Page 28 of 131 FirstFirst ... 1820212223242526272829303132333435363878128 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 1961

Thread: EF Typhoon News

  1. #406
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Herman the German View Post
    (Flug Revue/Dez 2008 p.42f.)
    That article is now available online, the extract I mentioned above:

    Informally, the pilots from Neuburg recently pitted their skills against their French Rafale colleagues in aerial combat. The results were extremely gratifying, the main difference being the much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine.
    http://www.flugrevue.de/index.php?id=4187

  2. #407
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default Bad luck in Meiringen

    Today both EFs arrived in Meiringen for the noise measurement and the hangar tests. IPA 3 in the "heavy configuration" was able to take off without the use of the afterburner, and also did the Hangar test. (the competition was forced to use the afterburner, so far everything was excellent)
    Unfortunately GT15 in the "light configuration" encountered a (supposedly electrical) problem and wasn't ready. Due to the early darkness the test couldn't be done and will probably be done tomorrow. GT15 stayed in Meiringen and IPA3 went back to Emmen.
    Meiringen seems to be a bad place for the evaluation, the Gripen had a punctured tire on the same occasion. Bad luck....
    Last edited by Herman the II; 11-27-2008 at 04:21 PM.

  3. #408
    Senior Member signatory's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Terra firma
    Posts
    10,694

    Default

    I'll put the articles with videos from the noise tests of all 3 jets here.... it's all subjective of course.

    Videos on links:

    Eurofighter

    Rafale

    Gripen

    BTW, is a layer of snow good or bad for noise pollution ? Does it even matter?

  4. #409
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default

    The officials from Switzerland said that the difference from snow is only "marginal". Whatever that means, I could imagine that the snow may reduce the echo from the surrounding cliffs/mountains. Its unfair from the start, two jets with and one jet without afterburner. Stupid test, I doubt anybody can hear a difference and those that don't like military jets will say its loud anyway..

  5. #410
    Senior Member signatory's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Terra firma
    Posts
    10,694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Herman the German View Post
    The officials from Switzerland said that the difference from snow is only "marginal". Whatever that means, I could imagine that the snow may reduce the echo from the surrounding cliffs/mountains. Its unfair from the start, two jets with and one jet without afterburner. Stupid test, I doubt anybody can hear a difference and those that don't like military jets will say its loud anyway..
    And humans don't have any "noise memory"... the only tests I can see as valuable is from when running the apu... the take-off is over in a few seconds anyway so why focus on that anyway.

    These videos annoy me too as there's some dumbarse talking over the speaker system actually trying to speak over the noise

  6. #411
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    GMT+1
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by signatory View Post
    BTW, is a layer of snow good or bad for noise pollution ? Does it even matter?
    Thanks for the videos! It gives you some idea, but it's rather subjective as you said.

    The test conditions are very important when doing sound measurements. Temperature and humidity are some climatic factors that matters and that obviously differed between the three test occasions. The surrounding surface is also very important. I'd say snow would be a better absorber than tarmac or grass.

    A company I worked with doing sound measurements were very picky about the above factors and wanted the different tests done as fast as possible so that the conditions would not change. They checked temp and humidity every 15min and made remarks in their final report about the surface being slightly damp on this occasion.

    I'm sure that the Swiss take these things into considerations. And I guess all three manufacturers have done measurements before so I'm sure they will be complaining if the results are misleading (in a negative way of course )

  7. #412
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default

    I dont have high hopes for this one, but the offical Eurofighter blog reports this morning that:

    28 November 2008 - Australia to change its mind about JSF?

    We were aware of the Australian Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon touring Europe and visiting Spain, getting briefed on Eurofighter by our friends of EADS CASA in Getafe. But now Australian media start to report about it, while the official press release of the Australian MoD does not mention that part of the visit. The Australian Government has not finally decided yet, if they want to buy the export version of the F-35. It is being said that also the Australian Strategic Policy Institute looks at Eurofighter Typhoon “at the head of the pack of current-generation fighters”.

  8. #413
    Senior Member oldsoak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Turning gold into sh*t
    Posts
    9,226

    Default

    As much as I like the idea of the RAAF flying EF's, it wont happen for several reasons, and heres just two

    1 - Timescales - we cant deliver them in the timeframe they want.

    2 - They need an aircraft that offers them commonality with the US for the simple reason of getting parts in time of war - unless they get a assembly line or are prepared for a substantial spares holding.

    Also the f35 offers a walk on the wild side of stealth for Aus industry - something which will be important to build on for the future.

  9. #414
    Senior Member signatory's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Terra firma
    Posts
    10,694

    Default

    Question:

    Did the Eurofighter fly with a full fuel load of 3 droptanks in the Swiss trials ?

    I know one of the jets arrived like that but I'm asking since am not sure if they ever used that loadout in the trials (not sure about the other candidates either).

  10. #415
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default

    I dare to claim that they didn't use all 3 drop-tanks during the evaluation. I cant remember any footage showing GT 15 or IPA3 with all 3 tanks, aside of the arrival (as you mentioned). Not 100% sure though.

  11. #416
    Member woodduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oz
    Age
    35
    Posts
    161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oldsoak View Post
    As much as I like the idea of the RAAF flying EF's, it wont happen for several reasons, and heres just two

    1 - Timescales - we cant deliver them in the timeframe they want.

    2 - They need an aircraft that offers them commonality with the US for the simple reason of getting parts in time of war - unless they get a assembly line or are prepared for a substantial spares holding.

    Also the f35 offers a walk on the wild side of stealth for Aus industry - something which will be important to build on for the future.
    If the delivery date of the F-35 slips much more or the cost blows out it might happen.
    I would like to think that the goverment is at least smart enough to have a good look at it.
    Ef would be a better replacement for our F-111"s than F-35 imo.
    Perhaps 50/50 mix of EF and F-35, but i would guess that more super bugs is more likely.

  12. #417
    Senior Member ghostdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The Holy Kingdom of stereotypes
    Posts
    1,739

    Default

    An awesome video ,sorry it's in italian language but let the Typhoon's evolutions speak :

    "9G EMOTIONS"


    Last edited by ghostdog; 11-30-2008 at 10:27 AM.

  13. #418
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    One of the best webpages about EF Typhoon, in my mind of course,....but only in German...

    http://eurofighter.airpower.at/

  14. #419
    Senior Member Herman the II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,371

    Default Switzerland

    As mentioned before the officials in Switzerland revealed the evaluation criteria and the importance of every single aspect.
    The original evaluation looked like that:

    1.operational capability (60 %)
    - A2A (50 %)
    - A2G (20%)
    - Recce (20 %)
    - growth potential (10 %)

    2. operational suitability (15 %)
    - maintenance (30 %)
    - militia compatible (25 %)
    - compatibility with infrastructure of Switzerland ( 25 %)
    - noise pollution (20 %)

    3. Cooperation (25 %)
    - industry off-set (70 %)
    - military cooperation (30 %)

    After the criteria were revealed on the media day last week a lot of criticism emerged. Basically some people were outraged over the fact that "bomb dropping" is four times more important than noise pollution. The officials already reacted and declared that the factor A2G will be less important and "noise pollution" will gain some weight. Basically it means that A2G will be mostly erased from the evaluation. The original article is only for subscribers but my summery says it all.

    Kampfjets: VBS distanziert sich von eigenen Kriterien
    [LEFT][*******red][FONT=serif][/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

  15. #420
    Senior Member xav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    13,232

    Default

    When one considers that the average aircraft availability rate is only 50 percent (this is claimed to be better than other Luftwaffe types), this means that no more than half a dozen Eurofighters are available for flying operations on a daily basis. According to wing commodore Wing Commander Andreas Pfeiffer, four of these are required for the QRA service (two plus two reserves), so that only two are available for other duties. This rules out intensive training in aerial combat, as Pfeiffer lamented during a visit by FLUG REVUE at the beginning of October. Despite this, the QRA aircraft take off twice a day on exercise flights even without being alerted.

    It will therefore take some time before FW 74 is able to exploit the full potential of the Eurofighter. Despite the overstretched situation, it is planned that FW 74 will participate in international exercises for the first time in 2009. Informally, the pilots from Neuburg recently pitted their skills against their French Rafale colleagues in aerial combat. The results were extremely gratifying, the main difference being the much greater thrust of the EJ200 engine. As far as the pilots are concerned, moreover, the Block 5 standard has brought clear improvements compared with earlier versions of the software. Areas which were previously problematic, such as voice input of commands, now function a lot more reliably.

    According to the Luftwaffe's broader plans, Fighter Wing 74 will initially be raised to a strength of 24 Eurofighters before the task of equipping the next unit begins, probably at the end of 2009/beginning of 2010.
    Doesn't the bold part rules out any real 1 on 1 dogfights? EF and Rafale merely did a few "evolutions" together... at least that's the way I get it.
    This is no DACT...

    Just asking a fair question...

    http://www.flugrevue.de/index.php?id=4187

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •