Only one RAF squadron is equipped with the F35 and that is currently dedicated to carriers ops (809 NAS is just about ready to begin operations). The RAF has aircraft from one of its Typhoon squadrons based in Cyprus as part of ongoing operations over Syria. It makes sense to use the assets already in place.
@jefffranklin4894
5 ай бұрын
Good ol' dambusters
@Rose.Of.Hizaki
5 ай бұрын
@@jefffranklin4894 sadly this is a historical fact that 90% of the UK population wont know about. The Squadron of F-35s being flown by the UK is indeed 617 Squadron that flew Operation Chastise in 1943. 👍👍👍 _'Après moi le déluge'_
@jefffranklin4894
5 ай бұрын
@@Rose.Of.Hizaki i only know it as i'm an RAF History buff. Grandad was in the RAF for national service (1951-54), and i was in RAFAC for 7 years with me now currently in the recruitment pipeline for RAF Logistics with 606 Squadron. Proud of my heritage and history
@teddypicker8799
5 ай бұрын
There are 2 combat squadrons now
@teddypicker8799
5 ай бұрын
I believe 1 testing and 1 training squadron too. We can deploy 24-36 f35bs anywhere in the world right now
@superflyguy4488
5 ай бұрын
Military planners should really visit the KZitem comments section more often, what with everybody being such an expert.
@SkyGlitchGalaxy
5 ай бұрын
😂
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
... you might wanna take a different perspective: they and military intelligence are quite happy, that YT & the internet help to offload them for spreading such a - let's say - `variety´ of information & rumours themselves 😈
@karlbrundage7472
5 ай бұрын
Your comment might have had some validity prior to 9/11, but the events of that day exposed the "experts" for what they are...................................
@superflyguy4488
5 ай бұрын
@@NRZ-3Pi10 You missed my point completely, you must be a DCS pilot.
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
@@superflyguy4488 Slightly amused about your feedback. Rest assured I got the message of your comment; mine just added a slight tongue-in-cheek undertone for some subtle traces of spicy flavour.
@fexyem5798
5 ай бұрын
Well, regarding the Air Policing, an argument for the Typhoon over the F35 could also be that the current mission requires a visual identification of the intercepted aircraft. Therefore the Interceptor needs to get close enough so that the stealth capabilities of the F35 become mostly irrelevant. Instead, the dogfight capabilities of the Typhoon are of significantly more benefit in this situation, in case it escalades.
@robshirewood5060
4 ай бұрын
The only ones who want escalation are the idiots in western governments, nobody else, including Russia wants escalation or indeed to invade Europe, its all a scam to boost the MCI and all its greedy degenerates who do not value human life "its a great investment in Ukraine because not one American life has been lost" to quote Cameron recently, but what about the lives of those they waste by pursuing this insanity that the west started in 2014. They put us all in danger.
@finenavaljewelry5798
5 ай бұрын
It's Europe's F-15 equivalent really - missile truck that flies high and kills everything
@alexs.4340
5 ай бұрын
F15 on steroid. In WVR the f15 is no match for a Typhoon
@KevinS47
5 ай бұрын
It's far more capable in terms of kinematics compared to the F-15C, so I wouldn't exactly label the two as equivalent of one another; certainly not a "missile truck" (and the F15C isn't an missle truck either haha what?!) !
@appa609
5 ай бұрын
@@KevinS47In its day, 8 fox-3's was considered a lot.
@appa609
5 ай бұрын
@@alexs.4340 Well the F-15 is a full 20 years older. Americans engineered another jet in the late 80's for the same role called the F-22. In almost every way that matters it blows EF out of the water.
@KevinS47
5 ай бұрын
@@appa609 ding ding ding, I smell yet another m braindead F-22 fan right here!
@falconeaterf15
5 ай бұрын
I remember playing F15E Strike Eagle sim back in the 90s. There was a mission where you are hunting down a large flight of cruise missiles over mountainous desert terrain. Hours of amusement!
@user-ho1yn6ms7y
5 ай бұрын
I remember that sim back then too! ❤
@falconeaterf15
4 ай бұрын
@@user-ho1yn6ms7y I remember the backseater would occasionally make puking sounds during extreme maneuvering, and once excitedly blurted out “ We blew that up bigger than Dallas!” after a strike on a oil refinery. Years later I heard that same phrase repeated on a combat HUD tape from desert storm. Strangely cool.
@forgeofknowledge9309
4 ай бұрын
1:01 Not sure why you missed Great Britain from the Typhoon's development, when it's written on the article. The British were the primary design group, having created the British Aerospace EAP, which the Typhoon is based on.
@Axispaw1
4 ай бұрын
Yeah that annoyed me too. Missing out UK involvement in EF is like missing out the US in F35s development.
@MostlyPennyCat
4 ай бұрын
Indeed, Typhoon is British in the same way F-35 is American. Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) is the British led 6th gen fighter.
@gregs7562
4 ай бұрын
Sometimes I wish we'd just gone on with the EAP ourselves & not fanny'd around with the Europeans.
@tonysadler5290
4 ай бұрын
@@gregs7562My father was a Hawker Sidley project engineer, formerly with the RAF 1936 to 1946. He always said we needed a European Aircraft Industry, as it was the only way we'd be able to compete. He left the aviation indusry after the TSR2 fiasco. We couldn't afford it on our own as the TSR2 proved. We were too reliant on the US. It was McNamara the US secretary of state that blocked UK loans with the IMF at the time that ultimately caused the demise of the project. The USA needed western countries to buy the F111. That, and Mountbatten running about decrying TSR2 saying he could have 5 Buccaneers for one TSR2. Had we been fully in with the rest off European aircraft manufacturers we might have had both. We would have pulled out of concorde (which insidently used pretty much the basic engines as TSR2) had it not have been for the French government holding the UK to its contract, and the then EEC standing up to to USA who banned concorde from their air space on exaggerated allegations of environmental pollution etc. The EEC retaliated and threatened a similar ban on US airlines which led to opening airspace. It is also notworthy that US industry set up offices in UK after TSR2 and offered a "new" beginning to former members of the project to go and work in the USA aircraft industry! No, I am glad of all cooperation with european engineering projects. It keeps us independent. As much as I have for many Americans (and I served with a few) I don't want that way of life. See you tube where US citizens compare there life to europeans - they all preferred the European way. Defence needs a successful economy. A successful economy provides everything, health, schooling development, investment. That's why the UK has had to rejoin european science and research bodies. If we want modern defence, then we have to integrate. Just think, if the merlin engine had been developed with fuel injection - how much more it could have been, eventually it had pumps. Injection is better. The eliptical wing was first developed by a German engineer. One of Mitchell's apprentices had an article about it for a project of his. He took it to Mitchell who recognised it's potential the rest is history. Collaboration between the european nations yealds world beating inovation and products. Together, we have the political clout and funding to bring them to market. We in the UK used go make stuff, good stuff. It was in the 80s that our own government sold our manufacturing industry and utilities to the international markets. Now we are asset stripped and alone.
@josephmarkey9096
4 ай бұрын
@@gregs7562 Indeed. It was a fine aircraft. Beautiful lines. Loved it's cranked arrow wing.
@Robert-xy4xi
5 ай бұрын
Turkey wanted to purchase 40 Eurofighter Typhoons but, Germany blocked the deal. Much to the displeasure of UK BAE Systems that had negotiated the deal.
@garethhughes5745
5 ай бұрын
Thankfully Germany are not as dumb as UK.
@delfinenteddyson9865
5 ай бұрын
what? why? Germany did sell them Leopards, why did they block the planes?
@noir1923
5 ай бұрын
not very friendly with germany anymore, even though our largest diaspora is in germany. strange.@@delfinenteddyson9865
@enisun5839
5 ай бұрын
Gsrmany is only selling us sea vessels for long time.
@SbrGrendel65
5 ай бұрын
Turkey is only NATO aligned when it benefits them. Otherwise they are a pita! Erdogan is a dictator and no way he’s running a democracy
@stephenhogg2472
5 ай бұрын
I may be wrong but I thought the UK had the F35B for the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy.
@Steamthrower1
5 ай бұрын
they do.
@Xenomorphine
5 ай бұрын
Yes. RAF has them, too, but the Royal Navy exclusively operates those.
@mp40submachinegun81
5 ай бұрын
they do, it was airforce, not navy. UK has an airbase in cyprus to fly from near israel. dont need naval aviation there, assuming thats what you're reffering to.
@Bob10009
5 ай бұрын
@@Xenomorphineno,the F35b fleet is a joint force of RAF and RN aircraft ,squadrons and crews.
@Bob10009
5 ай бұрын
RAF and FAA both have the F35b.
@MrRjsnowden
5 ай бұрын
I wonder if the Meteor missle is really the advanced tech on the Typhoon. Its a great airframe, but I think it carries an even better missle.
@RT42069
4 ай бұрын
Well, having a missile that can outrange an AIM-54 and maneuver like an AMRAAM definitely helps quite a bit
@denniskrenz2080
3 ай бұрын
What impressed me much more is how small the Meteor is relative to the AMRAAM. Its just a bit longer than a IRIS-T, if you just stand next to all three missiles.
@JasmineNuchbua-yg6nm
4 ай бұрын
You mentioned all the development countries except the main one, UK? When shooting down drones do you need stealth? No far lower operating costs for the Typhoon, more availability and a larger weapon load with greater endurance.
@henrikerdland578
5 ай бұрын
Air patrolling and quick reaction alert is all about speed. The eurofighter Typhoon has one of the fastest reaction time and with the ability to supercruise, it is probably the best aircraft for the job.
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
RE: „The Typhoon is the aircraft that’s ready now” … and it’s also opportunity to further prove its capabilities and testing latest enhancements in live environment. When thinking of air policing & QRA at NATO borders by European countries, there’s perhaps also some tactics by doing this `show of force´ with `non-stealth´ fighters “only”. Kind of “we’re not gonna show you everything of what we already have and how we will operate it”. Who knows, maybe there’s also F-35s up in the sky but acting in the back, already coordinating missions using their Gen 5 capabilities (e.g. direct plane-to-plane network / grid communication)…
@tomislavvukelic8897
5 ай бұрын
We croatians just got first 6 Rafale F3R version. Next 6 planes next year. Gret fighter jets.
@robbos3245
5 ай бұрын
You're right, Europe does know how to build a great looking Jet, which makes me proud to be European, but I cannot deny, there's nothing quite like the silhouette of an F22 Raptor. Now that is art. Functional art, but art nonetheless.
@JagdgeschwaderX
5 ай бұрын
I don't think our aircraft carriers are in the Med so the RAF was flying their Typhoons out of Cyprus for the drone stuff.
@alexs.4340
5 ай бұрын
Now Tranche 4 and 5 incoming. The Typhoon is a beast.
@gandalf6923
5 ай бұрын
Cost per hour is a factor - about $40,000 for F35, about $20,000 for Typhoon
@iain8837
3 ай бұрын
For those that have never seen the RIAT 2016 Typhoon display, have a look, it is fully loaded with weapons, very impressive. I love the Typhoon, they have flown over me…and under me when driving north Lossiemouth in Scotland. 100ft limit, what a sight!
@stupidburp
5 ай бұрын
Typhoon is good for high altitude air to air but less well suited for ground strikes. It can do air to ground adequately and is getting better at it but it is outside of the core strength of the platform. The observability level is somewhere close to Rafale and Super Hornet with some measures taken to reduce radar cross section but nowhere near full stealth. Agility, speed, weapons available, and situational awareness are all good. Against a Flanker it should have the advantage and that is what matters most.
@KevinS47
5 ай бұрын
From what I know it was mostly intended to be an air superiority fighter, with some elements of stealth (not full on coating though), over the years they modified the initial project so it could be also suited for air-to-ground with multirole capabilities. So while it's not the best suited for air-to-ground compared to something like an A10, I still have the feeling that it's good at it.
@bluefox9436
5 ай бұрын
Tbh "full" Stealth doesn't really exist anymore. Radars have improved as well and the times you could just fly over a hostile radar installation wirhout it noticing you are pretty much over. Though it certainly does reduce the spotting range and most importantly the lock on range.
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
@@KevinS47 In short you're wrong. Typhoon was always multi-role. The RAF requirement was to replace Phantom AND Jaguar. In the 1990's due to German budgetary pressures some of the emphasis on air to ground was delayed, not cancelled, just delayed. The reason was Germany desperately needed to replace F-4F as its main air to air platform, and had hundreds of Tornado for air to ground and integrating East Germany was hugely expensive. When Typhoon entered service in its Tranche 1 guise it was initially air to air only, but rapidly gained the ability to use Paveway II and targeting pods. Its long forgotten about but Rafale also arrived as air to air only, and contrary to popular belief Rafale has gained additional air to ground capabilities at the same pace that Typhoon has. In terms of air to ground weaponry Typhoon carries more varied munitions than Rafale can, a platform everyone thinks of as more multi-role. Cruise Missiles - Typhoon and Rafale both carry Storm Shadow/SCALP...but Typhoon can also carry Taurus PGM's - Typhoon and Rafale can both carry LGB's, Rafale carry's AASM, but Typhoon carries Paveway II and IV, GBU-12, SDB1 and JDAM/LJDAM..again a far greater selection Small PGM's- Typhoon carrie Brimstone (and LaGS), Rafale has no equivalent munition Anti-Shipping - Typhoon carries Marte ER for anti-shipping, Rafale carries Exocet Air to Air - Rafale carries MICA and Meteor, Typhoon carries Sidewinder, IRIS-T, Asraam, Amraam and Meteor (in greater quantities as well) Targeting Pods - Rafale carries Damocles, Typhoon carries Litening III and V (both of which are superior to Damocles) Typhoon will also gain an anti-radiation munition and small cruise missile way ahead of Rafale (AARGM/ER and Spear variants) The only advantage Rafale has is the ability to carry a nuclear missile.... As I think you can see now that the idea that Typhoon is not multi-role (especially in relation to Rafale) does not stack up...I should also note that Typhoon has performed far more combat missions than Rafale and dropped many times more munitions in combat.... The range and quality of the weapons is also far in excess of Rafale's capabilities and compares well with any other platform out there...
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
Just to add....pretty much everyone agrees that Typhoon has a much lower RCS than the Rafale. It was incorporated into the design from the get go. Rafales RCS improvements were far more modest. How it compares to SuperHornet I'm not sure however...
@Marlow8
5 ай бұрын
@@dogsnads5634 In short you're wrong. Typhoon wasn't always multi-role. The Typhoon project always had anair-superiority fighter as the final goal, however before production had started, the plans were modified as best as possible to make it more versatile/multi-role. Modifying already perfected plans ins't an easy task, so they had to settle with some drawbacks on its multi-role air-to-ground capabilities. Regarding how it compares to the Rafale, the Typhoon has clearly shown to be more capable both in BFM, kinematics (and so BVR) and avionics. With that said, while both aircraft have a lower RCS than your average 4-Gen fighter, the Rafale has a SLIGTHLY lower RCS than the Typhoon (on a clean configuration). As Kevin said, the Typhoon was designed with some elements of stealth in mind, but these are mostly implemented as electronic warfare technologies, rather than physical aspects of the airframe. Either way, both aircrafts are excellent at what they do, with the Rafale being more multi-role oriented and the Thyphoon being more Air-Superiority oriented.
@matsv201
5 ай бұрын
Stealth is a really good feature. But i kind think its overhyped a bit. But there is a other advantage. The loaded plane is really sleek making it more fuel efficent at high speed. Thinking about domething like J20, or even su57... with internal bays still give a aerodynamic advantage.
@callofduty611
5 ай бұрын
Engagements are always likely to be beyond visual range, so I'd say stealth makes a far larger impact compared to any aerodynamic advantage. Also obviously depends on what missions it'd be sent on and the amount of time it may be required to loiter.
@matsv201
5 ай бұрын
@@callofduty611 "Engagements are always likely to be beyond visual range," That might not always be true. "I'd say stealth makes a far larger " That only matters for radar guided missiles. The issue is that stealth fighters (but much less so stealth bombers) are really not invisible in the lower band. This have until fairly recently been really not a issue because that will prevent a missile from getting radar lock, hence no fire solution. This is no longer the case. Since 2016 this is no longer applicable (and possibly before that). While multi head missiles did exist prior. Modern link guided missiles probobly came around then (with the possible exception that there was some lesser known missile being able to do that prior) If the missile is link guided being stealth don´t matter. They can be guided via long wave, short wave, IR, visual or theoretical even satellite. Notching missiles is also a thing of the past. For instance would there be a new Denmark-Sweden war (very likely, already been 35 of those), Sweden would actually be better armed with Gripen and metior than Demark would be with F35 and AIM-120 AMRAAM becasue Gripen would both outrange and get a fire solution faster, even if the F35 have stealth... Of cause, this is only true for this and next year. When F35 got meteor integration gripen would have it far harder.
@khulgarulfsson8067
3 ай бұрын
I think it depends on the aircraft and how stealthy it is. In war games, the F-22 and F-35 are capable of complete domination against non-stealth fighters. For these two, I think the hype is justified. I would expect it to be the same for other US stealth aircraft. They have stealth and it actually works. For the J-20 and especially for the SU-57, I'm not nearly as convinced.
@matsv201
3 ай бұрын
@@khulgarulfsson8067 I do think the stealth of the F22 and F35.. specially so the F35 that is a bit worse, is getting dated. Both the radar are getting much better and so are the missiles. Go back just 10 years and the missiles had to lock on to the target. Today the missiles can be guided to the target with a longer wave radar, and lock on just in the last few seconds. Its really hard to make a aircraft so stealthy it will not be able to lock on if its like a km away or so. France, Germany and Sweden is pretty much there already. China probobly need 5 more years, and Russia probobly lack the capability to develop that during current situation. But i would say the F35 will probobly lose most of its stealth advantage with in a decade. F22 may last a few more years. Granted.. still there will be a advantage of stealth, but much smaller one
@khulgarulfsson8067
3 ай бұрын
@@matsv201 I think stealth hasn’t come under nearly enough pressure to reveal how extensible it is with decoys, etc. I don’t think it’s going to become dated as much as it’s going to become a minimum requirement.
@AtomicBuffalo
5 ай бұрын
It’s not just OpSec, but cost per flight hour, other demands, and in which team do you want to bank that experience.
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
I found the really interesting DERA study "Future Offensive Air System" today. The Eurofighter had a kill ratio of 4.5:1 against Su-27 Flankers and Su-35 Super Flankers, whilst obviously the (for EU expensive and heavy) YF22 had the best with 10:1, the Rafales had 1:1 with Su-35s, in a 4v8 against Mig-29s and Su-27s it managed a 2:1. Sadly I cant find an english version though and as I am german there's only the wikipedia article on the Eurofighter page as a source. Theres one more article from 2005, the classic "Eurofighter wins over 2 US jets" but that doesnt talk about the study. The closest one to a good informing read - after translating to english - is the article on the german website flugzeug-lexikon "ILA_2008 Luftwaffe Eurofighter Typhoon"
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
I find it very hard to believe that the Rafale would perform very differently to the Typhoon - flight characteristics are almost the same and the Rafale is currently packing a better radar to compensate for the Typhoon’s datalink to Meteor. Can you explain their reasoning? What was the date on the study?
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
@@TheGreatAmphibian let me first clear up: the study doesnt "really" exist. These are multiple studies test results all over west europe, each based on the similar conditions The beginnings date back to 1998, theres another article about "it" in 2000 and the whole story somehow concludes in 2005, thats the first year there are mentionings of the eurofighter being the "decision" (i guess) where again the FOAS "Future Offensive Air System" is mentioned. It was mainly to find an alternative to the F22, like i said Europe likes it cheaper
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
its easier to refer to the "DERA" or "FOAS" study. To me it seemed interesting that the Eurofighter than its competitors (other than the YF22) had better results under apparently SIMILAR circumstances.
@nobleman-swerve
5 ай бұрын
@TheGreatAmphibian Strictly speaking for air policing/supremacy, the Eurofighter was superior, especially when this study was done in the late aughts. It's basically a European F-15, able to get to altitude absurdly fast and keep that speed to grant immense kinetic benefits to any missle it lobs. Rafael is by no means bad, but it's just not as good as Eurofighter, and certainly didn't have an operational AESA in 2008 either. The Eurofighter just has an absurd level of thrust, 1.15 T/W in an air policing configuration to a Rafale's .98. That really matters for BVR when nobody has stealth to lean on.
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
@@nobleman-swerve If we’re talking about an old version of Rafale without AESA, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks!
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
i love our eurofighters.
@simongeorge2505
5 ай бұрын
The Typhoon can deploy the Meteor missiles (it can carry 4) where as the F35B can’t (yet). That gives it a lethal reach beyond the AIM120D’s. The Typhoon also has a much longer loiter time than the F35 as it can carry tanks.
@DWillis7
5 ай бұрын
I believe it can carry 8 (4 on the belly and 4 on the wings) but they usually operate with 6 meteor + 2 IRIS-T + bags.
@simongeorge2505
5 ай бұрын
@@DWillis7 RAF does not have IRIS-T (unfortunately) we have ASRAAM. You are correct it can in theory carry 6 but I've never seen one (operational/QRA) with mor e than 4 Meteor plus 4x ASRAAM and 2x tanks.
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
@@simongeorge2505 Just in theory with Meteor. No Meteor has ever been launched from a wing station on Typhoon, or in fact carried into the air. It would need a prolonged testing campaign.
@simongeorge2505
5 ай бұрын
@@dogsnads5634 That's probably true, as I said I've never seen one with more than 4 (on the body mounts). Its certainly been (wing) plyon launched from Gripen and Rafale and the Typhoon inner pylon can stand the weight (it will take a Stormshadow) and has the right data links. I am very much ***guessing*** but the reason its not been done is because it would require a different mounting kit for the body plyons vs. the wing rails. The Typhoon body mounts 'push' the missle clear to ensure seperation and there is no 'rail' to launch off. Wing mount would obviously use a rail system. Not a biggy as standard rail mounts must exist for it for Gripen etc. but there is probably no seen operational requirement to carry more than 4
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
@@simongeorge2505 Gripen and Rafale both have to carry on pylons as they either have no conformal carriage (Gripen) or limited (Rafale with 2). It's going to be a draggy store...Gripen with any weapons loaded is going to not have great performance...
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
RUSI published a study on how to use the F35 in air to air. Their conclusion was that the F35’s ungreat energy manoeuvrability and excellent radar meant that it should hang back and act as a mini awacs for Typhoon - very much like the Raptor/Viper pairing in Battlestar Galactica, so it’s a shame those two aircraft nicknames have already been used.
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
I'd expect actual air policing at NATO borders is used for training of such scenario to quite some extent.
@sparrowlt
5 ай бұрын
Its funny as in the spanish air force one of the first things they did when they got the Typhoons was to learn to use the datalink so the Typhoons superior radar could paint targets and the Hornets act as missile trucks firing AMRAAMs at then without engaging the radar
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
@@sparrowlt Sounds like the `radar food-chain´ - ".. and who is next going to be the bait?" 😉
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
@@sparrowlt Also smart!
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
@@NRZ-3Pi10 Well, if you need bait, then that’s one of the things the new wingmen drones should handle.
@feliscorax
3 ай бұрын
I mean, as an interceptor/air superiority platform, this thing’s the best aircraft flying that isn’t a Raptor, so I can definitely see why it is so trusted and relied upon by NATO in Europe. As a Brit, I say thank goodness she’s ours and not our potential adversaries’ weapons system. Everything else is moot.
@posmoo9790
3 ай бұрын
why did Russia annexing Crimea cause NATO to change it's posture? 1:20 The Russian's have been in Crimea & the Russian Black Sea fleet has been in Crimea since well before the USA was even an idea. Seems like that alone tells you it wasn't the Russians who didn't create this confrontation.
@BasedF-15Pilot
5 ай бұрын
We used to heavy-lift the Icelandic and Baltic air policing in the 493rd. The 492/494 took over (E-models) after our jets (the C-models) got re-distributed to guard units in MA and CA. I dont think the F-35's have the legs to air police properly without tanker support and they are winchester pretty much immediately. E-model guys were probably complaining about policing in bombers and asked the Euros to pick up the slack.
@timgosling6189
5 ай бұрын
For the QRA air defence mission Typhoon is the clear choice. As you say it can carry a bigger load out and get there much faster than F-35. It's a Mach 2+ jet with supercruise. RAF pilots love it, especially as it was designed specifically for the AD role and then later became a bomber, unlike the unhappy Tornado story. The only problem was how long it took to come into service. The Eurofighter programme was coming along nicely when I joined the RAF in '79 and we were expecting it to have full ISD in '92. Eventually it got a limited ISD in 05 and what would have been the finest fighter of the nineties was suddenly a generation behind. But if you don't need the stealth it's still a fabulous platform.
@mercboy111
5 ай бұрын
Good points. Let’s also not forget the Rafale M and Saab Gripen E 😊
@Husker5454
5 ай бұрын
Excellent QRA aircraft . Those rafales can fkin SHIFT
@weirdbritishperson9542
4 ай бұрын
@@Husker5454the Rafale is a good aircraft but tbf it was practically made off of the ideas of typhoon, of course changed but yk. Still a good jet and a good looking jet
@Husker5454
4 ай бұрын
@@weirdbritishperson9542 Yeah this is true they did leave the EF program for rafal its flight performance tho is better than typhoon although im not sure on range id had to look that up .
@mro9466
3 ай бұрын
@@weirdbritishperson9542 bullshit. Rafale is basically a mirage 4000 with bigger and moving canards
@solreaver83
3 ай бұрын
Show of force role like this you want to be seen for starters is my guess. Then the typhoon is faster, longer range, heavier loads and wider range like meteor missiles which I believe f35 still not ready for and cheaper running costs I've heard. All these things make the aircraft more versatile in a show of force mission and more efficient financially and force wise.
@deltaforceshuttles3749
4 ай бұрын
The typhoon is just such a nice jet / with the meteor and the iris ts the thing is a beast! I just love the simplicity of it
@user-aero68
3 ай бұрын
Those 1970's-style air intakes though are pretty ugly
@thoreberlin
3 ай бұрын
Eurofighter seems like a strange development where multiple teams don't talk to each other. It's build for dogfighting, but with the standard IRIS air to air missile loadout it doesn't need to dogfight at all, because you can send missiles to targets behind you. So stealth would have been the better option for that weaponry.
@joshman531
5 ай бұрын
Eurofighters are all good generally at air to air as that is what they were designed to do but I think a lot of RAF Eurofighters have now been upgraded with a lot more air to ground capablility.
@tomfuller4473
5 ай бұрын
Could it also be that the Typhoon is less likely to be mistaken as an Israeli jet by Iran?
@izziomelis
5 ай бұрын
Just from an historical perspective. NATO has a multinational an IADS system running since the early 60s. These deployments are either to support nations that do not have own fighter type aircraft to stand QRA, or to supplement other NATO countries in sensitive places like Romania or Poland. Thanks to the NATO IADS, called NATINAMDS, NATO countries have a fully integrated and standardized Air and Missile defence system to ensure all allies are protected. This is the equivalent of NORAD, but getting together 32 nations, is a huge achievement.
@RamblingRodeo
5 ай бұрын
I am concerned by the mentioning cost of shooting down the cheaply made ratio on drone vs. whatever is being used to take them down, it all seems like a massive DEBT trap in a lot of what is going on in terms of these little flare up conflicts all seem to be coordinated. As for the Typhoon, that is awesome to see them stepping up and using domestic aircraft to patrol the skys.
@minthouse6338
5 ай бұрын
Well hopefully energy weapons will be deployed by then. You know - like them phasers on the USS Enterprise NCC-1901
@rbrtck
5 ай бұрын
@@minthouse6338 NCC-1701.
@rbrtck
5 ай бұрын
It's being worked on--at least economical ground-based anti-drone systems, initially. It'll certainly be interesting to see what forms they eventually take, especially if/when aircraft are equipped with such systems. Maybe the solution will be for drones to take out other drones. 🤷🏻♂️
@PsychRian
5 ай бұрын
Its as simple as the typhoon being in interceptor
@hrvojegrgic5111
5 ай бұрын
The thing is also how much Combat ready pilots, there are much more of those in Europe already Combat qualified on Typhoon because it is 20+ years in use, while the F-35 is just starting to be ready in that sense. Also, Eurofighter Typhoon has a constant improvements program, latest batch includes a very capable AESA radar.
@danielhardman234
4 ай бұрын
sadly those improvements can only go so far, hence the current intention to replace the typhoon
@creativeearthian1702
3 ай бұрын
Fun fact..Rafale burns less fuel in low afterburner mode than Typhoon burns in the high subsonic mode
@MultiVeeta
3 ай бұрын
Oh rely? What are the figures? I think you'll find them somewhere up your backside just post them up here.
@creativeearthian1702
3 ай бұрын
@MultiVeeta For some reason yt doesn't let me comment with links. Anyway, read the interview with Rafale pilot Pierre-Henri ‘Até’ Chuet on hushkit
@MultiVeeta
3 ай бұрын
@@creativeearthian1702 the views of someone promoting the Rafale, how funny. Plenty of play on words in that article. You can find the data at Jet-engine net. Fuel use Typhoon EJ200- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.667 lb/lbf hr. Rafale M88- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.765 lb/lbf hr. As you can see the Typhoon actually burns less fuel in afterburner than the Rafale in afterburner. Now as for the article the pilot plays with words or the editor plays with his words. If any Jet engine was flying low it would burn more fuel in non after burner than a Jet engine would burn at very high altitude in afterburner. This is the play on words.
@MultiVeeta
3 ай бұрын
@@creativeearthian1702 the views of someone promoting the Rafale, how funny. Plenty of play on words in that article. You can find the data at Jet-engine. You need 'net' at end of Jet-engine. YT doesn't allow links. Fuel use Typhoon EJ200- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.667 lb/lbf hr. Rafale M88- dry thrust 0.785, afterburner 1.765 lb/lbf hr. As you can see the Typhoon actually burns less fuel in afterburner than the Rafale in afterburner. Now as for the article the pilot plays with words or the editor plays with his words. If any Jet engine was flying low it would burn more fuel in non after burner than a Jet engine would burn at very high altitude in afterburner. This is the play on words.
