F-16s to Iran or Cuba

[Vince278]

Originally posted by rah
Without replacement parts, they won't be flying long.

People forget that.

[BlackCat]

Just a humble question - is original parts a must ?

[Thorgal]

@Oerdin, sorry your posts about this matter are total nonsense. You dont know what are you speaking about. Everybody with some interest in the topic knows that Venezuela has not F-15. Only USA, Japan, Saudi Arabia and Israel has it. The Typhoon is not in any way based in the Rafale, it is another aircraft designed AFTER the Typhoon. About if the F-22 can turn fast (nonsense), go faster (Mach 2 typhoon vs 1.7 F-22) , fly higher (it is not important indeed but ceiling are about 20,000 metres for both) , turn tighter (au contrair F-22 is less maneuverable) you again show that dont know what are you speaking about. France has nothing to do with the Typhoon, it is only UK, Germany, Italy and Spain project. As have been already stated and you want to ignore the F-22 design took a longer time than the Typhoon's (and with political mess too, when it was obvious that the McDonel Douglas proposal, the YF-23, was superior, but they choose the YF-22 of Lockheed)....

Typhoon HAS indeed supercruise capability too (that simply means that the plane can maintain horizontal supersonic speed without afterburning). About range both plane are matched with about 3800km. About Stealth Typhoon is not an Stealth plane at the same level as F-22 (Stealth is a cuantitative matter, there are not Stealth planes only planes with smaller radar signal), but it has a low profile since front and rear, smaller than an hipotetycal resized Rockwell B-1 of the same size as the Typhoon., so it is difficult to detect when it approaches. The Typhoon has indeed the same payload, (much more if the F-22 doesnt use external weapons to maintain low radaric signal) use the same AMRAAM missiles and is indeed more maneuverable (in fact dogfight is important today when both sides are technologically matched, that is becuse they make fighters as maneuverable as they can and dont build Mig-25s anymore).

@Harry, a RAF general who in contrast with an Australian magazine, has proved both planes said that the Typhoon can do the 90% that the F-22 can but costing a 50% (less indeed). So it is supossed that the F-22 IS, MUST BE more powerful than the Typhoon (not so much as it seems you like to believe, though). If not it would be the greatest stupidity in aviation history.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Thorgal
@Oerdin, sorry your posts about this matter are total nonsense. You dont know what are you speaking about. Everybody with some interest in the topic knows that Venezuela has not F-15.

Jesus Christ! Can't you read? I've already explained what happened. Please look at one of the previous posts.

As for the rest... I have no idea where you get your delusions. Keep telling yourself the Eurofighter is better then the F-22 if it makes you feel better but I think most of the other people realize that the results are in and the Eurofighter lost.

[Thorgal]

OK, OK you mistook F-16 with F-15 becuase you looked briefly to the post, but you mistook Venezuela with Saudi Arabia or Japan and Chavez with the Emperor too?

Now, please tell me exactly which delusions are you speaking about and exactly where i say that the Typhoon is better than the F-22, please.

[Dinner]

Man, just so no one else falls for the false claims in this thread here are a few links.

Wiki (as always open source is suspect but worth looking at): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...ghter_aircraft

Military.com's discussion of this topic: http://forums.military.com/groupee/f.../m/60600421713

Lock On (a pilot web forum) also had a discussion on this: http://forums.ubi.com/groupee/forums...6/m/2301045423

As did airliners.net (another forum for pilots): http://forums.ubi.com/groupee/forums...6/m/2301045423


The basic facts are as follows:

Thrust to weight ratio (with full combat load): F-22- 1.2, Typhoon 1.18

Wing loading (in KG/m2): F-22-342, Typhoon-300

Trust vectoring (meaning angling the engine thrust to dramatically improve manueverability): F-22 has it, the Typhoon doesn't.

Supercruise: As said before the Typhoon can barely do it with a full load while the F-22 can since most of it's payload is carried inside of it for less drag.

Avionics: F-22's has much longer range, a larger field of vision, and better resolution.

Stealth: F-22 has it, Typhoon doesn't.

In the end it's a money game and the F-22 costs six to seven times as much so of course it performs better in every way. If you throw enough money at a project you'll get some results and this project had obscene amounts of money thrown at it. In the end this is a race between a super car and a VW. Yes, the VW did pretty good for the money but the Ferrari will still win every time.

[Thorgal]

All OK. Only a point, dont show F-22 higher wing loading as something good becuse it is a bad thing. Higher wing loading reduces meuverability, minimal speed and maximum angle of attack.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
Politically, yes...contractually, no.

Actually, we broke the contract first, when we slapped an embargo on them. We are contractually obligated to sell them the parts to keep those planes flying. We stopped, so we can hardly complain when they treat the broken treaty as broken.

[Thorgal]

Why did USA impose an embargo on Venezuela? (i mean the official reason )

[chequita guevara]

Officially it's because they are too close to "terrorism" sponsoring countries, like Cuba. Iran actually does sponsor terrorism, but Cuba has no ties to terrorism, rather being a victim of American based terrorism instead.

Basically, we don't like leftist governments.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Thorgal

How predictable. And from somebody who doesnt even know the difference beetwen an F-16 and an F-15. Amusing.

Lets see, Ierdon. The YF-22 development began in 1981 they selected the YF-22 to be the next USA fighter in 1986. The F-22 is not in service yet so if you can count it is 2006-1981=25 years and counting.

It is now in service. A wing at Hill and Langley AFBs

The Eurofighter program began in 1983 with the EAP prototype development, however the Eurofighter design began as late as 1987 based on the EAP experiences but being a TOTALLY different aircraft. The Eurofighter is in service since two years ago so 2004-1983=21 or to be more exact 2004-1987=17. OTOH it is normal in both cases, planes are a bit more complicated to build than cars, not if you know...

About the Eurofighter, it was designed and evaluated respecting advanced versions of F-15 and F-16 and has destroyed the F-15 systematically in simulations and real military exercises. It is something expectable since the Typhoon is a generation more advanced.

Here you can see an Eurofighter shooting down a couple of F-15s :
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=673262005

One again, until it looses one for real, it is still the best. In fact not one F-14, 15, 16, or 18 has lost in an air to air battles while an American or Israeli airman flew the plane.
1 Iranian F-14 did loose back in the 80's to Iraq I think.

[Dinner]

The claim was the Venzuela has not cooperated with anti-terrorism so they are not fit to get the latest weapons.

[Harry Tuttle]

Thorgal:

10% is a wide margin when an F-22 can burn the EF out of the sky before it knows its there.

You also compared the EF to the B-1 lancer. The B-1 Lancer was designed in the 70s, long before your EF was thought up. If it has the same ratio when comparing radar cross sections, well, cmon man, the B-1 is a fast attack bomber designed before stealth was stealth. The EF has the same ratio? Bad.

You also said the Y-23 was a superior aircraft to the YF-22. Yes, it was, while flying, by a very small margin. The reason why the YF-22 was chosen is because it could be repaired much, much easier than the Y-23 with parts already in inventory.

Cost per airplane or number airplanes produced don't mean diddly anymore.

The Typhoon was designed to be a dogfighter. The F-22 was designed to kill before it came within site. The contest is done like a dinner.

[Vince278]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Just a humble question - is original parts a must ?

Mostly. You might be able to get away with some variations but not much. Unauthorized changes can be problematic. A good example was Iran's air force after the revolution. They had alot of good US made planes but it wasn't long before they were all grounded. They eventually cannibalized their way down to nothing.

Venezeula's main threat is a possible technology transfer to a rogue nation, and not just providing some kickass planes.

[Serb]

F-22, Eurofighter...childish toys.

That's the plane!