Euro fighter best fighter
Both static at Sea Level Installed, and typhoon may well be higher.
I wouldn’t say that’s close
J-8F T/W ratio is > J-7E but we know which one rates better… there’s more to this.
1 Like
The eurofighter also has canards.
What’s the wing loading of those, and the wing loading of the eurofighter Vs f-14?
And 1.457 for F-18E at M 0.9(Peak thrust) installed…
I’m not following the point of these questions? The F-14 in similar configuration to what the Eurofighter was getting 16 something deg/s has a higher sustained turn rate in the game…?
1 Like
Eurofighter>f16 it is much better
No idea what you’re trying to say here, although not shocked you don’t understand the importance of wing loading.
Wing loading is an important characteristic of aircraft flight performance. The EF has a much better wing loading than the F-14. It also has a much better TWR.
The document earlier compared performances in sustained rate. It showed it was inferior to the F-16C, and we know the F-14B has a better rate in similar conditions. How is comparing wing loading going to change that?
Is it necessary to attack people when you’re having a discussion?
1 Like
Your Aussie air power source?
Not at all, just deserved in this circumstance.
@SlowHandClap
Can’t do all your work for you
Also doesn’t really help your argument to be constantly insulting the other party.
F-14 has better effective wing loading than the Typhoon due to the lifting body.
Typhoon wing loading is around 312kg/m^2
F-14D effective wing loading is 230kg/m^2
Regarding the rate fight, the Eurofighter is roughly equivalent to an F-16 below 10000ft exceeds it as the altitude rises according to Italian pilots:
Which is corroborated by the Indian MMRCA competition stating the EF2000 demonstrated only 0.3°/s lower STR at 5000ft (ie: below 10000ft):
Spoiler
And explains ex-german Eurofighter pilots explanation of the relative performance of a Eurofighter vs an F-16:
The Eurofighter is a dogfighting, and more specifically, a rate fighting monster. It has massive TWR, low wing loading, and great aerodynamics.
Beyond the fact that it effectively matches or exceeds the F-16 in all flight regimes (except aoa on early Eurofighters without the AMK kit), the Eurofighter also just brings more endurance in fuel, weapons, and countermeasures to the table.
9 Likes
Are you using the effective wing loading from Wikipedia? Because that figure includes the entire fuselage area as lifting surface, and I’m sceptical of that, especially as the source is a YouTube video.
Ehhh, while the Typhoon doesnt have the first shoot capabilities of the F-35, it has a VASTLY better defensive suite.
The radar based MAWS being able to detect missiles that have already cooled down, dedicated jammers that can target side-/rearwards, chaff (especially in combination with the jammer illuminating it more), dropped active radar decoys, the towed radar jammers (although the F-35 does have those as well)
German and Italian Typhoons can then also use their IRIS-T as hardkill interceptors (AIM-9X or ASRAAM cant be used for this purpose as their laser fuze is too likely to just miss small-ish missiles)
Meanwhile the F-35 can only carry 4 AMRAAM internally, Sidekick still isnt ready, any external stores will destroy the advantage of its stealth, and if its empty, it cant run away because its both slower and its exhaust area is much more visible on both radar and IR
I’m not saying the Eurofighter can just kill the F-35 like it wants, but I am believing it has a non insignificant chance of outlasting the F-35
Umm?
Especially since it’s an F-18 engine.
IRIS-T was mentioned in the long list of over 200 posts I skimmed.
Not yet; AIM-9X, IRIS-T, AAM-5B, MICA IR, et cetera are a bit too heavy for War Thunder currently IMO.
F-18E with AESA was mentioned as better than EF Typhoon. I don’t know when/if Tranche 3 was introduced so I cannot comment on that.
I mean if we got the Tornado F.3 a bit earlier, F-14A time or earlier, we wouldve had a very nice BVR capable aircraft that would’ve matched the F-14. admittedly in close combat that wouldve fallen down a bit, but that was always going to be the case. Now we’re stuck with a DOA Tornado that no one wants to play, and I fear the Eurofighter is going the same way.
Is that based on any facts, or an just assumption?
Wouldn’t know but considering that they are both used in a Surface Launch configuration to target drones and rockets I don’t think it’s likely to much of an issue with the fuse.
Considering that they both also have LOAL capabilities as long as the incoming missile could be detected they should be able to track it once they close the distance or are otherwise directed by the datalink.
If it would be something that I have proof of is another thing entirely and on what missile for example the AIM-54 at 15" in diameter falls squarely within the listed Cruise missile diameter range. and further which subvariant of the AIM-9X you were referring to the -1, -2 or -2+ as they all have different capabilities, I’m sure it would be similar to the ASRAAM’s developments.