DCS: Eurofighter Typhoon - Avionics

Also the Rafale is one of the best looking aircraft around...

Indeed they are.

I personally think the Raptor with Starscream markings looks awesome ;)

I've always liked the shape of the Raptor.

I personally think the Raptor with Starscream markings looks awesome ;)

I've always liked the shape of the Raptor.

+1.

 

Also i don’t consider mach 1.2 super cruise

Then you are wrong.

Errr.... No. First off, this alleged exercise victory was quite specifically listed as a "dogfight". Not sure how many dogfights are fought BVR these days. I always thought the two terms were mutually exclusive. Maybe that's just me.

 

I agree that speed, ceiling, radar output, radar cross-section, ECM, ECCM, and missile capability are more important than raw maneuverability.

 

I disagree that the Typhoon is superior to the F-15 in all of these (or even most). The F-15 is a mach 2.5 fighter. The Typhoon is a mach 2 fighter.

 

Currently, BOTH fighters are armed with AIM-120. You can't make comparisons with weapons that don't exist/ aren't fielded yet (at least, unless you want me to start claiming US Boeing ABLs are going to fly around melting all your fighters from the sky with death rays). They aren't pertinent.

The MBDA Meteor is ready next year, the Boeing ABL is cancelled and is a shit idea anyway because it involves constantly flying a a huge plane near enemy airspace hoping for a ballistic missile launch nearby. No one would think to shoot it down immediately prior to launch. The Typhoon is quoted at Mach 2+. The top speed has not been released.

I'm pretty sure the radome on the Eagle is larger than the Typhoon, and the available electrical power is superior, allowing for equal (or superior) radar. I don't know enough details to compare their detection ranges without doing some serious research first, but I'd be inclined to guess that the Eagle equals or surpasses the Typhoon in detection range (almost certainly, with the AESA-equipped Golden Eagles which now comprise a significant portion of the US active-duty F-15C fleet).

And CAPTOR-E will be on the way shortly.

The Eurofighter consortium's claims of stealth are frankly laughable. They could compare Typhoon to the F/A-18E, regarding RCS... they could even claim to significantly better the Superhornet, and I'd be willing to believe them. But when they claim superior RCS to the F-22 in ANY aspect, I call BS. ANY aircraft with external weapons stowage is going to lose to the F-22 and F-35 in RCS, from all aspects, by a lot. An AIM-9 has a larger RCS than an entire F-22.

Is it as stealthy as an F-22? No, not close, but it is a very stealthy aircraft relative to other 4th gen aircraft and perhaps the answer to stealth is to shoot down the missiles and force a dogfight. The only current NATO aircraft that will beat the Typhoon in an engagement with equal pilots is the F-22 in BVR and maybe the F-35 too soon.

Everything above mach 1 in mil thrust is considered supercruise..

Exactly, it's like saying, "Oh well I don't think faster than the speed of sound is faster than the speed of sound."

Then you are wrong.

 

 

The MBDA Meteor is ready next year, the Boeing ABL is cancelled and is a shit idea anyway because it involves constantly flying a a huge plane near enemy airspace hoping for a ballistic missile launch nearby. No one would think to shoot it down immediately prior to launch. The Typhoon is quoted at Mach 2+. The top speed has not been released.

 

 

And CAPTOR-E will be on the way shortly.

 

 

Is it as stealthy as an F-22? No, not close, but it is a very stealthy aircraft relative to other 4th gen aircraft and perhaps the answer to stealth is to shoot down the missiles and force a dogfight. The only current NATO aircraft that will beat the Typhoon in an engagement with equal pilots is the F-22 in BVR and maybe the F-35 too soon.

My opinion is wrong? The reason i say that is because many other aircraft can do that and it seems like more of a marketing thing to me.

I would happily listen to an argument saying the ef is better than the rafale or superhornet, but claiming its in the same class as a raptor or f35 is silly.

untill it gets CaptorE i am reluctant to even call it better than a hornet. And the aim120D is slotted to be better than the meteor.

Regardless the phoon is a beautiful and deadly aircraft that is extememly capable. But you must admit either they are really trying to sell them or they have a lot of fanboys.

My opinion is wrong? The reason i say that is because many other aircraft can do that.

