To see how much faith the RAF has in this plane, lets see how long they keep the tornado, (the plane it is meant to replace) The tornado is till the primary ground attack aircraft for the RAF in Lybia. Will the F35 take on that role instead?
I don t understand im looking for the eurofighter i want to hear the engine evrybody have a video of the eurofighter but with FUCK music WHY i dont want to here MUSIC
@Madzombie51 it has the lowest radar signature of none stealth aircraft. I doesnt have what u might call F22 stealth but it has been designed to have a low radar signature. Hope this helps
@dj8work ahh yep awesome. Not saying the F22 is better or anything, in fact, i find the E2000 the better looking one of the 2. Was just curious.
From what i understand the E2000 is designed as defensive tool rather than offensive like the F22, so was curious if they would equip them with stealth tech.
Designed to be an Air to Air Fighter in mind while keeping an eye on Air to Ground capability.
I think it is the better approach regarding latest US Designs: You don't need stealth for air to ground attacks as "nothing is invisible below 2GHz" ( F117 in Yoguslavia eg). And during Air to Air combat manouverability beats everything. Get Air to ground done by "Wild Weasel" or Anti Radition Missiles (Tornadoes maybe?) and clear the rest with Eurofighters... Thats it, Job done. ;-)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Madzombie51 The EF2000 has nearly the same radarsignature then the F22 from the groundview. By countrys with AWACS the stealt tech also doesent work proper by the F22.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
someone said that the ef isnt 3 times less expensive :/
look at wikapedia :)
u might confused with dollars and the english pounds... they have different value. the pound is just over half the dollar :) One dollar is 67 pence in enlish pounds :) hope it helped
u no what i think... USA, britain, russia, china, and germany should all get together and make the worlds most kick arse plane... it will be unstopable.
dassault should also take part i think...they also build insane fighter-jets already for years now and it's only a little country (because germany britain spain...are together in eads) they have experience
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the f-22 and the eurofighter are without a dought the 2 best fighter jets in the world. but as the eurofighter has a better OVERALL performance and is a 3rd of the price it is more considered a success. but if the eurofighter and the f-22 got into a DOGFIGHT then my money would go on the f-22. their both the worlds best planes so cmon america and england stop witht the competition. your both great allies and the 2 planes will never see combat with eachother... only alongside eachother. :D
@MMApolish I love the Sukhois, but western pilots agree, that avoiding a cobra is nothing big, once you have seen it for the first time and get past the sheer looks of it.
@Stover36 Right now it's 142 without R&D. We have already paid for the the 187 that are planned. So after that it will only be the production cost. With the EF the cost were alreay paid up front. So R&D is not included.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Tests show that the F22 is marginally better at BVR combat although tests at within visual range are still classified.
EF can carry many weapons like the Storm Shadow cruise missile, Paveway, AMRAAM (advanced medium range air to air missile), ASRAAM (advanced short range air to air missile), Brimstone, paveway etc.
watch?v=9NbwZ-_7d7o
All this for a third of the price of the F22 = success :)
I really respect jet-fighter pilots for working at the limits of human possibilities, but they will be eventually be replaced by machines just like 90% of all jobs.
I was watching a show called Top Ten Fighters and the F/A 22 was number 10 on the list. But they said that test results show against other American fighters it could 2 Raptors against 16 F-15's F-16's or F/A 18's and the Raptors will still win. But still the Eurofighter Typhoon is a kick ass plane no doubt.
There is a lot of nationalistic pride, and little facts being thrown around here.
The Typhoon and Rafale, or Grippen for that matter, are not "pure" stealth aircraft. They cannot be regarded as "stealthy", with the exception of RAM coatings. Their size assists in making them less observable. Furthermore, the Typhoon and Rafale incorporate advanced EW systems like active cancellation to hide the aircraft. It is a different but effective approach. Dare I say even better possibly?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Damn this thread is attracting some rational thinkers. I know Tony Blair wanted to use American missiles on the EF but for some reason this wasn't possible so from that I take it yours are better.
EF has better agility so may have a small advantage in an old fashion dogfight.
Their both awesome jets and will defend our skies for years to come.
I just hope the F35 is a worthy replacement for the ageing Harrier...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Let's compare this to the auto industry: Euro designs were waaayy ahead of the game vis-a-vis safety and reliability. Even the mid-70's VW Rabbit had side defrosters, which didn't appear on the domestic market until the late 90's....
And the US can crank out fast cars without the price of European ones, and with "old" technology.
There isn't really much of a point in trying to say who is better at what when every developed country has decent education and near equal understanding of science and technology.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Yeah i think I understand what your getting at mate. The USA tend to waste allot of their resources due to them having such a large budget to play with.
it comes down to whether the F-22 can shoot the Typhoon before it finds it. F-22 will rely on 120-AMRAAM's for their "range" waepons and Sidewinders for dogfights. the fact of the matter is that if by some miracle the EF gets shot down by a 120-AMRAAM grats F-22 HOWEVER if the Raptor is found may it RIP.
Yeah thats the only thing i'm not keen on regarding the F22. Its a great idea but I can't see it being able to shoot down it's prey from out of range all the time which means it will sometimes need to dogfight.
I think the USA realised this and so just have enough for them to be an asset but not a white elephant.
nah f-22 fails at missile platform also.weak engines + low internal weapons load mean having to use external weapons, basically a F-14 does a MUCH better job.
F-22 will most likely become a F/A-22 or even a B-22 because it is jusst fail at dogfights.
All this discussion about who has the biggest balls is pointless. Europe and the US are allies, so both the EF and the F-22 will fly missions together according to their roles and profiles. And gosh, I think anybody should think twice if he wants to engage either of both, especially if they're flying missions together.
That's still a matter of discussion and decision because the gain of maneuverability doesn't seem to be so big. Even without TVC the Typhoon seems to be agile enough.
Nevertheless, Eurojet states in their engine datasheets that a TVC update is possible and a possible update an integral part of the initial EJ200 design.
There is actually an 3D thrust vectoring nozzle already available for the EF. This ITP developed nozzle would increase the thrust of the EJ2000 up to 20% and reduce fuelburn approx. 8%. It can be deflected 360° with a slew rate of whopping 110°/sec and deflection angles of 23.5% and would be much more advanced then the F-22 TVC.
Eurojet had always the capacity for a EJ200 3D TVC upgrade in mind. Their datasheet containes that info for a long time now. But I think a 3D TVC would be a biggest advantage concerning induced drag reduction because you don't need control surfaces for trimming etc. The roll rate would not be that much higher, the engines are too near to the rotational axis.
As far as I know a TVC upgrade for the Typhoon is considered not useful enough (for now) because the plane is agile enough.
we'l see! the proof of the pudding in the eating. RAF Fighter Command were accused of propaganda at the Battle of Britain in 1940. the man in charge simply responded by saying "if the germans are right and we're wrong they'll be in London within 2 weeks". well 60 years later the closest Germany get to London is a ride on an open-top tourist bus. same with Eurofighter. if it is bad they'll drop like flies. if it isn't you'll eat your words.
