Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ken_ichikawa

Typhoon Useless

Recommended Posts

You could. And I suspect someone has.

Well, Ken's being a little economical with the truth himself. According to the article, the outcome was due to the different training that the pilots had received, not the planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ken's being a little economical with the truth himself. According to the article, the outcome was due to the different training that the pilots had received, not the planes.

From the Wikipedia entry:

"In the 2005 Singapore evaluation, the Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F-16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests.[146] In July 2009, Former Chief of Air Staff for the Royal Air Force, Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, said that "The Eurofighter Typhoon is an excellent aircraft. It will be the backbone of the Royal Air Force along with the JSF".[147]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Wikipedia entry:

"In the 2005 Singapore evaluation, the Typhoon won all three combat tests, including one in which a single Typhoon defeated three RSAF F-16s, and reliably completed all planned flight tests.[146] In July 2009, Former Chief of Air Staff for the Royal Air Force, Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, said that "The Eurofighter Typhoon is an excellent aircraft. It will be the backbone of the Royal Air Force along with the JSF".[147]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon

My uncle reckoned they made a right mess of some Hitler Jugend SS tanks he saw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it was a dog fight, would the F16 normally get within range of a Typhoon to engage as UK pilots are trained for Beyond Visual Range engagements?

that's pretty much it - not just the aircraft but the pilots aswell

the typhoon spanks the F16 for short-range manouvrebaility anyway, just the pilots were outdone tactically as the pakistanis had more experience in dog fighting, that's all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/08/eurofighter_beaten_by_f16/

Precis a 1976 $20 million (1998 dollars) aircraft in exercises wiped the floor with the Typhoon (£64 million quid and rising).

You couldn't make it up!

If you divide total program cost to the UK ( approx £25B ) to the number of aircraft being delivered to the RAF (140) it costs a hell of a lot more than £64m.

The £64m pricetag is for BAe's special customers such as Saudi Arabia who pay only the unit flyaway cost and contribute nothing to the staggering development costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As it was a dog fight, would the F16 normally get within range of a Typhoon to engage as UK pilots are trained for Beyond Visual Range engagements?

The PAF pilots train for dogfighting, the UK pilots train to shoot the enemy down before it comes to that, because, well, in the 21st century, either you shoot THEM down BVR or they shoot you down BVR. The only way you end up in a dogfight is if everyone runs out of missiles.

The typhoon outflys EVERY US made aircraft, including their shiney new JSF. Actually to be fair, the Harrier did that too, making the JSF look ridiculous and leading the Americans to make dozens of excuses.

Also, apparently these new stealth features aren't up to much. Stealth was great 20 years ago but radar is more accurate and computers are more powerful now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PAF pilots train for dogfighting, the UK pilots train to shoot the enemy down before it comes to that, because, well, in the 21st century, either you shoot THEM down BVR or they shoot you down BVR. The only way you end up in a dogfight is if everyone runs out of missiles.

Thats not strictly true, in USN thought guns were obsolete missiles are the way forward. Thus they removed the gun from the F-4 phantoms. There were numerous reports that it got close too close for missiles. And the losses to Migs were unacceptable.

So in 1965 TOPGUN was introduced an aircombat school for the NAVY to teach them how to fight dissimilar aircraft in dogfights.

Apparently the RAF doesn't do this any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats not strictly true, in USN thought guns were obsolete missiles are the way forward. Thus they removed the gun from the F-4 phantoms. There were numerous reports that it got close too close for missiles. And the losses to Migs were unacceptable.

So in 1965 TOPGUN was introduced an aircombat school for the NAVY to teach them how to fight dissimilar aircraft in dogfights.

Apparently the RAF doesn't do this any more.

:rolleyes:

The Typhoon was conceived during the cold war, and designed to dog fight MIGs. 10 years later it was becoming apparent that technology would render most dog fighting redundant. Hence the very costly and time consuming delays and redesign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The test was performed assuming the PAF F16s had magically overcome the Typhoon's BVR capabilities.

