Quote:
|
Originally Posted by goldorak
The same thing happens with the F-22 raptor. An extremely conventional and pricey fighter that doesn't stand up against the Eurofighter nor the Rafale.
|
Having been a critic of the Eurofighter myself, I must admit that slowly but surely even the Germans are turning theirs into useable and highly capable platforms now (they lagged seriously behind the British in their attempt to clean it of the many bugs it left the factory with). And yes, there is probably no aircraft today that is more maneuverable than the eurofighter. Question is if this really is the decisive criterion, in the age of highly maneuverable AA-missiles like AIM9X, Python-4s and Archers (which additionally has BVR capabilitiy). If close-range fights are such lethal, then, BVR fighting becomes essential, and here long range sensors and awareness of what is moving and hiding on the battlefield takes over the important role. The F22 has one major advantage: it must not be made stealth, it already IS stealth. Embedded in the battlefield network of CCCI, like the Americans typically are fighting in, this plane without doubt will perform very well. I assume it looses some of it's advanatages and tactical potentials once it is on it's own, though. All in all I think that both aircraft need to be deployed in different ways, and then both will deliver superior performances, outclassing that of many other fighters today (maybe excluding the latest Russian models with their state of the art radar and missiles technology).
What I mean is this: a statement like the F22 not standing up against the Eurofighter (or Rafael!?) is, I think, a little bit far-fetched. Even IF material-based stealth technology one day will be outclassed in importance by active electronical counter-radar-technology. And that America says it is not researching such technology, does not necessarily mean that it does not research such technology indeed.
Btw, the Eurofighter is an extremely expensive aircraft, too...