I don’t see how that would be 100% effective against modern post-90’s missiles and I haven’t seen anything to suggest it has been effective against anything but simulated 60’s SAM threats.
do you know how effective something like Britecloud would be? seeing as many aircraft in game could get it, Gripens, RAF eurofighters, anything in US service with AN/ALE-47 (F-15E, F-16, F-18, A-10, UH-60, AH-1, AH-64)
Do you have anything to suggest whether or not it is being incorporated in the Eurofighter? If they are switching to it, that would lead me to believe it is better than the current systems. If not, it may be on par or worse than.
Here is a source from Leonardo suggesting F-16, Tornado, and Gripen use it… doesn’t say the EFT.
This study implies the only downside to the towed decoy by comparison is essentially just the number of them that can be carried.
5 paragraphs down
Mentions F-15 and F-18 too
Interesting, I know that a single towed decoy is not going to be as effective as multiple expended active decoys; perhaps even the towed decoy system on the Eurofighter is outdated.
1 Like
Imagine how annoying an F-15E with it’s post-EPAWSS 360 cm count would be when loaded with britecloud lol
Imagine trying to defeat an F-15EX with EPAWSS when you’re in a Raptor and he can not only detect that you’re tracking him with a LPI radar, but also jam it and decoy your limited number of missiles with ease.
Now you’re working to turn off your RF signature and evade his up to 22 AMRAAM’s in return. lol.
This is why AIM-260 will be huge in modern environments. The systems it has are crucial.
Would be crazy huh, but I thought that even with the double amraam CFT things, it only goes up to 16 amraams, and the quad racks dont work
Funny thing is, that F-15EX will have AIM-260 as well lol
As F-15 are BOL compatible on wing stations, each wing station has 2 amraam so that’s 2 BOL pylon per wing station. F-15EX has 4 wing station so 8 BOL launchers total. With 160 CM per launcher, that is a staggering 1280 BOL + 360 regular
Assuming they fix BOL by then, a 640 flare, 640 chaff, 360 britecloud load out would be the way to go for the EX
Back on the topic of Eurofighter - they should be well aware of potential multiple seeker designs because the US had posed these features as a potential upgrade to sparrows we were trying to sell them as early as 1970.
True, modern 2 way DL effectively makes stuff like 120D a multi mode seeker missile when paired with full size AESA and IRST
Any news on the reports for STR and acceleration? Even on min fuel I still can’t get the thing to pull brakes off to mach in under 30sec.
It appears to be accelerating and turning at the correct time and rates. I don’t recall it being brakes off to mach in 30 seconds, rather wheels up to mach in ~30 seconds.
ive only seen it claimed its “brakes off” to mach, not seen “wheels up” before
it’s brakes off not wheels up according to the BAE brochure and other marketing material. Also how can it have the correct sustained turn if Flame (I think it was Flame lol) showed it couldn’t even match the initial requirements that the prototype exceeded?
3 Likes
here mig, i dont know how i can notify you without replying and notifying flame here cause i dont use the forums a lot
In that case it says from 200 knots to supersonic in 30 seconds, not brakes off to supersonic in 30 seconds… so we were both wrong there.
Statshark seems to imply the performance is slightly below 20 deg/s in full fuel configuration and above 22 deg/s on min if I recall what someone else had posted earlier. I have not reviewed the sustained turns in-game but based on that data I had made the assumption that it was good to go.
Still, it considerably overperforms in other areas in ways that make it essentially a UFO - totally exceeding angle of attack limits that would cause departure and total flow separation (no attached airflow over the top of the wing).
One part says 200kts to supersonic, other official sources in that same post claim brakes off to supersonic. As flame pointed out the brakes off to supersonic claim was used in presentations too.
I had a look at the more recent bug report Community Bug Reporting System
It was rejected outright and the mod claimed that the current performance matches ESR-D, which we know from an earlier post in here that the prototype aircraft with Tornado engines exceeded. So it’s clearly significantly lower than it should be.
I agree though the instantaneous turn/AoA is a bit mental at the moment. Rafale should be beating EFT in instantaneous and EFT should be winning in sustained rate.
4 Likes
As I said in the comment he linked you to the Eurofighter website says 200 kts to Mach 1.0 in 30 seconds, while the BAE Systems datasheet implies Brakes off to Mach 1.0 in 30 seconds, and Eurofighter also claim brakes off to Mach 1 in under 30 seconds in some marketing material.
I would speculate that 200 kts to Mach 1.0 in 30 seconds is for a fully loaded aircraft (missiles and maybe tanks), while Brakes off to Mach 1.0 in 30 seconds is clean.
Or alternatively the website was just understating the true performance.
7 Likes
I understand that in your opinion the vortex generator and slats perform a purely decorative function, yes?
I wonder, is there something in the Typhoon that in YOUR opinion works correctly and you do not seek to belittle/nerf it?
Over the last few days you have challenged:
Towed Decoy
Dynamic Characteristics
AoA
Turn performance
MAWS
I’m sure you think the radar is working properly? Well, it just works like crap, so I guess everything is fine, right? Some kind of deja vu. Something similar happened a year ago.
9 Likes