If you were to make only 185, but how about if you make 10 times that at 1850 like the F-35 is slated for?
I think there’s utility, I just don’t think there’s utility for everyone but bribes and lobbying combined have made rejecting it virtually not possible, despite it not being a good fit for many nations.
As I said F-15 can do everything the F-16 does but vice-versa isn’t true.
I would’ve done it this way too. I think multirole is inherent in any fast-jet now so its a given you’d end up with a strike eagle analogue.
I don’t think they would make that many if it was more of a strike eagle replacement, but your point still stands.
Bribes and questionable practices aside, an F-16 replacement is always going to be far cheaper to make and operate, as well as more export friendly. Like you said, the F-15 is more capable than the F-16, but far more F-16’s have been made and exported.
If they can’t get a glide bomb which has shown a remarkable capacity for compatibility with different platforms operational on the F-35 13 years after it’s first launch, I don’t know about a completely foreign missile
This is kinda the point Rileyy was making. We should have the ability to intergrate them ourselves, Instead we are beholden to LM dragging their feet. Probably waiting for Aim-260 to go on the market so they can leverage people buying it instead of Meteor
i dont think thats going to be exportable for the vast majority of countries for a while. and the only reason it would be integrated quicker is because it was made with the F-35 specifically in mind
Just a friendly reminder that this topic is about Eurofighter, yet some how for the past almost 100 messages, things where about Gripens, Tornadoes, AV-8s, F-14s,15s,16s,18s and 35s, so i kindly ask to take those to thier respected topics to keep this thread in order and on topic (German Eurofighters)
Since when do politicans think longterm? They won’t do things which cost much now and give a return of investment at the time when they most likely aren’t in power anymore so that the competitor gets all the glory. Never.
Interested in seeing Taurus in-game, though atm there’s quite literally functionally no use for it.
That being said, the precursor shaped charge on that thing is hilarious
They could make it so that it has a damage modifier that makes it destroy bombing targets in a single hit, but that just seems kinda dumb, so I’d rather they give us objectives for it to be used on.
P.S: 14in diameter shaped charge puts the low end of penetration estimates at ~2.49m of RHA…
Not sure if I’m reading this right, but looks like KS22a TNTe is ~1.45
Imagine, you set your point for an Taurus, and in the end kill an M22 via direct hit xD
First: impact of the penetrator which kills allready
After that to make sure its realy dead let it also explode xD
The huge issue with the F-35B in particular, but parts apply to the other F-35s, is that it uses fuel to cool its electronics, plus with the cancellation of the SRVL capability because it just wasn’t working, this means their margins for landing are extremely small, and the gross weight at takeoff leaves very little for missiles/bombs. So it’s range limited for A/A engagement more than most, because radar performance is throttled as fuel is used up, because it reduces the size of the cold sink and heat rejection rate.
Plus it’s just a slow plane, 1.6M top speed, even with AIM-120Ds, or even the mythical AIM-260 that is yet to be introduced, isn’t going to give good launch parameters especially with its low ceiling capability.
I thought it’s cooled by the fuel which is on its way to the engine anyway, so it gets warmed up and burned afterwards (enhancing the burn quality by better “misting” through the fuel injectors as a side-effect). Same with the fuel-draulic actuators of the nozzle. The minimal fuel flow should be more than enough to transfer the heat generated by the electronic equipment.
As I think about it it, I don’t know any modern plane which doesn’t cool its electronic equipment by fuel as it’s the easiest way to do that.
I found a brochure by a company called Eaton that specifies the Typhoon uses non-fuel water based cooling fluid, so that’s probably not true.
Either way I trust that the F-35’s electronics cooling system was designed poorly and isn’t very good, as the software is of the same dubious quality.
And where does the water bring the heat it absorbed? To a heat-exchanger with the fuel. So yes: Avionics is cooled by water which transports the heat to a heat-exchanger to transfer the heat to the fuel. Makes sense as you don’t want to risk fuel leaks in the electronics bay ^^
To draw a conclusion from software-quality to hardware-design-quality is quite the jump I wouldn’t go with TBH.
Yep. To think the company embroiled in decades long hyper-bribery/extortion scandals wouldn’t do it again is ridiculous.
Even if the plane performed in game as well as Lockheed says it does irl, which it doesn’t, I’m really wondering what BR it’s going to be at. In BVR it’s just going to get stomped flat by the Rafales, Typhoons, and Su-30SMs. It just doesn’t have the capacity to be competitive with its garbage performance.
