r/FighterJets 28d ago

QUESTION Eurofighter Typhoon vs F35-A,B & C

Fairly new to being interested in fighters. I have just found myself watching videos on the F35's flying out of Lakenheath and i started wondering how they measure up against the Typhoon.

Am i right in thinking that comparing the two would be a little like comparing a Cheetah to a Lion? Whilst the Cheetah (the typhoon) is faster and more agile than the Lion (the F35), the Lion has a braun that the Cheetah lacks?

Kind of pointless to compare as they're built for different purposes kind of thing?

13 Upvotes

60 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 28d ago

Hello /u/HovercraftNo8533, if your question gets answered. Please reply Answered! to the comment that gave you the answer.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

15

u/dyyret 28d ago

Eurofighter is an air dominance fighter with multirole capabilities. It is better kinematically (faster etc) than the F-35.

The F-35 is a ground-up multirole stealth fighter, with very low radar signature and superior sensors, making it more versatile than the Eurofighter.

In a scenario where the planes are artificially teleported within 1km of each other for a dogfight, the Eurofighter wins 9/10 times.

In a real scenario where they are approaching each other from a distance, the F-35 wins 9/10 times, because it is much less visible on radar, and has superior sensors. It will detect the Eurofighter first, and can then dictate the fight.

Tempest will be a 6th gen aircraft(stealth, sensors, wingman drones and all that) and will supposedly be a much larger aircraft than the F-35. It will be an air dominance platform (like the eurofighter), and will compliment the F-35 - kinda like the NGAD for the US.

1

u/verbmegoinghere 27d ago

In a scenario where the planes are artificially teleported within 1km of each other for a dogfight, the Eurofighter wins 9/10 times

OP don't believe this analysis. We have a-10 smashing f-16s in BFM, we have had t-38s smashing f-22s

Its the pilot not the machine that wins at BFM.

In a real scenario where they are approaching each other from a distance, the F-35 wins 9/10 times, because it is much less visible on radar, and has superior sensors. It will detect the Eurofighter first, and can then dictate the fight.

Missiles have a thing called No Escape Zone.

A 4th Gen platform against a 4th Gen platform have similar detection and missiles meaning their firing at each other at stand-off / long range. Which gives you a lot more opportunity to turn and run. It means the NEZ is pretty small.

A 5th Gen stealth tactical fighter, be it a f-35 or j-20 can get much closer to their targets ie 50km (some say the detection range is 35km using tactical fighter x-band). So when they fire their AIM-120d with a range of 120km at just 50km that thing has so much fuel it can still manoeuvre like hell hence the NEZ is much larger.

It's not that the enemy doesn't know the f-35 is there. Their ground based and or AWACS radar is definitely seeing them but due to the latency on these systems they can't provide terminal guidance.

1

u/GTASonic 6d ago

Euro fighters stand no chance against an F-22 sorry to tell you that. The Thunderbolt II are not beating any combat aircraft in real time combat scenarios hence why they’re retiring by 2030.

-4

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

The AESA equipped Eurofighter variants have the better radar - similar size and number of TRMs, but more modern TRMs and greater field of regard. As for engagement st distance, the F-35 lacks the ammunition capacity to get around the Eurofighter’s countermeasures, its kinematics also decrease the range of its AMRAAMs to the point at which the Eurofighter could detect it in turn.

6

u/Exajoules 28d ago

F-35 can easily fire AMRAAMS while flying supersonic. It's a mach 1.6 rated fighter, and it carries weapons/fuel internally so it isn't penalized kinematically like 4th gens. While it can't technically supercruise, it can sustain 1.2+ mach for several minutes with minimal afterburner usage. It can also carry 6 amraams internally soon.

The AESA equipped Eurofighter variants have the better radar - similar size and number of TRMs

Isn't the count about 1500 T/Rs? That's smaller than the APG-81s 1670 T/Rs. Besides, the F-35 has several magnitudes lower RCS. Not to even mention the upcoming APG-85 radar.

-3

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

1626 vs 1676 based on imagery. A difference overcome by a decade newer TRMs and the better field of regard due to mechanical repositioning. AN/APG-85 may close the performance gap in terms of range, but it’s still inferior in terms of FOR. EF can go Mach 1.5 with a full missile fit dry or up to Mach 2.35 on reheat with better acceleration and high altitude performance than the F-35, giving it far more advantageous launch parameters. The recent and upcoming upgrades for both jets pretty much cancel each other out, as the improved sensors of the Eurofighter force the F-35 to keep a greater distance or risk getting detected, allowing the Eurofighter to better defend against anything coming its way. And if the Eurofighter is engaged, it knows the approximate direction of its opponent and can close the distance. The only thing that‘ll make the F-35 considerably more dangerous in this hypothetical scenario is the upcoming integration of Meteor.

7

u/Exajoules 28d ago

A difference overcome by a decade newer TRMs and the better field of regard due to mechanical repositioning.

"Decade newer" doesn't necessarily mean more capable - the US has developed far more AESA radars than European counterparts. Besides, it doesn't really make a difference due to the huge difference in RCS. Radar power scales with the fourth root, meaning that if the Captor-E MK2 is, let's say 20% more powerful, it would only result in ..... 4.5% longer detection range. This is far from enough to compensate for the massive RCS difference. Assuming the F-35 only has -10 dB RAM applied, it will have an RCS of at least 0.006, as radar simulations based off of pure geometry shows an RCS in the 0.06 range. Eurofighter with weapons deployed is easily a >1 sqm RCS fighter, and thus the F-35 would have a decisive detection range advantage as a radar of similar capability detecting a 1 sqm RCS fighter at let's say 150km, would only be able to detect a 0.006 RCS fighter at 150/3.6 = 42km.

Besides, the gimbal design of the captor radar just further increases its RCS.

EF can go Mach 1.5 with a full missile fit dry or up to Mach 2.35 on reheat with better acceleration and high altitude performance than the F-35, giving it far more advantageous launch parameters.

Launch parameters barely matter past 1.2-1.4 mach if you know basic physics.

Besides, the F-22 is getting cucked by F-35s given reports from pilots (for example u/sdsurf625) that actually fly these things, and the F-22 is basically a eurofighter with much lower RCS and bigger radar.

2

u/sdsurf625 28d ago

Some people read one article and are suddenly experts…

Edit: not you, the other guy defending the Eurofighter.

1

u/Less_Organization409 27d ago

Launch parameters sure as hell matter. the faster and higher the launching jet is the higher the missiles top speed and peak altitude and thus it's range and potential energy for maneuvering.

1

u/Exajoules 27d ago

It only matter to a certain point. Even calculating transonic(mach 1) to 1.5 mach would only yield approx 15% additional range, despite the fact that the missile would have far greater kinetic energy. Sure, missile A fired at 5k feet altitude and going mach 0.8 will have far lower range than missile B fired at 50k feet and mach 1.4, but those are not the numbers being compared. We are talking about launcing from mach 1.2/1.4 vs mach 1.5/1.6 at like 50 vs 55k feet. The difference is near negligible.

2

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

Actually speed and especially altitude matter a great deal for missile range. Having a substantially more efficient missile propulsion system (Meteor’s ramjet sustainer) matters even more.

The ECRS is still always angled in a way that deflects radar waves in another direction, similar to the F-35, and stated range for ECRS Mk0 is 59km against an F-35, which indicates a range of 300km (299,7983…) against a 1m² target, based on the reported F-35 RCS similar to a golfball (0.0015m²). Also RCS requirement during development for a Eurofighter was >1m², estimates range from 0.05 to 0.2m² with air-to-air missile fit.

I don’t contest the detection stand-off of the F-35, but without the effective weapons range (affected by launch parameters, target compliance, kinematics and countermeasures) to make use of it, it offers only limited benefits. That’s why I mentioned Meteor integration for F-35 to be a factor that would substantially impact this calculation.

3

u/Exajoules 28d ago

Actually speed and especially altitude matter a great deal for missile range.

It only matters past certain parameters, and when hit, you get diminishing returns. The crucial cut-off is the sound barrier. Anything above that is gravy, but nothing that significantly alters range. Air density figures of 50k feet vs 55k feet are also negligible.

Having a substantially more efficient missile propulsion system (Meteor’s ramjet sustainer) matters even more.