You are wrong again.

I would happily listen to an argument saying the ef is better than the rafale or superhornet, but claiming its in the same class as a raptor or f35 is silly.

No one said that. I didn't anyway. Some people commented that it has, verifiably, beaten the F-22 in VR dogfights and that's when the teddy bear left the pram. No one is questioning the F-22's superiority in BVR - no one sensible anyway. The only other argument ongoing is wheher the Typhoon is better than an F-15C, which is like asking whether an F-15C is better than an F-4. (That might be a bit harsh, substitute F-14 for F-4.)

untill it gets CaptorE i am reluctant to even call it better than a hornet. And the aim120D is slotted to be better than the meteor.

That's like saying you're reluctant to call a Hornet better than a Tornado. More childish nonsense. As regards AIM-120D vs Meteor. The Meteor is closer to the proposed FMRAAM that was rejected by Europe in favour of the Meteor. To understand why you can't compare the AIM-120D to a Meteor, do some research and buy a book on propulsion and understand why, despite any wikipedia-style claims, it will not beat the Meteor for range. Due to the fact that the AIM-120D is not an air-breathing missile it has to carry its own oxidizer and therefore it's physically and mathematically impossible for it to outrange the Meteor. You also need to be careful in confusing absolute range with no escape range. The 60+nm (105+km) of the Meteor is a no escape range. An aircraft within that range is screwed even if it immediately 180s and goes full speed in the opposite direction as soon as the missile is launched. The same cannot be said with the ranges quoted for the AIM-120D.

Regardless the phoon is a beautiful and deadly aircraft that is extememly capable. But you must admit either they are really trying to sell them or they have a lot of fanboys.

There are no other NATO aircraft besides the F-22 beating it 'overall' in NATO air-to-air engagements and even that is struggling/losing in dogfights. Oh and you do know we are getting the F-35 as well as the US, hence why there are no carrier-capable Typhoons.

You are wrong again.

What i was trying to say, is that a clean EF2000 can "supercruise" at 1.2ish, but what can it do with a useful load? for example as i stated earlier a Clean f16N(from first hand experience) can stay at mach 1.2 for extended periods of time without the use of AB. Where the F-22 can do whatever it can do mach1.6-1.8ish with a full load. If it can do that with a useful load fine cite some sources and i will admit i was wrong.

No one said that. I didn't anyway. Some people commented that it has' date=' verifiably, beaten the F-22 in VR dogfights and that's when the teddy bear left the pram. No one is questioning the F-22's superiority in BVR - no one sensible anyway. The only other argument ongoing is wheher the Typhoon is better than an F-15C, which is like asking whether an F-15C is better than an F-4. (That might be a bit harsh, substitute F-14 for F-4.)[/quote']

 

I feel as though the F15C with the new AESAs is better than the EF typhoon, at least until it gets its own AESA.

 

 

That's like saying you're reluctant to call a Hornet better than a Tornado. More childish nonsense. As regards AIM-120D vs Meteor. The Meteor is closer to the proposed FMRAAM that was rejected by Europe in favour of the Meteor. To understand why you can't compare the AIM-120D to a Meteor' date=' do some research and buy a book on propulsion and understand why, despite any wikipedia-style claims, it will not beat the Meteor for range. Due to the fact that the AIM-120D is not an air-breathing missile it has to carry its own oxidizer and therefore it's physically and mathematically impossible for it to outrange the Meteor. You also need to be careful in confusing absolute range with no escape range. The 60+nm (105+km) of the Meteor is a no escape range. An aircraft within that range is screwed even if it immediately 180s and goes full speed in the opposite direction as soon as the missile is launched. The same cannot be said with the ranges quoted for the AIM-120D.[/quote']

 

How can you possibly say with any certainty what the Meteors no escape range is? you have any idea what that entails? This is why i believe this is just a ton of marketing hype. No escape range is very arbitrary and is completely dynamic. AIM-120D has a pretty long range at least comparable to the meteor. From the numbers I found on the extremely reliable internet:smartass:, it has a longer range.

 

 

There are no other NATO aircraft besides the F-22 beating it 'overall' in NATO air-to-air engagements and even that is struggling/losing in dogfights. Oh and you do know we are getting the F-35 as well as the US' date=' hence why there are no carrier-capable Typhoons.[/quote']

 

Exactally why i don't understand this following the Phoon has. Most mock dogfights or engagements the US does with a severe handicap (like no bvr), because they are going into fights to learn not to rack up the numbers.

Can we talk about eurofighter's avionics and weapons now? I am specifically interested in Brimstone anti armor weapons, how does the pilot use them.

Can we talk about eurofighter's avionics and weapons now? I am specifically interested in Brimstone anti armor weapons, how does the pilot use them.

No one here knows it.It's not even operational yet.But it is a microwave radar guided missile

if I'm not wrong,so the most plausible option is that it is launched with a radar lock in some kind

of GMT or GM radar mode.

.....It's not even operational yet....

This particular Brimstone begs to differ:

ZI0xj-xKlQ8

And yes - they are operational and have been used extensively as of late.

/OT and argumentative posts removed.

Gentlemen, kindly return to the topic of the thread, alternatively leave the keyboard well enough alone.

Ta

This particular Brimstone begs to differ:

 

ZI0xj-xKlQ8

 

And yes - they are operational and have been used extensively as of late.

Oops sorry,I thought they weren't operational,I was wrong.So any information about how is employed?

Can we talk about eurofighter's avionics and weapons now? I am specifically interested in Brimstone anti armor weapons, how does the pilot use them.

Missile has built-in high frequency millimetric wave radar + INS + lot's of other clever algorithms.

Oops sorry,I thought they weren't operational,I was wrong.So any information about how is employed?

Here is what the RAF has to say:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/brimstone.cfm

Keep in mind that they are currently working on the Brimstone 2 so it'll probably be a lot more clever. Details for that one will probably be sketchy at best.

Very interesting thanks,so if I got it right in Direct attack mode,you can launch it

with a TGP lock for example and the missile will take care of the rest.It's amazing the number of Brimstones a Tornado can carry,a single aircraft can take out lots of MBTs with that.

Very interesting thanks,so if I got it right in Direct attack mode,you can launch it

with a TGP lock for example and the missile will take care of the rest

Yeah, same goes for indirect I would have thought. It appears that the missile guides to specific coordinates/reference and once there/getting there, searches and targets units. Clever indeed :)

Herewith more info dug up from the good 'ol web:

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/brimstone/

Brimstone2:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/mbda-reveals-brimstone-2-missile-work-for-uk-369437/

so does that mean it is going to be modelled then? that would be awesome!

so does that mean it is going to be modelled then? that would be awesome!

Yes and yes :)

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1477685&postcount=4

The original brimstones was(is) designed to be ripple fired into an area and take out any targets they could find, and replaced the BL755 cluster bomb in the RAF inventory. The missiles use millimetre wave radar to detect and engage targets and also have clever methods of ensuring that 2 weapons don't go after the same target.

With the end of the cold war and advent of the current operations the weapons were upgraded with a dual mode seeker that allows direct attack of targets specified by the aircrew.

Tornado can carry up to 12 missiles on 4 triple launchers, although this load has never been used operationally. The common Tornado combat load (for Afghanistan and ops over Libya) was 2-3 brimstone on one launcher, 2 Paveway IV and a LITENING III TGP.

Typhoon will be able to carry up to 18 missiles (6 launchers), although the weapon is not currently cleared for carridge by the Typhoon.

A but of trivia for you. During operations over Libya the Tornados exhausted the entire UK stockpile of dual mode Brimstone and additional legacy missiles had to be upgraded with dual mode seekers to keep up with demand.

I wonder how they resolved the problems that the MMW hellfire had; or perhaps that was a system problem (namely, the Longbow radar having some trouble with correctly picking out targets - I suppose that part is dealt with via TGP).

Tanks are going to need a chaff launcher now :)

Testing footage, including ripple-fire at the end:

 

Testing footage, including ripple-fire at the end:

 

What is RMAX against a maneuvering target? That test footage was waaaay too close I would have thought :D

I think they were testing Rmin and low altitude delivery as well.

But, in any case, against a tank where you would probably not expect it to be moving faster than 40-50kph on average, you're not going to lose a whole lot of Rmax; there should be practically no difference if you're using PN.