Yes but the RB199 was being developed anyway and is a far superior engine to the speys both from a performance view and a maintenance veiw. Additionally any attempt to re-engine the UK’s phantom fleet would almost certianly have required the development of a new enigne, spey was geting long in the tooth and adour just wouldnt be fit for purpose.
What do you classify as performance because RB.199 at 16klbf is not what I would call superior or high performing.
Engine temps efficiency and whole metric of other material other than raw power.
1 Like
Oh definitely, in basically all metrics of efficiency they were better.
Not too mention politics.
“we’ve spent all this money on developing this aircraft/engines, you can be damn sure we are going to use it”
Not to mention airframe fatigue. F-4s had been in service for a long time by the time Tonka came into service.
Generally when these discussions happen the British aircraft(s) are always overhyped. The Eurofighter is claimed to be low observable and they make comparisons that imply it would perform on par (or better) than 5th gens and the like.
When someone comes along and brings the opinions back down to earth for a bit, that’s when the thread gets chaotic.
I’ll stand by my opinion that the development of an entirely new airframe, engine, complex of sensors for the Tornado to be just about as good as an F-4 Phantom was a waste of money. The Eurofighter took far too long as well. They served a purpose, but even with the knowledge of the time they should have built something far better than they did. I don’t think anyone’s gonna look back and say the same for F-14/15/16/18, F-22/35… And in case anyone thinks I’m biased towards Russia… They messed up similarly in the past (see my namesake).
To imply I was banished from a thread is an… Interesting response. Maybe we can go talk about it’s shortcomings some more and shown the devs it’s a potential addition. Certainly not the overhyped that prevented its addition so far…
I think your not quite understaning what tornado was for or its heritage, the history of tornaod goes alllll the way back to the canberra with the role of the strike bomber, in TSR-2 this switched from a high altitued aircraft to a low altitude one, then when TSR-2 collapsed AFVG popped up and collapsed, then some more stuff happened then tornado came along. Torando wasnt a replacement for Phantom but for canberra the Phantom replacement was a convenient if necessary case of happenstance in the air interceptor role. Tornado was fast stable platform that was avaliable and could be addapted with little effort. The RAF Phantoms were getting old worn out and rapildy becoming outclassed by peers soemthing new was needed.
3 Likes
I’m aware. The existence of it doesn’t mean it is what GJN are going to do though.
Imagine coming into a thread about the british version of a european aircraft and then mouthing off about how the British, of all people, overhype their aircraft when you yourself are named after one of the most overhyped soviet aircraft of all time, which is saying a lot.
Are you honestly surprised people are sick of seeing you in threads? You have a superficial level of understanding in everything you talk about, and when you’re proven wrong you just deny and move the goalposts. I guess that’s at least onform for the username.
2 Likes
Funnily enough Rolls-Royce were actually quite far along in the development of an upgraded Spey engine for use in the British Phantoms, known as the Spey 205. The Spey 205 had turbine blades manufactured from a single metal crystal. These blades would have significantly extended the operating life of the engine at its normal power rating, or optionally have allowed the engines to be operated at a higher temperature (and thus a higher thrust rating). The Spey 205 could be uprated to 25,000 lb (11,340 kgf), compared to 20,515 lb (9,305 kgf) for the regular Spey engines (albeit at the expense of decreased service life).
When the retirement of the Phantom was confirmed the Spey 205 programme was cancelled, and no engines were produced under the Spey 205 name; however by that point 12 Spey 202 engines had been upgraded to Spey 205 standard for testing (and are now generally referred to as Spey 205s, or Spey 202 hybrids).
Interesting after the programme was cancelled two of the Spey 205 prototypes, along with two standard Spey 202s were purchased from Rolls-Royce for use in the ThrustSSC programme (the world’s fastest car).
IIRC the remaining Spey 205 prototypes were purchased from Rolls-Royce and found their way to China (apparently we didn’t learn our lesson after selling jet engines to the Soviets).
1 Like
Shoker on the not learning our lessions there having worked on later spey varaitns and marinised and powe gen speys there still a bit more of pig than the RB199 even if the RB199 was dirty one.
The thing with an older Airframe like the phantom is there is a point where it’s less economic to maintain an old airframe compared to developing a new one. Same goes with a car, sure you can drive your car forever but at a certain point the cost of the repairs and maintaining will be higher than getting a new car.
Also there is only so much in terms of upgrades you can fit into an existing airframe per example size of instruments, computers, weapons load etc. Look per example at the T-2 and F-1 which became a one seater because the space that the second cockpit took up was needed for additional instruments. Same goes for radar, there is only so much you can put into an radome. Example B (warning disturbing image) the
Let’s do a real comparison in terms of capabilities of 2 modernised variants of both Phantom and Tornado ADV F.3.
F-4 Phantom EJ KAI: 8 Missles: most modern load out would be modern Aim-7 variants and AAM-3s.
Tornado F.3 CSP: more capable radar, better Missles, better flight performance and more importantly a younger airframe.
Just a few weeks ago a Turkish F-4 Phantom lost its drop tank just because of fatigue. Sure you can rebuild complete Airframes again and again but economically it’s not viable anymore.
Example C: The Marineflieger bought used P-3C Orion’s from the Netherlands. 8 Planes for 388 Million € the Airframes were 20 years old. Guess what happened to them. In just 10 years of service they already cost more than a Billion. It was planned to upgrade them for an expected service live till 2035. For that till 2020 another 900 Million € were spend for that. Some of the airframes spent more than 4 years getting upgraded. And guess what, will they fly till 2035? No they go out of service in 2025 because the airframes are to old. And now Germany have no Marine reconnaissance plane for another 10 years probably because of exactly the thought process you had. We only just ordered P-8 Poseidon’s, would we have started with that instead of procuring old airframes and upgrading them, we could have had a fleet like Britain or Australia which already got theirs.
Good luck fitting a Ferranti A.I. 24 Foxhunter into the radome of an F-4 Phantom Btw.
2 Likes
Well may as well write off this patch or any future ones for the time being
Tornado F.3 - DOA, lost to F-16/MiG-29 Spam with HMD and All Apespects (yes that’s intentional)
Harrier GR.7 - not even a designated A/A platform, only viable thanks to 9Ms. Can’t control any fights due to being horrendously slow.
Phantoms - not even gonna justify this. Why are we still using this as a top tier fighter.
confused noises
My guy, they’re really not.
Your statement is so non sensical I’m unable to tell whether you’re saying that we make the aircraft out to be too good or we get too pissed off when we don’t get stuff
Christ can I not just leave this thread for a week or two and not come back to some sort of apocolypse where any sort of sane sensible thought has vanished
3 Likes
There is no point engaging with them. They demonstrated a perfect lack of aerodynamic/physics understanding in another thread they derailed, and when called out on it they just pretend that you’re misconstruing their original statement. The result was them ranting and raving for dozens of posts about how missile mass doesn’t influence missile top speed lol.
1 Like
It doesn’t, unless you apply a conditional.
No need for you to rant about me derailing threads when you actively chase me in any other one … further derailing them.
Back to the Typhoon … As I said earlier … Maybe we shouldn’t be overhyping them so hard and Gaijin would consider adding them sooner instead of leaving them to be DOA…
Yep, also confirmed our new top tier isn’t this update either. Meaning any hope of 2 months of ARH before other nations is also DOA.
So the FA2 is going to come with ARH Vs ARH in Dec and we are going to be DOA again
You’re confusing force for velocity. Maximum speed has little to do with mass, unless you add a conditional. When I made my exaggerated statement it was in reference to someone saying the R-27ER is incapable of going as fast as it does or maneuvering at 35G “because it’s a 771 pound missile”. This really doesn’t need to be brought up further, but SlowHandClap can’t help himself but repeat topics of discussion that have long since been settled in an attempt to spite me.
If y’all wanna continue to derail the topic do so at your own peril, I’m not going to reply further. If you want to continue the discussion in DMs or whatever we can do that.
Regarding the topic, Eurofighter… The devs have no official information (to my knowledge) on the aircraft to properly model it. If they think it’s gonna be too OP, perhaps someone has information they’re withholding that says otherwise so we can go ahead and get it added? (Legally pls)…
Seems in my own research and testing that Brit mains have held back on reporting anything and everything they could that would nerf the Phantoms, Sparrow / Skyflash, AIM-9 series any chance they got.