>Typhoon a shit?

>>34939032
Typhoon's very good, and the "Swiss leak" was of the T1, not what the RAF is flying at all. Entirely different beast.

J10Bs are unproven and mediocre, but good job on swallowing chink propaganda.

>>34939032
Typhoon's heavily evolved from where it is. The previous airframes are basically a write off though. Its cheaper to get new airframes than to get an upgrade on the old models.

that being said a lot of the asspain comes from the fact that all the F-35 development memes pale in comparison to the typhoon, but it was developed before internet culture could really appreciate it.

It is a nice looking jet, but doesnt do much more than the F-15 C/D/E other than euro sovereignty.

>>34939954

as a F-15E flyer who worked with brit Typhoons in an exercise, i'll say that they were almost useless air-to-ground, but were awesome air-to-air.

>>34939032

buying an american jet is giving up your sovereignty.

>>34939967

No shit that Typhoons were shit at A2G. The Germans and Spanish blocked the fucking modules development because muh money, forcing britain to use outdated Tornados for their shit.

If the CAS module was on schedule, Typhoons would be the best 4.5 gen by a long shot but thanks to multi-national development and bureacracy, Britain and Italy had to co-develop one without the rest which is potentially leading to a legal battle over both nations refusing to make it standard on ALL Eurofighters.

>>34939032

/k/ seems to think that if you can afford it buy the F-35, if not, buy F-16s or Gripens. Everything inbetween isnt worth it.

>>34939032
It'd be a good plane if it was introduced in 1979.

But as it sits now it doesn't do anything special the F-15 does and it was introduced to compete with the F-22 and Asian vaporware.

>>34940012

they were pretty severely gas limited, and their mech for dropping on targets was shitty. their targeting pod sucks (to be fair, the Navy's targeting pod sucks), and the 2x 500 lb Paveway IV's they carry doesn't bring much to the fight compared to the GBU-31, GBU-54, 2x GBU-38s, and 4x GBU-12s a F-15E brought.

still, they were bros.

Tranche 3 w/ AESA and Meteor is probably the best non-stealth air to air platform on the planet.

>>34940068
How many typhoons are currently fitted with AESA?

>Does anybody know of something I can point to in order to easily highlight that this platform should have been cancelled by the time it was finally finished and the research effort rolled into a new project?

It seems someone made his mind up first and came looking for facts second.

What an ugly plane. The ugliest of eurocanards.

>>34940031

It was introduced as a overall replacement for every platform in use in Europe at the time.

It's just incapable of doing so.

>>34940048

> they were pretty severely gas limited

Well no shit, considering that Eurofighters are about 60% the size of an F-15E. They are in the same weight class as a legacy hornet.

For the expected scenario in the 80's, having low range isn't as much of a disadvantage. They were never supposed to do interdiction in the first place because the Americans and the Tornados had that covered.

>>34940048
Two paveways? Since when?

>>34940068
They donesnt even have Meteors yet.

How does Typhoon capare to Rafale
Outclassed in most sectors, is that true?

>>34940748
Rafale was more focused on A2G, Typhoon was more focused on A2A.

Neither outclass each other but I think the Typhoon has grown better. T3 Eurofighters will have an edge over the F4 version of the Rafale, in my opinion.

>>34940273

no idea. the point is they didn't carry that many bombs, and what they did drop wasn't that great. it's great air-to-air, just lacking air-to-ground. not for lack of effort from their pilots, though.

>>34940238

some ability to loiter is useful in CAS/interdiction unless you want to have roving motorcycle gangs of F-16s hanging out at the tanker and going supersonic back and forth in order to drop a BOC JDAM then immediately bingo out.

>>34940884
They carry four Paveways, two ASRAAM's and two AMRAAM's

>>34940895

yeah, that's one CFT on a Strike Eagle for 4x GBU-12s. literally less half the loadout. and we have a 2x2 missile loadout too.

>>34940884

Yeah, that general mediocrity is thanks to the transition phase of switching aircraft. There's a lot of Just Wait Shortly™ going on at moment with the brits.

What year was it that you flew with them?

Typhoons are probably the best A2A fighters in service right now, second only to the F-22. And in combination with F-22s they make a formidable force.

During Red Flag F-22s and Typhoons acted as "Hunter-killer" groups.
F-22s would feed targeting data to Typhoons and avoid detection or harassed the enemy while Typhoons ravaged the enemy forces at BVR and WVR engagements.

Sadly due to political bullshittery (a common trend in European joint aircraft development) it sucks horse dick at ground attack.

>>34940998
earlier this year.

and yeah, Just Wait Shortly describes it perfectly. we had to generate coordinates for them because there was a bug in their system or something and they were certified to generate a certain TLE, then they weren't, then they hadn't gotten the new software that was certified to that TLE, then...

>>34940048
>>34939967

My dad works at nintendo too.

Even if you are, sounds like massively outdated info, given nothing you said is accurate to the modern day.

>>34940908

Missing the point that he called you out on being factually incorrect in your "story".

>>34941012

>Sadly due to political bullshittery (a common trend in European joint aircraft development) it sucks horse dick at ground attack.

Except it doesn't. It's been out performing very well at it for ages in Iraq and Syria now, and it's already fired Storm Shadow, Brimstone and Spear 3 to enhance that air to ground ability further.

>>34941107

believe what you want.

the Typhoon in my experience wasn't great air to ground mainly because the Brits were working out a lot of systems issues vs a F-15E which had all those worked out a long time ago. and yeah, it is a smaller jet with a less capable targeting pod.

>>34940908
Great, not the point I made though

>>34941189
and that didn't change my point that the Typhoon is lacking air to ground for both systems and loadout reasons.

File: typhoonpylons.jpg (41KB, 800x585px)

41KB, 800x585px

>>34941222
Yeah seems super limited to me

File: Typhoon 19.jpg (179KB, 1600x1200px)

179KB, 1600x1200px

>>34941222

Except you stated it only carries 2 bombs, which is factually incorrect and it's been that way for a good 7 years now. And both the F-15E and Typhoon can use the same Targeting Pods, including the LITENING series and the Sniper Advanced TP.

So basically you got outed as making shit up.

>>34941241

With wing tanks, the stations numbered 5, 6, 8, and 9 likely missile only, targeting pods, and the aforementioned missile load out reducing the bombs carried, I agree with you that the Typhoon is limited.

The F-15E could carry 7 GBU-31s, but nobody in their right mind would put that many on one.

>>34939032
I thought it was okay.

>>34941293
>Comparing the Typhoon to a fucking F-15E
oh okay you're going to be that guy

yeah the F-15E doesn't carry as much as a B-1B either

>>34941266

Nope, the F-15E stopped carrying Litening operationally about 15 years ago, and in the training course about 5 years ago. It's a worse pod than Sniper.

>>34939032
>It seems to be consensus around here that basically anything that isn't the F35 is crap.
No
/thread

>>34939032

The Eurofighter is the best complement to the F-35 (if you don't have the F-22). The Eurofighter brings speed, altitude and transonic manoeuvrability to the table, which means that the F-35s relative weakness in interceptor capability and BVR weapon launch energy are addressed. With the two way datalink meteors and the AESA upgrade, it will be an excellent air to air platform.

>>34941309
Please pray tell what the F-15E is carrying operationally now.

>>34941373
The best compliment to the F-35 if you don't have F-22s is just more F-35s.

>>34941222
Again, not the point I'm contesting. "I was wrong" is what you say.

>>34941496
Do F-35s gain a speed boost when flying together so they can cover supersonic interception duties or something

>>34941309

Way to ignore the post you're actually quoting.

>>34941546
>interceptors still need to go more than Mach 1.6
Any other complaints or is that the only one you could think of?

>>34942111
Look up that M1.6 figure from somewhere other than wikipedia, chum.

>>34942111
I guess initial speed and altitude is useless for BWR combat now.

>>34942111

Besides top speed, the climbing to combat altitude, the higher altitude, acceleration through transonic, the supercruise, and the resulting weapon launch energy.

>>34942171
https://www.defensetech.org/2011/11/04/f-35-jsf-flight-test-update/?mobile=1
>Oct 23, F-35 reached maxed speed of M1.6 for first time

>>34942221
>he thinks fighters are always cruising at Mach 2 when flying CAP

>>34942245
I understand the benefits, but fighters RARELY go faster than Mach 1.5 which is why this is not much of an issue. There was a study on how often fighters spent going different speeds while in combat and they found that the design requirements to get that fast weren't worth it. I'll try to find the study if I can, maybe Dragon will jump into the thread later and link it cause I'm sure that dude has the paper saved somewhere.

