted FCS should be able to outmanoeuvre any F-15 (if that's what happened), regardless of whether it was a C, a D or an E, and whether it was 30 years old or brand new off the line.
What was much more surprising was Typhoon's performance in 'one versus many' engagements during the Singapore evaluation. I understand that Captor's parametrics are already absolutely extraordinary, and once the full-up DVI, helmet, PIRATE, and DASS are up and integrated, it will be a great AD aeroplane.
Moreover, we should remember that both Windermere and Singapore involved Block 1 jets, with a previous incarnation of the FCS, DASS, and when the aircrew were still getting used to the jet. Block 2 is a further step forward, and Block 5 will be a further 'leap'. And that's before we get to Tranche 2.
I don't want to sound like a PR man for Eurofighter - there are plenty of things to kick the programme for - the timescales are still hopeless, the A-G capabilities are still too far off, and why haven't they integrated an interim helmet (like Jaguar's, say?) if Eurofighter's all-singing, all-dancing model is going to take so long? And while some problems are in the past, they have resulted in the aircraft being years late, and have added millions to the bill. Still worth a kicking, in my view.
It's going to be 2007 before the aircraft's declared for QRA - and then with only a handful of jets and with barely more capability than the F.Mk 3.
The company can be complacent beyond belief - having thrown away Singapore with a mix of incompetence and not having a robust plan for A-G it is doing nothing to bring forward the interim A-G capabilities required by some existing customers, and likely to be deal-breakers for potential users, nor to make the A-G timetable more credible. It's hard not to see further disappointments on the export market if they don't sharpen up.
The only comfort is that all fifth Generation fighter programmes are doing just as badly or worse - F-22, Rafale, JSF and the stillborn Russian Gen 5 jets. And once Typhoon is fully in service, the RAF will be in the unaccustomed position of having a truly world class aircraft in service. Only the F-22 will better Typhoon's capabilities, and you can afford two or three Typhoons for one Raptor.
If you're going to kick Typhoon then kick it for the right reasons, where a kick is fair and well deserved. Most of the criticism is ill-founded, or is based on concerns from the early development programme that were addressed and put to bed long ago.
Last edited by Jackonicko; 21st Jun 2005 at 09:59.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had heard a rumour of one Typhoon vs many f-15's that went quite well, the details are unfortunately a bit foggy!!, I don't know if it was a planned sortie or just a chance meeting.
Can anyone confirm??, elaborate??, spill their guts;-)..... Please!.
Cheers
Can anyone confirm??, elaborate??, spill their guts;-)..... Please!.
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this case the story is actually gen. I know someone that saw it taking photos that day, but it was some time ago (over a year if memory serves me rightly). It was actually up in the flow arrow past ambleside at Grasmere, just after the left right up the hill where the dual carriageway is. And apparently the F15's were made tolook rather silly. What a shame....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing more than some usual ACM.
Agressors F-5Es are known for outdraging the F-15.
When fought out of the best part of the flight envelope, many airxcrafts can take the fight to F-15 jokeys.
Sorry for saying but Rafale too, easly.
It would have been hard to have to say the comtrary in view of the fact that Typhoon and other 4th gen aircrafts were designed to do just that.
Having said this, it's still a good perf by RAF, and the fact that it was the two seaters doesn't change much in terms of their capabilities. They only have one seat more, the avionics for the rear crewman and less internal fuel.
RJ,
I can assure you that the 48th TFW weren\'t playing to lose.
"It should hardly be surprising that Typhoon, with its thrust, big wing, powerful canards and well-sorted FCS should be able to outmanoeuvre any F-15, whether it was a C, a D or an E, and whether it was 30 years old or brand new off the line."
This line is amateurish at best. I don\'t suppose you could elaborate technically or aerodymamically etheir.
I\'m your man any time.
"What was much more surprising was Typhoon\'s performance in \'one versus many\' engagements during the Singapore evaluation."
More to the point 4 vs 2 is not a necessary the best position for the "four" wing it is more difficult to fight than 2vs 2.
Since when are you umtitled to disclose these infos? To remind you what you and your pars have been doing with theedition of the "Eastern smile" article on AFM:
Breaknig BAE/Eurofighter contractual obligation to keep quiet about evrything conscerning the result of these eveluation.
Results: Typhoon is out, not only because it was the less performant in rea life but also because the commercial bulls of ignorant and non-official writers...
"I don\'t want to sound like a PR man for Eurofighter"
But you constantly do write like you\'re on their payroll.
More of it you keep showing how little you know about the aircrafts design and real capabilities.
"having thrown away Singapore"
They\'ve done it from the requiered specs and design stage.
"Only the F-22 will better Typhoon\'s capabilities, and you can afford two or three Typhoons for one Raptor. "
Another Typhoon fan-club wish list, a clear line taken right from the Typhoon\'s site.
You\'ll need a far better airframe design, a lot of structural redesign to compensate for the lack of aerodynamic optimisation to beat Rafale. But having said that, you could\'nt be writing the truth.....
"If you\'re going to kick Typhoon then kick it for the right reasons"
My list:
Reaquiered specs, change of them afteer programme launch, basic design arrangement (1970 aeros design and technology), bad programme management, lack of optimisation of the whole package from day one.
They still manage to beat a 40 years old concept, not thanks to you Jack... AWANICEONE.
When fought out of the best part of the flight envelope, many airxcrafts can take the fight to F-15 jokeys.
Sorry for saying but Rafale too, easly.
It would have been hard to have to say the comtrary in view of the fact that Typhoon and other 4th gen aircrafts were designed to do just that.
Having said this, it's still a good perf by RAF, and the fact that it was the two seaters doesn't change much in terms of their capabilities. They only have one seat more, the avionics for the rear crewman and less internal fuel.
RJ,
I can assure you that the 48th TFW weren\'t playing to lose.
"It should hardly be surprising that Typhoon, with its thrust, big wing, powerful canards and well-sorted FCS should be able to outmanoeuvre any F-15, whether it was a C, a D or an E, and whether it was 30 years old or brand new off the line."
This line is amateurish at best. I don\'t suppose you could elaborate technically or aerodymamically etheir.
I\'m your man any time.
"What was much more surprising was Typhoon\'s performance in \'one versus many\' engagements during the Singapore evaluation."
More to the point 4 vs 2 is not a necessary the best position for the "four" wing it is more difficult to fight than 2vs 2.
Since when are you umtitled to disclose these infos? To remind you what you and your pars have been doing with theedition of the "Eastern smile" article on AFM:
Breaknig BAE/Eurofighter contractual obligation to keep quiet about evrything conscerning the result of these eveluation.
Results: Typhoon is out, not only because it was the less performant in rea life but also because the commercial bulls of ignorant and non-official writers...
"I don\'t want to sound like a PR man for Eurofighter"
But you constantly do write like you\'re on their payroll.
More of it you keep showing how little you know about the aircrafts design and real capabilities.
"having thrown away Singapore"
They\'ve done it from the requiered specs and design stage.
"Only the F-22 will better Typhoon\'s capabilities, and you can afford two or three Typhoons for one Raptor. "
Another Typhoon fan-club wish list, a clear line taken right from the Typhoon\'s site.
You\'ll need a far better airframe design, a lot of structural redesign to compensate for the lack of aerodynamic optimisation to beat Rafale. But having said that, you could\'nt be writing the truth.....
"If you\'re going to kick Typhoon then kick it for the right reasons"
My list:
Reaquiered specs, change of them afteer programme launch, basic design arrangement (1970 aeros design and technology), bad programme management, lack of optimisation of the whole package from day one.
They still manage to beat a 40 years old concept, not thanks to you Jack... AWANICEONE.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Green and Pleasant Land
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just can't stay quiet any longer!!! Condsider the 'BS' flag deployed (or at very least the 'I heard from my mate who works with a unit associated with the one on which this happened' flag!).
Like many things (IMHO), this has got out of proportion (if it's the 'incident' that I am referring to) and people are reading things into it that aren't supportable.
Sometimes aircraft just happen to end up in the same bit of sky - you do your briefed evasion/prosecution if you are authed to do so (ahem....) - if not you could just do a series of high g 'navigation turns' which, co-incidentally, 'help with the geometry'. So much of 'who ends up in front of / being shot by who' is just luck under these circumstances (not all, admittedly, but much in situations like this).
It's no great secret, it's just one of a series of 'meetings in the sky' that got noticed by a few people and talked about.
Hmmm, that's better :-)
Ray
Like many things (IMHO), this has got out of proportion (if it's the 'incident' that I am referring to) and people are reading things into it that aren't supportable.
Sometimes aircraft just happen to end up in the same bit of sky - you do your briefed evasion/prosecution if you are authed to do so (ahem....) - if not you could just do a series of high g 'navigation turns' which, co-incidentally, 'help with the geometry'. So much of 'who ends up in front of / being shot by who' is just luck under these circumstances (not all, admittedly, but much in situations like this).
It's no great secret, it's just one of a series of 'meetings in the sky' that got noticed by a few people and talked about.
Hmmm, that's better :-)
Ray
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody who draws conclusions from the supposed chance engagement know nothing about air combat.
Even if it took place on an instrumented range it would still be difficult to draw conclusions because there are many variables at work not least being the ability level of the aircrew.
If Typhoon can beat F-15E it would be reasuring because it was meant to.
If it can achieve operational capability soon it might begin to justify all the investment in it.
Even if it took place on an instrumented range it would still be difficult to draw conclusions because there are many variables at work not least being the ability level of the aircrew.
If Typhoon can beat F-15E it would be reasuring because it was meant to.
If it can achieve operational capability soon it might begin to justify all the investment in it.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Norwich,Norfolk,UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Raymond Ginardon. This thread seems, for the most part, populated by 'spotters' who undoubtedly know all the relative performance specs of these aircraft but have never graduated past 'rookie' level in some flight simulator videogame. Circumstances often allow a far inferior ac to enter the arena with higher SA and make the kill, unseen. The operator still counts massively in this ever more high-tech age.
As for a one-off encounter between two aircraft types (who were possibly both doing a bit of sightseeing in the lakes), I hardly believe that this constitutes an objective measurement of their abilities.
As for a one-off encounter between two aircraft types (who were possibly both doing a bit of sightseeing in the lakes), I hardly believe that this constitutes an objective measurement of their abilities.