What will the Thyphoon and The J-17 blk III add to the Egyptian air force

[Gentelman]

What do you know?
Enlighten us....please, please, please!

Simply look at the political dynamics, Arabs side themselves with someone theyvare dependant on or has an upper arm in world stage..
Moreover arabs are being pushed to choose among China and US. Egypt is also hugely influenced by GCC.

 

[volatile]

Yes..I guess more numbers when you are manufacturing your own version.. it can have the Selex AESA radar, some Russian IRST and a European Engine.. or just as it is from China-Pakistan.. It is all good..

No European and US engine that is for sure concept behind JF17 is sanction prone ,plus Chinese solution is fine and personally i like the Selex AESA couples with IRST may be some versions will get this .

 

[The SC]

Simply look at the political dynamics, Arabs side themselves with someone theyvare dependant on or has an upper arm in world stage..
Moreover arabs are being pushed to choose among China and US. Egypt is also hugely influenced by GCC.

That is a false premise.. why Arabs shouldn't side with anyone..when everyone is siding with someone..these are the real worldwide dynamics and context..
No one can push Arabs to chose between two strategic allies..

 

[Gentelman]

That is a false premise.. why Arabs shouldn't side with anyone..when everyone is siding with someone..these are the real worldwide dynamics and context..
No one can push Arabs to chose between two strategic allies..

It doesn't matter what you believe...
Reality is that arans are US's Pimp...

 

[dbc]

And there in lies exactly what we've been saying which in turn, makes the compatibility of both aircraft much easier to absorb for a single crew and pilot than any other combination aircraft of different makes out there.



Quite the contrary. There are a lot more similarities than differences and even the differences are marginal at best which don't suggest that any competent airforce (which already operates one of the aircraft quite fluently) could not easily absorb the other one using the same crews.

The cockpit ergonomics are almost identical....

No, Nyet, Nien , لا

The Typhoon is center stick the Rafale is side stick - this in itself is a huuuge difference for a pilot.
For fast jets, particularly for pilots of fourth generation fighters multi-tasking efficiently is the difference between life and death. We learnt this lesson in WWI, reinforced by WWII when our pilots attempted to alternate between the P-38 lightning and P-51 Mustang ... the immense torque of the powerful Mustang engine alone has killed a few dozen pilots.

Besides the flight characteristics, stall, departure, ceiling , buffeting is completely different ..between Rafale and the Typhoon..

 

[The SC]

It doesn't matter what you believe...
Reality is that arans are US's Pimp...

Reality is that what you believe is false.. you have no idea about the Arab mentality..try to force something on them and you will regret it..

No, Nyet, Nien , لا

The Typhoon is center stick the Rafale is side stick - this in itself is a huuuge difference for a pilot.
For fast jets, particularly for pilots of fourth generation fighters multi-tasking efficiently is the difference between life and death. We learnt this lesson in WWI, reinforced by WWII when our pilots attempted to alternate between the P-38 lightning and P-51 Mustang ... the immense torque of the powerful Mustang engine alone has killed a few dozen pilots.

Besides the flight characteristics, stall, departure, ceiling , buffeting is completely different ..between Rafale and the Typhoon..

Typhoon versus Rafale: The final word

....."In conclusions: both are fantastic fighter aircraft of which European defence communities should be proud. Rafale currently has the edge over Typhoon in terms of ground-attack versatility, radar modernisation and manoeuvrability at high-loads. Equally, Typhoon has the edge in the air-superiority role due to its superior high altitude performance and thrust to weight ratio, as well as long-range armament. The advantages in maturity for Rafale are more to do with failures in the Eurofighter consortium to invest and coordinate upgrades in the way that Dassault and the French government have managed, than any inherent limitation in the Typhoon itself. Indeed, with its larger radar aperture, power generation capabilities, engine power and growth potential Typhoon has more development potential than Rafale – if it can survive in production long enough. A hypothetical air force which operated both types, whilst that would be expensive, would enjoy phenomenal complementary capabilities and would arguably be stronger than a similarly sized force comprised only of one type."

https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon-versus-rafale-the-final-word/

 

[The SC]

Not overly enthusiastic, just pointing out the need to spend more on marketing. A picture is worth a thousand words, and a video more so. If More high quality videos are shot at exercises and mixed in with DCS footage, it can really bring hike the idea. Similar to what Saab does in its marketing.

I mean not too enthusiastic..too soon..that is all..
I believe PAF has been doing the necessary marketing.... don't think the JF-17 ..(all blocks) is intended for International audience.. It is a light weight fighter and does not compete with Gripen, Mig-35 or the Rafale or even the f-16 latest blocks.. these are all medium weight fighters.. So it is trying to find its own niche in the light weights..

 

[FuturePAF]

I mean not too enthusiastic..too soon..that is all..
I believe PAF has been doing the necessary marketing.... don't think the JF-17 ..(all blocks) is intented for International audience.. It is a light weight fighter and does not compete with Gripen, Mig-25 or the Rafale or even the f-16 latest blocks.. these are all medium weight fighters.. So it is trying to find its own niche in the light weights..

I get the sentiment you are aiming at, but we will need content to feed into the marketing by the time Block III is ready, externally the block III is expected to look nearly the same as the Block II. No harm in spending a little extra to get great shots of the ‘ole bird at its foreign outings, and some “vanity shots” such as flying past the Pyramids.

While the plane is designed for our needs, if the Egyptians feel their demand is meet by our bird and they want to procure a large number, I’m sure a repeat of the K-8 style local production could be done. In the mean time, building up footage of the JF-17 demonstrating all the capabilities any potential customers would like to see, could help speed up the procurement process, hence the need to spend just a little more on marketing. The marketing makes the customer feel our products fits their niche. That’s all I’m saying.

 

[The SC]

I get the sentiment you are aiming at, but we will need content to feed into the marketing by the time Block III is ready, externally the block III is expected to look nearly the same as the Block II. No harm in spending a little extra to get great shots of the ‘ole bird at its foreign outings, and some “vanity shots” such as flying past the Pyramids.

While the plane is designed for our needs, if the Egyptians feel their demand is meet by our bird and they want to procure a large number, I’m sure a repeat of the K-8 style local production could be done. In the mean time, building up footage of the JF-17 demonstrating all the capabilities any potential customers would like to see, could help speed up the procurement process, hence the need to spend just a little more on marketing. The marketing makes the customer feel our products fits their niche. That’s all I’m saying.

Yes..something like those 3D animations showing some limited (not all or everything) internal works.. should be a good addition to the marketing tools at hand.. this is just an example among many others..

 

[Gomig-21]

No, Nyet, Nien , لا

The Typhoon is center stick the Rafale is side stick - this in itself is a huuuge difference for a pilot.
For fast jets, particularly for pilots of fourth generation fighters multi-tasking efficiently is the difference between life and death. We learnt this lesson in WWI, reinforced by WWII when our pilots attempted to alternate between the P-38 lightning and P-51 Mustang ... the immense torque of the powerful Mustang engine alone has killed a few dozen pilots.

No no noooooo! dbc, you didn't go there, did you?!?! Center stick vs side stick? Come owwnnnn, maaaan!
Let me ask you something - do F-16 pilots train on a side stick aircraft before jumping into an F-16? Or do they use a basic trainer with the center stick like the K-8E in Pakistan is my guess? That switch from center stick to side stick and vice versa is absolutely nothing. Here's an example, actually, beside a personal one that I know since those are harder to believe but I'll tell you about it later.

This is from a US fighter pilot who does a lot of YouTube videos now that he's retired from BOTH, the airforce and the navy which incidentally fly what? The F-16 with a side stick and the F-18 with a center stick and watch how it was more difficult for him to go through the paperwork than it was to make the switch because the switch is nothing, lol. This is C.W. Lemoine (call sign "Mover") and he does all sorts of videos where he also critiques scenes in movies that have fighter planes in them like the Pakistani movie called Sher Dil (I'm sure it's been posted on here already but here it is again anyway) and other ones also. Here's the Pakistani movie critique:

Now this is the video of him talking about going from the F-16 (which he did a couple of combat tours in Iraq with) and then getting in the F/A-18 for the Navy.

Besides the flight characteristics, stall, departure, ceiling , buffeting is completely different ..between Rafale and the Typhoon..

Well, those are all things that are nothing for airforce fighter pilots that are Type-A personalities to get used to in no time at all. I spoke to a Thunderbird pilot about the differences in their flight routines compared to the Blue Angles and specifically if they add the heavy spring to the side stick on their F-16s like they do on the BA's center stick and he said no because the side stick's location and short throw is more sensitive than the center stick so they don't need to do that and he talked about the aircraft he flew that were all center sticks from F-4s to T-38 and switching between them was nothing. This guy was also part of the US squadron that went to Egypt to train with the EAF several times and spoke about his time there and experience and it was a good chat. Bottom line, there isn't much these guys can't get used to in no time at all.

 

[dbc]

No no noooooo! dbc, you didn't go there, did you?!?! Center stick vs side stick? Come owwnnnn, maaaan!
Let me ask you something - do F-16 pilots train on a side stick aircraft before jumping into an F-16? Or do they use a basic trainer with the center stick like the K-8E in Pakistan is my guess? That switch from center stick to side stick and vice versa is absolutely nothing. Here's an example, actually, beside a personal one that I know since those are harder to believe but I'll tell you about it later.

This is from a US fighter pilot who does a lot of YouTube videos now that he's retired from BOTH, the airforce and the navy which incidentally fly what? The F-16 with a side stick and the F-18 with a center stick and watch how it was more difficult for him to go through the paperwork than it was to make the switch because the switch is nothing, lol. This is C.W. Lemoine (call sign "Mover") and he does all sorts of videos where he also critiques scenes in movies that have fighter planes in them like the Pakistani movie called Sher Dil (I'm sure it's been posted on here already but here it is again anyway) and other ones also. Here's the Pakistani movie critique:

Now this is the video of him talking about going from the F-16 (which he did a couple of combat tours in Iraq with) and then getting in the F/A-18 for the Navy.

Well, those are all things that are nothing for airforce fighter pilots that are Type-A personalities to get used to in no time at all. I spoke to a Thunderbird pilot about the differences in their flight routines compared to the Blue Angles and specifically if they add the heavy spring to the side stick on their F-16s like they do on the BA's center stick and he said no because the side stick's location and short throw is more sensitive than the center stick so they don't need to do that and he talked about the aircraft he flew that were all center sticks from F-4s to T-38 and switching between them was nothing. This guy was also part of the US squadron that went to Egypt to train with the EAF several times and spoke about his time there and experience and it was a good chat. Bottom line, there isn't much these guys can't get used to in no time at all.

SIDE STICK VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CENTER STICK

Both the Hornet and Viper use fly-by-wire flight-control systems, which means aircraft response is governed by a set of programmed flight-control laws that "live" in the flight-control computers, which I affectionately refer to as "George." In other words, the pilot isn't flying the airplane, George is. The pilot tells George he wants the airplane to do something, and George then zips through the math to figure out which flight-control surfaces should be moved to fulfill the pilot's request. The big difference (and it is a big one) is that the Hornet uses a conventional center stick, and the computer senses stick position to interpret what the pilot wants. The Viper uses a side stick, and the computer senses stick force from pilot input.

Flying a side-stick control takes a while to get used to, but once you do, it's a joy. The conformai stick's shape feels very natural (it fits in the hand like a melted candy bar), and it allows easy access to nine of the 16 hotAS controls. Two fully adjustable forearm rests on the right cockpit bulkhead stabilize and isolate the pilot's arm and wrist, so when rattling around the cockpit during turbulence or going after the bad guy, the pilot's arm won't accidentally move and initiate unwanted control inputs. In its original design, the Viper's control stick didn't move at all; it just measured pressure from the pilot's hand. However, after initial F-16 flight tests, a ¼ inch of stick movement was incorporated to give a small dead band and a nominal breakout force to give better "feel" of a neutral stick because otherwise it was entirely too sensitive. The control harmony is quite good (the pressures required for pitch and roll mix well), but without the capability to physically position the stick, it's easy to contaminate roll inputs with unwanted pitch inputs, and vice versa.

My first Viper instructor predicted that I would over-rotate on takeoff and drop the right wing; he was right. The over-rotation occurs because a pilot is used to "moving the stick and then something happens" at rotation speed. When I reached 145 knots and pulled back, of course the stick didn't move but a scant ¼ inch, so I pulled more. The inexperienced have no way of knowing how hard to pull, so I pulled probably twice as hard as was necessary. After a half-second delay, the nose abruptly responded to my input and pitched up to about 10 degrees, while at the same time the right wing dipped to about 10-degrees wing down. I released back-stick pressure, and the aircraft held 10-degrees pitch as I gently leveled the wings. According to my instructor Lt. Col. Dan Levin, who has more than 3,000 Viper hours, pilot-induced-oscillations (PIO) are very common on takeoff for transition pilots.
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3477


You cannot have a pilot alternate between two aircraft types, you always transition pilots from one type to the next and this process usually takes months.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

It's not clear yet that Egypt is getting Jeffs.

 

[The SC]

SIDE STICK VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CENTER STICK

Both the Hornet and Viper use fly-by-wire flight-control systems, which means aircraft response is governed by a set of programmed flight-control laws that "live" in the flight-control computers, which I affectionately refer to as "George." In other words, the pilot isn't flying the airplane, George is. The pilot tells George he wants the airplane to do something, and George then zips through the math to figure out which flight-control surfaces should be moved to fulfill the pilot's request. The big difference (and it is a big one) is that the Hornet uses a conventional center stick, and the computer senses stick position to interpret what the pilot wants. The Viper uses a side stick, and the computer senses stick force from pilot input.

Flying a side-stick control takes a while to get used to, but once you do, it's a joy. The conformai stick's shape feels very natural (it fits in the hand like a melted candy bar), and it allows easy access to nine of the 16 hotAS controls. Two fully adjustable forearm rests on the right cockpit bulkhead stabilize and isolate the pilot's arm and wrist, so when rattling around the cockpit during turbulence or going after the bad guy, the pilot's arm won't accidentally move and initiate unwanted control inputs. In its original design, the Viper's control stick didn't move at all; it just measured pressure from the pilot's hand. However, after initial F-16 flight tests, a ¼ inch of stick movement was incorporated to give a small dead band and a nominal breakout force to give better "feel" of a neutral stick because otherwise it was entirely too sensitive. The control harmony is quite good (the pressures required for pitch and roll mix well), but without the capability to physically position the stick, it's easy to contaminate roll inputs with unwanted pitch inputs, and vice versa.

My first Viper instructor predicted that I would over-rotate on takeoff and drop the right wing; he was right. The over-rotation occurs because a pilot is used to "moving the stick and then something happens" at rotation speed. When I reached 145 knots and pulled back, of course the stick didn't move but a scant ¼ inch, so I pulled more. The inexperienced have no way of knowing how hard to pull, so I pulled probably twice as hard as was necessary. After a half-second delay, the nose abruptly responded to my input and pitched up to about 10 degrees, while at the same time the right wing dipped to about 10-degrees wing down. I released back-stick pressure, and the aircraft held 10-degrees pitch as I gently leveled the wings. According to my instructor Lt. Col. Dan Levin, who has more than 3,000 Viper hours, pilot-induced-oscillations (PIO) are very common on takeoff for transition pilots.
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3477


You cannot have a pilot alternate between two aircraft types, you always transition pilots from one type to the next and this process usually takes months.

So what is a few months..3 or even 6 months and you have the pilots fluent with both sticks' positions.. that is nothing for a serious airforce.. It takes pilots 5 years of hard training to become pilots and thousands of hours to become efficient.. so what is few months in all this anyway.. the fact is that the pilots will be able to use both kinds of aircrafts in no time ..