Singapore down selects three fighters...

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

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:44:07 -0700, Harry Andreas wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

AESA,

What's this?

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

At the moment Typhoon uses the CAPTOR radar, but this may well
change to the AMSAR active array radar in future. There's also the
possibility of a conformal smart skin array of sensors, firther
increasing radar capability.

360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

the 360 part is very important.

Possibly. In any case, I imagine it wouldn't be difficult to add a
reverse-looking one to Typhoon, perhaps on a wingtip pod.

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.

I don't think so; I did specifically say that long range missiles
would be used first, but there's a possibility of close range
combat -- I've no idea how high that possibility is.

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?

I don't know what NCTR is, so I won't discuss that. If the F-35 is
switching its radar on to detect the Typhoon, then the Typhoon will
presumably be able to detect this (the signal will be
billions of times stronger at the Typhoon than what's received back
at the F-35), so I am doubtful of the possibility of the F-35
sneaking up on the Typhoon undetected.

--
"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).

If you read the company releases, CAPTOR is actually performing a lot better
than expected, and at a level comparable with todays AESA radars.
Supposedly (and I know very little about radars) it will keep itself in
service for a lot longer than previously thought, and may just jump to the
next big technical leap?

"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:44:07 -0700, Harry Andreas
wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

AESA,

What's this?

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

At the moment Typhoon uses the CAPTOR radar, but this may well
change to the AMSAR active array radar in future. There's also the
possibility of a conformal smart skin array of sensors, firther
increasing radar capability.

360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

the 360 part is very important.

Possibly. In any case, I imagine it wouldn't be difficult to add a
reverse-looking one to Typhoon, perhaps on a wingtip pod.

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.

I don't think so; I did specifically say that long range missiles
would be used first, but there's a possibility of close range
combat -- I've no idea how high that possibility is.

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?

I don't know what NCTR is, so I won't discuss that. If the F-35 is
switching its radar on to detect the Typhoon, then the Typhoon will
presumably be able to detect this (the signal will be
billions of times stronger at the Typhoon than what's received back
at the F-35), so I am doubtful of the possibility of the F-35
sneaking up on the Typhoon undetected.

--
"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:

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:44:07 -0700, Harry Andreas
wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

AESA,

What's this?

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

At the moment Typhoon uses the CAPTOR radar, but this may well
change to the AMSAR active array radar in future. There's also the
possibility of a conformal smart skin array of sensors, firther
increasing radar capability.

Conformal arrays are so far in the future as to be effectively a
daydream. Not to mention the impact on the airframe, fuselage,
and systems will be so dramatic as to require almost a new platform.
I don't see it as being retro-fittable.


360 degree IRST,

My understanding is Eurofighter has an IRST too.

the 360 part is very important.

Possibly. In any case, I imagine it wouldn't be difficult to add a
reverse-looking one to Typhoon, perhaps on a wingtip pod.

Typhoon is already a very crowded aircraft. It may be more difficult
than you imagine.


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.

I don't think so; I did specifically say that long range missiles
would be used first, but there's a possibility of close range
combat -- I've no idea how high that possibility is.

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?

I don't know what NCTR is, so I won't discuss that. If the F-35 is
switching its radar on to detect the Typhoon, then the Typhoon will
presumably be able to detect this (the signal will be
billions of times stronger at the Typhoon than what's received back
at the F-35), so I am doubtful of the possibility of the F-35
sneaking up on the Typhoon undetected.

NCTR - Non Cooperative Target Recognition

Radar has many modes, and new ones are becoming availabe.
That's all I'll say about that.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:10:30 -0700, Harry Andreas wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
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?

I don't know what NCTR is, so I won't discuss that. If the F-35 is
switching its radar on to detect the Typhoon, then the Typhoon will
presumably be able to detect this (the signal will be
billions of times stronger at the Typhoon than what's received back
at the F-35), so I am doubtful of the possibility of the F-35
sneaking up on the Typhoon undetected.

NCTR - Non Cooperative Target Recognition

Umm, that's sound bizare to me -- isn't it normal for the target
to not co-operate in being recognised?

--
"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).

"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 Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:25:02 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

"phil hunt" wrote in message
rg
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.


Pretty much everybody was/is skeptical of that figure from RR but it's
notewothy that the PW version used on the non VTOL X-32 hit 52,000 in
afterburner. Considering that several years more developement time
are going into the production engine AND that GE will want to have
SOME reason for the buyer to choose their's over the P&W engine I
don't think 56k is beyond believability. But almost.