Hey everybody!  Talkin from Aspen here.  The hotel room is freakin amazin... more on that in about a week

On the drive back from D-day, I brought up the issue of how it seems all the Europeans I know think the Typhoon is soooo much better than anything we've got with a Marine Major, who was going to be a chopper pilot before being dropped late in his training due to problems with his night vision(8 months in).

Well, his answer? IT DOESN'T MATTER!  Who cares if the Typhoon can win in a 1-on-1 dogfight? Let me explain.

There is one thing the US military does extremely well-and that's infrastructure.  Nobody, but nobody is better than us at mid-air refueling and managing of our fighters through AWACS and KC-130 tankers.  As he put it-"We have that **** cold."

Since when did one fighter rise to meet one fighter?  Go ahead, send the Typhoon up-we'll have nine F-15s/F/A-18s flying CAT, around and around in circles at altitude, waiting to greet it.  F-16s will be sitting on the tarmac on the ground (they don't have enough fuel to fly CAT) waiting to be scrambled, and then recieve vectors from an AWACS.

What you need to understand about the AWACS system and how it ties into the (eventual) success of the F-22 is that there's already a plane that relies on the AWACS for radar-the F-16.  Only the F-14 and the F-15 were really ever built to operate independently.  The F-16 doesn't have a very strong radar, and therefore relies on the AWACS.

Another thing he mentioned-he knew a lot about all the flight programs for the RAF, etc., and he said while the actual skill and quality of their pilots probably matches that of American pilots, American pilots just communicate and work in groups better-we've been practicing since Korea.

So, in conclusion-the individual, one on one characteristics of a Typhoon v Eagle/Hornet really is irrelevent.  Not when US pilots tend to communicate and work together better-this isn't a rail against European airforces, we've just simply had way more practice, and we've absolutely perfected it, something that a European fighter pilot won't say about their airforce.

Tell me what ya think-but you have to admit it makes sense, nobody can argue that we can't manage resources effectively.

Although I'm a Brit I was never an advocate of the Eurofighter Typhoon although I agree it makes sense for any country to use its own aircraft & equipment where possible. I have no idea if the aircraft itself is any better or worse than the US equivalents. RAF pilots & aircrew have always been among the very best trained in the world, if not THE best. That's the reason so many air forces send their people over here for training. I have no doubt about American efficiency but where the US will always score is in sheer force of numbers. In a conflict it all comes down to that, no matter how good the pilots or aircraft are. I would hope that we're never in a situation to find out.

PS. I think the days of one-on-one aerial combat went out with the Korean War of 1950 - 53.

Quote:

As I understand it the RAF versions of the Typhoon II now have their gun back - BUT it's fitted purely as ballast.

Quote:

It might be better if the whole thing was done by remote control. Think about it, you could settle the argument over who has the best equipment once & for all without anyone getting hurt.

we also have Tankers aswell. And again what is failed to be mentioned. During operations in various warzones, american pilots were given the option of british or american tankers and quite a few have chosen the British tankers. And just as an example for communication, hungary was not the only friendly target to be hit. Anyone remember the Canadian forces they also bombed? or just recently the plane that shot up the school in New Jersey?
Sounds to me this article wasn't really about the Typhoon but just one major who couldn't even make the cut for flight school trying to put down a friend. Just remember, the US isn't perfect and has many things that can put it down.

Well if all statements above are true about both sides then the only conclusion is the Allies are the best of the best when combined and are useless without each other.

So why bother with the "My dad is bigger than yours" argument???

Just to put this in perspective this is the total current strength of the RAF. http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/strength.html

Compare that with the US figures of 2002/3. http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/inventories/united_states.asp From a quick check the USAF requirement for 381 F/A-22 Raptor is more than the total number of operational RAF aircraft including trainers.

Quote:

Well said Jeff. You always spoke a lot of sense.

In my views Probably the IAF/IDF have the best airforce but that also lacks in size..

I think PI is correct..Current western militairy is based on Coorperation between nations