If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Air & Space Magazine)   An in-depth review of the Eurofighter Typhoon, the multi-role combat jet that's easier to fly than a Cessna 150   (airspacemag.com) divider line 56
    More: Interesting, typhoons, jet fighters, Air & Space, Europe, Falklands War, Space Museum, gallery, Soviet Union's collapse  
•       •       •

5969 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Jul 2012 at 2:52 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-14 09:37:09 AM
* technically not easier to fly than a Cessna 150
 
2012-07-14 11:50:48 AM
Boon. Doggle. Not on the level of the F-35, but it's up there.
 
2012-07-14 12:54:44 PM
The Typhoon is a fantastic aircraft. That was a terrible article.


This is just factually wrong:
In a sense, the warplane-vending business is haunted by the cautionary tale of the F-22 Raptor. Widely regarded as the world's best air superiority fighter and once of interest to several foreign air forces, the stealthy Raptor, despite long development delays and astronomical costs, was intended to be another F-4 or F-16, churned out by the thousands.

Now to defend the F-35..... Of course it's going to get a lot of criticism due to the price. It's also going to piss off the fighter-mafia crowd.

Keep in mind one of the most expensive things on the aircraft is the software. Everyone focuses on the stealth, but in the long run that isn't going to be the big advantage that it's going to have over every other aircraft including the F-22 in many scenarios. Sensors and systems are going to make both stealth and maneuverability less effective. The F-35 is a platform that was designed to fight with combat systems that don't even exist yet. It is highly likely that it will fly into any fight as a wolf pack of manned and unmanned assets.

Even if you ditch the F-35 and buy F-18s, you're still going to need to buy the software.

You could argue that we won't need anything more than we have and maybe less than we currently have. That is a political question.
 
2012-07-14 03:05:19 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Boon. Doggle. Not on the level of the F-35, but it's up there.


The Typhoon is ~US$195 million each
F-35A: US$197 million each
F-22 US$150 million each
 
2012-07-14 03:21:34 PM
"But it reflected the fighter arms race ethic of its day, which echoed the Olympic motto: Faster, Higher, Stronger. In the 1970s, it was still possible to believe that the side with the fastest, highest, strongest fighter would win the war that seemed to be right around the corner."

Which is why the MIG 25 existed. That is what the Russkies were going for at least.
 
2012-07-14 03:29:05 PM
4 pages to long
 
2012-07-14 03:30:31 PM
It's only "easy to fly" if you remember to think in Italian.
 
2012-07-14 03:36:09 PM

No Such Agency: It's only "easy to fly" if you remember to think in Italian.


'Drop the bombs, take the canoli.'
 
2012-07-14 03:37:11 PM
Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s
 
2012-07-14 03:44:28 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


Only because the modern fighter would run out of ammunition before it ran out of P-51s to kill.
 
2012-07-14 03:50:52 PM

Smeggy Smurf: The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


I want some of what you are smoking. An F-15/16/18, Typhoon, Rafale or any of the MiGs or Sukhois built in the last 30 years could take out P-51s with wake turbulence alone.
 
2012-07-14 03:51:36 PM

006andahalf: Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s

Only because the modern fighter would run out of ammunition before it ran out of P-51s to kill.


That would only be for a short time until the Mustang drivers who survived figured out how to lure the enemy in. It's the same thing as always.

The end result of going over to that strategy would be to put up vast numbers of unmanned aircraft to soak up the enemy's stockpiles of missiles. Everybody only has so many of them readily available. Even less so if you're fighting over there instead of at home. It's the modern version of the zerg rush. Cheap, plenty and everywhere.
 
2012-07-14 03:56:11 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


The best fighter of today wouldn't lose either, once it was out of missiles it could just leave the area.

/The A330 is also reportedly easy to fly, it even has a feature where it won't let a pilot put the aircraft in danger like a stall.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-14 04:00:12 PM
Which is why the MIG 25 existed. That is what the Russkies were going for at least.

The MiG 25 was a higher-faster special purpose design, but in response to the B-70 bomber rather than to take on other high performance fighters at altitude. Then America decided low level high subsonic B-52s (a la Dr. Strangelove) were better than Mach 3 high altitude bombers and the MiG 25 was mostly obsolete. It did get a kill in the Gulf War.
 
2012-07-14 04:01:14 PM

clovis69: Marcus Aurelius: Boon. Doggle. Not on the level of the F-35, but it's up there.

The Typhoon is ~US$195 million each
F-35A: US$197 million each
F-22 US$150 million each


While your $197 million on the F35 is accurate for now, it won't be for long. That's the low rate production cost. It's likely the A model will be below $100m.
 
2012-07-14 04:01:55 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


Hahaha what? Any modern fighter can fly to a much higher altitude at much higher speeds, and can attack from BVR and has radar-controlled gunsights for the cannon. The P-51 mg's don't even fire explosive rounds.

The only reason the modern fighter would "lose" would be that it ran out of ammo before it couldwould destroy all 20.

/now if you had used a better example like the F104, it would be a different discussion....
 
2012-07-14 04:08:44 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


Assuming it didn't run out of ammo, any frontline fighter would walk all over 20 P-51s.

It's tough to imagine a scenario where a P-51 could ever shoot down a modern fighter. I'd rather take a spear against a tank.
 
2012-07-14 04:10:03 PM

006andahalf: Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s

Only because the modern fighter would run out of ammunition before it ran out of P-51s to kill.


Maybe so, but when we take the 51 to airshows it's the plane everyone, especially the jet jocks, want to see, touch, climb into. See you next week in Oshkosh!!
 
2012-07-14 04:10:11 PM
Sorry but as an aviation nerd, I must interject.

A modern fighter would probably not run out of munitions before destroying 20 P-51s. An F-16 can carry enough Air to Air missles to destroy eight of the P-51s, and has a 20mm cannon with 511 rounds.

It would only take a half second burst from that cannon to destroy each one, and only three to five hits to put one down.

20? Easily. Possibly even more.
 
2012-07-14 04:25:48 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.


It's very arguable that the T-34 was inferior to the German tanks. Remember that the majority of German tanks early in the war were the PZKW III and IV, both of which were not all that great. The T-34 had thick, sloped armor that could stop everything short of the 88mm flak guns, was diesel powered and had very low ground pressure which was critical in the mucky winters. The 76mm gun wasn't great, but it worked against the PZKWs. The improved Panther and Tiger tanks didn't appear until 1943, and in fairly small numbers. Even then the upgunned T34-85 held its own against them.

Yes, the ergonomics sucked rocks and the crews lacked training, but the T34-85s were still effective in the Korean war. It was a tremendous design.
 
2012-07-14 04:36:10 PM
I am 6'2" and the 150 isn't easy for me to fly. (Partly because its hard to fly from the back seat area...)
 
2012-07-14 04:36:41 PM

Glockenspiel Hero: Remember that the majority of German tanks early in the war were the PZKW III and IV, both of which were not all that great.


www.mindhuestudio.com
 
2012-07-14 04:42:14 PM
I'd like to see the results of a fly-off between a Raptor and Typhoon jock given a month to train on the other fighter before engaging in mock BVR missile fights and close-in dogfights.
 
2012-07-14 04:49:15 PM

b2theory: The Typhoon is a fantastic aircraft. That was a terrible article.


This is just factually wrong:
In a sense, the warplane-vending business is haunted by the cautionary tale of the F-22 Raptor. Widely regarded as the world's best air superiority fighter and once of interest to several foreign air forces, the stealthy Raptor, despite long development delays and astronomical costs, was intended to be another F-4 or F-16, churned out by the thousands.

Now to defend the F-35..... Of course it's going to get a lot of criticism due to the price. It's also going to piss off the fighter-mafia crowd.

It is highly likely that it will fly into any fight as a wolf pack of manned and unmanned assets.



I just had a vision of a wing of F-35s (or bombers) flying into enemy airspace, surrounded by a cloud of self-aware drones coordinating with the avionics on the F-35s (or bombers)

Enemy AA and aircraft pop up; drones pop out of formation to go take care of those threats while the manned aircraft stay on mission.

My inner child who obsessed over aircraft, bought every MicroProse flight sim, etc. just got a semi.
 
2012-07-14 04:51:32 PM
Speaking of P-51's...

I always thought the P-51 with modified drop tanks would make superb forest fire fighting aircraft. Take a squadron of 20 or so and they could do WWII style "strafing" runs on fire hot spots with near pinpoint accuracy. Then fly back to the forward air bases and get refilled fast with retardant and back out for the next run.

Sounds hokey but it would probably work very well and certainly be hella cool.
 
2012-07-14 05:20:51 PM
Since we are talking about P 51s and modern fighters here is a pic I took at the MacDill Airshow a couple of years back:

i.imgur.com

/I think the title of the formation was generations or something
 
2012-07-14 05:33:13 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


I'm hoping you are speaking hyperbole here. I'll update you to Korean War era F-86s/MIG-15s and in a modern fighter it will be like shooting skeet.

That's putting aside training people to drive a tank is easy, particularly when you don't give a damn about losing them the way the Soviets did. Try that with pilots and see how well you do.
 
2012-07-14 05:34:56 PM

clovis69: Marcus Aurelius: Boon. Doggle. Not on the level of the F-35, but it's up there.

The Typhoon is ~US$195 million each
F-35A: US$197 million each
F-22 US$150 million each


A Typhoon costs $94m each according to the article.

If you take the total cost of the F22 program and divide by 195 aircraft produced they come to $340 million each.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-14 05:36:04 PM
Igor Jakovsky

The Navy used to fly a formation with generations of Grumman fighters, Wildcat to Tomcat.
 
2012-07-14 05:37:26 PM

PlatinumDragon: I'd like to see the results of a fly-off between a Raptor and Typhoon jock given a month to train on the other fighter before engaging in mock BVR missile fights and close-in dogfights.


I'd be pretty confident the F-22 would win. The Typhoon would have to either get a lucky shot with a heat-seaking missile or put a bunch of cannon rounds into it, aiming the old fashioned way. Meanwhile, the Raptor could just tee off on the Typhoon's radar signature. The Typhoon is said to have marginally better maneuverability, but the F-22's combined stealth and electronic capabilities are a pretty significant advantage (when it's not stuck in the shop for some random issue).

Lt_Ryan: /The A330 is also reportedly easy to fly, it even has a feature where it won't let a pilot put the aircraft in danger like a stall.


It also won't let you push out of a stall if it doesn't think you're in one.
 
2012-07-14 06:40:59 PM

ZAZ: Igor Jakovsky

The Navy used to fly a formation with generations of Grumman fighters, Wildcat to Tomcat.


Saw them in Kalamazoo in ?1990. F4F, F6F, F7F, F8F, F9F. The Tomcat flew later. That was the first year the Soviet MiG-29s came through, before the fall of the USSR.
 
2012-07-14 06:53:13 PM

Dinodork: ZAZ: Igor Jakovsky

The Navy used to fly a formation with generations of Grumman fighters, Wildcat to Tomcat.

Saw them in Kalamazoo in ?1990. F4F, F6F, F7F, F8F, F9F. The Tomcat flew later. That was the first year the Soviet MiG-29s came through, before the fall of the USSR.


Heh, I think about that air show every now and then. "MiGs over Michigan," I think is how it was billed. The Cobra maneuver got lots of people's attention. That was fun.
 
2012-07-14 06:54:42 PM

006andahalf: PlatinumDragon: I'd like to see the results of a fly-off between a Raptor and Typhoon jock given a month to train on the other fighter before engaging in mock BVR missile fights and close-in dogfights.

I'd be pretty confident the F-22 would win. The Typhoon would have to either get a lucky shot with a heat-seaking missile or put a bunch of cannon rounds into it, aiming the old fashioned way. Meanwhile, the Raptor could just tee off on the Typhoon's radar signature. The Typhoon is said to have marginally better maneuverability, but the F-22's combined stealth and electronic capabilities are a pretty significant advantage (when it's not stuck in the shop for some random issue).

Lt_Ryan: /The A330 is also reportedly easy to fly, it even has a feature where it won't let a pilot put the aircraft in danger like a stall.

It also won't let you push out of a stall if it doesn't think you're in one.


I thought that turned out to be a copilot hauling back on his stick in a panic, which no one else was alerted to due to poor UI design?
 
2012-07-14 07:16:18 PM
One dude with an F14, refuel capability and sufficient rounds could have won WW2 alone.
 
2012-07-14 07:23:18 PM

Flint Ironstag: clovis69: Marcus Aurelius: Boon. Doggle. Not on the level of the F-35, but it's up there.

The Typhoon is ~US$195 million each
F-35A: US$197 million each
F-22 US$150 million each

A Typhoon costs $94m each according to the article.

If you take the total cost of the F22 program and divide by 195 aircraft produced they come to $340 million each.


See that is your problem right there. You are using real numbers to show costs. It is much easier to prove your point when you instead pull the numbers out of your arse.
 
2012-07-14 07:26:47 PM
www.coaster-net.com

What a Eurofighter Typhoon might look like...
 
2012-07-14 07:27:02 PM
PlatinumDragon:

I thought that turned out to be a copilot hauling back on his stick in a panic, which no one else was alerted to due to poor UI design?


It wasn't poor UI design. It was a lack of training when it came to understanding the shift to alternate flight regimes. Something that is very fundamental and represented a failure on the situational awareness and training of the pilots.
 
2012-07-14 07:43:09 PM

006andahalf: PlatinumDragon: I'd like to see the results of a fly-off between a Raptor and Typhoon jock given a month to train on the other fighter before engaging in mock BVR missile fights and close-in dogfights.

I'd be pretty confident the F-22 would win. The Typhoon would have to either get a lucky shot with a heat-seaking missile or put a bunch of cannon rounds into it, aiming the old fashioned way. Meanwhile, the Raptor could just tee off on the Typhoon's radar signature. The Typhoon is said to have marginally better maneuverability, but the F-22's combined stealth and electronic capabilities are a pretty significant advantage (when it's not stuck in the shop for some random issue).