The Typhoon can supercruise to. The stealth geometry is a advantage on the battlefield but from aerodynamics point of view it has also disadvantages. For example the Typhoon can withstand much higher g forces then the F-22 and is made of almost the double percentage of carbon fiber. Every design is a tradeoff.
techdfined, both Raptor and Typhoon are +12 & -4 G jets. Only a few pilot can remain conscious throughout an entire 9-G 360-deg turn, so why waste money building a +15 G jet, unless you want to kill the pilot? I haven't seen a Typhoon doing a "helicopter turn," or a "Yoopy Loop" if its aerodynamic is as advance as the Raptor. The helicopter turn (pedal turn) is a controlled flat spin.
Sorry thats not true, the F-22 is limited to 10,2G as cracks can happen. Thats what General John P. Jumper declared during F-22 excels. The Eurofighter pilots have a special "dragonfly anti-g suit" which makes possible for pilots to withstand 10g for a extended time even without pressure breathing.
You might haven't seen doing a Typhoon a yoopy loop but that doesn't matter. More important you haven't seen a F-22 doing 5g manouvers at 1,6mach without loosing speed.
techdefined, according to Brassey's Modern Fighters, by Mike Spick, Typhoon has thrust-to-weight ratio of 1.20 (compared to 1.27 of the Raptor) and wing loading of 63lb/sq.ft (compared to 65lb/sq.ft of the Raptor). Raptor can pull a 9g sustained turns at Mach 0.90 with 80% internal fuel; 6g turns at Mach 2.50 @30,000ft; and 2g turns @50,000ft; plus a minimum turn rate of 12deg/sec across the board. Raptor can accelerate from Mach 0.80 to Mach 1.80 in 50 seconds, and supercruise at Mach 1.40.
(cont) It's like the Old Days, Spitfire & Mustang. Spitfire's designed to defend British airspace, while the Mustang, to fly all the way to Berlin, and after kicking Goring & Hitler's asses, and be back in time for an afternoon tea in England. The same with Raptor and Typhoon, they could complement each other nicely, one offensively and the other, defensively.
(cont) According the same source, Typhoon doesn't possess such exceptional performance enjoyed by the Raptor, contrary to your assessment. Raptor has titanium airframe which permits its top speed well in excess of Mach 2.50. Can you cite me a source of Raptor's 10.2g limitation? Even a few of the old Tomcats were forced to make a 12g breaking turn in order to break a missile-lock duing air combat excercise, and no cracks. Can Typhoon match Raptor's 6g turns at Mach 2.50 @ 30,000ft?
LOL, you can't compare a Tomcat with a F-22 with lots of RAM's. The fuselage is much more delicate. Delamination and cracks are a big problem on stealth planes. Please stop hyperboling the F-22 can't fly fastern then 2,25mach.(Air Force Monthly)
(more) Tomcat had significat amount of titanium parts, but the Raptor's nearly entire airframe is made of Titanium. Lockheed use to make the "Titanium Goose," the Mach 3.50 SR-71, and their expertise in working with titanium is being put to good use making the Raptor. Typhoon is in the same class of Rafale and Gripen, but Raptor is in the class of its own, with Stealth and supercruise.
EF has also supercruise and while it lacks stealth it has more Radar range better weapons(IRIS-T,METEOR) and 3rd generation IRST. It also provides the most sophisticated pilot interface ever created. And NO the Rafale and Gripen are NOT in the same class. They can't climb/accelerate as fast, no supercruise, no sensorfusion, lower rollrates, lower turn rates, lower t/w ratio, higher RCS, lower service ceilling, higher wingload, i could go on and on. Most of this points are also valid for the F-35
techdefined, all three are of the same aerodynamic configuration being canard-delta. The only different is the Gripen being a single-engine type, and the lightest. The Swedish originally came up with the configuration evolving from double-delta (Draken), to Viggen, and finally the Gripen. The rest of the field is finally catching up with the Swedish's idea. So experience is on Saab's side. Pre-production Rafale exhibited an ability to supercruise but the Mach number is being kept secret.
(cont) It's so much you can "milk" the delta wing, playing with thickness, aspect ratio & airfoil. You're right that Typhoon has the highest thrust-to-weight ratio at 1.20 among the trio, Rafale at 1.04, and Gripen at 0.94 with virtually the same wing aspect ratio & loading. Unless, we have each type flying against one another in exercise, we would never know which one would come out on top. The Gripen would be the hardest to detect, being the lightest and smallest by a significant margin.
There are so many faults in your posts i don't even know where to start. They look similar but there are substantial differences in the delta wing design. For example the EF can roll at >270°/sec(exact number is classified) while the Gripen "only" 240°/sec.(F-16 220°/sec)
Totally wrong, the Gripen is nowhere as stealth as the EF or Rafale. Gripen RCS ~1,5m, EF 0,25-0,5m. There is extensive use of RAM's applied on the fuselage,canards from the Typhoon.
techdefined, do you know the pros & cons of delta wing, and that of the canard design? RCS is all about perpendicular surfaces. Typhoon's intakes, fuslage, and huge vertical fin are big giveaways. Compare that to the Raptor's and you'll know what I'm talking about!
Yes i know the pros and cons. As i already said there was need to apply RAM's at the intakes, canards,vertical fin and wing to minimize the frontal RCS. RAM's were developed by EADS DASA and tested by BAE Systems. Also the position of pylons loaded with missiles were designed so it does compromise frontal RCS only marginal.
techdefined, I mean pros and cons of a delta wing aerodynamically, and structurally? Why Russian and American designers shine away from it, despite of its cheap cost?
luckly largly solved with the combanation of the cannard and delta the canards are used to produce better airflow over the wings in manovering to negate the dissavantages of a pure delta wing plus the flybywire computor maintains them at an angle in cruise to further reduce radar cross section, its about the stealthest aircraft out there after americas pure stealth based craft
shackvan, if canard-delta configuration is so good, do you know why neither the Americans nor Russians have ever adopted it on any of their fighters, including the Raptor and the Flanker?
well differing roles and design ideas, that and later versions of the flankers do use a hybrid semi delta wing with cannard controls for good STOL and manoverability performance, europian needs are filled well with a delta style wings where as russian and american fighters have different roles to fill. all configerations have there pros and cons to dismiss one outright seems hastey
well yes for swedens needs i mean both are extreamly capable yet almost unique in that they can land on an extreamly short runway that only needs to consist of a regular road with almost no flare landings and be maintained by semi skilled conscripts. so prefect for swedens needs and still capable in the air and its the cannard delta shape that lets them do that. EF needs to get off the ground and climb quickly and as a result its the natural choice of wing shape
shackvan, the Swdish has always been an aerodynamic excellent. They solved the problem plaguing pure delta wing long ago, with their double delta's design, from Draken, Viggen, and now Gripen. Pure delta is excellent at high speed but airspeed go to down to hell once you crank it into hard turns. Canard delta solves that problem in providing longer pitching moment as well as a positive net lift. However, it's top speed must be reduced to stay within safe limit of what FBW can handle.
ALLINACAN, if those pair of small fins were canards, why a pair of huge horizontal stabilizers in the tail are still necessary on the Su-35? If the tails were shot away, can Su-35 fly with only those two tiny fin up front? Did you know that the B-1B has a pair of tiny fin by its nose too?
Ofcourse the Su-30 would possibly fall out of the sky without the HTP, but what you are calling "small fins" are classified as canards, even though this is not the true canard formation. The reason the Su-30 has the HTP because the original aircraft was designed around them. The canards were added to enhance high alpha performance when allied with thrust vectoring nozzles. And you cannot possibly compare the B-1B's stabilisers to the Su-30's canards.
I believe the small canard foreplanes/fins on the B-1B are for handling turbulence when transitioning from subsonic to supersonic flight. I am a fan of the Eurofighter Typhoon just because it is such an unstable platform that pilots must love it. The Flankers too have amazing manoeuvrability, especially with thrust vectoring. I just feel the Raptor brings more to the table as it is stealthy and extremely manoeuvrable.
ALLINACAN, I heard that the nose fins of B-1B are for manipulating the airflow over the airframe to smooth out bumpy ride at treetop level @ 0.92 Mach. The original A-model had Mach-2 capability but the B-model is limited only to Mach 1.25. The USAF concluded high-altitude Mach-2 penetration of Soviet's airspace was a virtual suicide, so it switched to tree-top level penetration instead.
I think EF-2000 has an edge over Su-35, but Raptor is extremely hard to beat in BVR fight.
Both the Raptor & Typhoon are ill-suited for flying at treetop level because of their low wing loading which is obtimized for max maneuverability. You need high wing loading to give smooth ride while sneaking across the treetop, and nothing flying today can beat the Tornado in this role. High wing loading = smooth ride at treetop level. The Raptor's & Typhoon's pilots may crack the top of their canopies if they try to fly the Tornado's flight profile.
(cont) Lacking titanium airframe like SR-71, or the Raptor, Concorde was limited to Mach 2.20 for fear of airframe's meltdown. I doubt Typhoon could top Mach 2.20 for the same reason. All Typhoon's Demo is nothing more than normal loobs & rolls with a few high AOA maneuvers, but well short of what we call "Superagility." So I would appreciate you backing up your claims with sources. I like dealing with facts, not fictions. Did I ever mention that Raptor is fully Stealthy too?
I don't care what you see in demos. If you find its the right way to judge about an aircraft abilities then go on. I prefer statements by real EF pilots. You haven't showed any facts but hyperboling. Because the F-22 isn't fully stealth. It has two multiwatt torches behind which can be easily be spotted on modern 3rd-generation IRST systems. Also its not stealth against sensorfusion.
techdefined, Demo is all about selling airplanes, and whatever capabilities each jet possesses, the manufactuere would surely like its potential customers to see. Do you know Mike Spick, a British aviation expert in publications like AirForce Monthly, Air International, Air Enthusiast, and more than 25 books under his name? He's my major source of aviation Info. So don't get pissed off with me, but tell Typhoon's test pilots to, at least, try to create more excitement like superagility.
A Cobra maneuver isn't a high-g maneuver even if it looks like it is. It's just draining as much energy as possible in a very short time by using heavy turbulence. Flying maneuvers over longer periods at, say, 7 or 8 g is something completely different.
And the g force margin of an SR-71 at very high speeds was small, very small. You couldn't pull 2 g's at mach 2.5 without tearing it to pieces. It was mage for fast, straight flying.
The hydrostatic principle of the Libelle anti-g suit makes it possible to withstand high g maneuvers over long periods. There's no reaction time as the fluid reacts instantaneously, compared to the .2 secs of pneumatic suits. This allows very high g onset rates. Flying 5 g's is possible without the muscle tensing routine used with conventional suits.
Even if an F22 can pull 12 g it's not a maneuver that should be flown too often as stuff like that considerably shortens the lifespan of planes.
Firstly the F-22 can pull max 9,7g more would damage it structurally. But thats the difference on the EF (Tranche 2+3)which has over 60%of composites and 40% monlithic CFRP!!(the double %then F-22) can withstand high g(over 10g forces for indefinite time without risking damage or shortening the lifepsan. Maximum g for the Typhoon is 14g even no human would survive that.
Maybe the Austrian and German pilots would survive that (if only for short periods of time) because these nations will use the hydrostatic anti-g suit. Centrifuge tests have shown that 9 to 10 g are possible with the Libelle anti-g without problems, even over long periods.
But even if the maximum load is 14 g then 12 g over longer periods will be life shortening to the structure, too. I know that the pilots can override the 9 g limit but that's only for emergencies, as far as I know.
Not entirely correct, there was a limit of 9 g and 90° AOA on Tranche 1 EF. With Tranche 2 they are much higher and you can do 10g for a indefinite time without doing structural damage .
TECHDEFINED,the FBWs of both the Raptor & Typhoon won't let the pilots overstress the airframe, no matters how hard the stick is pulled. Both of them are rated as +9/-3 G jets. Their true max G-load figures will never be known, until someone overstressing one during training exercises. What's the point of making a 15-g jet, if it ends up killing its pilot, no to mention the weight & cost penalties in beefing up the whole airframe? Read "Boyd," about the "Mad Major" who invented E-M theory.
I know its hard to understand for some people beyond the pond, but only Typhoons TRANCHE 1 were max +9 rated. Tranche 2+3 can go over 9G.(exact g though classified its over 10g). The point is in combination of the dragonfly anti-g suit described well by albedoshader you can sustain 9 to 10 g for a indefinite time, and thats gives you a edge over other fighters.
I got the chance to visit a base of the Eurofighter once a month and I have seen lots of other jets from Nellis Air Base to Russia - there is nothing thats worth comparing !
The Eurofighter is another fine example of cooperation, partnership and the crossing of language boundaries between countries that were at war with each other only 65 years ago.
Very well said. Together we can build incredible things like the A380 the most sophisticated and complex plane ever or the most agile supersonic fighter in the world.
@holydiver& vinniebaby1: during the KoreaWar the NORD-korea had the airsuperiority. the RUSSIAN planes were better than the americans...by luck the americans invented the PHANTOM F-111^^.
during the 2ww there was another strong airplane: the MACCHI MC-205 VELTRO. it was a very good plane,one of the best...he was able to compare with a P-51. after 43 it fought with the americans against the nazis.
oh yeah america have always had air superiority...are you mad man? battle of britain we had the 2 best allied fighters in the war thats why america bought loads of hurricanes and spitfires and talking about the lancaster man what a plane and when you compare it to the b-17 damn one hell of a lot of them got shot down..and yeah your right air superiority does belong to america now but you must realise the bulk of the designers were european so you cant say europe dont have any planes knobcheese
the fact they were used in vietnam? and thats not the point i was making just then im saying did you purposely leave out the fact that the chief designers on most american planes are european
theres quite an arguement about what is better the typhoon or the F-22 raptor and i think there both powerful aircraft in there own right but in terms of looks? the raptor is unbelievably ugly but the typhoon is jaw droppingly gorgeous
what is this a boxing match? This will win and that will tie? Bull shit. An airframe alone cannot win the battle. An Airframe is nothing without a good pilot at the controls. It's all about pilot skill, confidence in his equipment and tactics.
