Singapore down selects three fighters...

In article ,
wrote:

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:29:56 +1000, David Bromage
wrote:
AL wrote:
It is all about putting all your eggs in one basket. Everybody knows
about the Congress idiosyncrasies. Not to mention there may be plans to
do some kind of upgrade from type 52 F16 to near type 60.

IMHO, it is going to be a tossup between Rafale and the Typhoon. F15 is
too complicated and the road map is too short to operate.

I think the F-15 has a very good chance. Bear in mind their next door
neighbours are getting Su-30s.

If the want a counter to the Su-30, wouldn't something more modern
than the F-15 be approprate?

It's all about loiter time and weapons.
An amraam is faster than an Su-30.
And I can assure you that the newest F-15s have extremely modern
avionics and weapons. Unsurpassed.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Yes, the newest F-15s is most impressive. But there isn't any planned
future development. All funds are directed towards F-35.

If you are considering F-15K/T against other aircraft, that is
definitely not good.
Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

Harry Andreas wrote:

It's all about loiter time and weapons.
An amraam is faster than an Su-30.
And I can assure you that the newest F-15s have extremely modern
avionics and weapons. Unsurpassed.




--
AL
New anti-terrorism tool, "Fly naked"
http://www.alfredivy.per.sg

In article , AL wrote:

Yes, the newest F-15s is most impressive. But there isn't any planned
future development. All funds are directed towards F-35.

All US funds...maybe. There are upgrades programs underway for
AESA radar on F-15Cs. Probably other upgrades, too.
Plus Macair...oops, Boeing, will put in their own money if a sale looks in
the offing.


If you are considering F-15K/T against other aircraft, that is
definitely not good.

No, just a comparison of concerns, not missions.


Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

That's certainly a consideration. Plus the recognition factor when US forces
are in the area. USN a/c not likely to fire on an F-15.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:50:21 -0700, Harry Andreas wrote:

Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

That's certainly a consideration. Plus the recognition factor when US forces
are in the area. USN a/c not likely to fire on an F-15.

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).

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:09:46 +0100, ess (phil
hunt) wrote:

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:50:21 -0700, Harry Andreas wrote:

Interestingly models of aircraft operated by the Malaysia and Indonesia
did not make it to the shortlist. There are a million ways to interpret
this. One of them is to avoid any hesitation by the pilots when going
head to head?

That's certainly a consideration. Plus the recognition factor when US forces
are in the area. USN a/c not likely to fire on an F-15.

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).

Well it's good to dream but I'd say wait until the F-35C is flying
before making that judgement. That big wing, 56k lbs thrust (so says
RR) AESA, 360 degree IRST, stealth, -9X, . . .hell the list goes on
and on.

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:48:52 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:09:46 +0100, ess (phil
hunt) 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).

Well it's good to dream but I'd say wait until the F-35C is flying
before making that judgement. That big wing, 56k lbs thrust (so says
RR)

Who's RR? The figure I've seen for thrust is 35 klbf (15900 kgf),
giving F-35 a

AESA,

What's this?

360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

stealth, -9X,

The AIM-9X will have a shorter range than the Meteor (I'm assuming
that Singapore would buy it, it seems quite logical if they are
going for an air superiority fighter). So the Typhoons would be able
to get the first shot in (not only that, since they are faster than
the F-35, they have the ability to decide at what range the
engagement takes place). If the engagement does get to close range,
the Typhoon has (according to figures I've seen) a better thrust to
weight ratio and lower wing loading. F-35 has thrust vectoring, but
late models of the Typhoon might too. Typhoon is dynamically
unstable, which should increase its maneouvrability.

(BTW, is it right that the F-35's weapons bay is too small to fit in
some weapons like ASRAAM? My understanding is ASRAAM has a larger
diameter than AIM-9X, giving it potential for greater
range/acceleration).

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(My real email address would be if you added 275
to it and reversed the last two letters).

In article ,
wrote:

AESA,

What's this?

Active Array radar. Higher performance and more versatile than
mechanicaly scanned planar arrays. More reliable too.


360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

the 360 part is very important.


stealth, -9X,

The AIM-9X will have a shorter range than the Meteor (I'm assuming
that Singapore would buy it, it seems quite logical if they are
going for an air superiority fighter). So the Typhoons would be able
to get the first shot in (not only that, since they are faster than
the F-35, they have the ability to decide at what range the
engagement takes place). If the engagement does get to close range,
the Typhoon has (according to figures I've seen) a better thrust to
weight ratio and lower wing loading. F-35 has thrust vectoring, but
late models of the Typhoon might too. Typhoon is dynamically
unstable, which should increase its maneouvrability.

