Home » Air » PAS11: Confidence for Eurofighter

PAS11: Confidence for Eurofighter

By Philip Ewing Monday, June 20th, 2011 7:28 am
Posted in Air

PARIS — Bonjour from an cloudy, drizzly first day at Le Bourget, where the world’s biggest defense and aviation giants are hoping the overcast blows over in time for this afternoon’s planned flying demonstrations.

Defense trade shows are always impressive, with their displays of the latest aircraft, weapons and other technology, but despite the jets and missiles looming over this show, it’s a nervous time for the defense industry. The world’s military budgets — including that of its biggest, the United States — are not reaching ever skyward anymore, and the firms that have mounted their displays here want to exploit every option they have to stay ahead.

Consider this example: You read here on Buzz awhile ago about how America’s two aerospace titans, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, had been rebuffed in their attempt to sell new batches of fighters to India. The Euro-concern that manufactures the Typhoon, however, advanced to the next round of the competition to become the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft, as it’s reminding everyone at Le Bourget this year.

Just in case anyone forgot, the Eurofighter chalet has this simple message: “Indian MMRCA shortlisted.”

UPDATE: The Italian air force announced Monday that its Typhoons have passed 1,000 flying hours as part of NATO’s operations over Libya.

Join the Conversation

	common sense June 20th, 2011 at 7:35 am The Indian MMRCA competition happened at the best possible time for the two big Euro-jets. A decade ago, there was no integrated strike capabilities or roadmap for upgrades, which is why the likes of South Kore, Singapore and Australia all went for US platforms. A decade or so from now, stealth aircraft from China and Russia as well as an in-service F-35 will pose a very formidable threat on account of costs as well as stealth (limited or otherwise).
	VF 143 Puckindog 01 June 20th, 2011 at 9:26 am The Eurofighter Much better platfrom that JSF.… Stealth is DEAD.…
	Tim June 20th, 2011 at 9:47 am stealh is evolving.. if anything.. ask people 15 years ago if you could have a radar evading air plane.. answer would have been no. The field of “stealth” will always shift and change. People will always find a new way to evade what ever detection systems other people can come up with. Its their jobs
	@7thwave June 20th, 2011 at 9:50 am I see pukin dog is being a idiot again with his stealth is dead statements.…. But anywho, the typhoon is a great aircraft. Super maneuverable, great weapons capacity, and great salesman ship from EADS. HOWEVER.…as for American products like the JSF F35, we need to wake up. Our products are over priced. And in a world where MiGs and Sukois are made cheaply and in most cases can out perform our best technology, we seem to lack in such things as weapons carriage, maneuverability, and the ability to land on unprepared runways. Yet we seem to cram more technology into a product and think it can make up for short comings like like I mentioned above. All this type of thinking does is encourage cost over runs, poor performance of specified product ‚and abuse of allocated budgets. And through all of our mistakes, companies like EADS and SAAB have taken lessons from us and the Russian weapon designers.…making platforms affordable, superior in performance,and technological superior to those from the United States. If the United States wants to keep its place as the worlds leader, we had better wake up and degress a little…sometimes a modified rock can out perform a high tech airplane if thrown correctly into the airplanes air inlet. And that puts our technology to shame.
	Tim June 20th, 2011 at 9:54 am not if we have a rock that can be guided into your eye socket from miles and miles away. Not even Justin Verlander could throw a rock well enough to defeat that.