Take for example the red baron. His aircraft was really a handfull for many other pilots because of it's design. Wasn't exactly the easiest thing to fly but he turned it into a killing machine.
no, they wanted to give french industry(dassault, thales, snecma etc) a whole fighter project insted of few percents of workshare. rafale is based on same concept as EF, its a little smaller tough(carrier use)
eurofighter is german, france italy u.k and spain collaboration though most of it is german. nothing chinese here nor eastern european. its all western europe
Yes. No american aircraft si better than european planes. EF 2000 Typhoon with Jas 39 Gripen - both of them are better. For example EF 2000 is called raptor's hunter. And if you have Typhoon or Gripen with IRIS-T and METEORS missles your americans are in HELL !!
To see how much faith the RAF has in this plane, lets see how long they keep the tornado, (the plane it is meant to replace) The tornado is till the primary ground attack aircraft for the RAF in Lybia. Will the F35 take on that role instead?
kirbsnz 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kirbsnz the euro fighter blows the f-35 out of the water it is a overpriced turd the f-22 is where it is at!
ReDnEcKrCrAcInG 4 months ago
if i want music i go lok for it please you guys mees up every vid with this trash music
sertox12345 7 months ago
I don t understand im looking for the eurofighter i want to hear the engine evrybody have a video of the eurofighter but with FUCK music WHY i dont want to here MUSIC
536767676533766 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@536767676533766 If you want to listen to what the EF sounds like then this is the best vid:
watch?v=9Bi8os3owno
No match for this :)
TheARMAProductions 8 months ago
music kills the clip
si33uk 9 months ago
Great video - absolutely CRAP music! Ruined it!
nomiwilts 11 months ago
super video and song thanks
jkl6290 1 year ago
Comment removed
jackdavidharris 1 year ago
Comment removed
jackdavidharris 1 year ago
かっこいい・・・。
この機動力はＦ－２２にも勝るとも劣らないだろう。
Ｆ－２を日本独自で開発していれば、このような戦闘機になっていたでしょう。惜しい・・・。
YMO1112 1 year ago
I'm looking for the music from the original video! As you just changed the music you have to know where I can find the original! please help me out
shitNameAlert 1 year ago
@shitNameAlert
hey i'm sorry its been 3 years since i made this video, i don't remember the original music, sorry i couldnt be more helpful
Nitrous2k 1 year ago
@shitNameAlert check this out ...(Thousand Foot Krutch - Move )
nipuniub 1 year ago
Comment removed
001OMEGA100 1 year ago
Great video, but I would prefer sound of the EuroFighter.
VascoFL 1 year ago 8
I absolutely love this plane. Awesome video thank you for sharing!
Gig540 1 year ago
do they have stealth technology like the F22?
Madzombie51 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Madzombie51 it has the lowest radar signature of none stealth aircraft. I doesnt have what u might call F22 stealth but it has been designed to have a low radar signature. Hope this helps
dj8work 1 year ago
@dj8work ahh yep awesome. Not saying the F22 is better or anything, in fact, i find the E2000 the better looking one of the 2. Was just curious.
From what i understand the E2000 is designed as defensive tool rather than offensive like the F22, so was curious if they would equip them with stealth tech.
Very impressive bird indeed.
Thank you for clarifying that :)
Madzombie51 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Madzombie51
Designed to be an Air to Air Fighter in mind while keeping an eye on Air to Ground capability.
I think it is the better approach regarding latest US Designs: You don't need stealth for air to ground attacks as "nothing is invisible below 2GHz" ( F117 in Yoguslavia eg). And during Air to Air combat manouverability beats everything. Get Air to ground done by "Wild Weasel" or Anti Radition Missiles (Tornadoes maybe?) and clear the rest with Eurofighters... Thats it, Job done. ;-)
respinK 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dj8work
The infamous spammers are here now. I knew it wouldn't be long before they found this vid :0
29Gixxer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@29Gixxer Yeah tell me about it, they or he (Troll) doesn't like the idea of freedom of speech
dj8work 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Madzombie51 The EF2000 has nearly the same radarsignature then the F22 from the groundview. By countrys with AWACS the stealt tech also doesent work proper by the F22.
Rick2010100 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
someone said that the ef isnt 3 times less expensive :/
look at wikapedia :)
u might confused with dollars and the english pounds... they have different value. the pound is just over half the dollar :) One dollar is 67 pence in enlish pounds :) hope it helped
abckade123 1 year ago
Brilliant !!!
videogrinch 2 years ago
u no what i think... USA, britain, russia, china, and germany should all get together and make the worlds most kick arse plane... it will be unstopable.
abckade123 2 years ago
Or just conjoin Europe and North America into one entity and take over the world....just saying.
ra1n8ow 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yeah dude. Imagine combining USA/European ingenuity....
29Gixxer 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ra1n8ow thats sounds like the UN to me.
dj8work 1 year ago
@ra1n8ow judging by the amounts of EF haters in F-22 videos and vice versa, were still a looong way from that.
good plan, tho
iamYOURfathertoo 3 weeks ago
dassault should also take part i think...they also build insane fighter-jets already for years now and it's only a little country (because germany britain spain...are together in eads) they have experience
tobseNo1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the f-22 and the eurofighter are without a dought the 2 best fighter jets in the world. but as the eurofighter has a better OVERALL performance and is a 3rd of the price it is more considered a success. but if the eurofighter and the f-22 got into a DOGFIGHT then my money would go on the f-22. their both the worlds best planes so cmon america and england stop witht the competition. your both great allies and the 2 planes will never see combat with eachother... only alongside eachother. :D
abckade123 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Agree....
29Gixxer 2 years ago
@abckade123 good point! each design has its own purpose.. they have advantages and weaknesses..
SuperWeng10 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hehe. dont forget russian planes, wchich is much more better in dogfight, e.g. cobra. ....
MMApolish 1 year ago
@MMApolish LOL?
95predator 1 year ago
@MMApolish I love the Sukhois, but western pilots agree, that avoiding a cobra is nothing big, once you have seen it for the first time and get past the sheer looks of it.
rosenscharf 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rosenscharf
Yeah I'd like to see the Cobra evade a mach 4.0+ METEOR lulz
TheARMAProductions 1 year ago
@abckade123 A EF cost more than 100 mil. A F 22 cost 142 mil. How is that a 3rd of the cost?
aquietguy 1 year ago
@aquietguy I remember the F-22A being at a price of $360 Millions including research costs but only $136 Millions if you don't include that.
Stover36 1 year ago
@Stover36 Right now it's 142 without R&D. We have already paid for the the 187 that are planned. So after that it will only be the production cost. With the EF the cost were alreay paid up front. So R&D is not included.
aquietguy 1 year ago
I love this plane!!! :D
dogiela 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Tests show that the F22 is marginally better at BVR combat although tests at within visual range are still classified.
EF can carry many weapons like the Storm Shadow cruise missile, Paveway, AMRAAM (advanced medium range air to air missile), ASRAAM (advanced short range air to air missile), Brimstone, paveway etc.
watch?v=9NbwZ-_7d7o
All this for a third of the price of the F22 = success :)
29Gixxer 2 years ago
soon the entire air will be dominated by drones that can fly mach 8 or something anyways lol
nero91 2 years ago
you cannot put in a computer what a pilot can do with his natural instinks
EagleDriver08 2 years ago
such as?