Lt_Ryan: /The A330 is also reportedly easy to fly, it even has a feature where it won't let a pilot put the aircraft in danger like a stall.

It also won't let you push out of a stall if it doesn't think you're in one.


WTF? Pushing out of a stall is putting the nose down. You're saying it won't let you put the nose down? How do they land?
 
2012-07-14 07:45:01 PM

majestic: One dude with an F14, refuel capability and sufficient rounds could have won WW2 alone.


I've seen The Final Countdown. One old guy with a flare gun took down a Sea King.
 
2012-07-14 07:46:05 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

Was a fantastic game, and the predecessor to F-22 Air Dominance Fighter
 
2012-07-14 07:49:44 PM

Igor Jakovsky: Since we are talking about P 51s and modern fighters here is a pic I took at the MacDill Airshow a couple of years back:

[i.imgur.com image 456x394]

/I think the title of the formation was generations or something


This is the organization : LINK POPS
 
2012-07-14 08:17:21 PM

Thanks for the Meme-ries: Igor Jakovsky: Since we are talking about P 51s and modern fighters here is a pic I took at the MacDill Airshow a couple of years back:

[i.imgur.com image 456x394]

/I think the title of the formation was generations or something

This is the organization : LINK POPS


cool, thanks
 
2012-07-14 09:36:23 PM

zarberg: [upload.wikimedia.org image 256x251]

Was a fantastic game, and the predecessor to F-22 Air Dominance Fighter


All I want to see before I die is Falcon 5.0.
 
2012-07-14 09:53:38 PM

006andahalf: PlatinumDragon: I'd like to see the results of a fly-off between a Raptor and Typhoon jock given a month to train on the other fighter before engaging in mock BVR missile fights and close-in dogfights.

I'd be pretty confident the F-22 would win. The Typhoon would have to either get a lucky shot with a heat-seaking missile or put a bunch of cannon rounds into it, aiming the old fashioned way. Meanwhile, the Raptor could just tee off on the Typhoon's radar signature. The Typhoon is said to have marginally better maneuverability, but the F-22's combined stealth and electronic capabilities are a pretty significant advantage (when it's not stuck in the shop for some random issue).

Lt_Ryan: /The A330 is also reportedly easy to fly, it even has a feature where it won't let a pilot put the aircraft in danger like a stall.

It also won't let you push out of a stall if it doesn't think you're in one.



That's assuming the raptor pilot isn't choked to death by their own plane.
 
2012-07-14 10:11:11 PM

Igor Jakovsky: Thanks for the Meme-ries: Igor Jakovsky: Since we are talking about P 51s and modern fighters here is a pic I took at the MacDill Airshow a couple of years back:

[i.imgur.com image 456x394]

/I think the title of the formation was generations or something

This is the organization : LINK POPS

cool, thanks


i291.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-14 10:46:10 PM

Flint Ironstag: majestic: One dude with an F14, refuel capability and sufficient rounds could have won WW2 alone.

I've seen The Final Countdown. One old guy with a flare gun took down a Sea King.

You complete me.
 
2012-07-14 11:38:44 PM

Flint Ironstag: majestic: One dude with an F14, refuel capability and sufficient rounds could have won WW2 alone.

I've seen The Final Countdown. One old guy with a flare gun took down a Sea King.


Sea Kings take themselves down ... the flare gun was an unrelated coincidence.
 
2012-07-15 12:19:57 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


Quantity over quality works only so far. The soviets continued that philosophy throughout the cold war thinking that would work still for future conflicts. Major conflicts in the late 20th and early 21st centuries have shown how woefully inadequate the quantity stratagem is against modern weapons systems as large formations of soviet warmachines became the flaming tombs of tens of thousands of men. This is not theory espoused by armchair generals but a harsh reality proven multiple times in blood and fire.
 
2012-07-15 12:46:43 AM

mrpants5587: Sorry but as an aviation nerd, I must interject.

A modern fighter would probably not run out of munitions before destroying 20 P-51s. An F-16 can carry enough Air to Air missles to destroy eight of the P-51s, and has a 20mm cannon with 511 rounds.

It would only take a half second burst from that cannon to destroy each one, and only three to five hits to put one down.

20? Easily. Possibly even more.


An F-18E can carry a full 12 AIM-120s plus 2 AIM-9s, plus the gun. A 2 ship formation couldd smoke all 20 P-51s from beyond visual range before they Mustangs even know they were there.

A P-47 would take at least 3 AMRAAM hits to bring down.
 
2012-07-15 02:03:44 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Never forget the Germans had the best tanks but the Russians overwhelmed them with cheaper, easier to produce and plentiful t-34s.

The best fighter of today couldn't win if he was facing 20 WW2 era P-51s


Someone's still bitter that their modern armor unit lost to a spearman?
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report