Typhoon Upgrades
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: hi in the ski
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unknown, but, if we’re being honest, just not operationally relevant capabilities anymore. Between funding for a 21st (20th!) century e-scan or something that mitigates approach issues (of which we’ve had ?? how many attributable losses?) then I know which I hope the RMs prioritise.
Ouch! Just 40?! Wow. In 10 -15 Years from now that will leave the RAF with a pretty small fleet of effective A2A Fighters. The others you can only use as bomb trucks against a sub- par opponent. Have MOD read the Newspaper lately?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
A little bird tells me that Italy is to buy 24 more Eurofighter.
No confirmation/details yet from the Italian Air Force while LDO Aircraft declined comment, but following Germany's Quadriga’s and Spain's Halcon, that would leave the UK as only partner not to place an additional order.
No confirmation/details yet from the Italian Air Force while LDO Aircraft declined comment, but following Germany's Quadriga’s and Spain's Halcon, that would leave the UK as only partner not to place an additional order.
AFAIK no-one is fighting air to air right now anywhere - it's all bomb trucks or missiles or drones
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/p...ctronic-combat
Airbus to make Eurofighter fit for electronic combatMunich, 29 November 2023 –
Now it's official: The Eurofighter EK (Electronic Combat) is coming. Following the recent parliamentary approval by the German budget committee, Airbus will equip 15 German Eurofighters for electronic combat - and equip them with a transmitter location and self-protection system from Saab, as well as "AARGM" anti-radar missiles from the American company Northrop Grumman. The Eurofighter EK is to be NATO-certified by 2030 and will then replace the Tornado in the SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defence) role.
"Electronic warfare and reconnaissance are an important NATO requirement: current conflicts and the present security situation show how important the two capabilities are," says Airbus Defence and Space CEO Michael Schöllhorn. "In this respect, the German government's decision to include such an important capability as electronic warfare in the Eurofighter capability portfolio is an important measure. EK will add this important capability to the already broad operational spectrum of the Eurofighter while strengthening European sovereignty and autonomy."
With the parliamentary approval by the Budget Committee, the Eurofighter is now officially set as the successor to the Tornado ECR (Electronic Combat/Reconnaissance). Airbus is now looking forward to the official order to integrate the selected technical solutions into the Eurofighter. The corresponding contract between Eurofighter GmbH, as prime contractor, and NETMA (NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency) is expected to be signed before the end of the year.
With Saab’s transmitter location system and the Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) from Northrop Grumman, the Eurofighter EK will be able to detect, localise and disable anti-aircraft radars. In addition, the Saab solution has jammers that improve the Eurofighter's self-protection. The Eurofighter EK also has technologies on board that were developed by small and medium-sized enterprises and a start-up. These include an AI solution that makes it possible to analyse radar data on-board and quickly determine precise self-protection measures.
Airbus is currently working with the BAAINBw procurement office, the German Air Force and the Bundeswehr Aviation Office on a detailed schedule for the implementation of the selected EK solutions in 15 Eurofighters...
Airbus to make Eurofighter fit for electronic combatMunich, 29 November 2023 –
Now it's official: The Eurofighter EK (Electronic Combat) is coming. Following the recent parliamentary approval by the German budget committee, Airbus will equip 15 German Eurofighters for electronic combat - and equip them with a transmitter location and self-protection system from Saab, as well as "AARGM" anti-radar missiles from the American company Northrop Grumman. The Eurofighter EK is to be NATO-certified by 2030 and will then replace the Tornado in the SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defence) role.
"Electronic warfare and reconnaissance are an important NATO requirement: current conflicts and the present security situation show how important the two capabilities are," says Airbus Defence and Space CEO Michael Schöllhorn. "In this respect, the German government's decision to include such an important capability as electronic warfare in the Eurofighter capability portfolio is an important measure. EK will add this important capability to the already broad operational spectrum of the Eurofighter while strengthening European sovereignty and autonomy."
With the parliamentary approval by the Budget Committee, the Eurofighter is now officially set as the successor to the Tornado ECR (Electronic Combat/Reconnaissance). Airbus is now looking forward to the official order to integrate the selected technical solutions into the Eurofighter. The corresponding contract between Eurofighter GmbH, as prime contractor, and NETMA (NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency) is expected to be signed before the end of the year.