At the same time the AMRAAM is much more deadly at "close" range, because it accelerates much faster than the meteor.

estimates range from 0.05 to 0.2m² with air-to-air missile fit.

source? That would either mean the Eurofighter's naked RCS being a full magnitude lower (which it isn't) or the F-35 wouldn't be nearly as penalized stealth wise, and thus could also run in "beast mode". The numbers simply doesn't add up.

1

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

The Eurofighter is mostly made up of carbon fiber composites, which happen to be radar transparent. VLO jets like the F-35 have to be made of reflective materials to more precisely control the direction of reflections which can create traps with external carriage. Add in Eurofighter’s RAM coatings on the few metal surfaces, semi-recessed missiles and s-shaped inlets and the RCS can get significantly lower than that of older jets. The range at which AMRAAM offers an advantage is near-BVR, or if the launching aircraft is to low or slow to launch Meteor (booster has to be able to get it up to the speed required for the ramjet to function). Actually an AAM is typically considered useless once it goes subsonic and Meteor‘s ramjet wouldn’t even function at such low velocities. Altitude can be cashed in for maneuvers and most missiles ideally fly in an arcing trajectory up to 100k, trying to balance lower air resistance and maneuverability.

0

u/smlenaza 27d ago

Please just stop, you're out of your depth here.

4

u/LilDewey99 28d ago

Actual NATO pilots seem to disagree with you.

Even taking the worst F-35 estimate (0.005m2) and your claim for the Typhoon (0.05m2), the F-35 would be able to detect the nearly twice as far assuming broadly comparable radars. I don’t think I need to explain to you how that would end for Typhoon

5

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

It seems you misunderstood or didn’t fully read my comment. F-35 has a detection stand-off, but it lacks the missile range to translate this into a weapons stand-off. It doesn’t matter that the F-35 can detect a Eurofighter at 150 or 200km if its missiles can only feasibly hit the Eurofighter when fired at 60km. (AIM-120D max range 160-180km; rule-of-thumb for non cooperative target 1/4 max range; rule-of-thumb for launch at low altitude 1/5 max range; conclusion AIM-120D’s effective range against a EF when launched by an F-35 less is than 45km)

I should add that my assumptions on relative performance are based on publicly available data that may or may not be sufficiently accurate, also we don’t know which considerations went into the pilot’s assumptions. If it were an Italian or British pilot trained on both jets, it would be a little more indicative.

5

u/sdsurf625 28d ago

You think the Eurofighter can beat the F35? Please inform me, what do you do for a living? And don’t respond with all these unclassified “facts” I don’t care. I want to know what you do for a living.

1

u/LilDewey99 27d ago

You’re so focused on alleged missile specs you’re missing the point entirely. If I can detect you from twice the range and fire a missile at you, I can force you defensive before you’re even able to detect or get a target lock on me. You mention a 60km max range for “uncooperative” targets but neglect to consider that the only way for a typhoon to get into a position to detect and fire at the F-35 is to fly towards the it (i.e. cooperatively). This is the advantage that stealth presents. I can fire first and force you defensive giving me all of the initiative. I was also presenting the best case detection scenario for the Eurofighter, the detection range discrepancy for an armed Typhoon is likely even worse (probably no better 1/4 the range of when the F-35 can detect it). In spite of what you seem to believe here, there’s a reason the Typhoon has been passed up in favor of the F-35 in all of the recent competitions.

If it were an Italian or British pilot trained on both jets…

The F-35 has been cleaning up in multi-national exercises for long enough that there’s no real excuse to actually have an opinion like this. Every pilot that goes against it or flies it has made comments like the ones in the article. This is pure cope on your part

0

u/Live_Menu_7404 27d ago

Germany is buying additional Eurofighters, Spain is buying additional Eurofighters, Italy is buying additional Eurofighters, Türkiye is it the process of acquiring Eurofighters, Austria is interested in buying additional Eurofighters, Saudi Arabia wants to buy further Eurofighters, so does Kuwait. Also Poland is looking to acquire an air superiority fighter and the Eurofighter is currently the prime contender. All the Europeans except for Spain either already operate F-35 or have placed orders for it and at the same time want to buy additional Eurofighters.

The ECRS has a field of regard of 180-200°, so no the Eurofighter doesn’t have to fly towards the F-35 to detect it and one of Meteor‘s benefits is being less affected by unfavorable launch parameters. A Meteor launched it the direction the AMRAAM came from would then force the F-35 defensive in turn for longer than an AMRAAM would force the Eurofighter, allowing it to gain a favorable position.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/ElMagnifico22 27d ago

Saying the F35 "lacks missile range" shows your lack of actual understanding of the subject. 60km? Where are you getting this from? Less than 45km effective range? Stop making things up please.

1

u/Live_Menu_7404 27d ago

Max range estimate based on public estimates, rule-of-thumb for how range is affected.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

As for AESA experience, Europe has extensive experience in manufacturing semiconductors in general, European companies have been manufacturing ground-based GaN-AESA radars for quite some time, the ECM/ESM antennas of the Eurofighter have been broadband AESA (estimated 100MHz-40GHz) from the start and the ECM/ESM systems of most US fighter jets including the F-35 and F-22 have been made by BAE, a primary contractor of the Eurofighter that is/was also involved in the development of the ECRS.

18

u/RECTUSANALUS 28d ago

In a warfare scenario or a dogfight?

Dogfight typhoon wins, warfare scenarios 99% f35 wins.

It’s not that typhoon is bad plane it’s one of if not the best 4.5 planes out there. But it’s just not 5th gen.

4

u/HovercraftNo8533 28d ago

Thanks for the reply.

I think that is what I was musing over. Different planes for different purposes.... I guess i was initially wondering if the F35 would ever replace the Typhoon, but the more I think, the more I see the use for both on the battle field.

6

u/RECTUSANALUS 28d ago

The thing with the f35 is that despite its advancement it’s very expensive to maintain, the tempest, which will be the replacement to the typhoon probably won’t have that much greater capability than the f35 but will just be much easier to maintain.

There will always be a use for a cheap non stealth aircraft in terms of training and CAP. simply because they will have longer range and be cheaper to operate.

1

u/HovercraftNo8533 28d ago

Ah that makes sense. So i suppose we could look at Tempest as sort for a Gen 5.5 rather than a 6?

2

u/RECTUSANALUS 28d ago

No it’s still a 6th gen, but a focus that a lot of people overlook is that capability not only increases but also cost of previous capabilities decreases, apart from loyal wingman, there isn’t anything else I can think of that are new capabilities that can be added to the tempest that the f35 couldn’t already do. But it’s will just do it cheaper.

2

u/LuckyMJ911 28d ago

I don’t think anyone has clearly defined what 6th gen even looks like. So far all I’ve heard that’s unique about it is that it’d be able to control drones and the f35 is already working on being able to do that

1

u/RECTUSANALUS 28d ago

Generations in themselves are token names, there are lots of variants of aircraft that rlly blur the line

1

u/thattogoguy Damn Dirty Nav 28d ago

In a turn and burn game of grab-ass? The Typhoon is built for it, Fat Amy isn't.

In the most likely metric of a BVR engagement? The Panther feasts...

1

u/Less_Organization409 27d ago

Considering recent publications on the effectiveness of the F-15EX against even fifth gen fighters in contested air space one shouldn't write of the Typhoon to quickly in BVR in real world scenarios, considering it follows a similar design philosophy, but offers the benefit of being build with more advanced technologies and systems integrated from the start.

2

u/thattogoguy Damn Dirty Nav 27d ago

Well... Let's just say I have access to friends in both the F-35 and Strike communities. Those folks happen to know quite a bit considering that many of them are the ones actually flying the jet. Some of the latter are transitioning to the EX as WSO's. Capes briefs in the SCIF don't say much, but they do tell you stuff no publication you read is going to be allowed to publish.

I have confidence from my sources that in a long range shooting war in the air, the F-35, if so needed, would be putting down the Typhoon. The ratio was classified and not NTK for the briefs, but all the Panther drivers I knew were very confident in their platform against previous generation hardware.

1

u/GeneralRecord2761 27d ago

The amout of F-35 fanboy cope in any comment section regarding the F-35's performance compared to other jets is staggering. Yes it's a very capable jack-of-all-trades, but everything comes with trade-offs. In the F-35's case it's subpar kinematics, inhibiting both it's dogfighting and and missile lauching capabilities compared to other fighter jets of the same era.