@creativeearthian1702
3 ай бұрын
@MultiVeeta your numbers don't take into account the thrust to drag ratio. But okay, I'm happy to stand corrected so I hope you're right
@mikesmith-wk7vy
5 ай бұрын
the f35 was always going to compliment not really replace. like they said , stealth its best attribute is gone when you add external weapons it doesn't have the agility of other platforms either its strengths are its stealth and electronics systems but now even the electronics of 4.5 gen are almost equal . countries are just all flocking to the f35 because it checks the boxes to work with the American systems and weapons and for Us things like the f22 and f15ex are in such small numbers we dont have any other choice but to use more f35s
@nukerock2451
5 ай бұрын
I think Typhoon is the right aircraft to use for these missions for all the reasons discussed, especially OPSEC. In addition, it's the F35B that's used by the RAF/RN so (allegedly!) it can only go supersonic for several 10s of seconds otherwise factory repairs are required for some of the stealth components. For missions where you're over largely uncontested skies (e.g, policing) I'd rather have the ability to get there in a hurry at supercruise and be very "dynamic" if needed.
@robinwhitebeam4386
4 ай бұрын
Stealth is not required when you want to show the enemy that you are there. Stealth and non stealth aeroplanes work best when used together.
@d_lollol524
3 ай бұрын
Typhoon sensors and radar are outdated when compared to the latest Chinese jets such as J10C . I hope there are upgrade plans for eurofighters .
@svenhaheim
5 ай бұрын
America by far makes the best looking planes if there was ever a beauty contest.
@dun0790
Ай бұрын
Im curious what will end up replacing the typhoon as there's a lot of projects on going but none seem to fill all of its rolls and things like our tempest i haven't got confidence it gets past a technologies demonstrator unless it basically turns into another Euro fight with multi national help and support
@hoghogwild
5 ай бұрын
Good discussion Gents. Pretty amazing aircraft.
@edwardwilcox6606
5 ай бұрын
No expert here but I like that Typhoon has 2 engines.
@bowser515
5 ай бұрын
Outside of the F-22, the Typhoon is up there as one of the absolute best fighters in the world. What I wouldn't give for a ride in one. But I'm happy to see them in out skies keeping us safe.
@Steven-p4j
4 ай бұрын
It makes sense for the UK to use the Typhoon, for their current mission. Firstly, they want to keep the heavy hammer close to hand, and any potential for an F-35 loss would be embarrassing. For the purposes of dealing with Russian incursions, they have no peer.
@Cymruambyth2
4 ай бұрын
Typhoon is multi role but a very good interceptor
@wayneprice2737
5 ай бұрын
The RAF have a base in Cyprus that covers the east of the Mediterranean sea.
@apparition13
5 ай бұрын
The F-35 should be the AF-35, since it's primarily a strike aircraft. Typhoon was designed for air superiority, and if you don't need stealth I'd take it over pretty much everything else.
@CWLemoine
5 ай бұрын
That's a Navy thing. The Air Force doesn't put A in anything except the A-10 which is solely an attack aircraft. F-16, F-15E, etc.
@apparition13
5 ай бұрын
@@CWLemoine Oh, I know that. I'm just saying that by role it's more A than F.
@CWLemoine
5 ай бұрын
@@apparition13 nah, it’s almost identical to a Viper. SEAD, DEAD, OCA, DCA, etc.
@electricaviationchannelvid7863
5 ай бұрын
@@CWLemoine SEAD, DEAD with what payload?? There are only a few dozen anti-radiation (HARM) missiles in stock in Europe...I am just reading Wikipedia which says most of the orders future deliveries...The Brits have the ALARM...The Turks ordered a lot of HARM but in the EU almost nothing...we could launch Taurus/Storm shadow against the fix sites but the most of the eastern SAMs are mobile...
@tomriley5790
5 ай бұрын
RAF is retiring 26 of the 30 Tranche 1 Typhoons (keeping the 107 Tranche 2s) likely keeping 4 for the Falklands QRA. It has several advantages over the F35, much cheaper to operate, Higher speed/acceleration and can launch Meteor so for interception and air defence the Typhoon is the best aircraft currently available. It can also launch stormshadow (stand off cruise missile - I don't think this can be launched from an F35) and is approved for lgbs All in all it does the job... Why the Tranche 1 is being retired and not replaced/upgraded is a good question.
@ScratchyYard
4 ай бұрын
cost cuts
@dltafrc17
4 ай бұрын
How come the us doesnt make any delta wing aircraft?
@montanaosprey9840
5 ай бұрын
In Eastern Europe, we’re in a prewar phase! LOL
@michaelmueller9635
5 ай бұрын
Stealth is overhyped. In a huge conflict, it's a matter of time, when Stealth gets visible and useless. You can use it only before or in the beginning of a huge war.
@moonbaby6134
5 ай бұрын
It’s all part of the evolution of air superiority
@mikedittsche
4 ай бұрын
Stealth is not a Yes or No type of thing. Even if your radar can see stealth fighters, the question is, "from how far" the same radar that will see an F22 from 50km away, will see a Eurofighter from 200km away and a Flanker from across a two countries.
@michaelmueller9635
4 ай бұрын
@@mikedittsche Stealth only works for a small spectrum of wavelengths. There are i.e. passive radars, which are using a really wide spectrum of wavelengths. As soon as you know, how to adjust to the pattern/signature of a plane, these are easy to detect.
@theshoot2958
5 ай бұрын
The F35 is the most advanced fighter today but the Eagle is the greatest fighter ever built!
@minthouse6338
5 ай бұрын
They ain't the same. The F-35 is a replacement for the F-16. F-15 Eagle was supposed to be replaced by the F-22 except the USAF didn't have enough money to buy all the Raptors they wanted. This is why we have the F-15EX to make up the shortfall in planes.
@theshoot2958
5 ай бұрын
@minthouse6338 I never said they were the same just stating facts! The F35 has all the tech but the Eagle is undefeated in combat!
@everypitchcounts4875
5 ай бұрын
@@minthouse6338 The F-15EX exists because foreign governments invested in upgrades and kept the F-15 production line going. USA had already stopped buying F-15.
@appa609
5 ай бұрын
@everypitchcounts4875 The EX exists because the DoD is unwilling to let Boeing defense die
@richardsarcheryreviews
4 ай бұрын
Hi mover the RAF has 107 Eurofighter Typhoon and only 34 F35 lightnings so the number speak for themselves we just don't have the enough F35's plus our airbase in Cyprus has a squadron of Eurofighter Typhoon in place for Syria operations
@DasIllu
4 ай бұрын
Showing presence and being stealth is a bit self contradictory i'd say 😀
@jackwardley3626
4 ай бұрын
whats wrong with depending on the Typhoon only problem is we don't have enough of them maybe cause they cost a bloody fortune I think we should make a cheaper fighter like the U.S. did with the f-16 to build up numbers see even the U.S. didn't want to pay to operate 2,000 or so f-15's at the time
@LRRPFco52
5 ай бұрын
If you’re only using stations 1 & 11 external on F-35s, it doesn’t affect frontal or frontal oblique RCS that much, especially for A2A, so that’s 6x AAMs, which is a pretty typical loadout for the Typhoon and no need for EFTs on F-35. Sure, you can load a Typhoon and F-35 with more AAMs, but it isn’t common for the squadron munitions distribution. The main birds historically that have maxed out A2A load were the F-4 and F-15A/C. Most other fighter interceptors would/ still do 2x2, 4, 2x4, or 2x2x2 AAMs. Tomcat was like that, Flankers are configuring like F-14s, and not many are loading to max. Typhoon, SH, and Flankers have impressive weapons load capacity though. Typhoon in A2A will often do: 4 AIM-120C or Meteor 2x ASRAAM 3x EFTs We’ve seen Su-35S with: 2x R-27 2x R-77-1 2x R-73 or 1x R-37M hypersonic LR BVRAAM 2x R-77-1 or K-77M 2x R-73 F-35 in A2A: 4x AIM-120D3 2x AIM-9X or ASRAAM Biggest difference is F-35s can pull into NEZ parameters and not much the targets can do other than die. The others have to play the BVR timeline game with mutual detection.
