Eurofighter Typhoon (UK versions) - Technical data and discussion

[F0x_Hunter]

@MiG_23M

Makes me wonder how simple it would be to program a missile to chase the “lead target” first in the event that a towed decoy or something was used.

The feature doesn’t even exist yet, and MiG_23M is already trying to nerf it, huh?

[MiG_23M]

@Crazed_Otter

Ummm…no. Another unsourced opinion I see. It’s something of a habit when it comes to the Typhoon isn’t it?

Jamming isn’t just a case of making lots of EW noise and hoping it works. You CAN do that - but it’s inefficient and has every chance of negating your own sensors as anything else.

True jamming will detect the characteristics of the incoming sensor on the missile and create an appropriate counter-signature that exceeds that of the platform you are trying to protect. You can make a bigger signature, you can add a delay to the return to make it look like you are flying faster/slower/higher/further away. You can even make your jet look like it’s something else if you are feeling really sneaky - since a radar only has the electronic signal to identify what it is looking at.

All things that spoof an accurate return signal to the radar and/or missile seeker or both. The decoy just adds another layer to the existing system; the basic concept has been in use on land and sea systems for a while.

ECCM

@Crazed_Otter

Soooo… to recap the scenario. Evil Delta Wing Typhoon that you hate so much gets painted by an incoming missile’s radar.

Evil Delta Wing Typhoon that you hate so much deploys the towed decoy.

Because the aforementioned Evil Delta-Winged Typhoon has lots of sensors that hoover up precisely the kind of information that is useful - it relays that to the decoy. The decoy then begins doing it’s thing.

You see it’s simple, they spent a lot of time making the Typhoon rather clever at this sort of thing. They didn’t consult you of course, or check you agreed with their design decisions. That’s why they build the Typhoon and you sit on an internet forum arguing the toss with anyone and everyone that it shouldn’t/couldn’t/wouldn’t do this or that.

Appeal to authority =/= valid argument

@Crazed_Otter

Simples!

Insert Meerkat Meme here

AESA radar seeker and multiseeker designs go brrr

[quartas121]

can you elaborate on multiseekr designs? never heard of them before

[MiG_23M]

Multiple seekers on the same missile such as infrared + radar at the same time.

[Gunjob]

TRD on Tornado already performed very well over Bosnia;

[quartas121]

do any US aircraft have similar systems?

edit: there are two but only the AN/ALE-50 is on any aircraft ingame (F-16C)
how does it compare to the EFT one?

[luque13]

Makes the missile bigger and heavier though, you could upload a target library like with Cruisemissiles (Stormshadow etc)

It really depends of the efficacy of TRDs and ECCM against modern contemporaries.

[luque13]

Wait so F.3 guys were putting themselves in position to be engaged by Soviet Shorad systems?

[Gunjob]

No haha, this was testing for going to Bosnia, the same systems tested are what they would be going up against.

[luque13]

Right! Thought it was data obtained from the field ha ha

[MiG_23M]

@Gunjob

TRD on Tornado already performed very well over Bosnia;

1960’s SAM’s, including OSA and Kub are not modern whatsoever. Israel first tested their Arrow-2 sam in 1996, which includes dual IR + Radar seeker and delivered the first complete system in 1998. This is an example of a much more robust system that could be in use by other countries today.

1998 was an important year as that is when the Eurofighter was supposed to enter service. In 1995 an F-16C was shot down in Bosnia by a 2K12 Kub surface to air system (SA-6). They had thought their EW systems, jammers, etc were more than sufficient to evade these types of systems already as well. In 1996 newspapers were questioning whether or not the Eurofighter was necessary.

In 1996 the European combat aircraft situation was rather poor. The Tornado couldn’t cut it, neither could the Mirage F1. The Mirage 2000 was fairly robust and performed well enough to compete against the F-16C and others. The Gripen had just entered service. Simple systems like the towed decoy could similarly improve any 4th generation fighter and did not warrant the production of an entirely new aircraft on its’ own.

Had the Eurofighter come around the same time as the Gripen it may have been legitimately worthwhile. No - the phrase that best describes it is “late to the party”.

@luque13

Makes the missile bigger and heavier though, you could upload a target library like with Cruisemissiles (Stormshadow etc)

SAM’s like Israel’s Arrow-2 are large, sure, but there are already many more multi-mode seekers that have shown promise on smaller designs. They’re even testing an air to air variant.

@luque13

Wait so F.3 guys were putting themselves in position to be engaged by Soviet Shorad systems?

American’s were.

[Faster_Boiiiii]

the hornet and viper have attachable ones but the F-35 has internal Decoy(s) as well

[warhead_beast]

Interesting, a news article from back then was claiming that it was against R-27s XD

RAF uses radar decoys on Tornados in Bosnia

[Inverse_Hair_Law]

What are the limits on manoeuvring while towing the decoys? Do they remain attached no matter what or will they auto retract/jettison at some point?

[Faster_Boiiiii]

full flight envelope

[Inverse_Hair_Law]

Sounds like a nightmare to balance for War Thunder in that case lmao

[Faster_Boiiiii]

like man these towed decoys gotta be so shit that the US conveniently chose to retrofit them to multiple jets while also choosing to implement them into the F-35.
Strange, huh

[Morvran]

Not necessarily, would basically be 1-2 get out of jail free cards (when used right). after that, you are back to being just as vulnerable as before. No different to APS saving a tank from an ATGM at top tier GRB

[Flame2512]

It probably would work against those as well. What GunJob posted is just discussing the testing that was conducted on one occasion in the US.

[MiG_23M]

@Faster_Boiiiii

like man these towed decoys gotta be so shit that the US conveniently chose to retrofit them to multiple jets while also choosing to implement them into the F-35.

No one said that they were bad

@Flame2512

It probably would work against those as well. What GunJob posted is just discussing the testing that was conducted on one occasion in the US.

One successful test against older SAM’s made in the 60s does not indicate it should have a 100% success rate.