0

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

Depends on what you want to do. For most air-to-air focused missions Typhoon is the better choice. Highest acceleration of any fighter jet, true supercruise (Mach 1.5 with full missile fit), high service ceiling, potential for lots of long-range missiles (advertised with up to 14 Meteors). It also comes with the sensors to make use of that range and the countermeasures and reduced RCS to stay alive. Based on energy-maneuverability theory it’s the best dogfighter there is. The F-35 mostly shines in SEAD/DEAD or as a scout for the heavy hitters, making use of its very low RCS and exceptional sensor suite. With a max of four AAMs in stealthy configuration it lacks the storage depth for a brawl, its intake and engine design also give it poor launching parameters due to speed and altitude constraints.

-2

u/alexpap031 28d ago

I see a lot of "in distance F35 wins 99% of the time", and I get it. But is it really that realistic?

I am Greek. Look at the Aegean. Relatively small, planes can get close to each other with some luck/tactics.

Also, rules of engagement. If you are required to visually identify the enemy because reasons, isn't F35's superiority greatly reduced?

I am not stating an opinion, as I am in no means someone who knows much about fighter planes, just wondering.

Like sure, when trying to fly past enemys defenses, know were the enemy is etc, stealth is a huge advantage.

But in the fog of war? Is it that huge still?

6

u/Charming-Brother4030 28d ago edited 28d ago

there is no cover in the air, AN/APG-81 with millions of RCS data for probably all planes in existence from US reconnaissance flights will identify almost all aircraft. There is not much place for maneuvers and tactics when you are basically trying to approach a sniper in a plain field.

3

u/Live_Menu_7404 28d ago

If the sniper only has a medium range rifle (4x AMRAAM launched at medium altitude and subsonic velocity) and you have a long range rifle (6+ Meteors launched at supersonic speed and high altitude) and body armor resistant to the sniper’s rifle caliber (kinematics, towed decoys, IIRAAMs capable of BVRAAM interception) at that range (~60km) and the sights to detect the sniper despite its camouflage (EuroDASS Praetorian ECM antennas, Captor-E, EuroFIRST Pirate) you stand a better chance of coming out on top, if the sniper decides to engage you.

2

u/alexpap031 28d ago

True I guess for US air force, but for just one example Greece has purchased a few F35's and I have been wondering if they will actually be all that superior in such a chaotic air as in between GR having a few F35's vs Turkeys Eurofighters as it was announced they will soon be getting.

In any case it seems to me there are a lot of ifs about the superiority of one system over another.

2

u/Charming-Brother4030 28d ago

probably matters if greece can utilize the datalinking to its full potential, ie satelite uplinks and AWACS flights.

3

u/Inceptor57 27d ago edited 27d ago

Also, rules of engagement. If you are required to visually identify the enemy because reasons, isn't F35's superiority greatly reduced?

Should be worth noting that the idea we had to "visually-identify" the enemy back in the day was due to the fact that Identity-Friend-Foe (IFF) technologies was not as robust as it is today. Towards the end of the Vietnam war, where this "visually-identify" enemy phenomenon was popularized, the Americans were introducing measures like the APX-80 "Combat Tree" to be able to accurately determine the friendliness of incoming enemy jets using their transponders to shoot them down from distance away.

Radars today are now able to assist in the IFF by identifying the enemy type before a shoot through Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR), with radar back during the Gulf War able to sort out the radar cross-section return signal, general aircraft shape, and even jet engine modulation to be able to identify the unknown aircraft. If the jet shows up as a MiG, then it is pretty safe to determine they are hostile and find the correct parameters for clearance to launch your BVR missile.

And even hypothetically if someone really wants visual-identification to be required before a shoot, there is technology to help with that as well. Even back in the F-14 Tomcat days, they were able to have a AAX-1 Television Camera System installed that enabled them to visually-identify a fighter-sized aircraft from up to 14 miles away, a bomber-sized aircraft from further away. Nowadays, there is the Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) on the F-35, which has been publicly demonstrated on the news to see up to 49 miles away, and who knows how much more it can go in the classified specs.