Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: TwinEng on September 14, 2009, 10:20:25 PM
-
Here are some cool photos from a photographer in the UK, who has been taking pics of the British Typhoon fighter in flight:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2602/3727115299_8c24e56de7_o.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2630/3681865321_f946292d6d_o.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3606/3662749601_4363324d15_o.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3566/3603438819_881d88c6db_o.jpg)
-
The guy on the back seat in the 1st picture looks happy
nice pics BTW
-
Looks Swedish.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/Guardian/news/gallery/2007/jun/01/internationalnews/PD260700@FILE----Two-Swedish-Ai-5680.jpg)
(http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/gripen/gripen_07.jpg)
-
Looks Swedish.
What do you mean? that's the JAS 39, what TwinEng posted was the eurofighter typhoon
-
What do you mean? that's the JAS 39, what TwinEng posted was the eurofighter typhoon
I know. They look the same.
Yaknow -- big doohickies in the back and the small doohickies in the front.
-
Here are a few more cool ones. These planes are really loaded with ords:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2114/2141843487_6e4d98027a_o.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2059/2335454918_d0aa497f9e_o.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3047/2661664638_fd6b2f336f_o.jpg)
-
nice pics, ugly bird !!! :D THAT is pretty :aok
(http://kovy.free.fr/image%201024/Rafale-23.jpg)
I really like a the Navy grey finish tho
(http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rafale/images/rafale_1.jpg)
-
agree refale is so sexy plus it has an active radar which Typhoon is still looking for one :lol
-
On the Wikipedia web page for the Eurofighter Typhoon, they claim that a single British Typhoon was able to defeat two USAF F-15E's in a mock dogfight in 2005. And that in a 2005 evaluation by the Singapore Air Force, a single Typhoon defeated 3 F-16's. Although for some odd reason, Singapore ended up buying F-15's instead of the Typhoon. :confused:
And in one official evaluation done last year, a group of 8 Typhoons were able to defeat a force of 27 other planes, that included F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1's, Harriers, and F-16's, without any losses to the Typhoons. I wonder if this test could have been rigged at all??
I guess if there is another major air war in Europe anytime soon, the RAF is going to really kick butt!
--
-
Nice aircraft and great photos. Not going to ever compare to the F-22, but will be a nice ally.
-
Nice aircraft and great photos. Not going to ever compare to the F-22, but will be a nice ally.
I was waiting for that one, for a F22's price you get 3-4 rafales :)
-
I'm not a huge fan of the looks of the delta wing
*ducks*
-
I'm not a huge fan of the looks of the delta wing
*ducks*
mmh really ? :O
(http://www.militarypictures.info/d/385-2/FR_rafale.jpg)
(http://www.aric.or.kr/trend/history/images/rafale/rafaleC01.jpg)
wish I could find more black pre series rafale pictures in HD this time
-
What? No Boomstick?
Where's the Boomstick?
-
What? No Boomstick?
Where's the Boomstick?
I googled boomstick and I found "shotgun", whats the link to the thread ?
-
I googled boomstick and I found "shotgun", whats the link to the thread ?
Army of Darkness reference
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/wcgkjyhcrb--This-is-my-BoomstickArmy-of-Darkness-Bruce-Campbell-Ash-geek- (http://www.entertonement.com/clips/wcgkjyhcrb--This-is-my-BoomstickArmy-of-Darkness-Bruce-Campbell-Ash-geek-)
Bruce Campbell fan, sorry.
-
Army of Darkness reference
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/wcgkjyhcrb--This-is-my-BoomstickArmy-of-Darkness-Bruce-Campbell-Ash-geek- (http://www.entertonement.com/clips/wcgkjyhcrb--This-is-my-BoomstickArmy-of-Darkness-Bruce-Campbell-Ash-geek-)
Bruce Campbell fan, sorry.
sorry, never heard of the guy :D
-
I'm not a huge fan of the looks of the delta wing
*ducks*
Me either I like the F-14's look when wings are retracted though. :) Though the F14 is never not sexy.
-
On the Wikipedia web page for the Eurofighter Typhoon, they claim that a single British Typhoon was able to defeat two USAF F-15E's in a mock dogfight in 2005. And that in a 2005 evaluation by the Singapore Air Force, a single Typhoon defeated 3 F-16's. Although for some odd reason, Singapore ended up buying F-15's instead of the Typhoon. :confused:
And in one official evaluation done last year, a group of 8 Typhoons were able to defeat a force of 27 other planes, that included F/A-18 Hornets, Mirage F1's, Harriers, and F-16's, without any losses to the Typhoons. I wonder if this test could have been rigged at all??
I guess if there is another major air war in Europe anytime soon, the RAF is going to really kick butt!
--
It's not the plane, it's the pilot(s).
:noid
-
I'm not sure the Singaporeans have the latest models/avionics either. The French air force did some training with American F16's. I've seen it on TV and they were claiming 6 F16's shot for 2 Rafales lost in close quarters combat. I couldn't find the actual results on the net so I prefer the stay :noid as TV is pretty biased nowadays.
EDIT : I found this bashful thread http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-52874.aspx (http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/6-52874.aspx)
-
"This is my boomstick!"
:aok
"Shop smart, shop s-mart!"
love that movie.
-
Pilots in all air forces have always over estimated their actual kill rate...whether it was virtual or real. Heck we even do it online so you know they do it in super fast planes as well. If every kill that the Germans, Russians, Japanese, British, Americans and anyone else would have claimed were actual there would not have been any aircraft flying anywhere in the world after the first year of WW2.
-
The claims of the Fortress gunners were out of all proportion to the numbers of enemy aircraft shot down: had they been correct, the Luftwaffe would simply have ceased to exist. On one raid over Lille, for example, the Americans claimed over 102 enemy fighters destroyed or damaged, whereas the German records list one fighter destroyed and none damaged.
:lol
-
Pilots in all air forces have always over estimated their actual kill rate...whether it was virtual or real. Heck we even do it online so you know they do it in super fast planes as well. If every kill that the Germans, Russians, Japanese, British, Americans and anyone else would have claimed were actual there would not have been any aircraft flying anywhere in the world after the first year of WW2.
well this got nothing in common with WWII and every weapon system they use is "simulated", And every "kill" they make si confirmed by HQ over the radio in real time.
-
I'd love the EU made a 5th generation fighter altogether so we can kick some F22 bellybutton :D J/K of course, but EU cooperation is always enjoyable after thousands of years of wars, and there is a reason the F22 never came to Europe, we have sharp radars :salute
-
Why do all these threads always turn into nothing but nationalistic bull... poop?
-
Why do all these threads always turn into nothing but nationalistic bull... poop?
Because country X is always better than country Z :rolleyes:
-
Peacetime estimates and projections about hardware in war are usually not worth squat. Thats how you end up with fighters without guns, some braniac with a slide rule that thinks he has it all figured out.
-
On the Wikipedia web page for the Eurofighter Typhoon, they claim that a single British Typhoon was able to defeat two USAF F-15E's in a mock dogfight in 2005. And that in a 2005 evaluation by the Singapore Air Force, a single Typhoon defeated 3 F-16's. Although for some odd reason, Singapore ended up buying F-15's instead of the Typhoon. :confused:
Survivability. F-15s have come home on a single wing. The Typhoon may get a shot or two in on an Eagle, but the Eagle might survive, whereas as far as we know, a decent clip from an eagle will knock a Typhoon down.
-
...whereas as far as we know, a decent clip from an eagle will knock a Typhoon down.
Exactly how do "we" know that?
-
I thought the typhoon is largely controlled by a computer as it is near impossible to fly. I would geuss then that any slight damage to the airframe would result in computer having trouble keeping it airbourne.
Great photos btw, thanks for sharing.
-
You guess. Serenity used the word "know".
And why do you think the computers aren't far better able to fly a damaged aircraft than a human? Even modern airliners have computers assisting the pilot in controlling the aircraft when some or most of the controls are damaged or completely gone. The Boeing people figured out a computer system that allows controlled flight with engine commands only in case of complete hydraulics failure.
-
Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXUBgWbfws
Stable, analogue Hawk didn't make it. Unstable, fly-by-wire F-16 did make it, despite losing most of the left tailplane.
-
its only in his wording, he didnt mean to sound like he knows it all, just enthusiastic.
-
Exactly how do "we" know that?