	@7thwave June 20th, 2011 at 9:58 am And as for JSF, the Raptor,and the B-2, stealth is not dead. There are plenty of countries that cannot afford new weapons platforms such as the S-400, and rely on out dated radar to defend airspace. And that makes stealth more valuable than some might think…especially when it comes to entering air space undetectable. And even with the newer radars and the advances in coatings and shaping of aircraft, the effects of radar can be degraded to a point where a aircraft can still remain undetectable over certain radar frequencies and be able to penetrate a country’s airspace undetected..
	Guest June 20th, 2011 at 10:52 am India doesn’t regard the USA as an ally due to Pakistan. They have doubts whether the USA would allow companies to provide support in the time of need. They won’t choose USA due to political reasons.
	freefallingbomb June 20th, 2011 at 12:26 pm To the Seventh Wave —————————– You wrote: “(…) stealth is not dead. There are plenty of countries that cannot afford new weapons platforms such as the S-400 (…)” Trouble is: Stealth wasn’t invented ($$$) to sneak on the Bushmen Airforce, but on precisely those air defenses that DO have S-400s and the likes (for example their inventors’)… —————————– You wrote: “And even with the newer radars and the advances in coatings and shaping of aircraft, the effects of radar can be degraded to a point where a aircraft can still remain undetectable over certain radar frequencies and be able to penetrate a country’s airspace undetected..” Today, the most advanced anti-stealth radars even detect the vortexes which all aircraft inevitably create behind them in flight (except maybe the Goodyear blimps), not to mention the I.R. telescopes’ increasing ranges… – try to coat or dissolve that, especially when one of the modern jet engines’ paramount objectives is to burn fuel as efficiently ( = as HOT ! ) as possible… The race between cloaking and detection is continuously on, and the stealth planes’ “magic” already works only at increasingly bigger distances, almost outside their own ammunitions’ ranges. So much only for your claim “…and be able to penetrate a country’s airspace undetected”. Once you’re over enemy territory (especially over firm land), even the oldest bi-static radars in the World will detect you and your intentions. Stealth isn’t dead yet, but I believe it is slowly dying, without ever having seen any battle against a hi-tech airforce. You’ll see: In a few decades from now, that whole investment was in vain, an evolutionary dead-end. Like double-deckers, propeller-driven fighters and hydroplanes. Glad we € never believed in it.
	freefallingbomb June 20th, 2011 at 12:29 pm About E.A.D.S.’ publicity slogan ““Indian MMRCA shortlisted” : Nasty.
	Gregory Savage June 20th, 2011 at 2:17 pm Okay get a a target solution on the vortex. Keep a missile locked and tracked too. Your argument as usual has many holes in it. There is a difference between detecting and tracking thanks.
	Gregory Savage June 20th, 2011 at 2:19 pm What are you trying to say here? This is not very understandable in english.
	freefallingbomb June 20th, 2011 at 3:45 pm To the poster “mammamia” You wrote: “Yes but today, the eurofighter was made in 350 exemplars and only 4 of them was able to launch one bomb, can’t cry everywhere one of the best multirole aircraft in the world.” The “Eurofighter” is mainly a “not-one-pound-for-air-to-ground” plane, like the F-15 “Eagle” (originally at least) and the F-22 “Raptor” (“not-one-air-,-pound-to-the ground”), although I admit that the end of the Soviet Union and the absence any similar threats to us may have contributed to this state of affairs (this peace “problem” even nearly cancelled the whole “Eurofighter” program several times over, as you maybe know). For some reason, € Airforces don’t want any heavy bombers either, not just any fighter-bombers. War is so terribly démodé…
	sferrin June 20th, 2011 at 7:16 pm “Eurofighter Typhoon: Best Damn VCR Ever Built”
	William C. June 20th, 2011 at 8:19 pm Ability to land on unprepared runways? Just look at the F-35B. In terms of maneuverability, the F-35 is comparable to any other 4th or 4.5 generation design without thrust vectoring. The EF-2000 is a great performer and probably has better acceleration than the F-35, but so far additions like thrust vectoring are still in the theoretical stage. Compared to all of the Eurocanards, the F-35 has greatly superior stealth and sensors. I’ll agree with you in terms of weapon carriage and cost however, internal carriage for six air-to-air missiles should have been a requirement. Cost and other program management related factors are now the F-35’s greatest challenge, but lets not forget the EF-2000 isn’t exactly cheap either. It also has had a long and troubled history.