In reality the F16s would have been shot down by the Typhoons long before being close enough to fire their weapons.

The PAF can revel in this report all they like. In the real world combat just simply wouldn't happen that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The PAF can revel in this report all they like. In the real world combat just simply wouldn't happen that way.

Combat can and will happen whichever way you least want it to at every opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combat can and will happen whichever way you least want it to at every opportunity.

That works both ways, so whilst something bizarre may happen that results in planes getting withing dogfighting range most of the time it'll happen the way you least want it to for the side with the least long-range ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The test was performed assuming the PAF F16s had magically overcome the Typhoon's BVR capabilities.

In reality the F16s would have been shot down by the Typhoons long before being close enough to fire their weapons.

The PAF can revel in this report all they like. In the real world combat just simply wouldn't happen that way.

That's what they said in WWII and soon realised that it was the same as WWI, only faster.

Same in Vietnam, they had to modify the F4s and add cannon for dogfighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what they said in WWII and soon realised that it was the same as WWI, only faster.

Same in Vietnam, they had to modify the F4s and add cannon for dogfighting.

But looking at it from the other services sailors are no longer issued with cutlesses for boarding actions because close-range naval combat definitely has become a thing of the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But looking at it from the other services sailors are no longer issued with cutlesses for boarding actions because close-range naval combat definitely has become a thing of the past.

True, but no marine would be boarding another vessel without a bayonet and/or combat knife. Fixed onto the end of a stumpy sa80, it becomes another hand to hand weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats not strictly true, in USN thought guns were obsolete missiles are the way forward. Thus they removed the gun from the F-4 phantoms. There were numerous reports that it got close too close for missiles. And the losses to Migs were unacceptable.

So in 1965 TOPGUN was introduced an aircombat school for the NAVY to teach them how to fight dissimilar aircraft in dogfights.

Apparently the RAF doesn't do this any more.

Not so much they removed the gun as they built the F4 without an internal gun in the first place. They did have cannon pods for the hardpoints but they lacked accuracy. The first F4 with an internal gun was either the F4D or the F4E. About the same time as they got the slatted wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but no marine would be boarding another vessel without a bayonet and/or combat knife. Fixed onto the end of a stumpy sa80, it becomes another hand to hand weapon.

Which is interesting in its own way - about the next weapon after chucking a rock still hasn't gone away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what they said in WWII and soon realised that it was the same as WWI, only faster.

Same in Vietnam, they had to modify the F4s and add cannon for dogfighting.

Wasn't the spitfire wowfully underarm, it only had machine guns (something ridiculous like 10 seconds of shooting) whereas the 109 had cannon's. I know if I was in a dogfight I'd rather have cannons rather than a pea shooter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the spitfire wowfully underarm, it only had machine guns (something ridiculous like 10 seconds of shooting) whereas the 109 had cannon's. I know if I was in a dogfight I'd rather have cannons rather than a pea shooter.

8 x .303 brownings in the early versions although later versions had 20mm cannon. There was ammo for about 15 seconds, which was pretty normal for the day.

They lacked the power of the 20mm cannon but the fact that you were firing 80 rounds per second at your target mostly made up for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the typhoon spanks the F16 for short-range manouvrebaility anyway, just the pilots were outdone tactically as the pakistanis had more experience in dog fighting, that's all

Should have gone to China, they'd have been eaten alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the spitfire wowfully underarm, it only had machine guns (something ridiculous like 10 seconds of shooting) whereas the 109 had cannon's. I know if I was in a dogfight I'd rather have cannons rather than a pea shooter.

Because bullets are heavy, 10-15 seconds is/was normal. A decade ago when we played European airwar 13 seconds was enough to take down 5-6 bombers you just had to get VERY. Close enough to see the whites of the eyes of the enemy pilot.

Heh modern pilots only have a few seconds of fire as well with their 6000rpm cannons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.