I really respect jet-fighter pilots for working at the limits of human possibilities, but they will be eventually be replaced by machines just like 90% of all jobs.
nero91 2 years ago
@nero91: They will never be replacement, but possibly moved out of the cockpit and into a ground control station.
Helge129 2 years ago
@Helge129
But then they will probably be controlled RTS style, while the combat itself will be controlled by AI.
nero91 2 years ago
I was watching a show called Top Ten Fighters and the F/A 22 was number 10 on the list. But they said that test results show against other American fighters it could 2 Raptors against 16 F-15's F-16's or F/A 18's and the Raptors will still win. But still the Eurofighter Typhoon is a kick ass plane no doubt.
worldsairforce 2 years ago
yes f22 is probadly the best fighter in the world, but typhoon comes second.
I think the Typhoon can pull over 9gs even in supersonic speed
valkyrie1960s 2 years ago
this looks more agile than f22
valkyrie1960s 2 years ago
The typhoon probably is. From what I heard delta wing fighters are more maneuverable. But that does not necessarily mean it is better.
worldsairforce 2 years ago
There is a lot of shit i don't know about air planes but cant you pull over 9gs in any fighter aircraft while going supersonic.
worldsairforce 2 years ago
yes the eurofighter has been confirmed to have done more than 10 gs in supersonic flight! The F 22 can probadly do that as well!
valkyrie1960s 2 years ago
А эта французская хрень ещё и летает?!
molox55 2 years ago
There is a lot of nationalistic pride, and little facts being thrown around here.
The Typhoon and Rafale, or Grippen for that matter, are not "pure" stealth aircraft. They cannot be regarded as "stealthy", with the exception of RAM coatings. Their size assists in making them less observable. Furthermore, the Typhoon and Rafale incorporate advanced EW systems like active cancellation to hide the aircraft. It is a different but effective approach. Dare I say even better possibly?
biped19 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Damn this thread is attracting some rational thinkers. I know Tony Blair wanted to use American missiles on the EF but for some reason this wasn't possible so from that I take it yours are better.
EF has better agility so may have a small advantage in an old fashion dogfight.
Their both awesome jets and will defend our skies for years to come.
I just hope the F35 is a worthy replacement for the ageing Harrier...
29Gixxer 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The only thing that scare me about the F22 is the staggering ruunning costs..gulp.
29Gixxer 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Let's compare this to the auto industry: Euro designs were waaayy ahead of the game vis-a-vis safety and reliability. Even the mid-70's VW Rabbit had side defrosters, which didn't appear on the domestic market until the late 90's....
bluecollarcanuck 2 years ago
And the US can crank out fast cars without the price of European ones, and with "old" technology.
There isn't really much of a point in trying to say who is better at what when every developed country has decent education and near equal understanding of science and technology.
KARASAWA40 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yeah i think I understand what your getting at mate. The USA tend to waste allot of their resources due to them having such a large budget to play with.
29Gixxer 2 years ago
Good
Niemand1995 2 years ago
it comes down to whether the F-22 can shoot the Typhoon before it finds it. F-22 will rely on 120-AMRAAM's for their "range" waepons and Sidewinders for dogfights. the fact of the matter is that if by some miracle the EF gets shot down by a 120-AMRAAM grats F-22 HOWEVER if the Raptor is found may it RIP.
marco0798 2 years ago
Yeah thats the only thing i'm not keen on regarding the F22. Its a great idea but I can't see it being able to shoot down it's prey from out of range all the time which means it will sometimes need to dogfight.
I think the USA realised this and so just have enough for them to be an asset but not a white elephant.
29Gixxer 2 years ago
As in the F22 will be like a missile platform whilst other jets like the EF protect it
29Gixxer 2 years ago
nah f-22 fails at missile platform also.weak engines + low internal weapons load mean having to use external weapons, basically a F-14 does a MUCH better job.
F-22 will most likely become a F/A-22 or even a B-22 because it is jusst fail at dogfights.
marco0798 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm dissapointed in Mr Obama. F22 is awesome now but has shit loads of potential. I wish UK had of chipped in so we get both.
29Gixxer 2 years ago
Thanks for the upload Nitrous. It's nice to see such a well behaved thread regarding the F22 vs EF debate.
Fact is their both mean Mf's.
29Gixxer 2 years ago
Agreed.
Thanks for keeping it civil guys.
Nitrous2k 2 years ago 2
I don't realy understand the posts below, that's all I know is thank god it's on our side.
MYRDDINAPGERAINT 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
SUHOI- THE BEST
inetsprint 2 years ago
All this discussion about who has the biggest balls is pointless. Europe and the US are allies, so both the EF and the F-22 will fly missions together according to their roles and profiles. And gosh, I think anybody should think twice if he wants to engage either of both, especially if they're flying missions together.
albedoshader 2 years ago
I must say, this is one of the most well-behaved threads :)
allinacan 2 years ago
wie heißt den des lied
mostwantedundercover 3 years ago
The Typhoon will have thrust vectoring soon
zucoy21z89 3 years ago
That's still a matter of discussion and decision because the gain of maneuverability doesn't seem to be so big. Even without TVC the Typhoon seems to be agile enough.
Nevertheless, Eurojet states in their engine datasheets that a TVC update is possible and a possible update an integral part of the initial EJ200 design.
albedoshader 2 years ago
There is actually an 3D thrust vectoring nozzle already available for the EF. This ITP developed nozzle would increase the thrust of the EJ2000 up to 20% and reduce fuelburn approx. 8%. It can be deflected 360° with a slew rate of whopping 110°/sec and deflection angles of 23.5% and would be much more advanced then the F-22 TVC.
techdefined 2 years ago
Eurojet had always the capacity for a EJ200 3D TVC upgrade in mind. Their datasheet containes that info for a long time now. But I think a 3D TVC would be a biggest advantage concerning induced drag reduction because you don't need control surfaces for trimming etc. The roll rate would not be that much higher, the engines are too near to the rotational axis.
As far as I know a TVC upgrade for the Typhoon is considered not useful enough (for now) because the plane is agile enough.
albedoshader 2 years ago
Good post and factually correct.
techdefined 2 years ago
@ dusty: i´m german too,but you are wrong....
in afghanistan the BW has to use 30tee years old helicopters...and they think they will use them for other 10 or 20 years....
the helis are really bad,not that good as the helis of other countrys....like italy,asdasd
siladovia 3 years ago
German Air Force is the best ever!!
dustyOn3 3 years ago
Nice vid and music which matches it.Good work.
techdefined 3 years ago
we'l see! the proof of the pudding in the eating. RAF Fighter Command were accused of propaganda at the Battle of Britain in 1940. the man in charge simply responded by saying "if the germans are right and we're wrong they'll be in London within 2 weeks". well 60 years later the closest Germany get to London is a ride on an open-top tourist bus. same with Eurofighter. if it is bad they'll drop like flies. if it isn't you'll eat your words.
heddois 3 years ago
good video
funny plane hehe
jonhmillercoke 3 years ago
good video best ever the f-22 is realy suck HEHEHE
pakyto2 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Great video
bad air plane
jonhmillercoke 3 years ago
f-22 suck XD EF-2000 best ever
pakyto2 3 years ago
pakyto2, the two are closely matched, except that Raptor is stealthy and can supercruise.
KATAERO 3 years ago
The Typhoon can supercruise to. The stealth geometry is a advantage on the battlefield but from aerodynamics point of view it has also disadvantages. For example the Typhoon can withstand much higher g forces then the F-22 and is made of almost the double percentage of carbon fiber. Every design is a tradeoff.
techdefined 3 years ago
techdfined, both Raptor and Typhoon are +12 & -4 G jets. Only a few pilot can remain conscious throughout an entire 9-G 360-deg turn, so why waste money building a +15 G jet, unless you want to kill the pilot? I haven't seen a Typhoon doing a "helicopter turn," or a "Yoopy Loop" if its aerodynamic is as advance as the Raptor. The helicopter turn (pedal turn) is a controlled flat spin.
KATAERO 3 years ago
Sorry thats not true, the F-22 is limited to 10,2G as cracks can happen. Thats what General John P. Jumper declared during F-22 excels. The Eurofighter pilots have a special "dragonfly anti-g suit" which makes possible for pilots to withstand 10g for a extended time even without pressure breathing.
You might haven't seen doing a Typhoon a yoopy loop but that doesn't matter. More important you haven't seen a F-22 doing 5g manouvers at 1,6mach without loosing speed.
techdefined 3 years ago
techdefined, according to Brassey's Modern Fighters, by Mike Spick, Typhoon has thrust-to-weight ratio of 1.20 (compared to 1.27 of the Raptor) and wing loading of 63lb/sq.ft (compared to 65lb/sq.ft of the Raptor). Raptor can pull a 9g sustained turns at Mach 0.90 with 80% internal fuel; 6g turns at Mach 2.50 @30,000ft; and 2g turns @50,000ft; plus a minimum turn rate of 12deg/sec across the board. Raptor can accelerate from Mach 0.80 to Mach 1.80 in 50 seconds, and supercruise at Mach 1.40.
KATAERO 3 years ago
The EF can do sustained 9g turns at 1.2 mach with full AA payload according to German Pilots on Flug Revue.
techdefined 3 years ago
(cont) It's like the Old Days, Spitfire & Mustang. Spitfire's designed to defend British airspace, while the Mustang, to fly all the way to Berlin, and after kicking Goring & Hitler's asses, and be back in time for an afternoon tea in England. The same with Raptor and Typhoon, they could complement each other nicely, one offensively and the other, defensively.
KATAERO 3 years ago
I agree with that, as the EF was designed as fast interceptor and QRA missions. On the other side the F-22 is more a intruder.
techdefined 3 years ago
(cont) According the same source, Typhoon doesn't possess such exceptional performance enjoyed by the Raptor, contrary to your assessment. Raptor has titanium airframe which permits its top speed well in excess of Mach 2.50. Can you cite me a source of Raptor's 10.2g limitation? Even a few of the old Tomcats were forced to make a 12g breaking turn in order to break a missile-lock duing air combat excercise, and no cracks. Can Typhoon match Raptor's 6g turns at Mach 2.50 @ 30,000ft?
KATAERO 3 years ago
LOL, you can't compare a Tomcat with a F-22 with lots of RAM's. The fuselage is much more delicate. Delamination and cracks are a big problem on stealth planes. Please stop hyperboling the F-22 can't fly fastern then 2,25mach.(Air Force Monthly)
techdefined 3 years ago
(more) Tomcat had significat amount of titanium parts, but the Raptor's nearly entire airframe is made of Titanium. Lockheed use to make the "Titanium Goose," the Mach 3.50 SR-71, and their expertise in working with titanium is being put to good use making the Raptor. Typhoon is in the same class of Rafale and Gripen, but Raptor is in the class of its own, with Stealth and supercruise.
KATAERO 3 years ago
EF has also supercruise and while it lacks stealth it has more Radar range better weapons(IRIS-T,METEOR) and 3rd generation IRST. It also provides the most sophisticated pilot interface ever created. And NO the Rafale and Gripen are NOT in the same class. They can't climb/accelerate as fast, no supercruise, no sensorfusion, lower rollrates, lower turn rates, lower t/w ratio, higher RCS, lower service ceilling, higher wingload, i could go on and on. Most of this points are also valid for the F-35
techdefined 3 years ago
techdefined, all three are of the same aerodynamic configuration being canard-delta. The only different is the Gripen being a single-engine type, and the lightest. The Swedish originally came up with the configuration evolving from double-delta (Draken), to Viggen, and finally the Gripen. The rest of the field is finally catching up with the Swedish's idea. So experience is on Saab's side. Pre-production Rafale exhibited an ability to supercruise but the Mach number is being kept secret.
KATAERO 3 years ago
(cont) It's so much you can "milk" the delta wing, playing with thickness, aspect ratio & airfoil. You're right that Typhoon has the highest thrust-to-weight ratio at 1.20 among the trio, Rafale at 1.04, and Gripen at 0.94 with virtually the same wing aspect ratio & loading. Unless, we have each type flying against one another in exercise, we would never know which one would come out on top. The Gripen would be the hardest to detect, being the lightest and smallest by a significant margin.
KATAERO 3 years ago
There are so many faults in your posts i don't even know where to start. They look similar but there are substantial differences in the delta wing design. For example the EF can roll at >270°/sec(exact number is classified) while the Gripen "only" 240°/sec.(F-16 220°/sec)
Totally wrong, the Gripen is nowhere as stealth as the EF or Rafale. Gripen RCS ~1,5m, EF 0,25-0,5m. There is extensive use of RAM's applied on the fuselage,canards from the Typhoon.
techdefined 3 years ago
techdefined, do you know the pros & cons of delta wing, and that of the canard design? RCS is all about perpendicular surfaces. Typhoon's intakes, fuslage, and huge vertical fin are big giveaways. Compare that to the Raptor's and you'll know what I'm talking about!
KATAERO 3 years ago
Yes i know the pros and cons. As i already said there was need to apply RAM's at the intakes, canards,vertical fin and wing to minimize the frontal RCS. RAM's were developed by EADS DASA and tested by BAE Systems. Also the position of pylons loaded with missiles were designed so it does compromise frontal RCS only marginal.
techdefined 3 years ago
techdefined, I mean pros and cons of a delta wing aerodynamically, and structurally? Why Russian and American designers shine away from it, despite of its cheap cost?
KATAERO 3 years ago
luckly largly solved with the combanation of the cannard and delta the canards are used to produce better airflow over the wings in manovering to negate the dissavantages of a pure delta wing plus the flybywire computor maintains them at an angle in cruise to further reduce radar cross section, its about the stealthest aircraft out there after americas pure stealth based craft
shackvan 3 years ago 2
shackvan, if canard-delta configuration is so good, do you know why neither the Americans nor Russians have ever adopted it on any of their fighters, including the Raptor and the Flanker?
KATAERO 3 years ago
well differing roles and design ideas, that and later versions of the flankers do use a hybrid semi delta wing with cannard controls for good STOL and manoverability performance, europian needs are filled well with a delta style wings where as russian and american fighters have different roles to fill. all configerations have there pros and cons to dismiss one outright seems hastey
shackvan 3 years ago
shackvan, so do you think the Swedish got it right all along with Viggen and Gripen?
KATAERO 3 years ago
well yes for swedens needs i mean both are extreamly capable yet almost unique in that they can land on an extreamly short runway that only needs to consist of a regular road with almost no flare landings and be maintained by semi skilled conscripts. so prefect for swedens needs and still capable in the air and its the cannard delta shape that lets them do that. EF needs to get off the ground and climb quickly and as a result its the natural choice of wing shape
shackvan 3 years ago
shackvan, the Swdish has always been an aerodynamic excellent. They solved the problem plaguing pure delta wing long ago, with their double delta's design, from Draken, Viggen, and now Gripen. Pure delta is excellent at high speed but airspeed go to down to hell once you crank it into hard turns. Canard delta solves that problem in providing longer pitching moment as well as a positive net lift. However, it's top speed must be reduced to stay within safe limit of what FBW can handle.
KATAERO 3 years ago
The new Flankers have canards
allinacan 2 years ago
ALLINACAN, if those pair of small fins were canards, why a pair of huge horizontal stabilizers in the tail are still necessary on the Su-35? If the tails were shot away, can Su-35 fly with only those two tiny fin up front? Did you know that the B-1B has a pair of tiny fin by its nose too?
KATAERO 2 years ago
Ofcourse the Su-30 would possibly fall out of the sky without the HTP, but what you are calling "small fins" are classified as canards, even though this is not the true canard formation. The reason the Su-30 has the HTP because the original aircraft was designed around them. The canards were added to enhance high alpha performance when allied with thrust vectoring nozzles. And you cannot possibly compare the B-1B's stabilisers to the Su-30's canards.
allinacan 2 years ago
ALLINACAN, do you know what the small nose fins on the B-1B is for?
What is your asessment of Su-30/35 in comparison with EF-2000 or the Raptor?
KATAERO 2 years ago
I believe the small canard foreplanes/fins on the B-1B are for handling turbulence when transitioning from subsonic to supersonic flight. I am a fan of the Eurofighter Typhoon just because it is such an unstable platform that pilots must love it. The Flankers too have amazing manoeuvrability, especially with thrust vectoring. I just feel the Raptor brings more to the table as it is stealthy and extremely manoeuvrable.
allinacan 2 years ago
ALLINACAN, I heard that the nose fins of B-1B are for manipulating the airflow over the airframe to smooth out bumpy ride at treetop level @ 0.92 Mach. The original A-model had Mach-2 capability but the B-model is limited only to Mach 1.25. The USAF concluded high-altitude Mach-2 penetration of Soviet's airspace was a virtual suicide, so it switched to tree-top level penetration instead.
I think EF-2000 has an edge over Su-35, but Raptor is extremely hard to beat in BVR fight.
KATAERO 2 years ago
For example because of the stealth demandments of the US.
The Typhoon will also be a replacement for the Tornado, so it's configuration is also optimized for very low altitude flight, I guess.
albedoshader 2 years ago
Both the Raptor & Typhoon are ill-suited for flying at treetop level because of their low wing loading which is obtimized for max maneuverability. You need high wing loading to give smooth ride while sneaking across the treetop, and nothing flying today can beat the Tornado in this role. High wing loading = smooth ride at treetop level. The Raptor's & Typhoon's pilots may crack the top of their canopies if they try to fly the Tornado's flight profile.
KATAERO 2 years ago
(cont) Lacking titanium airframe like SR-71, or the Raptor, Concorde was limited to Mach 2.20 for fear of airframe's meltdown. I doubt Typhoon could top Mach 2.20 for the same reason. All Typhoon's Demo is nothing more than normal loobs & rolls with a few high AOA maneuvers, but well short of what we call "Superagility." So I would appreciate you backing up your claims with sources. I like dealing with facts, not fictions. Did I ever mention that Raptor is fully Stealthy too?
KATAERO 3 years ago
I don't care what you see in demos. If you find its the right way to judge about an aircraft abilities then go on. I prefer statements by real EF pilots. You haven't showed any facts but hyperboling. Because the F-22 isn't fully stealth. It has two multiwatt torches behind which can be easily be spotted on modern 3rd-generation IRST systems. Also its not stealth against sensorfusion.
techdefined 3 years ago
techdefined, Demo is all about selling airplanes, and whatever capabilities each jet possesses, the manufactuere would surely like its potential customers to see. Do you know Mike Spick, a British aviation expert in publications like AirForce Monthly, Air International, Air Enthusiast, and more than 25 books under his name? He's my major source of aviation Info. So don't get pissed off with me, but tell Typhoon's test pilots to, at least, try to create more excitement like superagility.
KATAERO 3 years ago
A Cobra maneuver isn't a high-g maneuver even if it looks like it is. It's just draining as much energy as possible in a very short time by using heavy turbulence. Flying maneuvers over longer periods at, say, 7 or 8 g is something completely different.
And the g force margin of an SR-71 at very high speeds was small, very small. You couldn't pull 2 g's at mach 2.5 without tearing it to pieces. It was mage for fast, straight flying.
albedoshader 2 years ago
Correct, doing a 6g turn at 1.5mach is a true performance leap over other planes and open new tactical possibilities for Typhoon pilots.
techdefined 2 years ago
The hydrostatic principle of the Libelle anti-g suit makes it possible to withstand high g maneuvers over long periods. There's no reaction time as the fluid reacts instantaneously, compared to the .2 secs of pneumatic suits. This allows very high g onset rates. Flying 5 g's is possible without the muscle tensing routine used with conventional suits.
Even if an F22 can pull 12 g it's not a maneuver that should be flown too often as stuff like that considerably shortens the lifespan of planes.
albedoshader 2 years ago
Firstly the F-22 can pull max 9,7g more would damage it structurally. But thats the difference on the EF (Tranche 2+3)which has over 60%of composites and 40% monlithic CFRP!!(the double %then F-22) can withstand high g(over 10g forces for indefinite time without risking damage or shortening the lifepsan. Maximum g for the Typhoon is 14g even no human would survive that.
techdefined 2 years ago
Maybe the Austrian and German pilots would survive that (if only for short periods of time) because these nations will use the hydrostatic anti-g suit. Centrifuge tests have shown that 9 to 10 g are possible with the Libelle anti-g without problems, even over long periods.
But even if the maximum load is 14 g then 12 g over longer periods will be life shortening to the structure, too. I know that the pilots can override the 9 g limit but that's only for emergencies, as far as I know.
albedoshader 2 years ago
Not entirely correct, there was a limit of 9 g and 90° AOA on Tranche 1 EF. With Tranche 2 they are much higher and you can do 10g for a indefinite time without doing structural damage .
techdefined 2 years ago
TECHDEFINED,the FBWs of both the Raptor & Typhoon won't let the pilots overstress the airframe, no matters how hard the stick is pulled. Both of them are rated as +9/-3 G jets. Their true max G-load figures will never be known, until someone overstressing one during training exercises. What's the point of making a 15-g jet, if it ends up killing its pilot, no to mention the weight & cost penalties in beefing up the whole airframe? Read "Boyd," about the "Mad Major" who invented E-M theory.
KATAERO 2 years ago
I know its hard to understand for some people beyond the pond, but only Typhoons TRANCHE 1 were max +9 rated. Tranche 2+3 can go over 9G.(exact g though classified its over 10g). The point is in combination of the dragonfly anti-g suit described well by albedoshader you can sustain 9 to 10 g for a indefinite time, and thats gives you a edge over other fighters.
techdefined 2 years ago
Re techdefined 14 G is Possible to survive males Normaly Knock Out at 11 G Woman 6 G ?
melfiire 2 years ago
11 can handle
melfiire 2 years ago
16 can i handle
Halfback1990 2 years ago
in which fighter is the libelle anti g suit?
typhoonginopilot 2 years ago
It's for the German and Austrian Typhoon pilots only at the moment.
albedoshader 2 years ago
for ef fighter pilots?can you give me more info please?i didnt know about this suit at all..thanks !!!
typhoonginopilot 2 years ago
google for "AUTOFLUG Libelle G-Multiplus". The first link points to the company website.
albedoshader 2 years ago
You'll find more information on the website under:
The products-> Rescue & Safety Technology -> Anti-G Garments
albedoshader 2 years ago
are you kidding me, britain has about 50 at the moment. The Spannish hae about 20 the Italians have 30 and the Saudi Arabians have 2.
bw92 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"The Spannish hae about 20 the Italians have 30 and the Saudi Arabians have 2. "
u missed out the germans
dj8work 2 years ago
Generally i agree they are closely matched, but the F-22 better if it gets a good BVRAAM weapon.
techdefined 3 years ago
Great video of the best aircraft of our days.
I got the chance to visit a base of the Eurofighter once a month and I have seen lots of other jets from Nellis Air Base to Russia - there is nothing thats worth comparing !
oreda2 3 years ago
The Eurofighter is another fine example of cooperation, partnership and the crossing of language boundaries between countries that were at war with each other only 65 years ago.
Oh and she's a beauty as well. :)
lumlum1606 3 years ago 4
Very well said. Together we can build incredible things like the A380 the most sophisticated and complex plane ever or the most agile supersonic fighter in the world.
techdefined 3 years ago 2
Whats the name of the song?
treborf18 3 years ago
read the description...
Nitrous2k 3 years ago
@holydiver& vinniebaby1: during the KoreaWar the NORD-korea had the airsuperiority. the RUSSIAN planes were better than the americans...by luck the americans invented the PHANTOM F-111^^.
during the 2ww there was another strong airplane: the MACCHI MC-205 VELTRO. it was a very good plane,one of the best...he was able to compare with a P-51. after 43 it fought with the americans against the nazis.
siladovia 3 years ago
They are still American aircraft, period.....god, what a pathetic argument.
vinniebaby1 3 years ago
what part of ''after WW2, there is NO comparison'' did you not understand?
vinniebaby1 3 years ago
I think history has proven the yanks and their air superiority and the F-22 proves that once again but I'm glad europe has something to boast about.
blowjobclinton 3 years ago
oh yeah america have always had air superiority...are you mad man? battle of britain we had the 2 best allied fighters in the war thats why america bought loads of hurricanes and spitfires and talking about the lancaster man what a plane and when you compare it to the b-17 damn one hell of a lot of them got shot down..and yeah your right air superiority does belong to america now but you must realise the bulk of the designers were european so you cant say europe dont have any planes knobcheese
1HOLYDIVER1 3 years ago
laughing at holydiver...
''america bought loads of hurricanes and spitfires''
Please define ''loads'...
Depending on who you ask, the P-51 was the best fighter of WW2, then the P-47...
The p-51 did have the merlin engines.......built in America by Packard.
Too bad you have to go all the way to WW2 to make any competent comparison, because after WW2, there is NO comparison.
knobcheese.... ;-)
vinniebaby1 3 years ago
did you just completely ignore what else i said?
1HOLYDIVER1 3 years ago
what part of ''please define loads'' did you not understand?
vinniebaby1 3 years ago
the fact they were used in vietnam? and thats not the point i was making just then im saying did you purposely leave out the fact that the chief designers on most american planes are european
1HOLYDIVER1 3 years ago
theres quite an arguement about what is better the typhoon or the F-22 raptor and i think there both powerful aircraft in there own right but in terms of looks? the raptor is unbelievably ugly but the typhoon is jaw droppingly gorgeous
1HOLYDIVER1 3 years ago 4
yeah the typhoon is really beautifull and the f22 looks like a duck or something
theyre both good f22 is overpriced and almost usless...
ninjahua 3 years ago
I think both aircraft's are good - but designed for different performance and usage.
Both excell in their own domain
slafkec 3 years ago
Best music and plane on sam time 5* xD
SoftyPro 3 years ago
what is this a boxing match? This will win and that will tie? Bull shit. An airframe alone cannot win the battle. An Airframe is nothing without a good pilot at the controls. It's all about pilot skill, confidence in his equipment and tactics.
Take for example the red baron. His aircraft was really a handfull for many other pilots because of it's design. Wasn't exactly the easiest thing to fly but he turned it into a killing machine.
ic3eee 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this fighter is so ugly looking
cortezfu2 4 years ago
france droped out of euro fighter project.
uk took up the slack and got a larger slice
of the manafactur of it.
runesaff 4 years ago
france retreated?
dopafeind1 3 years ago
like the way you think.lol
runesaff 3 years ago
wouldnt be the first time they retreat jaja
jesusmendoza89 3 years ago
yea, because of the costs. It was just too much. So they developed their own fighter : The ''Dassault Rafale''
EliteGhost001 3 years ago
no, they wanted to give french industry(dassault, thales, snecma etc) a whole fighter project insted of few percents of workshare. rafale is based on same concept as EF, its a little smaller tough(carrier use)
weedymacweedweed 3 years ago
and not so good :P
ninjahua 3 years ago
Kind of stupid to argue F-35/F-22 vs European jets since it's Russian/Chinese sh*t all western jets is built to kill.
samsungdog 4 years ago
eurofighter is german, france italy u.k and spain collaboration though most of it is german. nothing chinese here nor eastern european. its all western europe
da22ki 4 years ago
U'k and germany both had equall input into the project 33 percent each, and franch dropped out.
eurofightertyphoon10 4 years ago
the best f...ing plane!!!
Typhoon 4 ever dude!!!
johnnytyph00n 4 years ago
Yes. No american aircraft si better than european planes. EF 2000 Typhoon with Jas 39 Gripen - both of them are better. For example EF 2000 is called raptor's hunter. And if you have Typhoon or Gripen with IRIS-T and METEORS missles your americans are in HELL !!
Megerazwei 4 years ago 3
Eurofighter rules!With IRIS-T, METEOR an electronical scanning Radar nobody will beat us!
Z12IT 4 years ago