We don't, which was exactly the point of my post. "As far as we know" implies there is more we do NOT know. My point was that the Eagle has proven it's ability to sustain damage and maintain flyability. We know nothing as to how a Typhoon will handle in an actual combat situation, damage and all, because it has yet to experience one. Therefore, it makes sense that a country would select the Eagle over the Typhoon because the Typhoon is outstanding in theory, but until a country fielding them goes to war with them, their benefits will only be that: Theories.
This is no slight against the Typhoon. I expect it to be an outstanding fighter should it ever experience combat. I am simply saying it is unproven, and thus slightly less favorable compared to a proven fighter. But just in case... someone thought the Defiant was a great fighter in theory too...
-
Why do all these threads always turn into nothing but nationalistic bull... poop?
When did it turn like that ? Ho wait it did when you jumped in. Can't we have a nice chatter and stop trying to bash people ?
Because country X is always better than country Z :rolleyes:
What ? When did we even got close to saying that ? and BTW the EU is not a country.
-
Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXUBgWbfws
Stable, analogue Hawk didn't make it. Unstable, fly-by-wire F-16 did make it, despite losing most of the left tailplane.
do we really have to get lusche to explain the collision model again? :rolleyes:
-
When did it turn like that ? Ho wait it did when you jumped in. Can't we have a nice chatter and stop trying to bash people ?
Oh, I'd say at or around post 7.
What ? When did we even got close to saying that ? and BTW the EU is not a country.
However, France is, and for some reason you though it necessary to bring the Rafale to a picture thread about the Typhoon (or whatever they're calling it this week). Then the inevitable F-15 and F-22 remarks, my plane can beat your plane etc. etc. etc. :rolleyes:
Why can't we just enjoy the pictures of the Eurofighter? Start your own thread on the Rafale if you wish.
-
i'll see your typhoon, and raise you an eagle.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/EAGLE.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/EAGLE1.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/F15.jpg)
-
And why do you think the computers aren't far better able to fly a damaged aircraft than a human? Even modern airliners have computers assisting the pilot in controlling the aircraft when some or most of the controls are damaged or completely gone. The Boeing people figured out a computer system that allows controlled flight with engine commands only in case of complete hydraulics failure.
While I agree with the above, the example you posted, Hawk vs F16, doesn't prove it as we (I) dont know what parts the Hawk lost, and the damage to the F16 while major, didn't seem to be critical, but maybe it was the computer that made it so.
(devils advocate)
-
While I agree with the above, the example you posted, Hawk vs F16, doesn't prove it as we (I) dont know what parts the Hawk lost, and the damage to the F16 while major, didn't seem to be critical, but maybe it was the computer that made it so.
(devils advocate)
and yet a-10's have been known to bring their pilots home, while missing an engine, and both hydraulic systems for the controls gone, and the pilot having to fly it on full manual control.
oo ya....and ginormous holes in the wing too.
-
i'll see your typhoon, and raise you an eagle.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/EAGLE.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/EAGLE1.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa135/1LTCAP/F15.jpg)
nice, I'm not sure I ever saw a F15 in an airshow...
-
Oh, I'd say at or around post 7.
However, France is, and for some reason you though it necessary to bring the Rafale to a picture thread about the Typhoon (or whatever they're calling it this week). Then the inevitable F-15 and F-22 remarks, my plane can beat your plane etc. etc. etc. :rolleyes:
Why can't we just enjoy the pictures of the Eurofighter? Start your own thread on the Rafale if you wish.
You're reading too much into what pple say, if you want to enjoy typhoon pictures go ahead they are still there.
-
nice, I'm not sure I ever saw a F15 in an airshow...
i have, at mcguire afb. they're incredible aircraft. when they go by accelerting, full afterburner, it makes the hair on your arms stand up. :D(insert drooly icon)
-
they are all great pictures of impressive machines :aok
-
i have, at mcguire afb. they're incredible aircraft. when they go by accelerting, full afterburner, it makes the hair on your arms stand up. :D(insert drooly icon)
Is it any better than the F/A 18 ? I must say I was unimpressed by the hornet, it seems quite powerful but flies like a brick.
-
Is it any better than the F/A 18 ? I must say I was unimpressed by the hornet, it seems quite powerful but flies like a brick.
TO BE HONEST........
ya, think it may be. that could also be due to the fact, that the eagle driver put on a better show too.
they're ALL awsome machines though!
:aok
-
One aircraft that scared me was the MIG 29 OVT at the Bourget 2007, I guess the F22 can put a similar show and I can't wait to see it :aok