Delivery of Raptor delayed

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 19:17:02 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:



The Eurofighters IRST is much better than the Raptors,

AFAIK the F-22 doesn't have one *at all*.

Yup! it may be an upgrade to the raptor at a much later date, so the
Typhoons PIRATE IRST is infinitely better.

IF the Eurpfighter's has
to be cued by the radar then it's pretty much dead meat against the
F-22.

No the Pirate system is capable of cueing the Missle shot all by
itself, the missile may require mid course guidance if required, but
otherwise its totally passive..

Unless the IRST out ranges AMRAAM it's pretty much in the same
boat. About the only time it would make a difference is if it could
help the Eurofighter take an entirely passive Meteor shot from outside
AMRAAM's range.

Well the IRST tracked Venus!, the real question is how stealthy to IR
is the Raptor....

its has a wider
range of missile countermeasures,


So the decoy-on-a-string is better than all-aspect stealth huh? You
must know something the USAF doesn't.

Well if a radar missile is actually launched at a Typhoon or an F-22,
I'd rather have a decoy than not have a decoy;-).



just a couple of areas where the
Raptor 'Comes up short'.

How about something tangible?

Your
Eurofighter comes up short in the speed department and a plethora of
other areas.

Speed department? are you talking supercruise, or top speed, either
way tactically there's little in it,


Cruising at Mach 1.7+ has little tactical advantage?

As opposed to a cruising Typhoon at Mach 1.5 , its the 0.2 Mach that
has little tactical advantage.

Source


BTW Cost is better too!!.

No arguement there :-)

All fighters have to trade something, the Raptor is no different, The
Typhoon has a better instantaneous turn rate than the Raptor

From what I've read it depends on the flight speed.

True, IIRC the Typhoon is better at Supersonic speeds around 1.5 or at
least that seems to be the best.

.... one
could argue that for R&D money the Raptor has cost, it should be
better in _all_ areas regardless, and be cheaper to manufacture and
support...

There are tradeoffs in where you apply your R&D dollars too. You
figure they built four prototypes of two different designs and two
completely new engines in addition to breaking ground pretty much
everywhere. And sometimes even the mundane ends up costing $$$ when
you factor in the necessity for stealth.

Do they include the Costs for the YF-23??.

I imagine the radome on the
F-22 costs a few bucks more than that of the Eurofighter. Even the
nozzles on the engines are likely significantly more expensive, even
the vectoring aside. None of that stuff comes cheap and it doesn't
help that they stretched the program so long.



Its not all one sided you know!.


Oh, I know. Out of the gate the F-22 will pretty much be a one-trick
pony (air to air) like the Tomcat was for so long.

Thats not unusual its the same with the Typhoon!.

It just seems like
certain individuals have an almost irrational hatred of the F-22.

And others can see no wrong ;-)

Cheers



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

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 19:43:09 +1000, John Cook
wrote:

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 19:17:02 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:



The Eurofighters IRST is much better than the Raptors,

AFAIK the F-22 doesn't have one *at all*.

Yup! it may be an upgrade to the raptor at a much later date, so the
Typhoons PIRATE IRST is infinitely better.

IF the Eurpfighter's has
to be cued by the radar then it's pretty much dead meat against the
F-22.

No the Pirate system is capable of cueing the Missle shot all by
itself, the missile may require mid course guidance if required, but
otherwise its totally passive..


But then if the Eurofighter sends an update the F-22s ESM system will
pick it up. Not to mention the missile's terminal radar seeker still
needs to be able to detect the F-22.




Unless the IRST out ranges AMRAAM it's pretty much in the same
boat. About the only time it would make a difference is if it could
help the Eurofighter take an entirely passive Meteor shot from outside
AMRAAM's range.

Well the IRST tracked Venus!, the real question is how stealthy to IR
is the Raptor....

its has a wider
range of missile countermeasures,


So the decoy-on-a-string is better than all-aspect stealth huh? You
must know something the USAF doesn't.

Well if a radar missile is actually launched at a Typhoon or an F-22,
I'd rather have a decoy than not have a decoy;-).



just a couple of areas where the
Raptor 'Comes up short'.

How about something tangible?

Your
Eurofighter comes up short in the speed department and a plethora of
other areas.

Speed department? are you talking supercruise, or top speed, either
way tactically there's little in it,


Cruising at Mach 1.7+ has little tactical advantage?

As opposed to a cruising Typhoon at Mach 1.5 , its the 0.2 Mach that
has little tactical advantage.

Source


BTW Cost is better too!!.

No arguement there :-)

All fighters have to trade something, the Raptor is no different, The
Typhoon has a better instantaneous turn rate than the Raptor

From what I've read it depends on the flight speed.

True, IIRC the Typhoon is better at Supersonic speeds around 1.5 or at
least that seems to be the best.

.... one
could argue that for R&D money the Raptor has cost, it should be
better in _all_ areas regardless, and be cheaper to manufacture and
support...

There are tradeoffs in where you apply your R&D dollars too. You
figure they built four prototypes of two different designs and two
completely new engines in addition to breaking ground pretty much
everywhere. And sometimes even the mundane ends up costing $$$ when
you factor in the necessity for stealth.

Do they include the Costs for the YF-23??.


I guess it depends on who's doing the math. Do you include all costs
for the entire ATF program or do you start the money-clock ticking
once the YF-22 was chosen over the YF-23?




I imagine the radome on the
F-22 costs a few bucks more than that of the Eurofighter. Even the
nozzles on the engines are likely significantly more expensive, even
the vectoring aside. None of that stuff comes cheap and it doesn't
help that they stretched the program so long.



Its not all one sided you know!.


Oh, I know. Out of the gate the F-22 will pretty much be a one-trick
pony (air to air) like the Tomcat was for so long.

Thats not unusual its the same with the Typhoon!.

It just seems like
certain individuals have an almost irrational hatred of the F-22.

And others can see no wrong ;-)

Nah I can see wrong. The wrongest thing in the whole F-22 soap opera
IMO is how friggin' long they're taking to get everything done. I
don't doubt that's been a significant factor in the total cost of the
program.