EAP is not an option for us, forget it.
Early versions of Eurofighter Typhoons would be much better choice then EAP.
The American propaganda machine is hard at work.
Whilst the BAe website does state that it is a technology demonstrator this is based on the politics of its conception.
The Rafale A is labelled similarly for the reason of excluding the necessity of financial backing, future production and also to keep either project impartial in the overall European fighter project, this is why the countries of Italy and Germany did not invest in either prototype as it wouldn’t be impartial and to help with this they are referred to as technology demonstrators rather than their official classification which would be a pre-FSD prototype according to an external 3rd party not bound by this agreement.
Source RAND just slightly after the completion of the two aircraft, page labelled 10 in the link below.
One key difference is that the EAP carried these dummy weapons where the Rafale did not and simply tested the airframe, this shows intent of the EAP to carry armament as it specifically tested the aerodynamic performance of specified BAE products.
The aircrafts predecessor the P.110 intended for export to Saudi Arabia which this aircraft is directly developed from was slated to carry a Foxhunter radar from the Tornado. I have proof here as an MP the Hon. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton specifically asks about the P.110 and references Ferranti systems including a radar,
Link to parliamentary transcript: P110 Aircraft (Hansard, 1 March 1982)
Gaijin has given out a-historic flares to vehicles that need them and as Britain has no domestic options other than this one it is convenient that BAE bought a large stake in SAAB and purchased SAAB’s BOL countermeasure pods for the harrier GR.7, furthermore it is even more convenient that those same pods can be fitted to a standard ASRAAM/Sidewinder missile rail.
I do have more points i could make so i’d like to ask if we could have a dedicated thread for this aircraft, the interest is clearly there and it causes no harm to gaijin to at least entertain this proposal until grounds for its disqualification can be clearly outlined.
2 Likes
I would love a dedicated thread for this.
1 Like
They will find a way to butcher the eurofighter when it comes too, don’t you worry.
Just give up and play Russia is my recommendation.
Russian BIAS
South African aircraft subtree ? or just add Shar FA2 next year and put it in 12.0 to play with those supersonic?
1 Like
If its only 12.0 then we will be very happy. AMRAAM and 9M? I was thinking 12.3 at least, maybe even 12.7
And the worst part is Russia got a new Mig 29, the us got a new F16.
MY BROTHER IN CHRIST THEY JUST GOT AN F16 AND A MIG 29.
Meanwhile UK is stuck with a Tornado. A non competitive jet at that BR.
1 Like
Yeah, UK and Sweden I think are royally screwed this update,
1 Like
I don’t think Gaijin will do another BR decompression at this point.
And finally when they do add something for these nations - they get like a few weeks of being on top and then they add a new US or RU aircraft to put that back under again.
I’d expect any and all ARH jets to be 12.3 initially and eventually move up to 12.7 and anything currently in game at 12.0 that gets AMRAAM/R-77 to move up accordingly
Or its DOA on arrival because it was a year late
definitely like this in the end.
The biggest problem with top tier is diversification. Its the same jets over and over and over again and everyone else is just cannon fodder.
I have my problems with World of Tanks but man every battle was always a mix up of tanks.
Yeah, i main ASB. So i only see Mig29s and F16s and maybe the odd Yak141.
Id love for china to get a buff and to bring something than the F-16 and whilst im really not looking forward to typhoon vs typhoon when that happens, it will be more interesting sprwad than what there is now
Other aircraft are planned. We never said Typhoon was the only option.
The labels are not really even the key significant thing. Different sources may call the EAP whatever they wish. It’s very clear what it was designed, intended and set out to achieve.
It may be called prototype by some sources. But this does not change the actual fact of what it is or does.
Indeed it did carry mockup weaponary. However again BAes website makes it clear it carried no military equipment. There were no operational or planned means to fire and operate said weapons in the EAP program. This game with the Typhoon DA prototypes.
The P.110 may well have been. However everything on the EAP is clear that it was a demonstration aircraft with no intention to fit it with functional RWR, countermeasures or fit military operational equipment like the Yak-141 prototypes had outlined clearly.
Again, this came later in the actual Eurofighter DA prototypes where weaponary, avionics, full radar test and other developments were planned and completed.
We have only ever issued flares to Aircraft that were planned to get them a with clear means of how to do so or aircraft that were possible to mount them too.
There were no provisions for countermeasures on the EAP as it was never intended to be an operational fight in itself. It was purely a proof of concept. The BOL came out after EAP there was no intrigrated combination with it.
It’s entirely fine to make a dedicated discussion thread on the EAP in the machinery of war area. There is nothing stopping the historical discussion of it and sharing of further sources.
However the aircraft does not really even meet the minimum criteria for a full suggestion topic and as previously mentioned, the developers don’t currently have any plans to introduce the EAP demonstrator based on all the current information. Other Aircraft will be focused on for the British tree.
The Yak-141 had planned weaponary and countermeasures.
The F-5C is an a F-5A family aircraft. All F-5A aircraft were possible to retrofit with countermeasures.
No such plans or retrofits exist for the EAP to base countermeasures on.
2 Likes