I dont know where you got your information on the Raptor being all out faster than the Typhoon ??

Last time I read, Typhoon can supercruise at Mach 1.3 to 1.5 at altitude.. and has a top speed of mach 2, So I really dont know where you got your information about the Raptor being able to cruise faster that the Typhoon in full burners.

From my reading, the Raptor has had a speed limit thrown onto it of Mach 1.8 due to airframe overheating. Though that was a while ago, so may be etchy information there.

As well as numbers advantage, as things stand there will be under 200 F-22's built... and about 700 Typhoons.. as it has recently had some export orders from Austria and Saudi Arabia.

There will always be a lot more NATO Typhoons to call upon, and as the RAF are finding out now, they have a very very low downtime for maintenance.

Anyway, will the US ever let an F-22 out of US airspace??

Typhoons have gone from Europe to several places around the world, from the UK to Singapore was no small acheivement... as well as some currently operating in the US.

Well, it still can't supercruise as quickly as the Raptor (Mach 1.3 at altitude with typical air-to-air armament), but about it going slower even with afterburners- I can't remember the source, but I think the scenario was both aircraft being fully laden (the Eurofighter would have a payload of 7500kg and the Raptor its standard internal air-to-air loadout)... The Eurofighter is obviously less aerodynamic because of its external weapons carriage, and has a worse thrust to weight ratio, so this difference in performance is to be expected- but don't get me wrong, the Eurofighter performs fantastically well, and in terms of priceerformance, it certainly has an edge.

Also- I failed to mention this earlier... I think the Eurofighter looks nicer, and the Raptor would be pretty dull at an airshow seeing as it doesn't produce visible smoke- but that is just my two cents. #

P.S. My nephew has seen the Eurofighter at the Sunderland airshow, alongside F-16s and F-15s, and he has never stopped talking about it since over the phone, so it must be pretty impressive!

Lets look at this as a silly one sided blog! Who controls the state of the art computer knowledge? Uh we do! America! Who has the biggest budget? Uh we do America! Who has to agree with us on everything? You all do!.lol Even if anything could compare remotely to the raptor it would not matter! We have the best trained pilots!The most real war time expierience,The biggest pilot training budget! we can kick all with 30 year old tech! let alone what we have now!

For every training hour in a typhoon there is atleast 100 hours in a raptor!Whos gonna win?....lol

quote:

Lets look at this as a silly one sided blog! Who controls the state of the art computer knowledge? Uh we do! America! Who has the biggest budget? Uh we do America! Who has to agree with us on everything? You all do!.lol Even if anything could compare remotely to the raptor it would not matter! We have the best trained pilots!The most real war time expierience,The biggest pilot training budget! we can kick all with 30 year old tech! let alone what we have now!

quote:

For every training hour in a typhoon there is atleast 100 hours in a raptor!Whos gonna win?....lol

...

Those were probably the most dumbfounded posts I have read in a long while.

The most real war time experience, lmao, ever heard of a place called Israel? Day to day war-time experience and a tradition of excellent pilots, trained on tactics that have been based on their lessons on Air Combat that they have learnt first hand in the field. Not in a simulator.

Your pilots aren't the best trained, I'd put my money on Israel again, possibly followed by the United Kingdom and other European nations, and then there is India (I'll get into that later). I can remember when it was a rarity that the United States won NATO exercises.

I've heard of many instances where U.S. pilots have been out-fought. I heard of British Sea Harrier pilots defeating U.S. F-15 fighters, then there was the German MiG-29 victory over the U.S. F-16s. I even heard Polish MiG-23s defeated U.S. F-15s at one point, however I cannot confirm that happened.

Then, we have the Indian exercises, where the Indians completely thrashed the U.S.

And we don't have to agree with you on absolutely ANYTHING! If you have what you call 'Freedom of Speech', then you'll let us argue and disagree with you.

As to pilot training hours, well I hear the USAF hours are about 200-220 annually? (Information from Janes). Well the Europeans aren't that far behind, used to be around that but you know how defence cuts are. RAF is about 180-200 hours annually, Germany at around 150, Denmark about 180...so really about 150-180-200 hours. India gets about 150 hours as well, so they're not really that far behind, far less than your claim to American pilots having 100 hours per one hour in a Typhoon!

I apologise for this being slightly off topic to Typhoon VS Raptor, but it had to be said, if raptor4u01 would like to continue this arugment, he can add me at britishfighterpilot@hotmail.com and we'll talk .

Cheers,

Lord Flasheart

Lord Flasheart,

While I don't share raptor4u01's attitude, and as far as what countries have the best fighter pilots - I have no idea, I have to point out that many of the contests you quote are really meaningless (India, for example), because they were, in fact, training exercises.

You can read here and many other places that they were conducted with specific structures that limited who could do what when, and what constituted a 'win' (simply achieving radar lock first, for example). This was done to help train on specific capabilities and to reduce the possibility of revealing secrets.

quote:

Lord Flasheart,

While I don't share raptor4u01's attitude, and as far as what countries have the best fighter pilots - I have no idea, I have to point out that many of the contests you quote are really meaningless (India, for example), because they were, in fact, training exercises.

You can read here and many other places that they were conducted with specific structures that limited who could do what when, and what constituted a 'win' (simply achieving radar lock first, for example). This was done to help train on specific capabilities and to reduce the possibility of revealing secrets.

You are quite right, however, it still means the American pilots didn't get the lock on the opposing aircraft!

But I disagree with these training exercises being completely meaningless...the Russians said they could turn a MiG-21 into a forth-generation platform with the MiG-21-93 upgrade and proved that in the Indian exercises. But I shouldn't be discussing that in this particular topic.

I will also point out to raptor...that the reason the Americans do so well in the air, is they never fight against someone with good pilots or aircraft . You can't expect to be called the best pilots in the world when you have F-15s with AWACS support going up against simple MiG-21s with pilots with no clue, long range missiles (or any idea has to how to use them) or AWACS support.

Thanks for the intelligent reply mate,

Lord Flasheart

I'm not going to keep beating this into the ground, but I thought I'd clarify some of what I said, since it looks like I didn't provide enough information.

Neither side brought their best equipment, and both were limited in the way they deployed their forces. Plus, I'm sure neither group wanted to reveal the maximum capability to the other.

For what looks like a fairly balanced analysis, take a look at this:

http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/exercise-cope-india-article02.html

They credit India with using some advanced tactics, and fault the Americans for not anticipating a more skilled opponent.

However, it also points out that the U.S. didn't use any active missiles, while India did, but that the U.S. still used the same tactics as they do when using active missiles. The U.S. was also outnumbered 3-to-1.

Many think (and this ties it into the topic somewhat) that the U.S. did as poorly as they did to help justify the costs of obtaining the F-22 - allowing the F-15 to come off poorly in this exercise, but who knows.

The bottom line is, when neither side is deploying the same equipment and tactics they would use in a real shooting war, the outcome of the exercise really doesn't mean much.

Its also important to remember that these exercises are scripted...right down to the individual engagements and what tactics, sensors, and weapons red and blue will use. They are for practicing skill-sets, they are NOT competitions.

Some of the political motivations may have manifested themselves in the US press, but I get a different impression of the exercises from some of the Indian articles. The good ones...the ones that actually seem to know what they are talking about...make no mention of score-keeping or who out-performed who. This is AGAIN because these exercises aren't contests.

Exactly Iguana - better put than the way I said it in my replies.

In fact, if they were contests, and each side really tried to "win," it would give the other side insight into how you plan your tactics, and that would be giving away too much, I think.

In a way, that's sort of what happened with the Cope India exercise, from what I understand. The Indians used tactics that the U.S. didn't expect them to, and that possibly gave the U.S. more insight into the Indian's capabiity, which, from a certain point of view, could be considerd a "win" for the U.S.

Any time you learn something you didn't know about someone else's combat capability, without anyone dying in a fight, is a real plus, I would think.

The way I understood it is that the US pilots were more surprised by how quickly the Indian pilots caught on during cooperative engagements. These guys weren't accustomed to using AWACS support as we know it...but apparently, they got up to speed on it much quicker that the US pilots were anticipating. They expected to have to spend more time teaching them than they actually ended up having to. Those Indian pilots were pretty sharp, and learned quickly.

Thanks for the replies guys.

quote:

Neither side brought their best equipment, and both were limited in the way they deployed their forces. Plus, I'm sure neither group wanted to reveal the maximum capability to the other.

Yes I know neither side brought their best equipment, and its good that both sides were limited, gets both sides used to the fact that one day things may slide against them or they may not get all the support and cover they would like.

quote:

They credit India with using some advanced tactics, and fault the Americans for not anticipating a more skilled opponent.

However, it also points out that the U.S. didn't use any active missiles, while India did, but that the U.S. still used the same tactics as they do when using active missiles. The U.S. was also outnumbered 3-to-1.

True, but if it comes to a war with a large nation, for example, China which will have alot more Chinese aircraft for every one U.S. aircraft so the Americans best get used to flying against alot more opponents .

quote:

Many think (and this ties it into the topic somewhat) that the U.S. did as poorly as they did to help justify the costs of obtaining the F-22 - allowing the F-15 to come off poorly in this exercise, but who knows.

The bottom line is, when neither side is deploying the same equipment and tactics they would use in a real shooting war, the outcome of the exercise really doesn't mean much.

Oh it means something, it means another excuse for the Americans to continue lobbying for the F-22 to take to the skies when its really not nessesary.

quote:

Its also important to remember that these exercises are scripted...right down to the individual engagements and what tactics, sensors, and weapons red and blue will use. They are for practicing skill-sets, they are NOT competitions.

Indeed, we do it in LO-MAC all the time .

quote:

Some of the political motivations may have manifested themselves in the US press, but I get a different impression of the exercises from some of the Indian articles. The good ones...the ones that actually seem to know what they are talking about...make no mention of score-keeping or who out-performed who. This is AGAIN because these exercises aren't contests.

Of course, but it is still interesting to see how aircraft and pilots did preform though.

quote:

In a way, that's sort of what happened with the Cope India exercise, from what I understand. The Indians used tactics that the U.S. didn't expect them to, and that possibly gave the U.S. more insight into the Indian's capabiity, which, from a certain point of view, could be considerd a "win" for the U.S.

Only if the U.S. are planning an invasion of India , I know they had those plans at one point but it seems outdated now .

quote:

Any time you learn something you didn't know about someone else's combat capability, without anyone dying in a fight, is a real plus, I would think.

But as you said, they're scripted, so they wouldn't learn much as it is .

quote:

The way I understood it is that the US pilots were more surprised by how quickly the Indian pilots caught on during cooperative engagements. These guys weren't accustomed to using AWACS support as we know it...but apparently, they got up to speed on it much quicker that the US pilots were anticipating. They expected to have to spend more time teaching them than they actually ended up having to. Those Indian pilots were pretty sharp, and learned quickly.

Then it must prove something, that Indian pilots adept well to new situations and have a good idea of what to do while thats happening.

Interesting stuff guys, thanks for that

Cheers,

Lord Flasheart

One thing I do know which may surprise a lot of you out there..

The Typhoon engineers have designed a kind of infra-red radar that sweeps the skies around the Typhoon for a radius of 200kms and picks up all heat emissions. The Raptor gives off a specific heat signature that can be (hasn't been yet) programmed into the Typhoon computers, therefore making its cloaking technology almost useless, except that it will believe itself cloaked. The Typhoon will be able to pull a bluff on the Raptor and take it down.
I just hope my bosses don't read this

"Cloaking technology"? What is that, exactly?

In Money the F-22 sucks nuts but its a good my bad Extremely Risky but amazing advantage investment
RAWR