With Saab’s transmitter location system and the Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) from Northrop Grumman, the Eurofighter EK will be able to detect, localise and disable anti-aircraft radars. In addition, the Saab solution has jammers that improve the Eurofighter's self-protection. The Eurofighter EK also has technologies on board that were developed by small and medium-sized enterprises and a start-up. These include an AI solution that makes it possible to analyse radar data on-board and quickly determine precise self-protection measures.
Airbus is currently working with the BAAINBw procurement office, the German Air Force and the Bundeswehr Aviation Office on a detailed schedule for the implementation of the selected EK solutions in 15 Eurofighters...
AFAIK no-one is fighting air to air right now anywhere - it's all bomb trucks or missiles or drones
Errrrrrrr, did I imagine the air to air going on in Ukraine, pretty sure there was quite a bit early on
For FAST JET experts out there
At the risk of getting loads of groans - an old question which IS relevant when discussing the Typhoon - and future small agile fighters.
Are the days of Close Air to Air combat over ?
From google :
According to experts, lasers could potentially make the traditional air-to-air dogfighting obsolete, since a fighter with a laser weapon could destroy a target instantly without having the need to do a follow-up shot.
Because modern aircraft have reliable radar technology and missile guidance systems, dogfighting is no longer necessary. Aiming and shooting missiles with precise accuracy from further distances is now a reality, which means close-range aircraft combat is generally outdated.
In other words will the air battle be fought ‘ over the horizon’
Perhaps developing a Vulcan / B52 /B747 replacement ( BV will laugh !)with the ability to travel huge distances , with a large payload of missiles - air to air and air to ground ,modern ECM and able to stay on task for hours without AAR - is NOT so stupid after all ??
OR is the ability to visual I/D and escort ( with stealth and high g loads ) essential?
OR is an expensive MIX required ? - with small cheap bombers for asymmetric warfare .
Errrrrrrr, did I imagine the air to air going on in Ukraine, pretty sure there was quite a bit early on
For FAST JET experts out there
At the risk of getting loads of groans - an old question which IS relevant when discussing the Typhoon - and future small agile fighters.
Are the days of Close Air to Air combat over ?
From google :
According to experts, lasers could potentially make the traditional air-to-air dogfighting obsolete, since a fighter with a laser weapon could destroy a target instantly without having the need to do a follow-up shot.
Because modern aircraft have reliable radar technology and missile guidance systems, dogfighting is no longer necessary. Aiming and shooting missiles with precise accuracy from further distances is now a reality, which means close-range aircraft combat is generally outdated.
In other words will the air battle be fought ‘ over the horizon’
Perhaps developing a Vulcan / B52 /B747 replacement ( BV will laugh !)with the ability to travel huge distances , with a large payload of missiles - air to air and air to ground ,modern ECM and able to stay on task for hours without AAR - is NOT so stupid after all ??
OR is the ability to visual I/D and escort ( with stealth and high g loads ) essential?
OR is an expensive MIX required ? - with small cheap bombers for asymmetric warfare .
Last edited by mahogany bob; 3rd Dec 2023 at 17:34.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Perhaps developing a Vulcan / B52 /B747 replacement ( BV will laugh !)with the ability to travel huge distances , with a large payload of missiles - air to air and air to ground ,modern ECM and able to stay on task for hours without AAR - is NOT so stupid after all ??
Douglas F6D-1 Missileer
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thr...-rivals.33890/
Mahogany Bob
I’m far from being the leading expert on such matters but thankyou for the vote of confidence!
The problem your 747 will have is the length of its stick. On modern medium-long range missile combat, the aim is to launch your missile from as high and fast a platform as possible. It is also a good idea to be able to turn away ASAP once the missile is active and using its own radar. So your 747 could carry loads of missiles but would be dead from the first shot it received before it ever got a launch solution.
As for the validity of dog fighting, the fact that all Air Forces still train for it should tell you something. There is an argument that in the fifth gen world, the first time you get to ‘fight’ it will be in the visual arena with guns, once all other weapons have been expended. Basically, it’s better to train for it and know what to do if you need to, than to not train and have no idea what to do if the time ever came.