You seem fixated on close range combat.
Postulating a South Asia Typhoon v F-35 engagement, what makes
you think the more stealthy F-35 won't use NCTR then shoot the
Typhoon in the face BVR with an AIM-120?

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

"phil hunt" wrote in message

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:48:52 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:
Well it's good to dream but I'd say wait until the F-35C is flying
before making that judgement. That big wing, 56k lbs thrust (so
says RR)

Who's RR? The figure I've seen for thrust is 35 klbf (15900 kgf),

Rolls-Royce. They're working with GE on the F136 engine, which is the
alternative to the Pratt Whitney F135 specified for the first JSF batches.
The 56,000-lb figure came from Rolls-Ryce a couple of years ago; everyone
else is sticking to "40,000-lb class" for both F135 and F136.


The AIM-9X will have a shorter range than the Meteor (I'm assuming
that Singapore would buy it, it seems quite logical if they are
going for an air superiority fighter). S

Here you're comapring apples and oranges. AIM-9X is a dogfight missile; the
Eurofighter counterpart is ASRAAM. Meteor is a BVR missile; the US
counterpart is AMRAAM (which is shorter ranged) or one of several proposed
AMRAAM gowth options.

o the Typhoons would be able
to get the first shot in (not only that, since they are faster than
the F-35, they have the ability to decide at what range the
engagement takes place). If the engagement does get to close range,
the Typhoon has (according to figures I've seen) a better thrust to
weight ratio and lower wing loading. F-35 has thrust vectoring, but
late models of the Typhoon might too.

JSF does not have thrust vectoring, the tail nozzle moves only for vertical
flight.

Typhoon is dynamically
unstable, which should increase its maneouvrability.

But are like to the be dynamically unstable.

(BTW, is it right that the F-35's weapons bay is too small to fit in
some weapons like ASRAAM? My understanding is ASRAAM has a larger
diameter than AIM-9X, giving it potential for greater
range/acceleration).

The bays are designed for AMRAAM and 2000-lb JDAMS. ASRAAM will certainly
fit, but Meteor may not.

--�
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:50:14 +0100, ess (phil
hunt) wrote:

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 01:48:52 -0600, Scott Ferrin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:09:46 +0100, ess (phil
hunt) 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).

Well it's good to dream but I'd say wait until the F-35C is flying
before making that judgement. That big wing, 56k lbs thrust (so says
RR)

Who's RR? The figure I've seen for thrust is 35 klbf (15900 kgf),
giving F-35 a

I've never seen 35 anywhere. I've seen 40 a lot but that F119 in the
X-32 put out nearly that DRY.



AESA,

What's this?

360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

Eurofighter's has a MUCH smaller field of view. The X-35 will be able
to look in front, behind and below it. Basically all around.


stealth, -9X,

The AIM-9X will have a shorter range than the Meteor (I'm assuming
that Singapore would buy it, it seems quite logical if they are
going for an air superiority fighter). So the Typhoons would be able
to get the first shot in (not only that, since they are faster than
the F-35

An assumption yet to be proven.




, they have the ability to decide at what range the
engagement takes place). If the engagement does get to close range,
the Typhoon has (according to figures I've seen) a better thrust to
weight ratio and lower wing loading.


Depends. There is talk of putting the big navy wing on the land
version if someone wants it. That plus the uncertainty of how
powerful the engine will be makes this all speculation.



F-35 has thrust vectoring, but
late models of the Typhoon might too. Typhoon is dynamically
unstable, which should increase its maneouvrability.

You have to keep stealth in mind. The Typhoon likely wouldn't get to
USE it's superior manueverability (assuming it will have it).



(BTW, is it right that the F-35's weapons bay is too small to fit in
some weapons like ASRAAM? My understanding is ASRAAM has a larger
diameter than AIM-9X, giving it potential for greater
range/acceleration).


From what I've read the internal bays don't use rails like you'd use
for a -9X or ASRAAM. It's AMRAMM only. BTW there's serious talk of
putting LASER weaponry on F-35s at some point but whether or not THAT
little goodie would ever get exported is anyone's guess. Personally I
think it would be a bad decision.

In article ,
phil hunt wrote:

(BTW, is it right that the F-35's weapons bay is too small to fit in
some weapons like ASRAAM?

No, the AAM bay is designed for up to AMRAAM sized
missiles.

The RAF and RN are even thinking of fitting four ASRAAMs
internally.

My understanding is ASRAAM has a larger
diameter than AIM-9X, giving it potential for greater
range/acceleration).

True, but it's got a slightly smaller span and it's
slightly shorter.
--
Urban Fredriksson
Military aviation: Swedish military aviation, the rec.aviation.military FAQ
http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/aviation/
Weblog http://www.canit.se/%7Egriffon/aviation/avblog.html