It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Typhoon flies AESA and full bomb load

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 01:17 PM
link   
old news - but did i really miss this one??!!??

www.flightglobal.com...


EADS has conducted the first test flight of a Eurofighter carrying an active electronically-scanned array (AESA) front end for the aircraft’s Euroradar consortium Captor sensor; a potential key element of further enhancements to the Typhoon during its latter Tranche 2 and Tranche 3 production phases.



and


www.flightglobal.com...


The UK Royal Air Force’s 17 Sqn Eurofighter Typhoon operational evaluation unit (OEU) has flown the first two of a planned three heavy weapons load trial sorties, as the aircraft moves towards receiving clearance to conduct air-to-ground strike missions from mid-2008.


the second link shows 6x Paveway II`s , 4 AMRAAM and 2x ASRAAM - which is really quite an impressive load.

i knew that CAESER was being flown on a tornado but not on typhoon yet




posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I wonder if the 2 "Instumented" weapons were the hybrid paveway 2/4s that were developed for afganistan?



posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Isn't the E.F. a fifth Gen fighter?



posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


No, it is generally considered a "4.5 Generation" fighter. There is only one fifth generation fighter currently in operational service, in the world, the F-22A Raptor. The second fifth generation fighter closest to entering service is the F-35 Lightning II.

Have a read of Intelgurl's thread… Fighter Aircraft Generations: A Reference…



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Is the E.F.'s ASEA better than the APG-79?



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


That would depend on the intended use of the radar and what capabilities it has. I haven't read any specs on the european sets yet.

The U.S. currently has AESA sets installed on F-15E, F-18's and the F-22. I also read somewhere that the B-2 and F-16 will be considered for upgrade programs.

If the is being used for tracking airborne targets like cruise missiles then any fourth gen fighter will do just fine with AESA. For ground targets in SAM country, I should think a fifth gen aircraft would be the way to go. For a recon/strike mission again the fifth gen plane is the smarter bet.

An AESA radar on a "stealth" platform would allow one to fly close to or inside enemy airspace, scan for signals, areas and targets of intrest, attack high priority targets, loiter in the area to watch for any responce to the attack, and provide real time data and targeting coordinates for future attacks, before returning to base.

Installed on a fourth generation plane AESA is a very cool upgrade, and all the cool kids will want them. Stealth aircraft equiped with AESA sets become a force multiplier.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
reply to post by Lambo Rider
 


No, it is generally considered a "4.5 Generation" fighter. There is only one fifth generation fighter currently in operational service, in the world, the F-22A Raptor. The second fifth generation fighter closest to entering service is the F-35 Lightning II.

Have a read of Intelgurl's thread… Fighter Aircraft Generations: A Reference…


No sign shows that F-35 is any sort of fighter yet, I'll come to correct each time I meeting this.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by emile
 


I'm sorry but I don't think I am understaffing you correctly. Anyway, the F-35 family of aircraft are very much considered "fighters", depending on the version, each one specializes in a particular field.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 01:55 PM
link   
with a small and minor detail that other than carrying AIM-9x which frankly an unpowered glider can carry - the A2A capability won`t arrive till 2016 at the very earliest - 5 years after IOC.

so , as has been said quite a few times - its a fancy bomb truck.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Out of interest where is the canon located on the Typhoon?



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


Umm.. Why do you insist on mentioning this fairy tale of yours? Apparently my last explanation on the matter was overlooked, let me refresh your memory…

POST

Please stop with the story telling by mentioning an uncorroborated rumor while also adding on personal details and commentary.

But I'll bite, even if none of the F-35's receive full air to air capability until 2016, heck for the sake of it lets even go with 2030. That still has absolutely nothing to do with considering the aircraft a fighter or not, it is frankly childish to even argue about and discuss such a point.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   
and let me remind you that you are the only person on this entire forum that does not take the words of experts and chooses to live in fantasy land.

the F35A is being sold as the F16 replacement - and from the get go , must have A2A capabilty to achieve that role.


so stop with the fantasy that you know more than the experts - there are issues with these production aircraft that are assigned for testing - the gearbox which is for both the F35A and F35C P&W F135 engines needs to be redesigned - the government contract - which you ignored previously- says that quite clearly.

whilst being able to carry sidewinders does constitute self defence capability - the Vulcan bomber can carry them - and that by no stretch is a fighter.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Thirst
 


inside it.


in the wing root



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
and let me remind you that you are the only person on this entire forum that does not take the words of experts...


"Experts"? I have no time for Sprey replicas, foreign reporters and ambiguous anonymous sources. The best experts, with respect to this case, are those directly involved with the F-35 program.


Originally posted by Harlequin
the F35A is being sold as the F16 replacement - and from the get go , must have A2A capabilty to achieve that role.


And there is nothing substantial that indicates it will not have such a capability, hearsay from unnamed persons is meaningless. You can go pretending there is more information than that for all I care. However in the end, simple truth is, there is nothing credible to indicate what you claiming.


Originally posted by Harlequin
there are issues with these production aircraft that are assigned for testing...


