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.

 

Navalized Typhoon back on the cards?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Some time ago, a navalized Typhoon was a hot topic for debate and discussion in popular forums, think tanks and here on ATS.

Some threads :
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The matter seemed to die down after MoD confirmed full backing for the F-35 program... until recently when BAE unveiled a proposal with models et al: for a navalized Typhoon for the Indian Navy.

Now this is still a long shot as the core drive behind the proposal is that the Typhoon also get selected for the MMRCA bid for the Indian AF, which is still undecided.

The Naval Typhoon branded as a 'Game Changer' by BAE(?), was revealed at the recently held Aero India 2011.

Sources:
www.defensenews.com...
www.defense-aerospace.com...

Typhoon Model at Aero India 2011:

1.bp.blogspot.com...
3.bp.blogspot.com...
1.bp.blogspot.com...

(Source- livefist.blogspot.com...)

Navalized Typhoon centerfold(?) in 'Eurofighter World 1/2011':
2.bp.blogspot.com...

Link to full magazine download:

Also note that the Indian Navy/AirForce has been offered (pending Congress consensus) the JSF 'if they (India) ask for it' and ofcourse if they go with the F-16 in the MMRCA.

When asked the British Defence Minister again affirmed full support for the JSF program.
Is the UK still keeping the Naval Typhoon as a low key option? Or is the work that came out of the review between the JSF and the Naval Typhoon now being re-used to woo India into going the Typhoon way for the MMRCA contest? It seems to be most likely the latter but there could be a hint of the former as well.

Also note that the Naval Typhoon concept seems to be only rated for a
STOBAR CVF model.




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Daedalus3
 

Six month ago if you had put this up Daedalus I would have said "nice try" and laughed at you asking where is your proof. Then again so probably would have you. I dont think this is just an attention diverter/spoiler exercise I think it's a fairly serious attempt. I suspect it isn't the Indian order that is the driver here, most likely it is a real attempt at a plan B for the RN as the F-35 just more and more looks like a delayed bad bet. Most likely a cash strapped MoD has encouraged the Typhoon consortium to come up with this quietly under the cover of the Indian competition with probably hopes that if the Indians say yes it will cover the development cost allowing it to be made available and at an affordable cost to the RN for the QE class. And if they did operate them the QE's would be highly suitable for STOBAR ops for an aircraft like this. What surprises me is that they claim Navalizing it would only add around 500kg's to the baseline weight. And they seem fairly upbeat that it is quite doable in a reasonable timeframe. No doubt it would also feature up-rated EJ-200's but then that has always been on the cards anyway.

This could just happen after all.

LEE.



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:18 AM
link   
so i know its just a model

but it appears to have thrust vectoring nozzles and two conformal arrays of some kind along its flanks?

or am I reading something wrong
edit on 16-2-2011 by maintainright because: doh, shouldve read the article first instead of just looking at the pretty pictures




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by maintainright
 


yeap.. TVCEJ 200 engines is what they propose.


Also, on another note, the EuroFighter World article mentions that the concept has already been discussed with 'a number of potential customers' (last para)

2.bp.blogspot.com...

Who may that be besides India (presuming the MoD still toes the JSF line). RAAF? JSDAF? Carrier programs are not present in these countries and so a 'naval' version would not make sense per say.

So then the Italians? Spain?
edit on 16-2-2011 by Daedalus3 because: other potential customers?



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
reply to post by maintainright
 



Who may that be besides India...
So then the Italians? Spain?


Brazil



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
It isnt going to happen - no government will commit to the expense and risk of a navalisation program at this stage in the game.

The only Eurofighter partner nation that requires a navalised Eurofighter is the UK - Germany has no carriers, and Spain doesn't have the right size carriers. France won't buy them as they have the Rafale, China is out of the question and India will go with Russian and Chinese equipment.

In order for the UK government to go with a navalised Typhoon, it would mean cancelling the JSF buy, which will ultimately mean dropping one or other of the JSF variants (VSTOL or CATOBAR), both of which have a huge primary customer (USN and the US Marines, who will be buying a lot) which has a vested interest in making sure the program succeeds.

In place of the dropped JSF buy, we would be buying into a program which has ... no huge primary customer (the Royal Navy would buy 50 maximum), little export market and significant costs and risks involved.

No government is going to sign off on that - the alternative to the JSF is never going to be a Eurofighter, its going to be a Rafale or Super Hornet buy.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
It wouldnt make sense. The JSF is stealth, which by the looks of it, all 21st century fighters are going to be. The typhoon is an older concept from a bygone era. It would be utterly useless against advanced fighters/air defenses of the 21st century.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky
It wouldnt make sense. The JSF is stealth, which by the looks of it, all 21st century fighters are going to be. The typhoon is an older concept from a bygone era. It would be utterly useless against advanced fighters/air defenses of the 21st century.


The stealth capabilities of the JSF was not a consideration in the British evaluation the first time around, as its costly to maintain (even though the F-22 was supposed to be a step beyond the F-117 and B-2 in maintenance of stealth, it is still hugely costly and the JSF uses the same techniques) and only useful in certain scenarios - so it is unlikely to be considered if the JSF purchase was scrapped and something else procured in its place.

Oh, and a non-stealth platform would be far from "utterly useless" in the 21st century - its a defensive capability, and the Eurofighter is built with reduced frontal cross section in mind, so its at a reduced risk already from the primary component of BVR engagements.

Initial strikes against a hostile countries air defences (SEAD operations) can be carried out by stand off weapons such as the JSAM, Storm Shadow and the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile - they can open the door as well as any aircraft these days (and did in Afghanistan and the 2003 Iraq invasion), without putting any pilots at risk.
edit on 6/3/2011 by RichardPrice because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Janky
It wouldnt make sense. The JSF is stealth, which by the looks of it, all 21st century fighters are going to be. The typhoon is an older concept from a bygone era. It would be utterly useless against advanced fighters/air defenses of the 21st century.


This ridiculous for stealth everything is actually quite dated. It is a mindset that belongs to the last years of the Cold War, where both the Warsaw Pact and NATO had highly advanced AA systems in place and needed a guarantee that they could get some planes through.

Today the nations who are likely to be on the receiving end of these aircraft are lacking in such advanced AA systems. Even where they do have such a system, it is far easier to use stand-off weapons like Storm Shadow to wipe their defensive capabilities out.

Even the USN is looking in the opposite direction with the Super Tucano:
Navy Evaluates Tucano

I would rather see the Royal Navy equip the carriers with a single air wing of these overpriced and questionable aircraft and perhaps top up with simpler more reliable and usable aircraft. Potentially even looking at a light attack carrier version of the BAE Hawk.

Jensy
edit on 13/4/11 by jensy because: Link Fixage



posted on May, 1 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Note that the Typhoon and the Rafale have been shortlisted for the In AF fighter deal, thus improving(?) the chance of both being investigated as an option for the In Navy. The Rafale is for CATOBAR only as of now while the Typhoon is envisioned as STOBAR. However the Rafale has many years of operational maritime experience, while the naval typhoon is only a proposed option as of now.



posted on May, 2 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
'Stealth' will be largely useless in about 10 years.

The US tipped their hand to early with the stealth bit. They covered all of the major expense and the testing...all so other countries could develope technology to track it.

IE: IRST

Given time, IRST will be good out to the same range as X band radar (what stealth is meant to defeat). As soon as that happens stealth is gone. There is no known way to hide a planes heat signature, you can reduce it, but not eliminate it.

Why do you think the US put so much emphasis on super-cruise, ultra high AoA, and ridiculous manuevaribility into the F-22? If they thought 'stealth' would last, they wouldn't have bothered designing a plane that could more than hold it's own without stealth.



posted on May, 3 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
Note that the Typhoon and the Rafale have been shortlisted for the In AF fighter deal, thus improving(?) the chance of both being investigated as an option for the In Navy. The Rafale is for CATOBAR only as of now while the Typhoon is envisioned as STOBAR. However the Rafale has many years of operational maritime experience, while the naval typhoon is only a proposed option as of now.


The Typhoon isn't going to be selected by the Indian purchase in a month of sundays.



posted on May, 3 2011 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
Given time, IRST will be good out to the same range as X band radar (what stealth is meant to defeat). As soon as that happens stealth is gone. There is no known way to hide a planes heat signature, you can reduce it, but not eliminate it.


Uhm, you do realise that "stealth" doesn't eliminate radar return either, it reduces it? So what you suggest is the future for IRST is already the situation for stealth features.

There has never, ever, in the history of combat been an all-winning, all-powerful, undefeatable technology that has survived the march of time. Speed and altitude didnt do it, and they were the holy grail of the 1950s. Manoeuvrability didn't do it, and that was the holy grail of the 1970s and 1980s. Stealth won't do it, being the current holy grail. And infrared scan and track technologies won't do it either.

Having said that, IRST is at a disadvantage next to radar - there are no known natural sources of electromagnetic waves that give a constant, undefinable interference in the radar system, while with IRST there are millions of them in the environment that have to be handled as junk and searched through.

Its also quite possible to do a "stealth" on IR sources - you reduce them, as you suggest, and IR becomes much harder to track over greater distances anyway. So you take your hot engine exhaust and you manipulate it by spreading out its heat signature over many frequencies - there are plenty of existing, known ways of doing that at the moment.

Military technology developers are not looking for something to be the be-all end-all everlasting solution, they are looking for technologies that will give them a temporary boost over their rivals - they know their technologies are on borrowed time from the moment they are developed, and they work with that knowledge.

Its also worth noting that even with stealth technologies, the biggest thing that comes into play is tactics - even the B-2 couldn't just fly into Soviet airspace and drop its weapons undetected, it used tactics to employ its stealth capabilities to the best effect. Knowing that the B-2s stealth capabilities are not the ultimate protection, planners had to create specific routes for the aircraft which took advantage of the fact that the stealth abilities reduced the enemies radar coverage, BUT DID NOT ELIMINATE IT! They had to fly through the newly created dead zones of radar coverage where radar sites effective range was decreased.

And guess what - they had to update this planning constantly as the Soviets moved radar sites around, switched bands and upgraded equipment. Stealth was not the silver bullet, but it did improve matters.

And the same will be true of IRST and the technology after that.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join