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
Standard RAF QRA loadout is 4 x Meteor and 4 x Asraam....has been for years now.
@LRRPFco52
5 ай бұрын
@@dogsnads5634 No EFTs? Which one has more stowed kills? Typhoon w/4x4 F-35 w/4x2 In 4th Gen BVR metrics, your first shots are usually posturing shots that don't connect.
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
@@LRRPFco52 They carry 2 EFT's as well. Standard loadout from Lossiemouth. Not sure a Meteor engagement comes into the realms of a posturing shot...
@LRRPFco52
5 ай бұрын
@@dogsnads5634 If you are detected and tracked at pretty extreme BVR distances, then whoever shoots first will have an upper hand in posturing for the follow-on set-up shot. It’s why the Flanker was made with 10 weapons stations, so they could hopefully out-last the F-15 in a BVR exchange. (This was countered with AESA in the F-15C+ and improved 6x AIM-120C.) F-35s don’t play by those rules because they get first-look, first-shoot/unobserved shoot within NEZ, as well as coordinated sim shots unobserved. Because of that, they have more stowed kills. Typhoon can step-up in capability in this area with the CAPTOR-E Mk.II, but those still aren’t upgraded into the fleet. Against another 4th Gen opponent, it would allow continual mid-course guidance while offsetting/beaming, but a semi-competent opponent flight would expect launch at certain distances and counter as well. Su-35S has a repositioner right now with their PESA, so it can do the offset with mid-course guidance and employ Extreme LR BVRAAMs, pushing legacy 4.5 Gen fighters off more in the first-shoot fight.
@NRZ-3Pi10
4 ай бұрын
@@LRRPFco52 … need to `use´ this comment here since the other thread with 50+ somewhat doesn’t work properly; at least it fits here since topic to some amount is also about demolition … Getting back to `scientific exchange´ and transporting to what we can observe on KZitem. It’s remarkable once it comes to YT clips dealing with technical topics, there’s always a certain portion of comments where one can notice also experts sharing their knowledge & experience, which I really appreciate and enjoy. I could imagine this must also have been the spirit during the early days of the Internet (with DARPA being one the initiators as far as I know, possibly also other scientific institutions). These days there’s been update from MS Dali and the corresponding Francis Scott Key Bridge incident with preliminary report from the NTSB, which I’m quite interested in and following. There’s also quite good technical discussions, too. Partly some `educated guessing´ of course, but some very knowledgeable people from various disciplines around. Common attitude going towards “what could have been the series and root causes of issues observed?” - like trying to commonly put together pieces of a puzzle. So even when raising hypothesis with bit of speculation included, there’s always some beneficial, general info and interesting things to learn (at least for anyone with some technical & engineering mindset). Bit of a pity that YT software team doesn’t spend bit more effort by e.g. introducing more than one indent level. But of course, primary YT target of the `comment section´ is to simply create `clicks & likes´ rather than `deep-dive forum discussion´…
@RossSnyder78
5 ай бұрын
I think the F35 has a very high cost of operation per flight hour, a problem shared by other 5th gen fighters. Also the limited range and weapons capacity are problematic for certain missions. The US made a mistake by trying to go all in on stealth. Not every mission requires stealth. This is why you see them trying to extend the life of 4th gen fighters. Better cost of operation, better range, more weapons, and the lack of stealth isn't a problem in uncontested airspace.
@EricPalmerBlog
5 ай бұрын
If they can get good MC rates (still a challenge) with the F-35, you would think the spherical DAS would be great for starting a visual during an intercept for an air sovereignty mission. Some day?
@AKlover
5 ай бұрын
Is A low-costs heat seeker tailored for swatting drones possible or would "Contractors" just refuse to make it? I mean the guided missile equivalent of spam email?
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
5 ай бұрын
Already covered by APKWS. At 30k a pop, it is a precision guidance kit for unguided rockets and it can shoot down cruise missiles.
@Matt-mt2vi
5 ай бұрын
@ChucksSEADnDEAD it's a good developing system and inexpensive compared to AIM9X. But it is limited on what platforms that can deploy it. Tested so far only by ground vehicles, which is fine for limitedcoverageif a small base. The APKWS system itself is certified on slow moving jets and helos. Maybe buy a few A-29 Super Tucano. Maybe put M203LF gun it as well. Cheap drone interception/overwatch compared to jets. Better to destroy the drones before they get close
@Xenomorphine
5 ай бұрын
Drone swarms are better countered by electronic warfare and high-powered microwave devices, which can neutralised thousands of them in one go.
@johanmetreus1268
5 ай бұрын
@@Xenomorphine Microwaves are easily protected against with Faradays cages and hardened electronics, and jamming only works if there are no navigational backup systems onboard. These measures drives the cost per drone up though, so there would be fewer where hardkill is the *only* option... but one can not evade the need entirely.
@Xenomorphine
5 ай бұрын
@@johanmetreus1268 That's not what recent US military tests demonstrated. I imagine it's a matter of power.
@SuperFrosty85
4 ай бұрын
Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey are countries that can't operate the Eurofighter because the US will not transfer the technology to launch the American nukes from their forward bases. So these countries would need to maintain two platforms if they wanted anything other than F35. or break their NATO commitments.
@thelmaviaduct
5 ай бұрын
Typhoon has a carbon fibre wing and much of the fuselage/tail. How much lighter and agile would the F-15EX/F-16 be if made with modern materials?
@mikedittsche
4 ай бұрын
Why do NATO countries that have F35 and EF Typhoon use the EF for that kind of mission? Because it is a much more capable interceptor than the F35. It is MUCH faster, climbs much better and can supercruise unlike the F35. The F35 is a much newer plane and has stealth capabilities and a better, more modern way to display sensor data to the pilot. But for an interceptor role it is crucial to start, get to high altitude, get to the threat and either shoot it down or convince it to fly home. And the EF excells at that, it will be having russian flankers locked on with its Meteor missiles long before an F35 would be there to meet the threat.
@TheShowdown16
5 ай бұрын
There is an interview with a Thyphoon pilot here on KZitem and I think he said that this aircraft can pull 9g with bag(s?).
@Micha-qv5uf
5 ай бұрын
Yep that's true.
@MrZtapp
3 ай бұрын
Well the Gripen E is a better fighter with a significantly better economy going forward.
@glynnwright1699
4 ай бұрын
The moment he said 'developed by Germany, Italy and Spain' I stopped listening, because he clearly had no idea what he was talking about. It came out of Air Staff Target 403, issued by the British Ministry of Defence and first demonstrated in the EAP. I watched its first public flight at Farnborough, having previously worked on AST 403.
@beniyashasama8327
5 ай бұрын
I don't know about other countries but my country, Spain currently has a fleet of F-18s and Eurofighters Tranche 3 and 4, most of which are still Tranche 3 are going to be upgraded to Tranche 4, and it also has a Harrier squadron at the LHD Juan Carlos I. The plan to update my country's air forces is diverse. First objective is to obtain 6 generation fighters through the FCAS program in which Spain contributes to the project together with Germany and France, second is to update the fleet of Eurofighters tranche 3 to tranche 4, and at least 20 Tranche 5 Eurofighters will be acquired. Third point is to retire the F-18 fleet and replace it with at least 4.5 generation fighters such as the Tranche 4 Eurofighters or 5th generation fighters such as the F-35 and finally remove the harriers and replace them with F-35 B.
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
If you look at the development stage of the FCAS, I would think this objective will be finalized after the Eurofighter update or even the retirements of the F-18. Is there a Back-up plan for the FCAS?
@beniyashasama8327
5 ай бұрын
@@0cu0 As far as I know, regarding sixth-generation fighters, my country only has the FCAS project. I'm not aware that my country has any back-up plan in case the FCAS fails for any reason. But I suppose if the case arises I only see two scenarios, the first is that my country, after having lost billions of euros in the FCAS project, ends up giving up the acquisition of 6th generation fighters, or the second scenario would be to try to enter in other 6th generation fighter projects such as the Tempest together with Japan, the United Kingdom and Italy.
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
@@beniyashasama8327 My guess is, Spain will update its existing Eurofighters with Tranch 4’s and gets some Tranch 5. Replaces its F-18 fleet with second hand Superhornets and ditches its Harriers for F-35Bs. The FCAS project will take to long (2050’s) or will fail altogether. Trying to incorporate some drone wingman with the F-35 would be a sensible stopgap solution till the Tempest has sufficient numbers to export.
@beniyashasama8327
5 ай бұрын
@@0cu0 I agree with everything except when you say that the FCAS will be operational in 2050, as far as I know, the first prototype with flight capacity will be no further than 2028 and by 2035 at the most the first fully operational units will already exist. As for the Tempest, I don't think my country is interested in simply acquiring 6th generation fighters. They are also interested in an industrial economic return and the development of technology. My country has decent defense companies that are growing in the global market and in order to guarantee their future it is vital for these companies to partner in such important high-tech projects as the FCAS or the Tempest. The acquisition of sixth generation fighters is not important only from the point of view of the defense of my country but also from an economic and development point of view.
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
@@beniyashasama8327 The 2050s prediction is by Dassault (Trappier), my guess for the FCAS is less optimistic. If participation is important, I would look into S. Korea (or Turkey) Korea will likely go, after the KF-21, directly for a 6th Gen. Fighter production.
@darylkemp1257
4 ай бұрын
Modern day spitfire 🇬🇧🇬🇧💪💪
@jeffslade1892
4 ай бұрын
I do not believe americans understand the use of an interceptor, quick reaction alert (QRA) such as the Typhoon as opposed to the multirole combat and strike F-35. Britain has the F-35B VTOL, which is considerably slower than the Typhoon. The top speed of a jet is largely determined by its intake, what is important is how quickly it gets there. This it where the power to weight ratio gives the Typhoon the advantage.
@CWLemoine
4 ай бұрын
Why wouldn’t we, who did this for a living and actually sat alert, understand it? 🤦🏻♂️
@Peter-or8oc
4 ай бұрын
I think if we were going up against the Russian Air Force directly one on one then we'd use the f35 but at the moment it's a lot more drone interactions and ground target raids so they're using platforms that can carry a lot of ordinance but like I said if we were going head to head with an enemy Air Force we'd use the f35 to clear the way
@jager6863
5 ай бұрын
Why does the UK deploy jets in less than squadron strength, which is 12 planes for the RAF??? Do they lack money and spares or are they worried all their wives will run off with other men/women?? In the Falklands, they deploy 2 fighters, which is crazy as they have a huge ocean to practice maritime missions and ACM, without speed restrictions. Two fighters is basically no air defense and/or stick time, do to maintenance downtime, etc.
@Migthunder
5 ай бұрын
To keep it short. Our government literally doesn't spend enough on defence. Even though literally the entire of the uk is begging for us to spend more on defence😂
@paulefc1971
5 ай бұрын
The Falklands detachment is basically a token gesture, they have known that Argentina don't have the capability to launch any meaningful air sorties against them so no point sending a whole squadron of pilots and ground staff, IIRC the Typhoons based there are also pretty old models
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
There are 4 Typhoon in the Falklands... There is also zero air threat... No-one sends full squadrons to air policing as it just isn't necessary.
@chriswhitehead9850
5 ай бұрын
The F35 and Typhoon are very different in both their ability and role. F35 can far out take out a load of 3rd /4th gen fighters but once in close is far worse at close quarters combat. F35 is not a full replacement fighter. The US has the depth to have several front planes but here we get to see why the F35 and others can fill the space.
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
RE: “The US has the depth of several front planes” and “F-35 is not a full replacement fighter” Very valid point; and we also should take into account F-35s capabilities to support AWACS and ground / naval control facilities to an extent never seen before and beyond the “classic” tasks of fighter planes (just copied from my other comment here).
@huntingsynth
5 ай бұрын
In a 1 vs 1 long engagement the F22/F35 wins over all other aircraft 100% of the time…if you get access to some of the friendly engagements and analyze the test scenarios it is not close….close range gets more interesting
@dennisleighton2812
5 ай бұрын
Hi guys, As to your question of whether to use F-35 rather than Typhoon. Well it all hinges on one basic element - is it a stealth-dependent mission? If the answer is yes, then the F-35 is better, up to a point. If the answer is no, then the Typhoon is definitely superior in most counters. In addition, Typhoon has the massive advantage of the Meteor missile, which is currently the best beyond visual range anti aircraft missile in the world. Also, currently all F-35s are not configured to carry it and probably won't be for quite some time, if ever, as the AIM260 is waiting in the wings (sort of!). So, in the Middle East theatre and in a defensive role, Typhoon is by far the best option. In the within visual range arena it can take on any jet flying and stand a good chance, while clearly better than most. Comments?
@NRZ-3Pi10
5 ай бұрын
RE: “Comments?” Yes 😂 Thanks for expanding perspective from fighter plane only to entire weapon system and mission scenarios. Like you’ve indicated, BVR capabilities of the bird are useless if the AAM used runs out of energy and “easily” loses track. Wrt the AIM-260, web suggests it’s designed to be able to use `same´ or possibly slightly modified launcher pods of working horse AIM-120, so full compatibility with the existing `eco-system´. Accordingly, Typhoon would also have opportunity to choose between AIM-120D, AIM-260 and Meteor as BVRAAMs. The latter appears to have conceptual advantages (e.g. wrt propulsion technology) which make it first choice. With Lockheed-Martin producing both the F-35 and the AIM-260, we can safely assume they’ll also try and find ways to make a bundle here, too. “Integrating” the Meteor might be bit of technical challenge wrt to size of the internal weapon bays. Given all these aspects, would need some pressure to convince L-M of enabling `F-35 Meteor compatibility´ … Curious whether there will be feedback from F-15 and Rafale pilots wrt to your statement “… within visual range…, while clearly better than the most”. Getting back to the initial question “whether to use F-35 rather than the Typhoon?”. I believe it’s also worth thinking towards of how to make both operate as kind of `perfect couple´; combining their individual strengths while compensating some drawbacks. Which finally would also take us to F-35s capabilities of supporting AWACS and ground control facilities for mission control to an extent never seen before and beyond the “classic” tasks of fighter planes.
@PeterOZ61
5 ай бұрын
When I was in the RAAF when face with name we could not pronounce they got the generic term of "wheelbarrow". One of my fellow techs was named Ted Grygorkoviz. We called him Ted G to Z.
@GWLAD
4 ай бұрын
The Typhoon is far more capable than the Rafale or the Gripen
@philipmoll7459
5 ай бұрын
I’m understanding that their lifespan is pretty short like 5000 hrs
@robertpatrick3350
5 ай бұрын
F35 lacks the ability to carry the Meteor and it won’t be integrated until 2029 / 30
@everypitchcounts4875
5 ай бұрын
But it can carry nukes and AIM-260
@Cta2006
5 ай бұрын
Norway helps Iceland with safeguarding that country skies, doing airpolicing using the F-35A
@geoffrussell2471
4 ай бұрын
Gripen for 🇬🇧
@paulwood6729
5 ай бұрын
Grant Shapps is a very forgettable chap, it's not a surprise you lost it at that point. Also, the RAF used F35Bs because we've got useless politicians making the decisions.