When have I ever indicated that there were "issues" which where discovered during initial testing? BTW, AA-1 is not a production variant of the F-35…



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   
Lockheed themselves stated the AA-1 is the production version of the F35A , as the BF-1 is the production version of the F35B.

its on the lockheed website - go look it up.


`The best experts, with respect to this case, are those directly involved with the F-35 program.`


and those are the ones where the information is coming from - those directly attached to the prgramme be they domestic or foreign which leads to:

`And there is nothing substantial that indicates it will not have such a capability, hearsay from unnamed persons is meaningless. You can go pretending there is more information than that for all I care. However in the end, simple truth is, there is nothing credible to indicate what you claiming.`


reports from memeber of the testing team and purchasing countries members on that team state that it wont have anything other than self defence A2A capability before 2016.

your arguing your point against those people on the programme who are quoting isuues with the production aircraft - remember this programme cuts out the classical protoypes because the X series aircraft were to prove the concept and that each company can deliver the aircraft as designed and that it could perform within the spec they laid down - same as the F22 competition - and lessons learn then were directly applied this time and for future programmes.

prototyypes of this nature costs serious money - so they have to get it right first time.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally psoted by Harlequin
Lockheed themselves stated the AA-1 is the production version of the F35A , as the BF-1 is the production version of the F35B.


AA-1 is not representative of the F-35B due to redesign changes made while it was being assembled. BF-1 on the other hand is much closer in comparison to the F-35B, hence why I did not bring t up.


Originally psoted by Harlequin
and those are the ones where the information is coming from - those directly attached to the prgramme be they domestic or foreign which leads to:


Umm… no LM or the US military has not publically or officially released anything to indicate such. An unconfirmed, unnamed, person (yes singular) claiming to work within the huge F-35 program stating unsupported information is, as I said above, meaningless.


Originally psoted by Harlequin
…and purchasing countries members on that team state that it wont have anything other than self defence A2A capability before 2016.


Please quote, you wont because there is nothing but a single passage from a source such as the one I indicated above.


Originally psoted by Harlequin
remember this programme cuts out the classical protoypes because the X series aircraft were to prove the concept and that each company can deliver the aircraft as designed and that it could perform within the spec they laid down - same as the F22 competition - and lessons learn then were directly applied this time and for future programmes.


Umm… no it does not, please read up before stating such. What LM has proposed is to reduce the number of test flights due to computer simulations and other advanced means or testing. However that has nothing to do with the structure of the program, or how many test aircraft there will be.

For some refreshing, the X-35 (ABC) were all prototypes because they were the concept and technology demonstrators. They not only had major structural and design differences (from the final production version) but they also used off the shelf technology and systems to simulate advanced ones that would eventually be fielded. And in some case the X series lacked certain systems altogether because it was just a technology and concept demonstrator. It was not a test aircraft by any stretch of the imagination.

On the other hand the 23 pre production models (AA-1 etc...) will be very similar to the final design and in some cases identical. However they will have testing equipment on them and they will be used to validate the new systems developed for the Lightning. A prototype is just basically an empty shell largely different form the production standard used to show that the concept is achievable. While a test aircraft is a closer representative of the final production design with many (if not all of the) production systems and technologies.

For example, the F-22A Raptor had two YF-22 prototypes and several pre production EMD aircraft used at Nellis and Edwards for initial flight tests.

The F-35 series already had the X-35 initial prototypes and there will be a total of 23 test aircraft (F-35's of all variants) built for various purposes. Of these 15 will be used for flight tests, 7 for non-flight tests and one will be a radar signature test airframe. These pre production models will be thoroughly tested and they do in some forms differ from the final production standard. IOC (at the earliest) for the F-35A is scheduled for 2011, so there will be several years of IOT&E.

Please Read This Link

[edit on 20-12-2007 by WestPoint23]



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally psoted by Harlequin
Lockheed themselves stated the AA-1 is the production version of the F35A , as the BF-1 is the production version of the F35B.


AA-1 is not representative of the F-35B due to redesign changes made while it was being assembled. BF-1 on the other hand is much closer in comparison to the F-35B, hence why I did not bring t up.
[edit on 20-12-2007 by WestPoint23]


I just want to be clear on this one point everthing else I agree with more or less Westpoint. Do you mean AA-1 was suppose to be representative of the F-35A not B? (I'm already aware of why its not and has changed but it was suppose to be the A not B)

By the way this all stuff that should very much be in the F-35 testing thread not the typhoon just due to the depth of this convo

[edit on 22/08/06 by Canada_EH]



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   
edit:


and canada is spot on - gonne delete and repost in the proper thread

[edit on 20/12/07 by Harlequin]



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I haven't done this for too long but I'm gonna jump in on Westy's side.

AA1 was originally due to be fully representative of the production F-35A, but due to the re-design that was required after its construction had begun this was no longer the case by the time it flew. The F-35B however didn't start to get built until after the redesign, this allowed all the changes to be incorporated and so is the first fully representative production standard F-35 model airframe to emerge.



posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


I'm not arguing about that point its just that I think Westy had originally miss spelt what he mentioned in that the way he worded it as AA-1 was a F-35B. anyways n/m most of us know what he meant to say and I don't disagree at all about the weights and production models etc



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join