On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:03:32 -0700, (Harry
Andreas) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

They'd be well advised not to fire on a Typhoon either, since it's
better than anything the USN is likely to have for some time (and I
think the F-35C falls in that category).

Is it better than an Amraam?

Would the F-35 even get close enough to fire an AMRAAM? Meteor is
longer range, and since the Typhoon is faster it could (depending on
the tactical situation) decide whether to break contact.

Speed doesn't matter as much when the opposing platform is stealthy.
If you can't "see" it you can't shoot it, so speed does not dictate the
engagement anymore.


Nice theory in a two dimentional world, until they make Runways
invisible the aircraft will have to be at a specific location some of
the time , bomb that location and (invisible of not) there toast.

Visual stealth is the next big thing as you can see a fighter from
tens of miles away... the right sort of paint scheme reduces this
but!!!.


As long as you can detect the target at longer range than the targets
weapons range then you 99% safe, after that you have to commit to the
fight, your chances are then reducing depending on ESM ECM ECCM of the
respective aircraft and the skills of the individual pilots.

In short stealth is nice but lots of other factors come into play, eg
Aircraft A is 100% invisible, but aircraft B has a 100% effective
defensive decoy system.

Who wins??



Cheers
John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk