developments in the SAF
-
When the French will tell you that the European consortium that builds the Typhoons/EFA are wrong in the sums... the Rafale is better in the area of Avionics, stealth and costs.Originally posted by Shotgun:The rafale vs typhoon arguement can go on for ages. BUt my theory is simple, they didnt label the typhoon only being second to the F-22 for nothing.
You are right, both frames are equally matched. I reckon RSAF should consider Typhoons if they want a fighter whose primary role is air-defence, secondary role is deep-strike/CAS. If they wish to have a fighter that excels in deep penetration strike and can hold its own in air to air combat, then choose the Rafale... Depending on how RSAF sees the role of the Vipers, I think the decision is then fall on the role of the new type of fighters. Then again, perhaps RSAF should just get the Super bugs. It is just as equally good. Maybe wait for the Super bugs to get the new electronic steered phase array radar with Terrain following and Synatic Aperture capabilities rather than the present radar which is essentially the same as the C/D versions. -
Actually most of the reports I have seen does not really show the Super bug being any much better. Most just agree that they have better avionics over the bugs C/D, as well as slightly extended range. Basically, the Superbugs are less manueverable, and really have less acceleration over the bugs C/D.
[This message has been edited by Shotgun (edited 30 October 2001).] -
Agreed. However, I think USN and Marines have something in the pipeline to improve the superbugs. I think they are looking at an uprated engines 33,000IB range F404 derivative, and modifying the radar dish to a electronic steered ones over the current the APG-78 mechnical steered dish. As for other capabilites, I saw pictures of the trialled EF-18 E/F or was it designated -G...Originally posted by Shotgun:Actually most of the reports I have seen does not really show the Super bug being any much better. Most just agree that they have better avionics over the bugs C/D, as well as slightly extended range. Basically, the Superbugs are less manueverable, and really have less acceleration over the bugs C/D.
Lastly, they are comtemplating also to build a Wild Weasel version.
Given all these different variants over the same frame, that is the reason why I think RSAF should look at the super bugs carefully. Perhaps have a sqn or two as a stop gap for the JSF F35????
-
33,000lb F-414?? where did you get that from?! As for the Wild Weasel version of the F-18, its the EF-18G Growler, now still a concept. The JSF would be a long term replacement for the F-16, I strongly believe.....Originally posted by Joe Black:Agreed. However, I think USN and Marines have something in the pipeline to improve the superbugs. I think they are looking at an uprated engines 33,000IB range F404 derivative, and modifying the radar dish to a electronic steered ones over the current the APG-78 mechnical steered dish. As for other capabilites, I saw pictures of the trialled EF-18 E/F or was it designated -G...
Lastly, they are comtemplating also to build a Wild Weasel version.
Given all these different variants over the same frame, that is the reason why I think RSAF should look at the super bugs carefully. Perhaps have a sqn or two as a stop gap for the JSF F35???? -
WOAH, hold your horses. APG-78?! Superbugs don't use APG-78s, APACHE-D's use APG-78. The APG-78 is THE longbow radar.... Are they arming Superbugs with longbowS???Originally posted by Joe Black:Agreed. However, I think USN and Marines have something in the pipeline to improve the superbugs. I think they are looking at an uprated engines 33,000IB range F404 derivative, and modifying the radar dish to a electronic steered ones over the current the APG-78 mechnical steered dish. As for other capabilites, I saw pictures of the trialled EF-18 E/F or was it designated -G...
Lastly, they are comtemplating also to build a Wild Weasel version.
Given all these different variants over the same frame, that is the reason why I think RSAF should look at the super bugs carefully. Perhaps have a sqn or two as a stop gap for the JSF F35???? -
Another thing. The US made a serious mistake by even funding the bugs and superbugs when they should have just concentrated on the SuperTomcats. We don't have to make the same mistake of buying Superbugs that will probably expired within 10 years.
Which is why I feel the Typhoon is more likely to win its way into RSAF inventories. It's new, it has great potential. -
Oops. soorry.. I think its APG-75 rather ... or I must have got my desingation mixed up....Originally posted by Shotgun:WOAH, hold your horses. APG-78?! Superbugs don't use APG-78s, APACHE-D's use APG-78. The APG-78 is THE longbow radar.... Are they arming Superbugs with longbowS???
-
Oops. soorry.. I think its APG-75 rather ... or I must have got my desingation mixed up....Originally posted by Shotgun:WOAH, hold your horses. APG-78?! Superbugs don't use APG-78s, APACHE-D's use APG-78. The APG-78 is THE longbow radar.... Are they arming Superbugs with longbowS??? -
Funny to say that... 'cos USN is going to replace all their Tomcats with the Super bugs.... I think the B+ and D version of Tomcats will remain slightly longer as they do have ground attack capabilities.Originally posted by Shotgun:Another thing. The US made a serious mistake by even funding the bugs and superbugs when they should have just concentrated on the SuperTomcats. We don't have to make the same mistake of buying Superbugs that will probably expired within 10 years.
You are right to say that Typhoon ias more growth potential as they are a truth 4th gen fighters. The Superbugs is more like a updated 3rd gen just like the Block 60 Vipers.
Which is why I feel the Typhoon is more likely to win its way into RSAF inventories. It's new, it has great potential. -
Funny to say that... 'cos USN is going to replace all their Tomcats with the Super bugs.... I think the B+ and D version of Tomcats will remain slightly longer as they do have ground attack capabilities.Originally posted by Shotgun:Another thing. The US made a serious mistake by even funding the bugs and superbugs when they should have just concentrated on the SuperTomcats. We don't have to make the same mistake of buying Superbugs that will probably expired within 10 years.
You are right to say that Typhoon ias more growth potential as they are a truth 4th gen fighters. The Superbugs is more like a updated 3rd gen just like the Block 60 Vipers.
Which is why I feel the Typhoon is more likely to win its way into RSAF inventories. It's new, it has great potential. -
Well, when they lose the tomcat D, they are gonna lose all the deep strike capability the USN has. Neither the Hornets or Superhornets can hit the range the Tomcat D currently can. The Superhornet with all its external fuel tanks, can barely match up the Tomcat's range. Plus it has to refuel mid-air in order to get back. Which was why the USN chose the Bomcat for deep penetration strikes into Bosnia instead of the Superbugs.
-
The Demise of the SuperTomcat can be attributed to the lack of Navy funds, and also due to America's current V-P, Dick Cheney. He ordered the Tomcat production line shut down and the equipment destroyed.Originally posted by Shotgun:Another thing. The US made a serious mistake by even funding the bugs and superbugs when they should have just concentrated on the SuperTomcats. We don't have to make the same mistake of buying Superbugs that will probably expired within 10 years.
Which is why I feel the Typhoon is more likely to win its way into RSAF inventories. It's new, it has great potential.
When he was Sec of Defense back then, He was also the Senator of (Dunno where) where Boeing production plant was located. Its said that he did that so as to enable Boeing to continue with the SuperHornet, thus Boeings production line in his area of responsibility would be kept open... -
It is true about the C/D versions bugs, but the Super bugs do have 30% more internal fuel...Originally posted by Shotgun:Well, when they lose the tomcat D, they are gonna lose all the deep strike capability the USN has. Neither the Hornets or Superhornets can hit the range the Tomcat D currently can. The Superhornet with all its external fuel tanks, can barely match up the Tomcat's range. Plus it has to refuel mid-air in order to get back. Which was why the USN chose the Bomcat for deep penetration strikes into Bosnia instead of the Superbugs.
As to the use of Bombcats rather than the superbugs... USN hasn't got a operational sqn of Superbugs till last month... I don't think they are yet to be deployed on any aircraft carriers. Bombcats are still the main workhorse for any deep strike penetration stuffs... C/Ds for the tactical strike and CAS roles.... Anyway, the real reasons for the bombcats roles are actually more for the fact that the lost of A6s means that the carriers need something to fill the void. Will have to see how good the Bombcats are in the near future... anyway, the Phoneix capability will definitely be missed when the Tomcats say bye bye to the serivce. -
Actually, they have a new missile to fill in the Phoenix. Currently it has no nick name, but is designated the AIM-155 FMRAAM.
In any case, the Bomcats still has longer legs than the Superbug, and can hit targets further. Until they think of something to fix that, we'll still see the bomcat hanging around cats of most USN Carriers. -
Read somewhere that the FMRAAM will have a 200% increase in range... ie about 100 KM?Originally posted by Shotgun:Actually, they have a new missile to fill in the Phoenix. Currently it has no nick name, but is designated the AIM-155 FMRAAM.
It is still going fall short of the 150+ KM Phoenix can achieve. -
The bombcats have already started to be replaced by the F-Superbug. The first unit, VF-41 Black Aces is on their way back to CONUS on Enterprise, and once the arrive will trade in their F-14s for the F-SuperBug. The CAG bird pic is already up on VF-41 website.
Its a pity really, I've seen Tomcats on the 3 carriers I've visited before, and I just feel in terms of looks and capability the SuperBug is nowhere close. One interesting thing was that mechs from all 3 carriers did say that even though its good, the Tomcats (even the Bs and Ds) are bithes to maintain due to their age, so I guess its replacement was inevitable
AIM-54 is actually more for defeating heavy bombers, not a really relevant weapon today. The only AIM-54s shot in anger was in 1999, when VF-213 from the Carl Vinson launched a few in tail chases at Iraqi violaters in the southern Iraq NFZ. They all fell short or were easily evaded. -
The unfortunate part about the Phoenix was the no-escape zone. It is relatively easy to evade the missile as the no-escape zone is quite low.
I suppose the Superbug is the only viable interim option for US naval aviation. However, I read an article somewhere about a retired US Admiral suggesting purchasing Flankers for the US Navy. No offense, but a flanker can kick a bug or superbug butt easily. One can only imagine what an Americanized flanker can do. Best of all, it has the legs to make the deep penetration runs. -
Plus the fact that the Phoenix can't manoevre for nuts. The Backfires Bears and Badgers it was designed to kill can't either, but any fighter pilot who spots the -54 early has a big chance of getting away, particularly in a tailchase. I'm not too sure about the '99 engagement, but I seem to recall that the Iraqi jets were MiG-25, not exactly spring chickens when it comes to dodging missiles, but they still got away relatively easily...Originally posted by Shotgun:The unfortunate part about the Phoenix was the no-escape zone. It is relatively easy to evade the missile as the no-escape zone is quite low.
I suppose the Superbug is the only viable interim option for US naval aviation. However, I read an article somewhere about a retired US Admiral suggesting purchasing Flankers for the US Navy. No offense, but a flanker can kick a bug or superbug butt easily. One can only imagine what an Americanized flanker can do. Best of all, it has the legs to make the deep penetration runs.
Flankers for the navy might make military sense, but any active US service member who even makes such a suggestion can kiss his military(and any political) career goodbye. Its just not good form to suggest that the US gets weapons from the Russians. I do agree that it makes military sense though, I have seen analysis that the Flanker was aerodynamically the best fighter there is, but let down by generally substandard engines and avionics. Can you imagine what kind of performance a Flanker using Western engines of a similar size to the Russian ones can churn out?? -
I did mention that it was a retired US Navy Admiral. I'll try to find the article somewhere.
-
Found it. Take a look here.
A retired US rear admiral suggests Su-27s as interim replacement for US navy.
http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/su27/su27.asp -
Yea, and the US Navy will be the laughing stock of the whole world naval aviators or should I say the whole world military orgnisations. Given that the the US always think that they produce the best stuffs, I cannot see this option will even be remotely considered. Anyway, Boeing and Lockheed will make sure that this will not happen tooOriginally posted by Shotgun:Found it. Take a look here.
A retired US rear admiral suggests Su-27s as interim replacement for US navy.
http://www.flightjournal.com/articles/su27/su27.asp hee hee