>>34942311
"An interesting factoid, one of the USMC test pilots mentioned this little tidbit—they have to use a modified Rutowski profile in order to get the F-35B and C up to Mach 1.6. Basically, you do one push over, unload the jet and accelerate, get up to 1.2, turn and repeat until you hit 1.4 Mach, turn and repeat till you hit Mach 1.6. It just barely gets there and barely has any gas left over afterwards."

Very useful for interception duties, wikipediachamp

>>34942370
>"it cant go Mach 1.6 like the Typhoon"
>yes it can
>"well the F-35B and C have to unload so that they reduce their induced drag"
The F-35B and F-35C aren't competing against the Typhoon. Having to nose over to speed up isn't exactly a critical design issue either, and the idea that the most important role for a multirole with all of our potential enemies is pretty retarded. Again, aircraft rarely go faster than Mach 1.6 in combat, Im pretty sure that the total time all fighters have gone faster than that in combat can be measured in minutes.

Fighter A is better at most things
Fighter B is better at one thing that is barely relevant.

Would you rather have a bunch of Fighter B and Fighter A or just a fuckton of Fighter A.

>>34942311

Right, but you still need an aircraft capable of it, because if you don't your enemy can take advantage of it. It isn't just to intercept bombers and cruise missiles. Consider if the USA hadn't brought its F-15Cs to the Gulf War, the Iraqi MiG-25 harassment of slower multirole USAF aircraft could have been far more dangerous, but the presence of high and fast aircraft usually deterred this.

>>34942559

While he IS being a bit of an overly triggered retard about it and harping very loudly in an unnecessary manner, remember that for some countries, the kind of interception climb and sprint rate the Typhoon can do is very important.

It's better to say that the Typhoon and F-35 are excellent complimentary platforms to use that work very well together in combination. Same as the F-22 and F-35 do. It takes nothing away from any of those planes are individuals to say that, is how I'd put it.

>>34942565
The people that design aircraft determined that VLO makes up for lack of Mach 2.0 capability. Truthfully, I'm more inclined to believe those people.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Northrop_F_5_case_study_in_aircraft_desi.html?id=0Z9TAAAAMAAJ

This was the study, talks about how rarely aircraft went faster than Mach 1.6

>>34942630
>1978
good shit, anon.

>>34939985
Buying European jet is a much as giving up sovereignty. Americans at least wont lie about industrial cooperation, French always lie,

>>34942630
A study from a time when the AIM-7 wasn't perfected and the AIM-120 (or any SARH missile) wouldn't exist for closing in 20 years, where cannons were still a primary combat weapon. kek.

>>34941410
Sniper SE

B course has the XR.

>>34941301

The point there was what you can carry theoretically isn't what you carry operationally. Bone's full possible bomb load implies penalties on gas and takeoff and landing, so they don't always load up fully. Same reason the Strike Eagle takes off with locked out CFTs with full bomb loads all the time.

>>34941538

Yup, I was wrong. 4x Paveway IVs, not 2x. Better than I said, still not that great. Brit Typhoon drivers are still great guys.

>>34942839
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2016/september/mfc-092816-lm-sniper-advanced-targeting-pod-continues-platform-expansion.html

So..the exact pod the Eurofighter supports, then

>>34942823
Not if you're the European country making it.

>>34940884

> roving motorcycle gangs of F-16s hanging out at the tanker and going supersonic back and forth in order to drop a BOC JDAM then immediately bingo out.

I think that's the idea for the Eurofighter/Rafale when they were planning the "strike" capability. They hit a target that's already been identified and located and immediately bug out. If you look at the use of Rafales in Libya, they take off after JSTARS has a target, hit it, then land. They aren't designed to do things like waiting on station for a target to appear/request for a strike.

>>34942839

>Yup, I was wrong. 4x Paveway IVs, not 2x

Look at the guy's picture. It can carry 6 no problem. And with Spear it can carry 16 A2G munitions in addition to stll having 2 spare A2G hard points.

>>34940012

Well, the "muhmoneygate" happened because lolbritannia lied about the amount of typhoons that was going to build to get a bigger piece of the industrial pie counterparts.

>>34942630

My point is that the presence of an aircraft with interceptor & air superiority fighter characteristics shapes how the enemy behaves. Your opponent will plan their attacks based on your known ability to respond to them, if they know you lack an aircraft able to respond fast enough to an attack they will do it. It is a deterrent.

Can somebody make a case for F-15?

I fucking love that bird but stealth and AMRAAMs will smoke an Eagle.

>>34943274

Nice way to spin it.

Germany and Spain dropped the numbers way WAY before anybody else. The UK and Italy dropped numbers because of the financial explosion that those countries fucking around being non-commital caused.

File: eagle-f22a-formation-330901-h.jpg (499KB, 900x600px)

499KB, 900x600px

>>34943285

Just look at pic related. If I needed to build an airforce on a tight budget, these look pretty fucking enticing

>>34943286
Don't put us with Germany here, I won't argue that we dindu nuffin regarding the development of the typhoon but at least we didn't lie with our order. We ordered 100 units and finally lowered it to 86. Germany ordered 250 and lowered to 140 units.
(in comparison the UK lowered it from 250 to 232 and Italy from 165 to 121)

>>34943274
>>34943286

Yeah, Germany really slashed its order hard. Also whereas Germany only managed to bribe Austria into buying 15 of its used T1, The UK managed to bribe KSA into buying 72 new T2&T3 (with the possibility of more sales in future) and 12 to Oman, making up for the RAF's procurement cuts. Even Italy managed to flog 28 T3s with AESA upgrade to Kuwait.

>>34943315
Not in 2017.

>>34939032
>It seems to be consensus around here that basically anything that isn't the F35 is crap.

The Typhoon is the best A2A euro plane, that's far from crap

File: 1503266374005.jpg (57KB, 498x498px)

57KB, 498x498px

> but can in flatten Dresden tho?

>>34941124
>>34939967
Former F-15 maintainer from Lakenheath here. Your story checks out. Typhoons in the year of 2017 are still shit at a2g as they were in 2008.

On the development front for a2g, the typhoon is absolutely fucked, as many countries are eyeing the F-35 for its general purpose aircraft. The other euro countries have contented themselves to just to SLEPs and incremental upgrades on the Tornados, Jags, or buy F-18s.

>>34945985
I think the Germans are considering a Tornado replacement

>>34943132

It can carry that many with a likely severe penalty to performance in terms of endurance and speed. It's not a realistic loadout

>>34942928
Kuwaiti Typhoons. Are you not familiar with rich gulf states' philosophy when it comes to air force acquisitions? They'll likely be jammed with sand inside of a year.

>>34943454
Seriously? So, lets say that ALL 500 some off Typhoons are full operational. And lets say HALF of the F16's ever built are ( around 2,700 give or take ).. You're telling me, that 500 Typhoons are going to be able to disable, and do more than 5 times the amount of F16's? Forget even adding F15's. F/A 18's, F22's, F35's.

I am from the US of A here, and I think the F35 is a complete turd. Idc what the rest of /k/ says. It's a flying shit sandwich.

>>34947986
>If I needed to build an airforce on a tight budget
In 2017 those fighters are fairly expensive; an F-15E or F-15K, etc goes for >$100m flyaway and a new Block 60, Block 70 F-16 goes for around $70m flyaway.

File: 1435664905531.gif (2MB, 219x186px)

2MB, 219x186px

>>34947857
>Typhoon is shit at A2G, it can only carry 2x Paveways
Proven wrong
>Uh, my mistake I meant it can only carry 4x Paveways, still super limited
Proven wrong again
>B-but 6x Paveways is unrealistic, allow me to shift the goalposts

The burgerstan damage control is off the charts in this thread, you truly are in a class of your own

>>34939032
The real reason why it's shit is that everyone is dragging their ass on funding and it's still not fully qualified for it's air to ground mission after two decades.

File: 42630422.jpg (51KB, 1016x561px)

51KB, 1016x561px

>>34939032
Its shit , your country should fund the HAL Tejas.

I really wonder about the Eurofighters combat performance.
The EJ200 supply 60 kN dry thrust/90+ kN on afterburner each. It weighs 16 tons loaded.
That's actually a pretty whimpy engine compared to a F-22 or a Su-27. I guess what makes up for it, is that the Eurofighter weighs about half.
On the other hand side: how can it be so fucking light without sacrificing on other capabilities? Frog aerospace magic?
t. Kraut

>>34940119
This

File: EFTyphoonvsSu35.png (1MB, 2323x1662px)

1MB, 2323x1662px

>>34949959
Because the Typhoon is actually rather small.

>>34949881

In that case, a B-1 can carry something like 50 GBU-54s and a F-15E can carry 7 GBU-31s with a 2x2 missile loadout (or 28 GBU-39s, also with a 2x2 missile loadout). Both are absolutely stupid loadouts that would only be shown off at an airshow because the aircraft would be in danger of not being able to takeoff safely if it was hot out, and would need to hit a tanker immediately (and burn a ton of gas getting from point A to point B) because of the reduced fuel weights in order to safely take off.

I admitted I was mistaken, it can carry 4 bombs realistically. But what a jet hypothetically can carry isn't what it does carry in combat, and 4 bombs isn't a lot. Plus as I mentioned earlier, it's an awkward jet to drop a bomb in with systems limitations.

>>34950135

Plus, y'know, I've done integration with Typhoons.
While you've read press releases.

>>34949959
>Eurofighter
>Empty weight: 11,000 kg[382][N 6] (24,000 lb)
>Loaded weight: 16,000 kg[383][N 7] (35,270 lb)
>Dry thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) each
>Thrust with afterburner: >90 kN[382][386] (20,230 lbf) each

>SU-27
>Loaded weight: 23,430 kg (51,650 lb) with 56% internal fuel
>Max. takeoff weight: 30,450 kg (67,100 lb)
>Dry thrust: 75.22 kN (16,910 lbf) each
>Thrust with afterburner: 122.6 kN (27,560 lbf) each

>F-22
>Empty weight: 43,340 lb (19,700 kg)
>Loaded weight: 64,840 lb[269] (29,410 kg)
>Dry thrust: 26,000 lb[269] (116 kN) each
>Thrust with afterburner: >35,000 lb (>156 kN[N 5][270]) each

File: 0fb5de659979fc39436b4b1fe66a4dbe.jpg (29KB, 529x398px)

29KB, 529x398px

>>34949927
That is some bait, my friend.

>>34946040
tornado to be replaced no later than 2035. The germans are playing the longest game. Either the EU has worked, and they can make a joint fighter that will be the hypothetical 6th gen format, or they fucked up, and the F-35 is a mature platform that can comfortable replace all their fighters, and now has its second generation engine.

>>34950665
> first flight 1974
> delivered into service 1979
> decommissioned 2035, 56 years later
B-52 tier. How is it cost effective to keep them flying that long.

>>34950623
No, really. Because fuck china shitty j-10 jet. fuck china

>>34950728
Not at all, J-10 is brettyguuud.
But fuck Indian Tejas for a laugh, that plane is their first attempt at a fighter and exists as industrial welfare to get their indigenous aerospace industry online. Even the Indians know not to rely on the project for their air force. Small order numbers, it's a learning experience and research project. Like Arjun 1. Indian jets in 2025 are the benefactors of the Tejas project.

>>34939032
It's the best answer to a question that was not asked. They could have made a jet that was inferior to the F-22 in a dogfight but better than everyone else due to stealth but instead they made a jet equal to the F22 in gun engagement which will never happen. At least the French have an excuse.

>>34945985

> Typhoons in the year of 2017 are still shit at a2g as they were in 2008.

Meanwhile in reality...

>On the development front for a2g, the typhoon is absolutely fucked

Except it's still gaining new munitions programs. So no, it's not done development.

>>34947857

Not really, it's entirely designed for that amount, and has been doing so in syria numerous times.

If you'd like to provide a first hand source that states that it suffers severe penalties in excess of what all planes get when loading it on...

>>34947913

You claimed the Typhoon couldn't use the same pods. He proved they can.

>>34951320

well excuse me for flying with the Brits and having them tell us to our faces that they weren't as capable with their targeting pod, even if they had the software update that was certified to generate better TLE. for that matter, the Kuwaitis are probably just getting their first Sniper pods now, so as of earlier this year I'm 100% correct that all Typhoons had a shittier pod.

and simple physics would say that the more bombs you carry, the more weight you'd carry and the more drag you induce and the more gas you'd burn as well as be able to accelerate and climb less well. you'd know this if you actually knew anything about aviation.

>>34951347

and for my first hand account, let's just say i've run TOLD for heavy Strike Eagle at deployed locations that are hot and high, and it gets shitty fast.

>>34951347

>Originally talk about how it can't use as good a pod
>Get proven wrong
>B-but I mean this one instead
>Get proven it can use that one too
>M-MUH SOFTWARE

You're changing your song every post, it's embarrassing how desperate you are to try and hold water on this one.

And now you're even switching the goalposts to talk about only RAF Typhoons, when previously you were talking about it as a full platform.

>and simple physics would say that the more bombs you carry, the more weight you'd carry and the more drag you induce and the more gas you'd burn as well as be able to accelerate and climb less well. you'd know this if you actually knew anything about aviation.

But that wasn't what you said.

You said that the TYPHOON suffers severe issues when carrying A2G munitions. By your logic, that means every plane in the world that doesn't carry internal munitions is bad at A2G. You were talking about the Typhoon specifically, implying it was the ONLY one that suffers that.

Unless you have a direct source that says the Typhoon specifically and solely suffers a greater loss than other planes doing the same basic thing, then all you're doing is trying to twist your words post by post after getting BTFO earlier in the thread.

>>34951399

So you have no source then. Gotcha.

>>34951462

the B-1 suffers TOLD issues when it's at full bomb load, and it's internal-only. it doesn't carry a fancy new pod yet, and the Brit Typhoons aren't great at CAS. it doesn't bring much to the fight air-to-ground wise. i watched Brit Typhoons check in, execute 2 9-lines, and check out as we cleared higher in the stack to deconflict, then resumed prosecuting 9-lines. i took 9-lines from Brit, USAF, and USMC JTACs (or ANGLICOs or whatever the Marines call them) during the same exercise.

holy shit dude, I was there. you're fucking Tyler Rogway, who thinks he knows shit about aviation by reading press releases and PA articles, but has never had to stand up to brief weather, NOTAMS, and an EP.

>>34951505

"it" in the second sentance being the Typhoon.

i stand by all my statements - it has a worse pod (the Sniper ATP isn't the XR which isn't the SE), it doesn't carry that many bombs, as of a few months ago they couldn't generate coordinates as well, the loiter was worse, the workload was worse, the reliability of its systems was worse (i had flight leads tell everybody about how they had to reboot their pods in the middle of a CAS stack), and it doesn't carry that many bombs.

i was there, fucker.

and your defense is fucking press releases?

>>34951505

Except you're constantly ignoring me and others highlighting clear inconsistencies in your posts where you've said one thing, then said another. Or stated something that is so completely inaccurate that it throws everything you said you "saw" into completely discredited areas.

For fucks sake, you thought the Typhoon could only carry 2 bombs (despite dozens of photographic proof saying otherwise), said it hasn't changed A2G wise since 2008 (which is LOL tier to claim) and didn't know which pods it can carry (Until someone linked a direct source). Your knowledge on the plane is PITIFUL.

And you're constantly claiming things that make no sense, like when you claimed the Typhoon alone suffers from performance reduction when carrying a payload, then tried to act high and mighty about how others don't know planes suffer, despite no-body claiming that at all.

Now you're just pulling out unsubstantiated claims with no evidence to back yourself up, in contrast with every actual report on its performance at A2G and ignoring the wealth of upgrades its had or has coming.

It doesn't matter what your job is. Your own posts in this topic have revealed you know absolute fuck all about the plane.

>>34951505
>>34951521

>Has to be corrected when declared it can strap only two PGMs to it
>Claims to be an expert

>>34951320
>"Except it's still gaining new munitions programs. So no, it's not done development."

So by your own admission, the aircraft still is not finished entering a true IOC for practical air to ground war-fighting. Still in development. Still relying on Tornadoes, or other legacy airframes to do ground strike.

Biggest issue is that the Euro fighter is not homogeneous.

>>34951572

Maybe because I saw them with only 2 bombs during Green Flag West 17-04.

Maybe because they told me to my face their pod sucks compared to ours.

And you're ignoring the fact that I said US jets didn't carry their maximum possible bomb loads for takeoff, weight/drag, and fuel considerations too.

The 2008 claim wasn't me. I have no idea what they were capable of in 2008. I know what they were capable of in Feb 17. And they weren't great.

>>34951572

and of course fucking press releases are going to say everything is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

it's fucking PA. they wouldn't know the truth if it gave them a blowjob.

>>34951619

So now you're admitting your basing your entire opinion on decade old information and thus voiding your entire arguement.

Glad we agree on your knowing fuck all about it today then.

>>34942823
>French always throw a massive hissy fit then leave joint venture

FTFY.

>>34951633

How you think February of this year is 10 years ago is beyond me, but by my count, it's 6 months ago

>>34951686

In which case you're admitting to talking utter bullshit then.

Because trying to claim the Typhoon can only carry two Paveways in 2017 is beyond ridiculous to try and assert.

File: f15_04-load.jpg (23KB, 860x443px)

23KB, 860x443px

>>34951619
dude. Quit arguing with him. Its your experience and logic vs his passion and civilian news briefs. On top of that, I respect your dedication to aviation, but you are entering the ol' "OPSEC/ INFOSEC/ SECSECSEC" kinda territory.

Let the public think whatever the fuck they want. Civilians like to feel smart and informed. Fuck, I once explained to someone that COGs has existed since before 2010, and that shipping o2 bottles to remote locations without the intent of shipping back was a waste when we had a stable electrical generation base. Know what I got told? COGs is labratory experimental, and is not viable for field use. Meanwhile at dyncorp they had it.

http://www.cobham.com/mission-systems/oxygen-systems/cogs-ceramic-oxygen-generation-system/

People get all ate up about publicity shit, Typhoons carrying max bomb load. Want to know a fun fact? Cracked spars, or reduced airframe life. They do that shit once or twice on an older airframe, or developmental model to show it off. Same thing with an F-15 carrying a max load of

see my pic? looks cool right? Want to know something? You never want to do that to an airframe. Max load is structurally retarded. "muh less jets, muh less MX work, muh more fuel, and crew" and then buy a new jet sooner, deal with more grounding issues sooner from stress related breakage. fuck. FUCK.

Stop talking to civilians about shit they dont want to understand! They are happy thinking you are a stupid fucking knuckledragger who knows nothing. We are happy knowing what we know due to working in close proximity with contractors, development, etc. It works out.

When you get out, go commercial. Just...just fucking stay away from the civilian world. I'm here and it's shit.

>>34951633

Green Flag West 17-04 was the fourth Green Flag West of FY17. It wasn't 2004. I'm not that old.

And my experience contextualizes the typical hyperbolic press releases. Which hacks like Rogway fail to do.

>>34951734
Copy shot. Wasn't that the converted D model test bed? I think that's the jet on a stick outside wing HQ at SJ.

>>34951739

Again.

You claimed that in 2017, Typhoons can't carry more than 2 bombs.

Nothing more needs to be said with how much that completely invalidates everything you say.

>>34951794

Whether two or four, operationally: no they can't carry very many.

File: 1388642037865.jpg (205KB, 1920x1080px)

205KB, 1920x1080px

>>34951763
Pretty sure. former 2A6x6. Got out a few years ago after an extended 7 year stay. Too injured to keep doing MX. If there is an F-15 in USAFE, I pulled it apart at one point and did Phase/ flightline on it. Even got hands on some from ShadyJ during a deployment, fucking inferior orange flame jets. Praise be to PW-229 master race, glorious purple fire.

>>34951794
This

>>34951819

220s suck. I'd pull every one for a 229 or even a GE 129 like the Saudis and Sings have if I ruled the world.

>>34951598
I think you're misunderstanding what he's trying to say.

>It can only
He means it can only carry 2 bombs if it actually has to loiter somewhere, its the same as saying the F-16 can only carry between two and four GBUs into combat, or that the A-10 doesn't go into combat with a fucking 18,000lb payload ever. A more accurate description is
>It can only carry 2-4 pgms and still be able to loiter for a reasonable amount of time.
Same issue as the F-16

Sure, they CAN carry more, but they effectively never do because they lose so much speed, maneuverability, gas, and loiter time. That's all he's saying, you're just intentionally misinterpreting his poorly explained experiences.

>>34952569
If this is actually what he is saying he is shit at communicating what he wants to say.

>>34952589
You just can't read, nigger, he's explained it several times.

>Typhoon pilots
>"we can't really carry more than 2 PGMs due to fuel constraints"

>F-15E fag
>"They said they can't carry more than 2 PGMs"

>you
>"HURRR WELL HERES A PICTURE OF A TYPHOON WITH 4 BOMBS"