	William C. June 20th, 2011 at 8:29 pm A missiles active seeker is significant weaker than a ground or fighter based radar. A radar that can detect the vortexes left behind by an aircraft would be so large, powerful, and stationary, where it would become a magnet for cruise missiles and HARMs. That’s the big problem with all of these anti-stealth radar proposals. The F-117A Serbia topic has been beaten to death again and again. It was a combination of bad luck and poor planning. Stealth isn’t going away anytime soon.
	Gregory Savage June 20th, 2011 at 9:07 pm There was alot that went into that shot, per the officer in charge they were observing the flight patterns in order to take a shot. I don’t think you will have that luxury during the first day of a war. Let’s ALSO not forget that there have been thousands of sorties with stealth aircraft and only one shoot down. Take a look at the record, 1000 to 1 is pretty good. As I was saying tracking is still a problem…no one says stealth is perfect, it just improves survivability at say 1000 to 1 or so whatever the statics are. Would you really take a rafael or an Euorfighter over the f-35 really? And if stealth was so uselessly expensive why are China and Russia actively developing, and Japan and South Korea looking to develop stealth air craft then?
	pfcem June 20th, 2011 at 9:07 pm Six internal air-to-air missiles is a requirement, just not a requirement for IOC (Block 3). Current plan is integration (of 6 internal air-to-air missiles) as part of Block 5.
	pfcem June 20th, 2011 at 9:15 pm The problem is getting said missile within a few hundred meters… Serbia again, good God man, I think the USAF (& everybody else) learned the lesson of not flying the exact same flight pattern (course, speed, altitude, time of day) day after day after day… ECM has gotten smarter since then too. ;)
	pfcem June 20th, 2011 at 9:16 pm India is buying plenty of military hardware from the US.
	pfcem June 20th, 2011 at 9:21 pm Err…the origins of the Eurofighter go back to a Jaguar replacement program. In fact the Eurofighter is much like the F-35 in that it is/was one plane intended to replace many different types. Air-to-air was considered most important & thus concentrated on 1st in order to get the aircraft into service. The addition of greater air-to-ground capabilities has for the most part been delayed due to a lack of funding (& lack of an imminent threat requiring it).
	@7thwave June 20th, 2011 at 9:26 pm Ability to land on unprepared runways is a big plus considering that active runways can be damaged due to bombings by the enemy air force. I am not up to speed on the F35 engine…however, the EF Typhoon is super maneuverable in its design. The forward canards and the way the delta shaped wing is designed helps it achieve its super maneuverability…along with the high thrust to weight ratio engine. Where as the F35 does not have the wing loading the Typhoon does, and its engine does not have the thrust to make the plane super maneuverable..and that is a plus for the Eurofighter. The F35 relies too much on sensors, which is a throwback to the Vietnam early days. We lost a lot of aircraft due to poor maneuverability due the North Vietnamese MiGs being able to out turn the larger American aircraft. And in today s world of Sukoi Su-35, and the advanced MiG35 variant of the MiG 29 family, that is a big mistake. The same technology used in the Typhoon and the Sukoi designs , was used in the F15 and the F16 for testing during the 80’s and 90’s…forward canards, thrust vectoring engines(none for typhoon). We should have gone and modified the F16 and F15 platforms with forward canards…and put themin use today.
	Ribby22 June 20th, 2011 at 11:39 pm I still think that an F-15C or E with AESA an irst pod off an F-18 E/F super hornet and AIM-9X sand AIM-120 C/Ds could thake an EUROFIGHTER F-2 typhoon. (the F-2 has no chance against an F-22 — NONE!) That’s just my opinion (about the F-15 LOL)
	common sense June 20th, 2011 at 11:54 pm Does the F-15C have the kinematics to match a Eurofighter?? Can it supercruise or does it have the agility that comes with the higher thrust to weight ratio of the Eurofighter. About all the toys that come with the F-15, the Typhoon already has an IRSTS and will be getting an AESA radar and Meteor BVRAAMs, which are more advanced than the AMRAAM.
	Oblat June 21st, 2011 at 12:00 am The indian program are about an objective measure as you can get in the industry. It’s particularly telling that no American aircraft made it to the second round of MMRCA.
	ribby22 June 21st, 2011 at 12:05 am The Indians didn’t want an F-16 or F-18 in any blocks because 2 reasons , pakastan has F-16block 50s and the tec transfer. If you can work a deal to buy 10 jets from the euro.s and the rest to be built in India you can advance your avionics knowledge by 20 years. That’s the Problem With our GOV. they let Boeing and company “outsource” wing and other sub assemblies to china and went to china to show them how to build jets, we took them from the 1930s to the 1980s in ten years in aircraft construction. I am an A&P mechanic and i made a comment to one of our suppliers of parts rep.s about how the chinese were probably making the $8,000 part i had in my hands in china with a file and selling it for $80.00. He told me and mind you this was 10years ago , that I was very wrong (@ the time i was standing in front of a $100,000 HAAS CNC machine) he told me that the China Gov. had went out and bought the very best japanese (who they hate by the way) machines . That stuck with me alot of years I knew back then that we were in big trouble.
	ribby22 June 21st, 2011 at 12:13 am The eurofighter typhoon was obslete the day it took flight. (It’s too bad we didn’t let them in on a little thing called stealth)
	everyone June 21st, 2011 at 12:48 am I tink uua r pa-king prain dead!! uur not too smart u moter dropuur ona youur duumb head!!! 4 a facct!!!01 THAT IS WHY RUSSIA AND CHINA AND USA AND EUROPEAN UNION ALL HAVE STEALTH PROJECTS. ALL-MANNED EXECPT EUROPE AND THEIR’S IS A DRONE !!!!! MORROON!!!!
	momomimamo June 21st, 2011 at 5:35 am the eurofighter become one multirole plane, don’t go to the initial project of it.And in this sector, the rafale have one big adavnce and you can’t compare them like similar plane.The eurofighter isn’t a bad airplane, but he don’t was one multirole plane like the rafale or one f-35…
	momomimamo June 21st, 2011 at 5:37 am yeah, yeah, for american people that’s difficult to say: Yes the f-16 and f-18 have fail for technical reason. But when one f-16 was take by one country that’s because he was superior and not for political reason…
	freefallingbomb June 21st, 2011 at 9:19 am To the poster “pfcern” You wrote: “ECM has gotten smarter since then too. ;) ” If a pilot has to start thinking about his E.C.M.s it’s because he can forget about his plane’s stealth: It failed, he’s in the sights, missiles are chasing him from all sides, his and his stealth plane’s existences can be terminated in a few seconds ( “1000 to 1″, “Gregory Savage” ?) and his shocked mom will get some stupid folded flag as a “consolation”. And indeed, I dare ANY stealth-fanatic U.S.A.F. pilot to fly entirely WITHOUT E.C.M.s (no decoys and such), relying blindly on his plane’s vaunted stealth alone. Fly back to Serbia in your F-117s, big mouthes… LOL !
	JSFMIKE June 21st, 2011 at 9:45 am Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen, etc. The default position is that all weapons, pods, fuel tanks, etc must be hung on pylons. This makes a small, nimble aircraft a much bigger radar reflector. It also adds to drag, makes them less maneuverable, and ruins range. The F-35 can carry more than 2 AMRAAM if bombs are not used. With stealth, the MIGs and even the jets listed above become targets to an invisible airplane. Then the sequence becomes this .… radar warning alert sounds, the opposing pilot tries to ascertain what is happening among his many devices. Two, three, four seconds …boom! That’s the senario against a stealth aircraft. And the F-35 is not as good at air dominance as the F-22.
	Gregory Savage June 21st, 2011 at 12:21 pm Fly over Serbia with your countries current stealth.
	asdf June 21st, 2011 at 2:03 pm check lampyridae also check the date of its development.
	William C. June 22nd, 2011 at 3:29 am And where did they supposedly fail for technical reasons?
	PAK FA June 22nd, 2011 at 5:37 am The Indian Air Force had set approximately 643 parameters to evaluate the six contenders for the MMRCA competition. The Eurofighter and Rafale met the most number of these parameters. The offerings from the US and other contenders supposedly failed on parameters for high altitude operations in the Himalayas as well as turn rates to assess agility. That’s not exactly surprising since the newer Delta-canard configuration of the two Euro-jets gave them better agility and their higher T-W ratio would have been of use in carrying out strike missions from spartan bases in the Himalayas unlike the heavier Super Hornet or Mig.
	freefallingbomb June 22nd, 2011 at 6:19 am You’re well informed, and you inform well!
	william mckeon June 23rd, 2011 at 8:40 am Let us stick to made in America and we will have spare parts to go with it on that rainy day too!
	haroldbest3 June 23rd, 2011 at 3:57 pm Heck, If you are anyone with HALF a brain, you don’t count on America as an ally, Unless of course you are a totalitarian, or a scumbag Jihadist.
	Chris June 23rd, 2011 at 4:57 pm Ribby22 has got it right; as I wrote before during the tanker wars, Boeing is not now and has not been an American company for a very long time.
	G777 June 28th, 2011 at 3:09 pm Let me just kill the whole stealth idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxeU2oK-KRk&fe…
	William C. June 28th, 2011 at 3:31 pm The F-22 would be quite affordable if we continued production and development of the aircraft. The problem isn’t with the design, it is with our political leadership. As far as the Typhoon goes, it’s a nice aircraft but does it kill the “stealth idea”? No.
	Digigoldberg July 11th, 2011 at 3:31 pm Lot of people would say stealth where the american missed out. What I feel its the tech. transfers & bleeding edge technology sharing, the cismoa & the hard binding terms of checks & rechecks by americans after the sales has done the deal off from the americans & given it to europeans who were reliable partners during the nuclear test phase(1998 to 2002 tech. denial phase to India due to Pokhoron nuc. test) & in tech. transfers. The Europeans were willing to give Aesa radar tech. software codes & cutting edge technologies to India whose indignation of its industry is in full swing now aims to become a partner rather than a mere customer. India does not require right now the F-35 as its requirement because the russians are providing it with Sukhoi PAKFA (FGFA) & its own AMCA Stealth programme. What it now requires is the fundamental & bleeding edge technologies to integrate with its future requirement & fifth generation technology development. F-35 may come as a requirement in the future lets say after 2017 for Indian navy after its production Of Indigenous Aircraft Carrier 2 (IAC-II) or F-35 B for its future amphibious assault ships fleets for which a tender may be floated in the near future. But not now right the choices are right by the Indians to select The Rafale & the Eurofighter as the final competitors.
	I4U September 2nd, 2011 at 2:45 pm The scenario you propose 1) implies the F-35 uses it radar: if so, it’s immediatly detected. If it’s using only passive sensors, it’ won’t be better than the others! Did you know the IR signature of each? If the radars is’nt used, it’s matter. 2) once shot, the missile isn’t stealth: all this fighters have strong capacities to avoid even advanced missiles. Then, a shot missile doesn’t mean a hit fighter. 3) only the heavy external load limits the agility of the jets. That’s not the case for AA configuration. If the first shot missed, they are in WVR and the agility of non stealth fighter becomes a key advantage for victory. Take a look at the Australian Report about the inability of the F-35 to do the job: and Aussies are close allies of US!

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

DoD Buzz

PAS11: Confidence for Eurofighter

Join the Conversation

Recent Comments