Congratulations. Your best fighter defeated two of our strike fighters that were designed in the 1980's. We have new ones, you know.
Eagerly awaiting Typhoon vs F/A-22.
Eagerly awaiting Typhoon vs F/A-22.
Eurofighter defeats two F-15E's
- Thread starter Derelan
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Congratulations, your an American. Or wasn't that the only purpose of your comment?
Meh, this the article was just posted here because it was interesting I think. Actual dick comparing didn't really happen.
Meh, this the article was just posted here because it was interesting I think. Actual dick comparing didn't really happen.
Don't mistake scepticism for blind nationalism. It has nothing to do with me being an American. I prefer many "un-american" things to the counterparts offered by my nation. I just have seen this article spread around numerous forums, and the fact that the technologies and purposes of the aircraft mentioned are separated by such a gap is never mentioned. I would find it interesting were it somewhat relevant. Might as well have a P-51 Mustang engage an first-generation F-14 or something.
I would love to see a Typhoon vs F/A-22 vs SU-37 Super Flanker brawl. I'm cheering for the Sukhoi.
I would love to see a Typhoon vs F/A-22 vs SU-37 Super Flanker brawl. I'm cheering for the Sukhoi.
Last edited:
The first part of my post was just meant to be annoying. With succes I can see. The second part was a bit more serious.
By the way I read like 6 years ago that the EF2000 was designed to end fights from long range, when it would reach dog fighting range it already didn't do its job. Am I mixing things up?
By the way I read like 6 years ago that the EF2000 was designed to end fights from long range, when it would reach dog fighting range it already didn't do its job. Am I mixing things up?
Well it does say something about American might when British Pilots are "surprised" to win a dogfight against machines out classed by 3 decades of technological improvements.
That would be true if there would be 1 F15E, but there were 2. Now I don't know too much about those things but that eurofighter must have made his move fast otherwise he would have been taken down after he had a shot at the first one. That is kinda impressive, but since it's not a war scenario it still doesn't say that much.
Rostam: Yes, the EF2000 is designed to engage from medium to long-range (at the limits of its radar ability, essentially). But it cannot hit what it cannot lock on to. Many "next-gen" fighters have very advanced electronic countermeasure systems.
Also, the F-15E is a strike fighter, a two-seater that is outfitted primarily for air-to-ground, but has air-to-air capability as well. The Eurofighter is a single-seater designed to engage air-to-air, it can also engage multiple targets at once. Chances are it locked on to one, confirmed the lock, and was already locked on to the second.
Also, the F-15E is a strike fighter, a two-seater that is outfitted primarily for air-to-ground, but has air-to-air capability as well. The Eurofighter is a single-seater designed to engage air-to-air, it can also engage multiple targets at once. Chances are it locked on to one, confirmed the lock, and was already locked on to the second.
I'm sorry, but doesn't anybody else think it's funny that the plane is called the 'EuroFighter 2000'?
Kibbles-N-Bits said:
Actually, it was designed in the 1960's, with the first flight in 1972, and it entered service in 1976.
Now back on topic.
You mean a Modern aircraft outperformed 2 (TWO!) planes that were designed in the vietnam era? Who would have thunk it!!
Kibbles, thanks for explaining. But what I meant was that when the two F15E's would work together wouldn't it mean that when the EF would get behind one, that the other would get behind the EF? Now maybe there are all sorts of new stuff that gave the EF a huge advantage, but from my limited knowledge I think the fact that this was not a war scenario played the biggest role. The F15E pilots probably reacted too late. Something similar is what I am thinking would have happened, or I am totally missing something.
Demo:
In 1982 McDonnell Douglas modified the TF-15A in the 'Strike Eagle' prototype, this was because he realised the air force would need a replacement for the F-111.
In 1991, during the Gulf war, the F15E still wasn't fully developped.
Now this information could be wrong, but I somewhat doubt it.
Demo:
In 1982 McDonnell Douglas modified the TF-15A in the 'Strike Eagle' prototype, this was because he realised the air force would need a replacement for the F-111.
In 1991, during the Gulf war, the F15E still wasn't fully developped.
Now this information could be wrong, but I somewhat doubt it.
The plane was DESIGNED in the 60's. Since then, it has been MODIFIED. Example, the F15A was a single seater, the E a two seater. The E has more thrust and can carry a heavier payload.
The modern planes don't work the same way as the old ones do. The pilot can look at a plane to aquire a lock and fire a missile without actually turning the aircraft. Also, in a typical mock engagement, lock is all that is needed. even if they were all using the same plae, it is possible for the solo to take on the pair and win. Locking on isn't like in the movies where you have to try and get the enemy into this circle. You select a target, and the RADAR simply follows that target instead of sweeping. Takes a split second to do, and when it is done, you can fire your missile, and turn to the next target without hanging about behind the one guy for too long.
The modern planes don't work the same way as the old ones do. The pilot can look at a plane to aquire a lock and fire a missile without actually turning the aircraft. Also, in a typical mock engagement, lock is all that is needed. even if they were all using the same plae, it is possible for the solo to take on the pair and win. Locking on isn't like in the movies where you have to try and get the enemy into this circle. You select a target, and the RADAR simply follows that target instead of sweeping. Takes a split second to do, and when it is done, you can fire your missile, and turn to the next target without hanging about behind the one guy for too long.
Again, I don't see the dick comparing contest so many seem to see behind this. It's just some interesting info the way I see it.
To me, mainly the following part is interesting: "and moved into shooting positions on their tails."
So the EF2000 either had to move very fast or the F15E pilots weren't that focussed, that's my conclusion anyway. Otherwise if the F15E would have worked together I don't see how one plane could get behind 2 (at the same time).
As for the "DESIGNED" part you mention, I'm going to try and confirm that part. Or maybe if some folks I trust a bit more could confirm it then I'll believe it as well. It really doesn't matter that much but now that it has been mentioned it has made me very curious.
To me, mainly the following part is interesting: "and moved into shooting positions on their tails."
So the EF2000 either had to move very fast or the F15E pilots weren't that focussed, that's my conclusion anyway. Otherwise if the F15E would have worked together I don't see how one plane could get behind 2 (at the same time).
As for the "DESIGNED" part you mention, I'm going to try and confirm that part. Or maybe if some folks I trust a bit more could confirm it then I'll believe it as well. It really doesn't matter that much but now that it has been mentioned it has made me very curious.
The F15 isnt that manuverable it is mostly a fighter with very powerfull engines. The Typhoon is much more manuverable and thus gets behind the tails of the F15's quiker than vice versa
Do a google search you retard. It isn't that difficult, and the first two sites on the list confirm what I have said.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-15.htm
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=21
On a side note, tacking “again” into the start of the sentence only makes you look like an idiot if you never made the comment before.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-15.htm
http://www.jetplanes.co.uk/
http://www.ugamedia.com/f15.htm
ok, so that one wasn't too helpful.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=21
In the words of a great many children, “You started it!”
On a side note, tacking “again” into the start of the sentence only makes you look like an idiot if you never made the comment before.
I'm really not a dick-hardened pro-war fag, but I must admit that nobody can **** with us(United States). US wins and the rest of the world loses.... just the facts, ma'am!
Yeah untill they start to boycot you economically and stuff. The rest of the world will suffer but the US will just crumble.
like the world will stop eating McDonalds, drinking Coke and listening to Kenny G.
P.S. Tomcat, your post count is at 420
P.S. Tomcat, your post count is at 420
Why is that being brought up that my postcount is 420?
The us does some more important stuff than only that but still the economical impact will be the greatest in the us self.
The us does some more important stuff than only that but still the economical impact will be the greatest in the us self.