naval eurofirghter on the cards

#1
Gents it appears that the head of the eurofigher sales dept has advised the indian navy they can offer a full navalised eurofighter to operate of the new carriers for india, which are some what smaller then our new carriers, in fact BAE had been testing this option back in the mid 90s see below

In fact, he pointed out, Eurofighter is the only aircraft among the six contenders for the IAF order which would have thrust vectoring capability in the coming years. Thrust vectoring capability allows an aircraft to stand still in the air, and takeoff and land even in vertical mode like a helicopter.

Some 200 Eurofighters have been produced so far, predominantly to meet the requirements of participating nations which include Germany, Britain, Spain and Italy.

Thrust vectoring is being developed and would be operational on Eurofighters within the first half of the next decade, Dr Schmidlin said.
 
#4
Not quite true on the thrust vectoring. Given sufficient deflection (90 degrees) you could do VSTOL. The EuroJet thrust vectoring is currently to about 23.5 degrees. This gives increased agility but nowhere near enough for VSTOL/STOVL.

meridian - it does allow that - if you can get enough of it and control it.
 
#6
Two points…

TVC is NOT STVOL… nothing like it. The Typhoon cannot hover of stop in the air… period

You cannot navalize a Typhoon withou a very expensive and huge redesign that would include a new wing. new strengthened undercarriage as well as a strengthened fuselage.
 
#7
Mr_C_Hinecap said:
Not quite true on the thrust vectoring. Given sufficient deflection (90 degrees) you could do VSTOL. The EuroJet thrust vectoring is currently to about 23.5 degrees. This gives increased agility but nowhere near enough for VSTOL/STOVL.

meridian - it does allow that - if you can get enough of it and control it.

Nope, even if you fitted some 90 degree nozzles to the arse end of the Typhoon, all you would produce would be a jet powered cartwheel machine, no forward lift or attitude control systems
 
#9
I honestly dont know what to say about this, Firstly you mentioned most of this in the F35 thread you started except now you've mentioned even more imaginary stuff. VTOL Typhoon indeed :roll: .
 
#11
Having spoken to someone who was on the Carrier IPT, IIRC he said they did a study on making Eurofighter a carrier aircraft. catapult launch and conventional recovery, no VTOL madness.

The main problem was to strengthen the aircraft so it can cope with being slammed onto a deck everytime it lands and being able to fold the wings to fit it inside the ship, meant adding so much weight it would be reduced to carrying a weapon load similar to that of a wood pigeon.
 
#12
Instint yes pc playing up when first posted it did not show up so i posted again and trying to delete one of the threads but cant seem to find the button
 
#13
edited due to DII causing a double post
 
#14
Knights, not saying your mate was wrong or anything but the Rafale M has no folding wings and has a wingspan of 11m or so, the same as the Typhoon.

Rafale M has a weight of 9.5 tonnes and thrust of 150KN

Assuming the Rafale M has a suitably strong airframe, the Typhoon has a weight of 11 tonnes and thrust of 180KN

There seem to be many reasons why people say a naval Typhoon is not a viable option but I wonder if they are the ones with a stake in JCA?

I dont really have an opinion but I do know that thrust vectoring, as envisaged for the Typhoon, is definitely not capable of providing a vertical take off and landing capability. Remember the F35B/JCA has a massive lift fan
 
#15
It wasn't the wings so much but strengthening the undercarriage and fuselage is where most of the weight penalty occurs.

They can do it, it will take off, fly and land, but it was the payload that suffered very badly.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
There's other problems too, AoA on landing being a big one. Canard designs aren't necessarily the first choice for carrier ops and navalisation might as well be another word for redesign.

I'd be somewhat suprised if the Indians were at all interested in Seaphoons as they have their own design about to begin initial production. Might not be a world beater but it is remarkably cheap compared to all other available options.
 
#17
There was a lot of research done on this with the Rockwell/MBB X-31 and the VECTOR project; by using thrust vectoring, GPS positioning, and a camera to see forward (the extreme angle of attack means that the pilot can't see the runway), they were able to demonstrate a short take-off and landing ability. The slide show on the second link shows a landing at 24 degrees AoA; with a 520m rollout (apparently they wanted to trial a 40 degree AoA landing, but couldn't afford it in the budget).

The system means that the landing is rather gentler than the typical carrier landing, so presumably you can get away with less strengthening.

...the Spanish (who are leading the Typhoon TVC project) apparently wanted to put an EJ200 in the X-31 for trials purposes...

 
#19
meridian said:
Interesting link here, Saab are responding to this Indian request with a Sea Gripen

http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2009/12/saab-offers-sea-gripen.html

Could this be a realistic lower cost option for the RN and RAF instead of the F35?
From Meridians link I found this quote interesting: "India has ambitious plans to build three indigenous aircraft carriers (IACs). "

Can anyone tell me why we send India Money? Me am confoooosed :x
 
#20
"From Meridians link I found this quote interesting: "India has ambitious plans to build three indigenous aircraft carriers (IACs). ""

Plans do not equal a navy - the Indian procurement system is legendary for being so appalling. Any nation that buys a decomissioned russian STOVL carrier and tries to turn it into a CTOL carrier needs its head examined...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads