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.

 

Why isn't Eurofighter getting stealth?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 07:04 AM
link   
The Raptor can sacrifice stealth for an increased warload by carrying weapons on underwing hardpoints.

As for all this talk of the Raptor being behind the times, well, let me remind all concerned that this was designed for Cold War air superiority. The Raptor may be the superior aircraft (which is EXACTLY what it was designed to be), but the Eurofighter is far better equipped to fight today's wars.




posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 07:17 AM
link   
what is the difference between cold war and now. I understand that their is not (or at least a smaller) Russian threat, but still, if both are A2A fighters first, then the 22 is best.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 10:51 AM
link   
the f22 is the best but the eurofighter isnt that far behind
only 9 points



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   
where do you get this points system - do you have a link?


ppp

posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   
"I also heard someone say that the EF stealth was bested only by the Raptor - I was wondering if that included the JSF?"

No, it leaves out several of aircraft.

"only 9 points"

9 points...lol you realise this could be 9 in 9,000,000!

Some people are making the point that Eurofighter doesnt need stealth. This is incorrect. Eurofighter in air to air would struggle against ANY stealth fightrer. Even though Eurofighter is equiped with a very potent radar, the range from which it can see an aircraft will be reduced everytime the RCS of the target is reduced. In terms of the F35 JSF which has an RCS of 0.005 the Eurofighter would have to be so close to the JSF that the JSF would appear on Eurofighters PIRATE IRST before it would on radar. By contrast, Eurofighter has an RCS of 0.25 double that of a harpoon missile, and one sixth of an F16.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   
when you say the ef has a rcs of .25, are you talking about the front? the front is the only aspect that the EF2000 designers really concentratedf on (ex only one tail) and has none for any other angle. I also hear even the f/a-18e/f has a better rcs than the ef2000



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Might I remind everybody that stealth aircraft, even the likes of the F-117, can be tracked with long-wave search radar. While not very accurate, it will still take away the element of surprise. There are other methods to track aircraft besides radar - infrared, laser and good old eyesight. While there are countermeasures against all of these, these skills have not really been developed that much themselves - ie, there is room for dvelopment regarding that area of stealth / tracking.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 03:09 PM
link   
So simply fire a HARM at it. The radar will either be hit or turned off to save it, in the meantime a stealth plane can sneak in and kill it, no problem. also other forms of detection arre either at too close of a range or fair weather detection devices, so they arent as important as radar and are not really necessarily hard to prevent detection.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Was the Eurofighter designed to take out stealth aircraft and will it ever be likely to have to destroy one?



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hyperen
Was the Eurofighter designed to take out stealth aircraft and will it ever be likely to have to destroy one?


No, based on the radar it was to be equipped with.

No, because it will never even have the chance. Unless the export the Eurofighter to our enemies.

The only likely scenario is where the Eurofighter picks up a stealth fighter or bomber and does a visual attack with guns.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   
hang on mad man ill give u the link
the stuff
oh and by the way its not 9 in 9,000,000
the euro fighter has a bvr combat rating of 82%
where as the f18 has a rating of 21%
the nearest was the rafale with 50%
the raptor had 92% though cant blame it is the second best fighter out there



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
hang on mad man ill give u the link
the stuff
oh and by the way its not 9 in 9,000,000
the euro fighter has a bvr combat rating of 82%
where as the f18 has a rating of 21%
the nearest was the rafale with 50%
the raptor had 92% though cant blame it is the second best fighter out there


I think that those numbers are just a little biased.

I would not take that at face value, they do not give the criteria that was based on.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
may i say this why cant u guys let us have one good aircraft I MEAN COME ON JUST ADMIT IT FOR ONCE WE INVENTED A DECENT AIR CRAFT LET IT DROP ,SLIDE OR WHAT EVER U WANT
also why are these number biased if they are biased whats the point in posting them i mean if u where going to buy this aircraft u would need to know about the stuff so i have to say that if they were biased then u would know



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
also why are these number biased if they are biased whats the point in posting them i mean if u where going to buy this aircraft u would need to know about the stuff so i have to say that if they were biased then u would know


The point in posting them was to try to make the Eurpfighter seem better than it is. It is a good aircraft, but it is at least one generation behind the US.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 04:43 PM
link   
oh and i suppose the f 18 has super cruise AS STANDARD? no oh then we must be less than a generation behind
also i supppose the f18 can make mach 1.5 with out burners ?



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
may i say this why cant u guys let us have one good aircraft I MEAN COME ON JUST ADMIT IT FOR ONCE WE INVENTED A DECENT AIR CRAFT LET IT DROP ,SLIDE OR WHAT EVER U WANT
also why are these number biased if they are biased whats the point in posting them i mean if u where going to buy this aircraft u would need to know about the stuff so i have to say that if they were biased then u would know


The EF is a GREAT aircraft. it is not good, it is GREAT. It is the better value then the raptor, and is bested in 1v1 combat only by the raptor. It is on par or better then any other aircraft out there.

However, the Raptor IS a generation ahead - it has VERY advanced stealth, supercruise, thrust vectoring 2 supercomputers with room for a third, revolutionary radar, ECT ECT ECT.

I think the point is not how bad the EF is, because quite simply it is a magnificent aircraft, but to show just how good the raptor is. You should take it as a compliment - you have a plane that is only a little bit behind a plane, while costing about a fith the price.


[Edited on 19-4-2004 by American Mad Man]



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 05:33 PM
link   
i know the raptor is the second best (to the blcak widow of course the raptors bigger brother) i love that aircraft but like the black widow better
i was just saying how well this aircrfat has done agaisnt all other openents and how for once 3 countries could build a decent realiable fighter



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
oh and i suppose the f 18 has super cruise AS STANDARD? no oh then we must be less than a generation behind
also i supppose the f18 can make mach 1.5 with out burners ?


The Super Hornet can supercruise.

No aircraft besides the F/A-22 can do 1.5 without burners.



posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
emm i have to say this to state the obviois but what the **** is the point in a cannon on a supersonic jet ?
i mean come on its designed for supersonic manoveurs and stuff not for sub sonic fighting
also does the f22 have an engine that doesnt require it to afterburn to reach mach speeds ?


The vast majority of air-to-air combat still takes place at subsonic or transonic speeds, typically around Mach 0.8 to 1.2. Combat at supersonic speeds has never been very successful because both turning radius and turning rate suffer as speed increases.

www.aerospaceweb.org...

That is why we no longer see high-speed interceptor aircraft being built. Supersonic interceptors like the F-104, MiG-25, and Mirage III had such terrible maneuverability that they were very ineffective in typical fighter engagements. Today's fighters like the F-16, F-22, F-35, Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen, Su-27, and MiG-29 are all designed to be most effective in that transonic regime. Most fighter pilots will tell you that having a gun is highly desirable in this kind of engagement.



posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Originally posted by devilwasp
may i say this why cant u guys let us have one good aircraft I MEAN COME ON JUST ADMIT IT FOR ONCE WE INVENTED A DECENT AIR CRAFT LET IT DROP ,SLIDE OR WHAT EVER U WANT
also why are these number biased if they are biased whats the point in posting them i mean if u where going to buy this aircraft u would need to know about the stuff so i have to say that if they were biased then u would know


The EF is a GREAT aircraft. it is not good, it is GREAT. It is the better value then the raptor, and is bested in 1v1 combat only by the raptor. It is on par or better then any other aircraft out there.

However, the Raptor IS a generation ahead - it has VERY advanced stealth, supercruise, thrust vectoring 2 supercomputers with room for a third, revolutionary radar, ECT ECT ECT.

I think the point is not how bad the EF is, because quite simply it is a magnificent aircraft, but to show just how good the raptor is. You should take it as a compliment - you have a plane that is only a little bit behind a plane, while costing about a fith the price.


[Edited on 19-4-2004 by American Mad Man]


Yup, what I've been saying all along LOL!!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join