Eurofighter Typhoon - Updates and Discussions

Bon Plan

Well-Known member
Dec 1, 2017
1,464
564
France
Typhoon AESA will be superior to RBE-2 AESA.
Why? because the nose is slighly bigger?
You forget that the french one is operationnal for more than 8 years, and use the software raffined on the PESA model for more than 20 years. A gap that the european radar will have difficulties to catch up.
Before being a full air to air and air to ground radar some more years to wait. And we haven't seen yet the first one on front line EF....
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
Because it's >1.5x bigger precisely. That gives it more than a 3-fold advantage on the top-line of the radar equation.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
Because it's >1.5x bigger precisely. That gives it more than a 3-fold advantage on the top-line of the radar equation.
German, Spanish Eurofighters will receive the world’s most capable fighter jet radar

European aerospace giant Airbus announced that German and Spanish Eurofighter fighter jet will be equipped with the world’s most capable fighter jet radar.

The company’s news release said the Airbus has been awarded a contract for the development, supply and integration of 115 Eurofighter ESCAN Radars for the German and Spanish Eurofighter fleet.



As noted by the company, it marks the so far largest order for the world’s most modern electronically scanned array radar, Captor-E. The contract signature followed the approval by both governments in recent weeks.

The contract foresees the delivery and integration of 110 Captor-E radars for Germany and an initial batch of 5 radars for Spain to be delivered by 2023. The new sensor will equip Tranche 2 and Tranche 3 Eurofighters as well as new aircraft. Whereas the Airbus sites in Manching, Germany and Getafe, Spain will act as overall integration Hub, the development and building of the radar will be subcontracted to a consortium under the leadership of Hensoldt and Indra and by participation of further Eurofighter partner companies.

“The contract for the Captor-E radar is a main achievement to equip Eurofighter with sensors that ensure todays dominance of the aircraft also in the threat scenarios of tomorrow”, said Dirk Hoke, CEO of Airbus Defence and Space. “With Eurofighter, Germany and Spain are investing in a strong backbone of European air defence and in the leading project of the European defence industry.”

Eurofighter Captor-E is the world’s most advanced electronically scanned array radar for fighter aircraft. The design of the front fuselage airframe allows Eurofighter to deliver the largest electronically scanned array for increased detection and tracking ranges, advanced Air-to-Surface capability and enhanced electronic protection measures. The large antenna surface also allows a wider field of regard than any other platform pushing the aircraft’s performance and guaranteeing its role as a valuable asset within the Future Combat Aircraft System environment.

The signed contract will also give an additional push to the export tenders Eurofighter is currently bidding for.

 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
:) :) :)
1000+ T/R Modules: same claim as RBE2 Rafale Radar!
More than 200 Km detection Range same claim than RBE2 Rafale Radar at initial deployement !!
Perhaps there is not enough power to add more T/R or perhaps it's too hard to extract the heat on a repositioner ???? :cry:
Developed over 10 years means 10 years late perhaps, who know?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Bon Plan

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
:) :) :)
1000+ T/R Modules: same claim as RBE2 Rafale Radar!
More than 200 Km detection Range same claim than RBE2 Rafale Radar at initial deployement !!
Perhaps there is not enough power to add more T/R or perhaps it's too hard to extract the heat on a repositioner ???? :cry:
Developed over 10 years means 10 years late perhaps, who know?
You do suffer from confirmation bias don't you. The number is around 1,500, which complies with 1,000+, 1,422 rings a bell. The Rafale only has 898, it's a tiny radar.
 
Last edited:

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
You do suffer from confirmation bias don't you. The number is around 1,500, which complies with 1,000+, 1,422 rings a bell. The Rafale only has 898, it's a tiny radar.
I stand by the fact that Airbus claims 1000+ T/R and Thales also claims 1000+ T/R so for me it is likely that the number of T/R modules of the two radars is equivalent. Otherwise I would not understand that the range of the E-Captor is only 200 km.
As long as the radar was a project, Airbus could tell anything, but now that the radar is well defined they are obliged to get closer to the truth because otherwise future customers will ask themselves questions by discovering the true characteristics of the Radar.
 

Nikhil

nik141993
Dec 1, 2017
333
194
India
You do suffer from confirmation bias don't you. The number is around 1,500, which complies with 1,000+, 1,422 rings a bell. The Rafale only has 898, it's a tiny radar.
While TRM count does help but it is not everything.....first generation AESA with 1000 TRM count can be outgunned by 2nd or 3rd generation AESA with far less TRM. radar range is factor of many things.

•Captor E AESA
Screenshot_2020-06-27-20-08-05-40.jpg

Screenshot_2020-06-27-20-07-19-45.jpg


• RBE-2 AESA
IMG_20200612_131506.jpg


there is massive difference between both of them. Captor E AESA use slotted waveguide Array while RBE 2 AESA use flared notch radiating element. Later offering far higher bandwidth, higher directivity hence increased range despite less TRM and tiny size.

new-bitmap-image4 (1).jpg


@Picdelamirand-oil
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
While TRM count does help but it is not everything.....first generation AESA with 1000 TRM count can be outgunned by 2nd or 3rd generation AESA with far less TRM. radar range is factor of many things.

•Captor E AESA
View attachment 16637
View attachment 16636

• RBE-2 AESA
View attachment 16638

there is massive difference between both of them. Captor E AESA use slotted waveguide Array while RBE 2 AESA use flared notch radiating element. Later offering far higher bandwidth, higher directivity hence increased range despite less TRM and tiny size.

View attachment 16639

@Picdelamirand-oil
You're looking at a mock-up, not the real thing. Basically a tin plate.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
I stand by the fact that Airbus claims 1000+ T/R and Thales also claims 1000+ T/R so for me it is likely that the number of T/R modules of the two radars is equivalent. Otherwise I would not understand that the range of the E-Captor is only 200 km.
As long as the radar was a project, Airbus could tell anything, but now that the radar is well defined they are obliged to get closer to the truth because otherwise future customers will ask themselves questions by discovering the true characteristics of the Radar.
What the heck does 1000+ mean? 1000 plus what? It's like 'more than 200km detection range'. Against what RCS, what does 'more than' mean, how much more. Other sources say it can detect an F-35 at 60km.


To give you an example, Meteor's range is currently stated at more than 100km officially, and the AIM-120D is quoted at 150km, so has the AIM-120D got greater range because people don't know how to interpret generic statements and mock-ups?
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
What the heck does 1000+ mean? 1000 plus what? It's like 'more than 200km detection range'. Against what RCS, what does 'more than' mean, how much more. Other sources say it can detect an F-35 at 60km.

Surprisingly when you're told the same kind of thing about the Rafale's performance you don't want to hear it. 😛

Why should we consider that the antenna on the photograph of the E Captor is that of a moke up if you don't want to consider that the antenna of the RBE2 on the photograph is that of a prototype which does not have the same number of T/R as the standard equipment.?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Lolwa and Bon Plan

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
Surprisingly when you're told the same kind of thing about the Rafale's performance you don't want to hear it. 😛

Why should we consider that the antenna on the photograph of the E Captor is that of a moke up if you don't want to consider that the antenna of the RBE2 on the photograph is that of a prototype which does not have the same number of T/R as the standard equipment.?
Because we know for an absolute fact that the Rafale's radar aperture area is smaller and that tends to determine detection performance, just like we know that a variable flow ducted rocket provides greater range than a solid rocket motor. It's commonsense.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
Because we know for an absolute fact that the Rafale's radar aperture area is smaller and that tends to determine detection performance, just like we know that a variable flow ducted rocket provides greater range than a solid rocket motor. It's commonsense.
But we also know for a fact that Typhoon's technology is crap and this proves that they will never be able to tune their radar to get all the potential performance out of it and moreover they won't have enough electrical power available to put all the T/R modules that the size of the antenna allows nor the ability to extract the heat optimally due to notorious incompetence.

As I proved that it is possible to make an X-band antenna with more than 1000 T/R of the size compatible with the nose of the Rafale, the nonsense of your free assertions is of the same order as that of my own assertions above.

 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
7,809
5,226
India
I thought Europeans used the same antenna tech in order to reduce costs. So I suppose Rafale, Gripen and Typhoon have the same supplier for the T/R modules. Or am I missing something?
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
I thought Europeans used the same antenna tech in order to reduce costs. So I suppose Rafale, Gripen and Typhoon have the same supplier for the T/R modules. Or am I missing something?
Yes you'r right the supplier is UMS same technology for T/R module. But the antenna is different and if you'r able to extract more heat you are able to increase the power.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
7,809
5,226
India
Yes you'r right the supplier is UMS same technology for T/R module. But the antenna is different and if you'r able to extract more heat you are able to increase the power.
It would make more sense to believe the main factor that will create the biggest difference will be software rather than hardware.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
But we also know for a fact that Typhoon's technology is crap and this proves that they will never be able to tune their radar to get all the potential performance out of it and moreover they won't have enough electrical power available to put all the T/R modules that the size of the antenna allows nor the ability to extract the heat optimally due to notorious incompetence.

As I proved that it is possible to make an X-band antenna with more than 1000 T/R of the size compatible with the nose of the Rafale, the nonsense of your free assertions is of the same order as that of my own assertions above.

We don't know that at all, it's just your assertion. What we do know is that Captor-E spent much longer in development than RBE-2 AA.

What we also know is that Tranche 3s were made specifically with more cooling and that EJ200s are more powerful than M88s and can hence generate more electrical power.

What we also know is that Jaguars are made in the UK and BMWs in Germany, whereas Citroens are made in France.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
We don't know that at all, it's just your assertion.
As it is just your assertion that RBE2 AESA is 892 T/R.

What we do know is that Captor-E spent much longer in development than RBE-2 AA.
Which prouve a lack of competence

What we also know is that Tranche 3s were made specifically with more cooling and that EJ200s are more powerful than M88s and can hence generate more electrical power.
The argument is completely ridiculous, the power of a reactor is never a limiting factor in power generation, the gap between the two is too large. And your E Captor will be integrated on tranche 3 and on Tranche 2 so it has to fit with the least interesting specifications. :)

What we also know is that Jaguars are made in the UK and BMWs in Germany, whereas Citroens are made in France.
But we also know that Jaguar BMW and Citroen do not develop AESA antenna.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
1,426
1,703
France
transition.wifeo.com
It would make more sense to believe the main factor that will create the biggest difference will be software rather than hardware.
It's not so easy to make a good AESA antenna : Same T/R modules were available to the French and the British at the same time and the British are 10 years late. The software is needed but not for the performance we discuss in Forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,196
1,249
As it is just your assertion that RBE2 AESA is 892 T/R.



Which prouve a lack of competence


The argument is completely ridiculous, the power of a reactor is never a limiting factor in power generation, the gap between the two is too large. And your E Captor will be integrated on tranche 3 and on Tranche 2 so it has to fit with the least interesting specifications. :)

But we also know that Jaguar BMW and Citroen do not develop AESA antenna.
Wasn't my assertion, someone else counted them way back.

That's just another assertion. Better technology often takes longer to develop.

Ermm... that statement is just factually flawed. Power/energy can't be created or destroyed, only changed form one form to another. So of course the power of the reactor is a limiting factor.

Tranche 2s have to have the cooling system upgraded to Tranche 3 standard during the process.

We also know that Citroens, Peugeots and Renaults are shitty biscuit tins with wheels. Even Tata Motors probably makes better cars. Have the Chinese ever knocked off a French car? Nope. Wonder why.
 

Nikhil

nik141993
Dec 1, 2017
333
194
India
You're looking at a mock-up, not the real thing. Basically a tin plate.
a tin plate showing what radar actually look like.

CAPTOR-E AESA-MMR-1 (1).jpg


and no it doe not have 1500 TRM as you claim. It's a rotatable AESA unlike RBE 2 AESA. size is only slightly bigger.