The other problem will be the number of fighters you have and the number of missiles they can carry. I know you might think that’s where your 747 comes in but it just wouldn’t survive long enough to be useful. If there were a way to re-arm your fighters in the air that would be a real step change!
BV
The problem your 747 will have is the length of its stick. On modern medium-long range missile combat, the aim is to launch your missile from as high and fast a platform as possible. It is also a good idea to be able to turn away ASAP once the missile is active and using its own radar. So your 747 could carry loads of missiles but would be dead from the first shot it received before it ever got a launch solution.
As for the validity of dog fighting, the fact that all Air Forces still train for it should tell you something. There is an argument that in the fifth gen world, the first time you get to ‘fight’ it will be in the visual arena with guns, once all other weapons have been expended. Basically, it’s better to train for it and know what to do if you need to, than to not train and have no idea what to do if the time ever came.
The other problem will be the number of fighters you have and the number of missiles they can carry. I know you might think that’s where your 747 comes in but it just wouldn’t survive long enough to be useful. If there were a way to re-arm your fighters in the air that would be a real step change!
BV
The following 4 users liked this post by Bob Viking:
I think the discussion on here led to the view that the power cable to the nearest GW power station was a bit of a limiting factor
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
If there were a way to re-arm your fighters in the air that would be a real step change!BV
Meanwhile those that are Winchester can recover by landing or parachute to be turned round.
Doing homework on the ‘Air War choices ’ I have come to the conclusion that the hundreds of boffins and military ‘experts ‘ (including Elon Musk )working on the way to go are not in agreement - so are keeping agile dog fighters in play - before gambling on as yet unproven missile /drone technology.
Aircraft manufactures and the whole aerospace industry must be lobbying hard (and the tax payer foots the huge bill) - the price of freedom! £100 million for one F35!
All new ideas are obviously Top Secret so it is impossible to find out what is really going on. Let’s hope that America keeps propping up Europe and keeps ahead of China.Hopefully Russia will lag behind.Perhaps UK can benefit with our historical talent for innovation /invention ?
One thing certain is that technology is advancing at an unprecedented rate and that Star Wars is not as far away as we once thought !
Aircraft manufactures and the whole aerospace industry must be lobbying hard (and the tax payer foots the huge bill) - the price of freedom! £100 million for one F35!
All new ideas are obviously Top Secret so it is impossible to find out what is really going on. Let’s hope that America keeps propping up Europe and keeps ahead of China.Hopefully Russia will lag behind.Perhaps UK can benefit with our historical talent for innovation /invention ?
One thing certain is that technology is advancing at an unprecedented rate and that Star Wars is not as far away as we once thought !
Perhaps developing a Vulcan / B52 /B747 replacement ( BV will laugh !)with the ability to travel huge distances , with a large payload of missiles - air to air and air to ground ,modern ECM and able to stay on task for hours without AAR - is NOT so stupid after all ??
There were two versions offered - one armed with 12 US Phoenix missiles and the other with 10 air-to-air versions of the Sea Dart missile. There would have been a "chin" radar under the nose.
The project didn't go far due to the proposed missile costs and the remaining fatigue life of the Vulcans.
The idea was that a pallet - fitted with four Skyflash missiles - would be reeled out from the back of the MRSA on a cable and it would home onto the fighter. The fighter would then lower a cradle and by some means the pallet and cradle would connect and then be be fitted under the Tornado's fuselage.
Another factor that must be taken into account is the Rules of Engagement (ROE). These are usually written by politcians and or lawyers. Whenever the UK has been involved in No Fly zones in the past there has been a distinct reluctance to allow the use of BVR weapons.
The following 2 users liked this post by ASRAAMTOO:
Following a suggestion from the RAF in 1977 BAe proposed a version of their Multi-Role Support Aircraft that would be able to re-arm and refuel a Tornado on long range patrol.
The idea was that a pallet - fitted with four Skyflash missiles - would be reeled out from the back of the MRSA on a cable and it would home onto the fighter. The fighter would then lower a cradle and by some means the pallet and cradle would connect and then be be fitted under the Tornado's fuselage.
The idea was that a pallet - fitted with four Skyflash missiles - would be reeled out from the back of the MRSA on a cable and it would home onto the fighter. The fighter would then lower a cradle and by some means the pallet and cradle would connect and then be be fitted under the Tornado's fuselage.
The following users liked this post: