It baffled me that UK MIC did jack shit between period of Harrier and Typhoon. Like, what the frick did you do in 30 years between Harrier and Typhoon?
Unironically rot, other than joint development with the US.
They also didn’t have fixed wing naval aviation for several years between the Harrier and F-35B.
Developed avionics for the US mostly
In the late 70s to early-90s bongs made various HUD, TERPROM, FLIR, HMD, Flight Control computers etc. that ended up on things like late model A-4s and A-7s, F-16s, F-14s
I think blowing up taxing MiG-29 on runway while bombing said runway is more impressive than any nose art, but that is just my opinion.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>whynotboth.jpg
4 months ago
Anonymous
No it's a gay armatard thread.
He hasn't stopped for months kek, I come back every few days and he's here every day seething about anything British kek
4 months ago
Anonymous
>marks for armament released, not targets hit
It's like participation trophies for planes.
4 months ago
Anonymous
Bombers generally add those for bombs for missions completed. Those also indicate what kind munitions used. First row with MiG are bomblet dispenser runs against runways, pretty suicidal kind of missions. Three rows in middle are cluster or dumb runs and last three rows are PGM missions. That brings us to another plane, RAF had to bring in ex-Fleet Air Arm Blackburn Buccaneers to designate targets for Typhoons. Typhoon didn't have laser designator integrated at the time, due to budget issues. Buccaneer had one because it at the time was pretty much designated anti-ship aircraft as it no longer had nuclear strike role. Even the RAF considered risk of not hitting a high value target like Soviet warship a waste of resources in late 70's. Designator pod used was same USAF adn RAF used on F-4 Phantoms and US Navy on A-6's or A-7's. The Buccaneer in Gulf War is another rather baffling episode of what the frick RAF was thinking. Initially they used those solely to paint targets for Typhoons and a couple weeks later they realized that they could simply use Buccaneers to take out any point targets as it could carry decent payload on its own.
Why the long face?
She is RAF aircraft, she has to deal with defense white papers. All the time.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>That brings us to another plane, RAF had to bring in ex-Fleet Air Arm Blackburn Buccaneers to designate targets for Typhoons. Typhoon didn't have laser designator integrated at the time, due to budget issues
You mean Tornado (and Jaguar), not Typhoon. Buccaneer was retired decades before Typhoon was in service.
It's because the thermal imaging targeting pod being developed for Tornado was still in development in 1991, where Buccaneer had American (non-TI) Pave Spike pods since 1979.
Two trials TIALD pods (named Sandra and Tracy after the Fat Slags comic) were rushed in to service and equipped Tornado during the Gulf War.
The case where Typhoons needed other aircraft to designate for them was in 2011 on Op Ellamy (Libya) where Tornados were flown with Typhoon to provide lasing with Litening II pods.
That was because there were insufficient numbers of Typhoon pilots who had been trained to use Litening pod - partly because of costs but also because the training program was a new one for single-seat pilots and was being reviewed and updated from lessons learned with the initial cadre.
aviation wise, manufactured all the refuelling, life support, ejector seat systems and sensors and other bits and pieces for the US, whilst bongland recovered financially a bit. Basically just kept the capability alive as much as possible by selling odds and ends
Defence White Paper gutted UK aerospace and the cancellation of what few projects were left (like TSR.2) made it worse. Cancelling them wasn't necessarily a terrible idea either - the entire period had a lot of questionable procurement strategy that was trying to create solutions for problems that didn't really exist - the US had tons of similar swan song projects like the XB-70 Valkyrie, but was big/wealthy enough to keep on going.
yeah this is silly. If one jet carries a greater A2G payload, it's a better ground attacker. The F-15E is utterly based in this regard.
There's a dumb irony that for the cost it took to convert the ground attacking Tornado into an interceptor, I beleive the unit cost was comparable to just buying F-15's. This is the British political class in action
Bongs (read: the English) are petty nationalists. I did an aerospace degree there and the incessant seething from students professors and industry partners about how the mean Americans simultaneously are incompetent but also stole all the good British inventions was hilarious
well, aside from the irony that you had to go there to do your degree, a lot of the seethe is from times when the USA used political muscle to kill UK aerospace projects to protect their own export interests. This hurts the bong.
well for some examples, the UK gave to the USA the proximity fuze, radar, penicillin, jet engines, etc. Proximity fuzes and radar went to Raytheon in Cambridge Massachusetts. Antibiotics went to Pfizer in Brooklyn New York. Jet engines went to General Electric in Schenectady New York. The UK then also shared all their nuclear research with the USA. The idea was the USA would repay by using its industrial base to help produce those products to sell back to the bongs at a good price, and would also share their nuclear research. But this never really happened. So a bit of a stab in the back. There's a lot of this kinda thing which does generate some justifiable seethe
>Typhoon FGR4 >has 20k lbs less max takeoff >has a shorter range even with bags by a thousand miles >single seat vs having a dedicated WSO, may seem like an odd thing to list as a con, but 2 sets of eyes on sensor packages, general awareness, faster reaction and response, these things are important for a strike aircraft especially for ground radar and a targeting pod on the same craft. >equal
We'll ignore pricing differences as well and just talk capabilities.
Don't get me wrong, I think the typhoon is a good bird, but they're not equal. And not just saying that due to being a massive eagle fanboy but she's got some clipped wings. It is however a great multirole bird,and IIRC it has a pretty great sensor package.
This, I'm as nationalist a Brit as they come and I'm not going to try and defend the Typhoon as a strike aircraft against the F-15E. Sure it's capable, but that's what the Lightning is for.
The Typhoon is a monster of an air superiority plane though and I will defend it to the death in that role. The new radar gets my dick so hard.
The Mirage 2000D, is fully the equal of the F-15E. It is a strike development of an interceptor, and was produced around the same era. It has the same capabilities and the same role. It is the equivalent of the F-15E
The F-5E, is fully the equal of the F-15E. It is a strike development of an interceptor, and was produced around the same era. It has the same capabilities and the same role. It is the equivalent of the F-15E
I was looking at side-by-side specifications comparison to F-15E.
It's about 4500kg lighter empty and 3.5m shorter. It's even smaller than Super Hornet.
TLDR yes
the F-16 is chibi
the delta wing Euros are about 20% lighter than the F-15C
I was looking at side-by-side specifications comparison to F-15E.
It's about 4500kg lighter empty and 3.5m shorter. It's even smaller than Super Hornet.
>F-15E
is a bomber
the F-15C and the Eurocanard airframes are much more manoeuvreable by design
and not in a meme "pugachev's cobra" way, but actually pulling higher Gs and tighter, faster turns while carrying ordnance
>smaller than Super Hornet
maybe 10% heavier than the Super Hornet
Wasn’t multi role until almost the 1990s by which time they’d wrapped up Tornado to meet their strike needs and the Cold War was over a couple of years later
Domestic production matters. Also Typhoon being expensive was honestly anomalous, I think they were expecting more foreign orders when they designed the thing. Typhoon spent a very, very long time in the oven and defense planning was very different in the 70s and 80s.
>its the 1980s (2000s), start of a brand new decade, field is wide open for next generation fighter sales. Time for Europe to catch up with America! >A British-German-Italian consortium, Panavia (Eurofighter GmbH), after much toil and setbacks, has finally produced an advanced multirole combat aircraft, the Tornado (Typhoon), which meets all the partner nations' diverse requirements. Hopefully some of the cost of its convoluted development can be recouped with foreign sales >Meanwhile, Dassault is certain that its own offering, the Mirage 2000 (Rafale) will enjoy the same export success as its predecessor the Mirage F1 >prospects are looking good for Euroboys, many countries are looking for a low cost, high performance light fighter to keep up with the latest generation of scary Miggers (Sukhois) >Yes yes, well done, Europoors, well done. HOWEVER >USA has just unveiled the F-16 (F-35), meant to be a less advanced, affordable export-friendly version of its primary air superiority fighter, the F-15 (F-22) .... but it still mogs the shit out of everything else >the Israelis just tested it over Lebanon (Syria), no better advertising required >oh fugg, everyone is lining up to buy it >Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, which France and the consortium had been hoping to capture, are the first in NATO to place orders >sells just as well with third world countries and proceeds to utterly dominate the market for cheap Western fighters over the next two decades .... sales which should have rightfully gone to the Tornado (Typhoon) and Mirage (Rafale) >EuroTurkey ends up being bought only by Saudi Arabia due to UK political bullshittery, only breaks even due to initial orders by the partner countries >Mirage does slightly better outside Europe thanks to an extensive overseas bribery campaign by Dassault, but not as good as expected >Still better than the Viggen (Gripen) I guess.... lel
How does this keep happening? Why does this keep happening?
>Why didn't Euros buy the F-15
Local jobs and skills preservation
>They all dipped with the F-16
the F-16 was only used by poorgays such as Belgium and the Scandis, the big players bought their own ie Harrier, Jaguar, Alphajet,
Mirage, Gripen
>with some c**ts being F/A-18 or F-18E
post Cold War
Domestic production matters. Also Typhoon being expensive was honestly anomalous, I think they were expecting more foreign orders when they designed the thing. Typhoon spent a very, very long time in the oven and defense planning was very different in the 70s and 80s.
Typhoon was meant to be in service in 1995, it was delayed because of post-Berlin Wall peace dividends
no >Harrier
F-16 can't VTOL >Jaguar
is a better low-level strike jet than contemporaneous F-16s >Alphajet
is cheaper >Mirage
again, earlier variants were the equal of the F-16, and it does have equivalent upgrade potential, only the French Air Force probably would prefer to phase it out for an all-Rafale fleet >Gripen
the E is as good as the 16V
Inevitably someone is going to b***h and moan about the Gripen E costing too much, but it can be maintained by conscripts and a sergeant, so in the long run it's actually cheaper.
uh, okay
>typhoon can finally match the ground pounding capabilities of a 30 year old yank aircraft
Implessive
The Typhoon is also 30 years old
The F-15A entered service 51 years ago. The F-15E entered service 30 years before the Typhoon FGR4.
>The F-15A entered service 51 years ago
It baffled me that UK MIC did jack shit between period of Harrier and Typhoon. Like, what the frick did you do in 30 years between Harrier and Typhoon?
Unironically rot, other than joint development with the US.
They also didn’t have fixed wing naval aviation for several years between the Harrier and F-35B.
the UK in the 80's was a bleak poor shithole
Developed avionics for the US mostly
In the late 70s to early-90s bongs made various HUD, TERPROM, FLIR, HMD, Flight Control computers etc. that ended up on things like late model A-4s and A-7s, F-16s, F-14s
que? Bongs were fielding the tornado. Perfectly fine ground attacker, bad interceptor
Just want them back lads
Is this Tornado thread?
>not Foxy Lady
you were this close
I think blowing up taxing MiG-29 on runway while bombing said runway is more impressive than any nose art, but that is just my opinion.
>whynotboth.jpg
No it's a gay armatard thread.
He hasn't stopped for months kek, I come back every few days and he's here every day seething about anything British kek
>marks for armament released, not targets hit
It's like participation trophies for planes.
Bombers generally add those for bombs for missions completed. Those also indicate what kind munitions used. First row with MiG are bomblet dispenser runs against runways, pretty suicidal kind of missions. Three rows in middle are cluster or dumb runs and last three rows are PGM missions. That brings us to another plane, RAF had to bring in ex-Fleet Air Arm Blackburn Buccaneers to designate targets for Typhoons. Typhoon didn't have laser designator integrated at the time, due to budget issues. Buccaneer had one because it at the time was pretty much designated anti-ship aircraft as it no longer had nuclear strike role. Even the RAF considered risk of not hitting a high value target like Soviet warship a waste of resources in late 70's. Designator pod used was same USAF adn RAF used on F-4 Phantoms and US Navy on A-6's or A-7's. The Buccaneer in Gulf War is another rather baffling episode of what the frick RAF was thinking. Initially they used those solely to paint targets for Typhoons and a couple weeks later they realized that they could simply use Buccaneers to take out any point targets as it could carry decent payload on its own.
She is RAF aircraft, she has to deal with defense white papers. All the time.
>That brings us to another plane, RAF had to bring in ex-Fleet Air Arm Blackburn Buccaneers to designate targets for Typhoons. Typhoon didn't have laser designator integrated at the time, due to budget issues
You mean Tornado (and Jaguar), not Typhoon. Buccaneer was retired decades before Typhoon was in service.
It's because the thermal imaging targeting pod being developed for Tornado was still in development in 1991, where Buccaneer had American (non-TI) Pave Spike pods since 1979.
Two trials TIALD pods (named Sandra and Tracy after the Fat Slags comic) were rushed in to service and equipped Tornado during the Gulf War.
The case where Typhoons needed other aircraft to designate for them was in 2011 on Op Ellamy (Libya) where Tornados were flown with Typhoon to provide lasing with Litening II pods.
That was because there were insufficient numbers of Typhoon pilots who had been trained to use Litening pod - partly because of costs but also because the training program was a new one for single-seat pilots and was being reviewed and updated from lessons learned with the initial cadre.
Why the long face?
She hungers
aviation wise, manufactured all the refuelling, life support, ejector seat systems and sensors and other bits and pieces for the US, whilst bongland recovered financially a bit. Basically just kept the capability alive as much as possible by selling odds and ends
The F-4 was just that good
Defence White Paper gutted UK aerospace and the cancellation of what few projects were left (like TSR.2) made it worse. Cancelling them wasn't necessarily a terrible idea either - the entire period had a lot of questionable procurement strategy that was trying to create solutions for problems that didn't really exist - the US had tons of similar swan song projects like the XB-70 Valkyrie, but was big/wealthy enough to keep on going.
they had a tornado, destroyed the entire air force
>fully the equal
Yet it carries less than half the payload
yeah this is silly. If one jet carries a greater A2G payload, it's a better ground attacker. The F-15E is utterly based in this regard.
There's a dumb irony that for the cost it took to convert the ground attacking Tornado into an interceptor, I beleive the unit cost was comparable to just buying F-15's. This is the British political class in action
Bongs (read: the English) are petty nationalists. I did an aerospace degree there and the incessant seething from students professors and industry partners about how the mean Americans simultaneously are incompetent but also stole all the good British inventions was hilarious
well, aside from the irony that you had to go there to do your degree, a lot of the seethe is from times when the USA used political muscle to kill UK aerospace projects to protect their own export interests. This hurts the bong.
well for some examples, the UK gave to the USA the proximity fuze, radar, penicillin, jet engines, etc. Proximity fuzes and radar went to Raytheon in Cambridge Massachusetts. Antibiotics went to Pfizer in Brooklyn New York. Jet engines went to General Electric in Schenectady New York. The UK then also shared all their nuclear research with the USA. The idea was the USA would repay by using its industrial base to help produce those products to sell back to the bongs at a good price, and would also share their nuclear research. But this never really happened. So a bit of a stab in the back. There's a lot of this kinda thing which does generate some justifiable seethe
bait thread
but it IS the best non-US jet in the world.
Laughs in Baguette F4
That's certainly not an F4 anon. The green coloured Spectra receivers are a big hint. They should be black.
>Eurofighter "taille-foune"
What a name...
>Typhoon FGR4
>has 20k lbs less max takeoff
>has a shorter range even with bags by a thousand miles
>single seat vs having a dedicated WSO, may seem like an odd thing to list as a con, but 2 sets of eyes on sensor packages, general awareness, faster reaction and response, these things are important for a strike aircraft especially for ground radar and a targeting pod on the same craft.
>equal
We'll ignore pricing differences as well and just talk capabilities.
Don't get me wrong, I think the typhoon is a good bird, but they're not equal. And not just saying that due to being a massive eagle fanboy but she's got some clipped wings. It is however a great multirole bird,and IIRC it has a pretty great sensor package.
it was bait anyway
This, I'm as nationalist a Brit as they come and I'm not going to try and defend the Typhoon as a strike aircraft against the F-15E. Sure it's capable, but that's what the Lightning is for.
The Typhoon is a monster of an air superiority plane though and I will defend it to the death in that role. The new radar gets my dick so hard.
The F-15 was also designed for air superiority. There is no reason not to assume the Typhoon would not be as good as the F-15E
Who the frick is assuming anything? Do you even know what a bomber does?
JASSM is superior to Storm Shadow, especially JASSM-ER and the F-15E still has better range while carrying an equivalent number of munitions.
ignore the bait
>the Typhoon can't drop bombs
That's how ridiculous you sound
No, it isn't.
>lust provoking image
The Mirage 2000D, is fully the equal of the F-15E. It is a strike development of an interceptor, and was produced around the same era. It has the same capabilities and the same role. It is the equivalent of the F-15E
This is an f-15 thread now
The F-5E, is fully the equal of the F-15E. It is a strike development of an interceptor, and was produced around the same era. It has the same capabilities and the same role. It is the equivalent of the F-15E
>The F-5E
what a joke of a plane. even its tail looks like a barn door.
>this modern aircraft is fully the equal of that 1970s aircraft
This lmao. In 2040 we'll have bongs claiming the tempest is fully the equal of the F-22 which is really an 80s aircraft.
wow, only 35 years later, how impressive to see you poors finally catch up to a late 80s jet
Wrong. With Brimstone and Storm Shadow, it is superior to the F-15E in the strike role
>Typhoon payload 16,500lbs
>F-15 payload 23,000lbs
Obvious bait but still
Why is the Typhoon so small anyway?
It's skinny, not small. Unless you're trying to compare it to a flanker or something.
I was looking at side-by-side specifications comparison to F-15E.
It's about 4500kg lighter empty and 3.5m shorter. It's even smaller than Super Hornet.
The F-15 is one of the biggest fighters ever made.
I guess that's my question then. Why isn't the Typhoon supersized? Is it aiming for a happy medium between F-16 and F-15?
TLDR yes
the F-16 is chibi
the delta wing Euros are about 20% lighter than the F-15C
>F-15E
is a bomber
the F-15C and the Eurocanard airframes are much more manoeuvreable by design
and not in a meme "pugachev's cobra" way, but actually pulling higher Gs and tighter, faster turns while carrying ordnance
>smaller than Super Hornet
maybe 10% heavier than the Super Hornet
Hey, guys.
Hey.
Hey!
Look, we can drop tings, too.
Guys?
Shit, posted a photo too clean museum aircraft with damn mannequins or photoshopped scale model. Real ones with dirt are better.
i'd like the f15 a lot more if we didn't export it to the saudis and israelites
Why didn't Euros buy the F-15?
They all dipped with the F-16 with some c**ts being F/A-18 or F-18E users.
It's not like they're poor, they can most definitely afford them.
Wasn’t multi role until almost the 1990s by which time they’d wrapped up Tornado to meet their strike needs and the Cold War was over a couple of years later
Domestic production matters. Also Typhoon being expensive was honestly anomalous, I think they were expecting more foreign orders when they designed the thing. Typhoon spent a very, very long time in the oven and defense planning was very different in the 70s and 80s.
>its the 1980s (2000s), start of a brand new decade, field is wide open for next generation fighter sales. Time for Europe to catch up with America!
>A British-German-Italian consortium, Panavia (Eurofighter GmbH), after much toil and setbacks, has finally produced an advanced multirole combat aircraft, the Tornado (Typhoon), which meets all the partner nations' diverse requirements. Hopefully some of the cost of its convoluted development can be recouped with foreign sales
>Meanwhile, Dassault is certain that its own offering, the Mirage 2000 (Rafale) will enjoy the same export success as its predecessor the Mirage F1
>prospects are looking good for Euroboys, many countries are looking for a low cost, high performance light fighter to keep up with the latest generation of scary Miggers (Sukhois)
>Yes yes, well done, Europoors, well done. HOWEVER
>USA has just unveiled the F-16 (F-35), meant to be a less advanced, affordable export-friendly version of its primary air superiority fighter, the F-15 (F-22) .... but it still mogs the shit out of everything else
>the Israelis just tested it over Lebanon (Syria), no better advertising required
>oh fugg, everyone is lining up to buy it
>Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands, which France and the consortium had been hoping to capture, are the first in NATO to place orders
>sells just as well with third world countries and proceeds to utterly dominate the market for cheap Western fighters over the next two decades .... sales which should have rightfully gone to the Tornado (Typhoon) and Mirage (Rafale)
>EuroTurkey ends up being bought only by Saudi Arabia due to UK political bullshittery, only breaks even due to initial orders by the partner countries
>Mirage does slightly better outside Europe thanks to an extensive overseas bribery campaign by Dassault, but not as good as expected
>Still better than the Viggen (Gripen) I guess.... lel
How does this keep happening? Why does this keep happening?
>Why didn't Euros buy the F-15
Local jobs and skills preservation
>They all dipped with the F-16
the F-16 was only used by poorgays such as Belgium and the Scandis, the big players bought their own ie Harrier, Jaguar, Alphajet,
Mirage, Gripen
>with some c**ts being F/A-18 or F-18E
post Cold War
Typhoon was meant to be in service in 1995, it was delayed because of post-Berlin Wall peace dividends
But the F-16 is better than all of those
no
>Harrier
F-16 can't VTOL
>Jaguar
is a better low-level strike jet than contemporaneous F-16s
>Alphajet
is cheaper
>Mirage
again, earlier variants were the equal of the F-16, and it does have equivalent upgrade potential, only the French Air Force probably would prefer to phase it out for an all-Rafale fleet
>Gripen
the E is as good as the 16V
Inevitably someone is going to b***h and moan about the Gripen E costing too much, but it can be maintained by conscripts and a sergeant, so in the long run it's actually cheaper.