Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: AquaShrimp on September 20, 2006, 06:48:52 PM
-
The Typhoons (2 of them coded AA and AC from 17Sqn) were originally there purely for EW testing work on an indefinate detachment. However due to the fact the USAF have nothing that can give it a run for its money at any range, they have been paying the RAF for the Typhoons to provide dissimilar combat training for the F-22.
In WVR the Typhoon is currently winning the majority of engagements as they are almost equal in manouverability terms (f-22 superior in instantaneous) however Typhoon is carrying hobs where as F-22 currently is not. Giving it a major advantage. Once (if ever) F-22 gets hobs, things should be pretty even.
Also the F-22 is winning the vast majority (but not all) of the BVR engagements. Which is as expected. However, on atleast one occasion the Typhoon has been reported to have detected, tracked and locked an F-22 at 80km! It is believed that the F-22 was carrying external tanks at the time though.
-
Its whos behind the stick, not the stick. ;)
-
Sounds cool, I look forward to hearing about how Red Flag develops with these two sweet fighters in the air.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Its whos behind the stick, not the stick. ;)
then the US should be able to go back to F5s or F86s I suppose.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
then the US should be able to go back to F5s or F86s I suppose.
If given a strictly air to air environment, we'd whoop em. :)
-
Given the same generation fighters, flown by *competent pilots, the determining factor in an air-to-air engagement is something known as the 'unseen fighter'.
Example: Two F-4s are engaged with two Mig-21s. If another Mig-21 were to join the fight, that side would likely win. Conversely, if an F-4 were to sneak into the fight, that side would win.
*The pilots dont have to be the best, just competent to fly and fight in the plane.
Source: The Air War over Vietnam.
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Given the same generation fighters, flown by *competent pilots, the determining factor in an air-to-air engagement is something known as the 'unseen fighter'.
Example: Two F-4s are engaged with two Mig-21s. If another Mig-21 were to join the fight, that side would likely win. Conversely, if an F-4 were to sneak into the fight, that side would win.
*The pilots dont have to be the best, just competent to fly and fight in the plane.
Source: The Air War over Vietnam.
Superior pilot training will win an outnumbered engagement.
-
Not if one of the superior pilots is engaged by an unseen enemy aircraft and destroyed before he has a chance to use his superior training.
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Not if one of the superior pilots is engaged by an unseen enemy aircraft and destroyed before he has a chance to use his superior training.
So that explains our 3.7 to 1 kill ratio in 'Nam. Thanks! :aok
-
Whatever you all want to debate about it sounds exactly like the F22 and the typhoon are doing what they are supposed to.
The latter being more manuverable than the raptor but sacrificing stealth.
The outcome should be as predictable as this is.
What some of rip says holds merit though, no matter what you employ they are never as good as the tactics that you use. However stealth engagement is designed to limit WVR and thus ACM tactics. If a pilot can "plink" off his targets with superior weaponry without even being seen (what the raptor does best) then the tactics dictate he do just that.
Although fully capabable, using the F22 at WVR is wasting much of it's usfullness, IE stealth. Against most fighters it can hold it's own but then again modern air combat usually doesn't result in a single fighter paired up against another single fighter.
-
if anyone has any sick video's of the typhoon, please post em up here
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Not if one of the superior pilots is engaged by an unseen enemy aircraft and destroyed before he has a chance to use his superior training.
And when Stealth Pigs fly outta my asss we won't have probs with Iran now would we?
Geez where do we pick up N00bs like this Aquashrimpchit?
Mac
-
what is "hobs"
-
Originally posted by Yeager
what is "hobs"
High Off Boresite System. Targeting aquistion.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
High Off Boresite System. Targeting aquistion.
Kinda like JHCMCS
Joint helmut mounted cueing system.
-
Originally posted by AquaShrimp
Given the same generation fighters, flown by *competent pilots, the determining factor in an air-to-air engagement is something known as the 'unseen fighter'.
Example: Two F-4s are engaged with two Mig-21s. If another Mig-21 were to join the fight, that side would likely win. Conversely, if an F-4 were to sneak into the fight, that side would win.
*The pilots dont have to be the best, just competent to fly and fight in the plane.
Source: The Air War over Vietnam.
such statements were proved false durring the Vietnam war where compitent american fighter pilots maintained the lowest atrition rate for fighters that the US has ever suffered: 1:1. however, after the navy and air force improved training, it went back up to acceptable levels. the reason that the US comes out on top in most arial engagements is because we have the best pilots. however, if a better pilot is facing a plane that completely outclasses his own, he's screwed.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
he's screwed.
Again it doesn't just boil down to the pilots or the planes, it's the TACTICS employed.
IE 4 on 2 engagment could be completely turned around with use of AWACS.
Exploit the advantages and minimize the weakneses.
-
AWACS isnt tactics. its hardware.
-
you don't give much credit to the training in the Royal Air Force Ripsnort.
-
But he did:
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Its whos behind the stick, not the stick. ;)
-
Originally posted by Tac
AWACS isnt tactics. its hardware.
But proper use and exploitation of it in combat is a tactic.
You can have all the shiny new toys you want but if you don't employ them correctly they wont stay shiny and new very long.
-
Last time I checked, Situational Awareness was part of being a superior pilot. That would account for not getting bounced in a fight.
-
Originally posted by Nifty
Last time I checked, Situational Awareness was part of being a superior pilot. That would account for not getting bounced in a fight.
Oh yea that's right. Those big radars and huge air combat command centers directing the fight and all those tankers keeping the planes up in the air......that's all the pilots doing. :rofl
-
Gotta love this thing:
(http://www.military.cz/international/air/eurofighter/typhoon_2.jpg)
-
The Yurofighter is a contender to replace our F16M3s and i hope either that or the GripenN wins. Both have _very_ different strenghts so im finding it hard to choose. I hope none of the other two contenders win.
(http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/na/archive/00246/norskgripen-t_246922c.jpg)
-
@Nilsen, although I work with the Eurofighter, I must say I love the Gripen!
-
The Eurofighter has more engine power and two of them. It will give us the additional safety over the North Sea and mountains. The EF group has met all finanical and technical requirements although cost is still not set in stone.
The Gripen-N will have twice the range of the original Gripen. ESA radar, very short take-off and landing (5-600m or even less), Designed to be used from "dusty" roads and highways just like the Viggen. It will cost less in purchase price and the life cycle cost is lower, and all the weapons we want to put on it will be integrated within the purchase price. It is designed for much fewer maintnance hours per flying hour than any of the competing progams.
I started off as a JSF fanboy, then moved to EF and now im leaning towards the Gripen-N but still the EF is a big contender.
If i could choose right now I would go for the Gripen-N in combination with the UCAV system the swedes are working on and the Taurus cruise missile.