In article ,
wrote:

On 17 Oct 2003 11:37:20 -0700, Kevin Brooks wrote:
(phil hunt) wrote in message
...
Typhoon has been designed from the beginning as a multi-role
aircraft.

Yes, but it is optimised for being a fighter. An optimised bomber
would look like an A-10 or Tornado.

"Would look like" seems to be rather shaky criteria to me. The F-15E
is most decidedly a muti-role aircraft with a decided strike
orientation--does it "look like a bomber"? Did the F-4? Or the
proabable King of Multi-Role, the F-16? And BTW, that example of
"Tornado" that allegedly epitomizes what a "bomber" should look like?
It too is multi-role--witness the ADF and ECM versions.

It is not a dogfighter. Tornado is optimised for fuel efficiency and
the ability to carry large amounts of munitions a long way.

A-10 is optimised for survivability, carrying a large bombload, and
direct cannon fire at a target.

F-16 is optimised for air-superiority. It has a high-performance
engine, is highly maneouvrable, and has a big radar to track other
aircraft. It can do other stuff, but that's not its primary role.

You're right and wrong. The F-16 was designed as an air-superiority
fighter. The "low" side of the "high/low" mix, with the F-15 of
course being the high side. But the F-16 proved so poor at the mission
that it was re-designated as a CAS/A-G/AI/EW/kitchen sink fighter
and the F-15C does primarily all A-A.

Being intimately familiar with the radars on both a/c, one of the reasons
this is so is because the F-16's radar is TOO SMALL and too low performance
to do good A-A (at least on the models I'm familiar with).

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur