Tiffie splashes Raptor?
 

Twitter spotterati abuzz with rumours of a 3 sqn Typhoon (call-sign Zenith) splashing an F22 (call-sign Hawk1) during ACM over the North Sea today. Someone was on their game...

Not sure if its newsworthy but thought it worth a mention.

Not worth a mention at all. In my Harrier GR 3 I "splashed" F 15s when they were new back in the 70s. It doesn't imply overall superiority of one type vs another; it's just an exercise. It's the real war which counts.

If it's worth a reply it must be worth a mention.

This can't be right, I mean the Indian AF Sukhois trounced the Tiffs, so what chance v F22? :cool:

I guess that means that Sukhois are the bestest of them all.

Raptor pilot might have been asleep, who knows what the variables were.

It might have been his first trip to the UK and real ale. :yuk:

Meanwhile...back behind the curtain... Vlad and his mates tremble!:eek:

train hard-fight easy..

Assuming this is correct - Kudos to the Tiffie pilot -Better have something else up your sleeve for next time though!

Wouldn't the Raptorites have us believe that the Tiffie would be in BVR Deadsville before the fight got going? Isn't '40 second Boyd' dogfighting all over and done with now?

CG

There's nothing new in this. From 2012 - The Aviationist » F-22 Raptor kill markings shown off by German Eurofighter Typhoons. "The F-22 is not invincible" saga continues.

http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/...psmbgqs7oj.jpg

And the Rafale has been there too -

http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/...psztnjasws.jpg


Of course, as has been stated, it all depends on the rules that were employed at the time of the exercise.

To be honest, is any aeroplane invincible? The aircraft can only do so much. If an inexperienced pilot recently out of training is up against a 3,000+ hour pilot, then the aircraft he is flying isn't going to make much of a difference. He is probably going to lose that fight....

I think I've seen pics of most NATO fighters in most other NATO fighter's sights over the years.

I think most of the "who would win?" debates are bolleaux anyway, as it also would depend on the quality of the training the pilot has received, and their currency in maintaining their skills gained from that training.

The Sea Harrier is the perfect example. When looking at it, "air superiority fighter" isn't the first thing that comes to mind. Although it proved that it was capable of doing that job, in the Falklands, probably because those who were in the seats are the among the best of the very best pilots in the world so were able to utilise the aircraft's capabilities.

The F-15 has the best air-to-air kill record of any combat aircraft ever made, but the pilots that made that possible are also part of that elite group. Perhaps it would have been a lot different if they were, for example... Iraqi pilots, and the Americans had the MiGs in Desert Storm?

If the pilot isn't up to it then surely it's only going to end one way?

Rather pathetic to have simulated kill markings in the side of a fighter.

Too right sport. On our 92 F4, XV422, we had a Jag and a Jindy on the intake ramp.

Joint,

Nothing means anything in preseason. There is a lot of "let them win to make them feel better". In real combat the F-15 is undefeated.

The Sultan

While that seems to be conventional wisdom, and has been for a long time, I wonder if the performance of Iranian F-14A's in the Iran-Iraq war is a counterexample ?

Persian Cats- page 1 | Military Aviation | Air & Space Magazine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat#Iran

Chuck Yeager proved this point when he tested the Mig (15?? not sure) vs the Sabre.
He said that the pilot will always make the difference.
Granted that was quite some time ago, so things may have changed now.