Comanche Project Canceled...

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

That has to be the most depressing thing Ive seen all day.

[Jaffa]

I think the Typhoon is considered outdated because it is not stealthy.  Let's face it:  with modern avionics and missles, dogfights and manueverability are a thing of the past, as aircraft will engage many miles away in the future.  Don't get me wrong,  I beleive the Typhoon is a marvel of an aircraft.  Hopefully the JSF will supplement it well.

Hagar:  Part of the Comanche design was to make it less prone to take fire through its stealthiness(yeah right, I think a haji with an RPG could see and hear a helicopter, no matter what it is).  And yes, Blackhawks and such are indeed susceptible to ground fire, but the same argument can be used against ground transport and IEDs.

I really do hope the 5 Comanches under construction make it into service be it with the army or NASA.(oooh a new toy for NASA )

[Ivan]

There is NO stealth flanker at all.

Still it's better than that so-called 'stealth' F-22. Look at the exhaust pipes... you can see the burner rings when it's on non-afterburner mode.

Flakkers, and the more modern MiG's have the EOS sight... which is a long-range infrared scanner (almost the same range as the AIM-120).
That scanner is quite happy with the thermal signature of the F-22...


The only good transport helicopter in a war zone is a Mi-24.

[Hagar]

[quote]Hagar:

[Craig.]

the mi.24 isnt the only good transport helicopter in a warzone. The lynx, merlin, blackhawk

[SilverFox441]

Ivan...

By the time the Raptor turns for home...there'll be no hostiles to point an EOS up it's tailpipe.

You should also remember that EOS is not new, either is IRST (InfraRed Search and Track). Both technologies were abandoned by the US. EOS and IRST was used on the F-14 and IRST was installed on the F-101B and F-106 Interceptors.

http://www.ualberta.ca/EDMONTON/CONTRIB/airmuseum/aamvoodooc.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-14-systems.htm

[ATI_7500]

(what is in fact now the Rafale, a far inferior aircraft and underpowered, outdated design.)

disagreed. the rafale has afaik a longer range than the EF and a smaller radar signature. additionally,it's more manoeuverable than the eurofighter and (i think) even cheaper.

[Craig.]

ok firstly, the Eurofigther does have stealth capabilitys its just not completly invisible to radar, but it has a very low radar profile.
secondly the Eurofighter may be bigger, but empty it only weighs 1000lbs more than the rafale. The Eurofighter is faster by quite alot, the Raf top speed is mach 1.8, the typhoon mach 2
they both have equal +G limits being 9 each. The rafale beats the typhoon by .6 on negative G that being -3.6, the typhoon -3
weapons load out the typhoon has the rafale beat big time, but because of the fuel tank option on the rafale it has a higher takeoff weight
rafale has a 680 mile combat radious, typhoon 345
the typhoon engines two eurojet afterburning engines, producing 13,490lbs of thrust each dry and 20,250lbs afterburning
the rafale, two snecma turbofans, each producing 11,236lbs dry and 16,854 afterburning
as for the rafale being much smaller than the typhoon nope.
raf length 50ft 2ins
typ length 52 foot
raf wing span 35ft 9ins
typ wing span 35ft 11ins
and the rafale is taller by 3ins at 17ft 6ins
the typhoon can supercruise, the rafale cant
the rafale doesnt have much in the way of low radar profile, and is actually not as manuverable as the typhoon
further stats are classified apparently, so from that y'all can decide which is better.

[ATI_7500]

but the rafale is already into service,the Ef isn't,although they were developed together until a certain point (when the french jumped off).

[Craig.]

the eurofighter has been in service with at least one country for a while now, its just britain that has yet to fully mobalise it.
The reason that the Rafale is in full service is simple. The French didnt have to worry about what other countries wanted, they didnt have to develop it with other countries and be forced to wait for parts from elsewhere. so that time was saved.

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

Ivan, Ivan........
1.  I second the motion that the fact of the matter is, the designers of the F-22 don't care what the '22 looks like from behind, no enemy will ever be back there to make it matter. It's going to find them from the front first.  First look=First kill. End of story.

2.   To make it stealthy from behind will be a serious hit to its power; the abiltiy to supercruise without the afterburners is one of the focal points of the Raptor.  I cannot wait to see it start going around the world wasting migs.  GO USAF!!!  Remember, they are already on the training lines in Marietta, Georgia; soon to be elsewhere as well. Bye bye F-16's.

3. Why in the world do you prefer Migs to Boeing's, Lockheed's, Northrop's, and McDonnel Douglas's? The migs are a pain to fly because their designers don't know the meaning of the word "ergonomics", they fall apart because they are built to be cheap so things like care and precision are sacrificed, they kill their pilots because of inadequate pilot protection in the name of added performance, they are sold without a care or a thought of  the kind of nation they are going to, as well as other things that should't be mentioned here.
Here's Something else:  Go on the net and look for vids of airshow crashes and other military vids. 8 out of 10 times when a militay airplane has an accident for whatever reason, it is a mig.

[Craig.]

firstly Beyond visual range fighting is actually a last option. Unless it is a direct threat to a high priority target or ship, the airforce usually asks that a plane be visually identified to avoid shooting down innocent planes(as has happend) all this oh the F-22 could shoot a plane out of the sky is all hype by the military. realistically thinking, where and when will it ever be put in a position to have to do that? Iraq has no airforce. and while there are a few tense places, none right now indicate a full scale war. All the planes coming out right now were designed with the cold war in mind and at the time of planning the chance of a second cold war or even WW3. Yes the F-22 could shoot a plane out the sky, but unless that planes heading to the US or the UK with a nuclear weapon on board, it wont happen. Hell remember the F-14 could shoot a plane out of the sky before its ever seen.  So unless the Airforce has changed its rules of engagement lately, its unlikely to ever matter. And no this isnt a knock on the plane, its awsome, a little pricey but theres no denying its abilitys. Also i think its first designed to replace the F-15 but i may be wrong.

[Mach_Fast.3]

What the heck is the government thinking!
These projects are so far along that most of the money has already been spent. If they think that they are saving money by cancelling these projects then they need to go back to 1st grade math.
Throwing away the worlds most powerful combat tools like this is foolhardy and wasteful.  This sure doesn't sound like the president that I was gonna help re-elect...

[Cvrt7.62Ghst]

All right Its back:  Remember who won the war, how and why.  In that sense your arguement is moot.