Eurofighter just as good as F-22 if not better !

[+Veltro2k 6,351]

interesting

 

http://news.yahoo.com/f-22-fighter-loses-79-billion-advantage-dogfights-201119575--abc-news-topstories.html

[+SkateZilla 49]

F-22 Pilots are trained not to Merge on a Superior Maneuvering Aircraft.

 

In Real Combat Situations, the F-22 would do everything in its Power to avoid going head to head with a aircraft with superior maneuvering numbers. Use its speed and stealth to keep distance and fire from a distance..

 

The wording in the article is mis-represented.

 

In Real Life its nearly Impossible for an Euro Fighter to even get that close. the Only reason they got that close is because the exercise Put them that close.

 

The F-22 Wing is still under the 6G Limit Set by the Airforce until the Oxygen issue is resolved.

Edited July 31, 2012 by SkateZilla

[Gr.Viper 131]

Use its speed and stealth to keep distance and fire from a distance..

Or have someone else bomb the enemy airfields in advance. That worked too lately.

[Slartibartfast 153]

Have to say this is fairly old news though this is from the Luftwaffe as the RAF defeated them at an earlier encounter in close in fighting with the Eurofighter before the 6G Limit was added... the Euro does have some advantages in the close in combat as it is not hampered with its Stealth as the F-22 is... also another advantage over the F-22 is the Pirate IRST which could happily pick up the jet exhaust from the F-22 at certain ranges...

Edited July 31, 2012 by Slartibartfast

[+Typhoid 231]

So the recommended tactic to fight the F-22 is to count on the Raptor pilot to screw up?

 

Yea, that'll work well.............

[Gr.Viper 131]

Yea, that'll work well.............

That's what killed the best pilots of the last century.

[Misty FAC 3]

I don't think for a minute that even IF what is stated re Typhoon maneuverability is true that any USAF pilot good enough to be in a Raptor to begin with is going to deliberately fly inside someone else's envelope - unless the other guy is stupid and makes it quite obvious.

Edited July 31, 2012 by Misty FAC

[+SkateZilla 49]

EF2000 Pilots have been at it 3 more years than F-22 Pilots, 3.5 if you count the grounding of the F-22. Pilots are still discovering the aircraft's agility,

 

Proof to point (again), that Thrust vectoring back flip at 20 Knots s**t doesnt work in Dogfights.

[+daddyairplanes 10,241]

again also what about the training? USAF tactics since the heyday of the Eagle have been to kill em off at a distance. in the 80's right after Vietnam much attn was paid to dogfighting but every Eagle pilot would tell you his first choice was to hit the Migs way out there and NOT get in the phonebooth. i think most other western AF's expect to get up close before realizing that they'll have to go weapons hot and so train more for close in ACM. full on hostile encounter, i can't help but think that thrust vectoring will give the Raptor an edge if the pilot can stay awwake and keep his/her head. my bigger concern would be with the limited numbers, seeing an adversary with red stars on their wings throw a few squadrons of say Floggers up to catch the Amraam's then, sneak Flankers in after the missles are depleted. Either some Raptors will go down, or be forced to disengage causing the USAF to give up local air superiorety for the first time in decades........ but hey 187 is a fine enough number for DOD.

[+SkateZilla 49]

Any Pilot would have common sense not to engage in a merge situation with this:

 

 

Its Blatantly Obvious without looking at a stat sheet, the EuroFighter can accelerate like crazy.

 

the F-22 is bigger and heavier.

 

F-22 is designed for a different type of engagement

 

The Eurofighter is both agile and sophisticated, but is still difficult to compare to the F/A-22 Raptor. They are different kinds of airplanes to start with; it's like asking us to compare a NASCAR car with a Formula One car. They are both exciting in different ways, but they are designed for different levels of performance. …The Eurofighter is certainly, as far as smoothness of controls and the ability to pull (and sustain high g forces), very impressive. That is what it was designed to do, especially the version I flew, with the avionics, the color moving map displays, etc. — all absolutely top notch. The maneuverability of the airplane in close-in combat was also very impressive.

Edited July 31, 2012 by SkateZilla

[MAKO69 186]

In a one on one close in gun fight I'll take the Typhoon, anything else gimme the Raptor.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Not really sure you can tell anything from airshows and videos regarding actual combat performance. If this was a 1 on 1 play fight with guns then its anyones game - the Typhoon has been seen in the HUD of other jets regarding this.

[+SkateZilla 49]

The same Typhoon won a 3 on 1 engagement vs 3 F-16s too.

[MigBuster 2,884]

The same Typhoon won a 3 on 1 engagement vs 3 F-16s too.

 

Which means absolutely nothing without knowing the weapons and conditions involved.

 

In this contest with an F-16AM it was probably the best pilot:

 

Edited July 31, 2012 by MigBuster

[Caesar 305]

Interesting when you read the whole article. "Two other German officers, Col. Andreas Pfeiffer and Maj. Marco Gumbrecht, noted in the same report that the F-22's capabilities are "overwhelming" when it comes to modern, long-range combat as the stealth fighter is designed to engage multiple enemies well-beyond the pilot's natural field of vision - mostly while the F-22 is still out of the other plane's range. Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren't able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted." - Kind of difficult to get to the merge when you've been killed 20 miles before! And what of past performance in Red Flag? In excess of 200:1 kill to loss is heavily lopsided in the jet's favor.

 

As I've long said, and as MigBuster's video illustrates, in a dogfight, it is the better pilot who is going to win. Certainly, the hardware is going to affect the fight, but consider the Starfighter defeating the F-15, F-4F's defeating MiG-29G's following the reintegration of Germany, even the F4 Wildcat holding a kill to loss in its favor against the Japanese Zero! In this case, we have two fighter which at visual range are both highly maneuverable, one with canards the other with thrust vectoring, both 9g capable (not assuming temporary limits), both with better than 1:1 thrust to weight ratio at combat weight - these jets are very comparable in terms of fighting statistics, so should anyone be surprised when one betters the other in a series of exercises? Of course the F-22 "looses $79B advantage" at visual range! Every aircraft at visual range is going to loose most of its technological advantages, and we've known this for decades. This is not news.

 

Look at ACEVAL/AIMVAL - F-14 and F-15 crews only managed 2 to 2.5:1 in their favor against the F-5 with an all aspect missile. Because of ROE that mirrored Vietnam (VID before shoot) visual range combat was anticipated every time. That multi-million dollar AWG-9 and APG-63 weren't very advantageous at such close ranges, were they? True, many of the F-5's kills were possible because of a relatively inexpensive bit of hardware: the AIM-9L (they had been getting smoked during the workups), but with all the electro-wizardry packed into the Tomcat and Eagle (Radar, VTAS, TVSU, etc), you'd think the Tiger II would be outmatched every time. But how well does an F-5 defend a carrier battle group? How well does it do sweeps into hostile nations? It doesn't. It has neither the range nor endurance without huge tanks attached to it, nor can it engage at beyond visual range. At best it is a point defense fighter. Unsurprisingly, when the Tomcat crews started using the TVSU, having one F-14 spot the F-5's and positively ID them, pull away, and have the second F-14 shoot, the kill to loss ratio was again lopsided in their favor. The tactic put range back between the fighter and bandit and the AWG-9's long range detection and the AIM-7's BVR engagement range was again working to the fighter's advantage. This tactic got flagged, and it was back to the drawing board.

 

So now we have two aircraft, each with advanced air-to-air systems in the forms of Radar, IRST, stealth, HMDs, etc., most of which is entirely negated when the aircraft close to visual range, specifically set up in a situation where the EF-2000 isn't getting shot somewhere between 20 and 70 miles from the Raptor to see how the aircraft perform in a dogfight, and the news is clowning on the F-22 because the EF-2000 got the better of it in a couple rounds? One aircraft beat another one with comparable performance at visual range!? YGBFSM!

 

...What a joke.

[+daddyairplanes 10,241]

well Ceasar, Raptor bashing is rather popular in the news these days.........

[RogerSmith 72]

F-22 Wins, it has stealth and is faster. EF has no stealth and is slower. IRST might help. But F-22 RWR works up to 250 miles, and if it does have IR detection, it's no good.

 

Besides, who cares as long as the major operators are our allies?

[exhausted 55]

We need more Raptors and we also need to buy Eurofighters to replace the F-16s reaching the end of their service. Maybe it can be called the F-24A Typhoon! They should put American avionics and targeting systems in it with interchangeability with European avi.

 

One last thing, thank God the US, UK, DE, and Italy can all be friends now!

[warthog64 92]

This is old news that anyone familiar with air to air combat could have predicted anyways. The F-22 would never enter close in combat unless malfuntions forced the pilot to do so. The long range, capabilities of the raptor have yet to be equalled or defeated. The F-22 is simply the most capable and lethal fighter today. The F-22 is also incredibley agile, the thrust vectoring allows it swap ends on literally one molecule of air. The Typhoon is also an incredibley agile and capable machine and in close in combat is capable of defeating any adversary if flown well. Even though the Typhoon lacks thrust vectoring, and the F-22 is not the best WVR platform despite its agility, when it comes to close in "dogfighting" it is the pilot that makes the difference and not the plane.

Edited August 1, 2012 by warthog64

[+Julhelm 266]

The Eurofighter is already obsolete. Stealth is such a major gamechanger which is why Russia and China are investing huge sums of money into developing VLO fighters that can fight on equal ground with the F-22. Against T-50 or J-20 Eurocanards will do as well as the Fairey Battle.

[Toryu 156]

The Eurofighter is already obsolete. Stealth is such a major gamechanger which is why Russia and China are investing huge sums of money into developing VLO fighters that can fight on equal ground with the F-22.

 

Or maybe they're into that whole "Whose invisible d*ck is the logest?" game. Last time I checked, stealth wasn't a major game-changer in actual wars.

The chances of Russia, China and the US engageing in a major clash are relatively slim, thanks to their nuclear forces.

 

If there's a semi-hot war between those powers (as in numerous clashes during the Cold War), stealth is not gonna change much, as few third-world countries can afford stealth-technology.

 

 

So far, the Eurocanards are far more useable in actually-fought wars, than those high-tech "Don't deploy me anywhere because I'm so prescious!" stealth a/c.

[JediMaster 451]

Fighters haven't been a major "game-changer" since Vietnam. It's been bombers for the last 25 years that have accomplished everything. and there stealth HAS made a difference. Only one plane lost in combat due to stupidity in the planning phase.

[Toryu 156]

Given the exchange-ratio, based on total sorties flown against total losses, non-stealth or semi-stealth aircraft have done pretty well, too.

[+Gepard 11,297]

Today Eurofighter Typhoon and F-22 are as usefull as the big battleships in WW2. Okay they looks good, but today we would need rather A-10 or Su-25 then superfighters.

[JediMaster 451]

Yes, today.

 

Tell me what we'll need in 15 years when everything is different yet again. In 1997 no one would've guessed what we'd be doing in just 5 years, let alone 15. The Typhoon, F-22, and F-35 are the frontline for the next several decades. Today is pretty much irrelevant.