@blacklake13
5 ай бұрын
Eurofighter is generally pretty good looking, but those big square intakes aren't exactly as pretty as the F-16's. I also wonder about their RCS, though I know they weren't billed as stealth (though I seem to recall they at least thought about RCS when designing Rafale, and it was overtly a consideration on F/A-18E/F). To the extent you can tell by looking at anything, they seem fairly anti-stealthy (though no idea how much the fan blades are visible from the front, which I guess is the biggest thing).
@DWillis7
5 ай бұрын
Typhoon's RCS is very low for a 4/4.5 gen fighter. The blades are barely visible from the front as it has a large S-duct and it's mostly made out of carbon composites. It varies between 0.5 - 1.0 m2 based on quite a large number of sources which would put it as one of the lowest RCS of any 4/4.5 gen, Rafale being close and Gripen E being on par. It helps that it's not a big aircraft too.
@dogsnads5634
5 ай бұрын
@@DWillis7 The design team also incorporated RCS reduction into the design. Rafale came late to that and only made minor improvements. Most experts agree that Typhoon has a far lower RCS than Rafale or other 4/4.5 jets.
@oddvardmyrnes9040
4 ай бұрын
One thing I find disturbing with these fighter jocks, is their (in my view) lack of perspective. They seem to pretty one-sided to me. They know their subject for sure, but what do they know about history, economics, geopolitics and culture? I fear that they have a limited set of information which I will advise them to update themselves on. Start with checking out Mr Stephen Cohen & Prof John Mearsheimer. Then read up on Mr Jacques Baud & his writing on Ukraine. And when done with that, read the RAND Corporation strategy report written for the State Department; 'Extending Russia. Competing from Advantageous Ground'. Military pilots are very capable people, & they are responsive to criticism, which is a HUGE advantage. They are curious & willing to seek information. And they process information well. They are trained to consume a massive amount of info in their job. The question is; are they governed by loyalty to their Air Force background, and against everything that may contradict the mainstream truth? I hope they are loyal, but open for arguments. On the subject they are discussing, I dear to suggest; 1. Risk of loosing one F35 over hostile territory. 2. Only 1/3 of the U.S. fleet are operational. I think the same goes for the NATO fleet.
@FoxKhan30
5 ай бұрын
At the end of the decade, Romania will upgrade to the F-35 too.
@TheBongReyes
5 ай бұрын
The Typhoon is an excellent platform. But a very expensive one as not too many are already sold. That’s the biggest factor on why there aren’t more nations selecting the Typhoon. It’s better than its Russian & Chinese counterparts. Not as old as the F-16. I’d say equal to its development brother the French Rafale. That said, the Gripen might actually be better but that’s subjective. All that said, Israelis has shown how effective the F-35 is. If one takes the thoughts by this channel that the Israelis might be using the F-35 to guide their F-16s to intercept drones and cruise missiles. Then it proves the whole “hive mind” concept of the F-35. It finds the enemy. Relay the information to F-15s & F-22s to engage without exposing their presence. I wouldn’t be surprised if NATO is taking notes of how the Israeli F-35s are being used and its overall performance.
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
Or you could use AWACS for enemy spoting :) You need F-35s for other situations
@TheBongReyes
5 ай бұрын
@@0cu0 Yes, AEW is there for early detection. But part of the F-35 mission is to be the hivemind of an air force. It’s well documented on one of its key advantages over previous gen aircraft as it serves as a battle space node to guide other assets. F-35 EW suite is another key aspect of the platform.
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
@@TheBongReyes I think we can agree on the following. The AEW&C system spots the enemy in a certain area and sends fighters to intercept. Because of its advanced radar system, F-35s can pinpoint and lock on to small targets better than, lets say older F-16s. It can also share some of the data with other fighters. I have a problem with your hivemind expression in this situation. On the other hand If a few F-35 fly through enemy space and gather (in passive mode) the location of anti-aircraft systems and lets a missile launcher carry out a strike - that I would call a hivemind set up.
@everypitchcounts4875
5 ай бұрын
@@0cu0Have you not seen videos of USAF using F-35 to link with HIMARS and fire rockets while also using the F-35 to guide those rockets to a target?
@0cu0
5 ай бұрын
@@everypitchcounts4875 that would be a good use for the F-35
@mcal27
5 ай бұрын
If the Typhoon is so good, why did the RAF loose so badly in mock combat against Indian Su-30’s?
@jeromeportier4914
5 ай бұрын
Never heard of that. Any sources?
@alexs.4340
5 ай бұрын
it's just poor speculation. FYI gonky showed how a legacy hornet can be lethal in WVR against SU30MKI. You'll never know the ROE applied or how much the RAF were allowed to show Typhoon capabilities to the Indians
@mcal27
5 ай бұрын
@@alexs.4340 that’s what I’m always told.. that the RAF were holding back.. Don’t believe a word of it! No way would they cripple the Typhoon’s export potential by doing something to enable such negative reports to get out. It was actually the Flankers that limited their functionality due to them not being allowed to use the flankers Radar fully as agreed with Russia.
@mcal27
5 ай бұрын
@@jeromeportier4914 not looking very hard then? Just Google it.. too hit shows it all
@mcal27
5 ай бұрын
@@jeromeportier4914 I’ll help: Based on the provided information, during Exercise Indradhanush 2015, Eurofighter Typhoons and Indian Air Force Su-30MKIs participated in aerial combat exercises. In 1 vs 1 and 2 vs 2 engagements, the Su-30s reportedly held an edge over the Typhoons. In a 2 vs 1 exercise, a lone Su-30 emerged victorious against two Typhoons. However, the RAF disputes these claims, stating that their analysis does not match the reported 12-0 victory for the Su-30s. The performance of both aircraft was considered valuable in the training exercise, and the RAF looks forward to future opportunities to train alongside the Indian Air Force.
@brashachilles9725
3 ай бұрын
F-35 on British aircraft carriers.
@soumyajitsingha9614
5 ай бұрын
Rafale simps are gonna come after you both now damn
@CanadianGulfstream
5 ай бұрын
typhoon goated
@joshuakruk5158
5 ай бұрын
Quote me if I’m wrong but doesn’t the Typhoon have almost the same stealth capabilities as an F35 even with its external weapon systems?
@ph5832
5 ай бұрын
All four operational of them …
@Bob10009
5 ай бұрын
130
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
germany got like 75 active, idk bout other countries. tornados still active, f35s to come
@slezyorla
5 ай бұрын
eurofighters can carry double of those others armory btw
@philwatson6659
5 ай бұрын
NATO DEPENDS ON THE TYPHOON, the Brits decommission 30 of them
@DWillis7
5 ай бұрын
They were old Tranche 1 variants.
@howardroark7726
5 ай бұрын
Typhoon looks good till Rafale and Gripen walk into the room. 😂
@appa609
5 ай бұрын
lol cope harder
@GoD_Quake
5 ай бұрын
Exactly… “show of force” requires actually being seen.
@TheGreatAmphibian
5 ай бұрын
Ahh, KZitem experts. No, the f35 isn’t invisible on radar. It’s low observable on the high accuracy bands used for targeting. But on the bands used for DETECTION, not really.
@peetky8645
5 ай бұрын
could iran deploy MANPADS along the cruise missile paths to shoot down non stealth western fighters
@overkill1340
5 ай бұрын
You mean in another sovereign nation, or at sea? My understanding is that they are mostly being shot down over Iraq and Syria and there's going to be some questions if another nation is allowing Iranians with missile launchers to engage NATO aircraft or doing it themselves. If the US starts limited striking Iranian systems after Iran shoots at commercial shipping, what response do you expect to happen if someone shoots at an actual NATO aircraft? I suppose they /icould/i, but the political and military outcome probably isn't worth it.
Пікірлер: 604