They aren’t directly comparable so it’s hard to say who’s a winner. The F/A-18 Super Hornet is designed to be a carrier based multirole aircraft while the Eurofighter was designed to be an air superiority fighter that was converted into a multirole aircraft. They had different requirements that they have to meet and therefore different concessions that had to be made because of it. A more fitting comparison would be the F-15 Strike Eagle. Good video though. Another category that could be considered is cost. The F/A-18 Super Hornet is $70,000,000 per plane whereas the Eurofighter is almost $100,000,000 per plane which means the F/A-18 is less expensive and easier to procure in bulk. Still I’d say they aren’t totally comparable

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

A fair point and that’s what made this a challenging video to make. F/A-18 vs F-15 is a great idea, thanks for commenting!

@thesupermaninthecloud6856

4 жыл бұрын

Well, in my eyes I just see it as who can win in a one vs one aerial combat

@thesupermaninthecloud6856

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog I honestly think FA-18 is a completely different class of jet than F-15 since F-15 is a heavy fighter jet and clearly have a unfair advantage due to it's heavy weight and missile storage. In fact, the newest version F-15ex can carry 22 missiles and the almost identical radar that is on F-35, which gives it the full advantage. I think it would be more interesting to compare F-15EX to su-35 or F-16 V to J-10 or Euro fighter to Dassault Rafale. After all, thanks for the video

@mimimimeow

4 жыл бұрын

@Nick Bennett not many supported Rafale, that's because Dassault was originally a part of the FEFA programme. then France was kicked out due to politics and also because their design demands were very different to other members' requirements. Dassault went on to build their ideas; the Rafale, which is way more versatile than the EF and does not suffer from major development issues. Eurofighter nations buying Rafales is like licking their own spit from the floor lol, lots of political ego is involved here

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the comments and commentary. I like your idea of F-15EX vs SU-35 that would be a great match up, so would F-16V to J-10

“It’s not how fast you fly, it’s how well you fly fast”

@kurtjeternity7991

2 жыл бұрын

Very true,

You’d also be surprised how much the skill of a pilot can change the fight.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Indeed! It’s just hard to quantify directly. Thanks for commenting.

@elliottscruton9976

4 жыл бұрын

Cameron Langevin Ik

@jermf35

3 жыл бұрын

You are correct I have seen interviews with American pilots talking about dogfights they got into when they are in a much less fighter jet. And they still won, and that rig by r there goes to the skill Of the pilot in all their hundreds in hundreds of hours or thousands hours of training and that's where it kicks in when they are in an older far less weaker of a fighter jet and this pilot admitted that for all intents and purposes he should have lost the dog fight because the enemies fighter jet was so far superior to has but the skill of the pilot his skill won him the dog fight in it all comes down to the hundreds upon hundreds of hours of trading that the US military fighter pilots go through and it saved this guy's life so you just brought up an excellent point one that I have watched a couple of interviews of fighter pilots and that's where they are grateful for the Air Force making them do all these hours of training

@MostlyPennyCat

3 жыл бұрын

Of course, with equally matched pilots it cones down first to the capability of their respective platforms, teeth to who shot first and then finally luck.

@zanedickson2725

3 жыл бұрын

I'm soo sick of this comment, P-51's shot down Mig-15s in the Korean War, but it's not like they had the Tech of today. There's like almost zero chances of Dogfights in real war situations.

The German defense minister is essentially thinking out loud... Germany hasn't actually decided to do anything.

@jakobliftz

4 жыл бұрын

That‘s not allright, the purchase of typhons and super hornets Is decided only the Bundestag has to vote about the decision and they will becaurse the coalition Gas a big majority and ministery of Defence only lost a vote one Time in the History, and That was the decicion to purchase of Mirage Jets in the 1960‘s.

@Praxics0815

4 жыл бұрын

@@jakobliftz No it is not. What AKK did was requesting quote for the jets. Nothing has been decided. Your point about Ministry of Defence only losing out on one vote ever means nothing because only plans which are agreed upon upfront within the government coalition ever get to be voted on, that they pass is almost a given. However the coalition hasn’t discussed nor agreed upon procuring F-18 jets yet, therefore nothing is decided. This option may never ever get to be even voted on in parliament in the first place. AKK is checking the options and they need a quote to accurately calculate the cost. Meanwhile SPD holds the Ministry of Labour and the Treasury. May I remind you that the SPD has strong ties with left wing labour unions? They won’t stand idle by while billions are spend on US military hardware when German jobs are on the line. The very second this news got out labour union IG Metal and other already chimed in that buying 45 F-15 could cost up to around 25 000 jobs in Germany and around 100 000 jobs in Europe. The SPD will move against AKK and once this in discussion there is a high chance the option is thrown out the window. Germany hasn’t actually decided to do anything is an accurate description of the current state.

@N75911_

3 жыл бұрын

They're choosing the Super Hornet for it's nuclear strike capabilities and lower cost.

@PatsFanGermany

3 жыл бұрын

@@N75911_ only for the nuclear strike capability and the ECM capability of the Growler. Other than that, they are committed to buying European.

As a Yank, I'm partial to the Super Hornet, but to be fair, the United States can afford to operate the Super Hornet in many roles, and in the roles it is less capable in, the gaps can be covered by the F-35B and F-35C for Marine and Naval operations, and F-15 Strike Eagles, F-35A, and F-22 for Air Force operations including area denial and air superiority. However, if a nation needs one fighter to defend its airspace and provide short to medium strike capability, they would probably have to go with the Tranche 3 Eurofighter, if they can afford it. The key is the numbers requirement, as you can essentially buy 3 Super Hornets for the price of 2 Eurofighters. I like the Eurofighter's payload and speed, so if my first concern is to defend my airspace, I have to go with the Eurofighter. I'm glad the Eurofighter is on our side, that's for sure.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and agreed, we are lucky to have two highly capable fighters defending our skies!

@carlrest6553

4 жыл бұрын

Block 3 Hornet changes the game somewhat.

@markjackson7650

4 жыл бұрын

As a Brit I'm partial to the typhoon, but I still can't escape the feeling that the typhoon is a bit of a waste of money. It only entered service in 2003 and by 2005 it was made pretty much obsolete by the f22 raptor. Obviously the typhoon will never fight the raptor, but it may have to fight other 5th gen fighters that have been built to counter the raptor. Undoubtedly it's one of if not the best 4+ gen fighter in the world, but what good is having the best 4+ gen fighter if your enemy has 5th gen fighters. In typical UK MOD fashion we're late to the party. In my view instead of ploughing money into the the eurofighter program we should have continued maintaining our tornado and jaguar fleet long enough to develop a true 5th gen fighter. As realistically the typhoon is only marginally better than the tornado which was still more than capable of holding its own against any conceivable threat at the time. The writings on the wall for the new tempest program as well. It'll be finished right about the time the US come up the new latest and greatest that makes all previous fighters obsolete. Maybe it's time we ditched these joint ventures with our euro neighbors and got more in tow with our colonial cousins from across the pond 😜 glad you guys are on our side

@joeb1442

3 жыл бұрын

@@markjackson7650 You are spot on with everything you stated. What most don't realize is that the Eurofighter started back in the 70's only to have first France pull out and then Germany and then they both got back in along with Italy and finally you got the Eurofighter. The good news is that now you do have a 5th generation fighter in the F-35 that the Typhoon is already capable of Datalinking up to. That my friend is a pretty scary Duo and not to mention what we your cousins have to join any fight.

@MostlyPennyCat

3 жыл бұрын

America would buy some MBDA Meteors to go with all those fancy AESA radars!

This guy only has 5k subscribers, and kim kardashian has millions... this is the reality where we live... keep up the good work, i love your videos

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much! I can’t express to you how awesome your comment is - more videos on the way!

@mobiusflammel9372

4 жыл бұрын

Generally speaking, human interest have a broader appeal than machines do. Meaning that people are going to gravitate towards people more so than our creations more often than not. Maybe that will change when / if we make a AI but even then that's something with personality.

@jonniiinferno9098

4 жыл бұрын

@@mobiusflammel9372 well now, that just kinda sucks =P

@philipgeffner3208

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah that's quite a commentary on how things are versus how they really should be. I guess that's the nature of life lately where everything is upside down or so it seems. You make a good point.

@nolanolivier6791

3 жыл бұрын

Ain't watched a single Kim Kardashian video in my life... absolutely no intention to ever.

US tested the delta wing configuration with F16XL. It had very similar characteristics to Eurofighter(hardpoints, speed, range). They didn't follow with it, because it was bleeding the speed too fast, on turning - and it was turning worse too. There is a cost/benefit to delta wing, as is on everything else.

@x-man5056

7 ай бұрын

US also had F-106 and F-102 and learned the lesson. The Eurofighter is way over ratted. Rafle also. Tejas. Canards the same story as full Delta wings. No stealth fighter will ever have Canards and yes I'm aware of the Chinse J-20 POS. Not stealthy.

I don’t know anything about either one, I’m just glad that we’re on the same side. Greetings from the U.K.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

I too am glad these are defending our skies, thanks for commenting and greetings from Texas!

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

If you want is could explain in more detail the Eurofighter and F/A-18, or why stealth is still weak for a fighter, for example Eurofighter vs F-22.

@MegaJJ1968

4 жыл бұрын

I must say I find your approach on the matter very refreshing. And you are totally right. Greetings from Cologne, Germany to the United Kingdom. Stay safe and healthy, folks. ✊

@jacksonhudd3681

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog defending your skies from what exactly??? You need to be defended by your own racists police forces!!

@themitri5643

3 жыл бұрын

greetings from Serbia. we are with justice.

Cost per aircraft and cost for maintaining the aircraft during its operational life should be another factor, and probably deciding factor since it's getting more expensive every time a new aircraft comes out or a new, improved version of a current model goes into production. I think this is why smaller countries are looking at the JAS-39 E & F Gripen as their multi-role fighter.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Excellent point and thanks for the comment, JAS-39 Gripen is an excellent airplane and subject of it's own upcoming video!

@laracroft938

4 жыл бұрын

New gripens are 65 million plus. Not so cheap for a plane smaller than F-16

I am a former Hornet handler, and I have always loved the Hornet for all its capabilities, and it looks pretty cool,too. However, I have been drawing aircraft, much like the Eurofighter Typhoon since I was a kid. I would have to say my vote goes to the Typhoon.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you and thanks for your service!

@Jay-O_Carlow

10 ай бұрын

Yes Sir! I have to Agree , Just by optics alone the Typhoon is a fucking Gorgeous fighter , sleek & sexy with the F-22 coming in a very close second ( Just on looks alone ) David did you ever attend Red Flag..? and if so did you ever play war games Vs the Typhoon..? I've heard from many pilots from F-16's F15's that are blown away by its capabilities. As a pilot id love to hear your Take on it as I'm just a huge fan and you do this for a living. I'd love to hear your take

The Super Hornet is a superb carrier aircraft, The Eurofighter is land based fighter, as such the they are not directly comparable. If I had to choose one platform for everything it would be the Super Hornet.

“Speed is life.” In simplest terms, Eurofighter wins in Europe with plentiful places to land and potential adversaries near at hand. However, aircraft carrier based aviation is a significant part of power projection…a major diplomatic & political strategic American policy. I do not see a tailhook, adequate fuel capacity, or desirable reliability on the Eurofighter to meet those needs. BOTH are winners in meeting their respective design parameters.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Well said and thanks for commenting!

@glennridsdale577

4 жыл бұрын

Of course, for the USN there's no question. But the rest of your points are just silly.

@cattledog901

3 жыл бұрын

Speed hasn't been life since ww2 dude. Get with the times. Radar, electronic warfare capability, and BVR attacks are way 50 times more important than speed in modern air combat.

@glennridsdale577

3 жыл бұрын

Taylor Wow! You’re obviously not familiar with John Boyd’s Energy Manoeuvrability Theory which was developed in the 1960s and which remains the basis for both WVR and BVR BFM to this day. Other factors are important, of course, but given that Typhoon is superior in all of them I really cannot see what point you’re hoping to make. Unless your comment was simply intended to display your ignorance, in which case you succeeded admirably. Well done. A little studying for you: acquisitiontalk.com/2019/04/john-boyd-and-the-development-of-em-theory/. Dude.

@a350fsx7

3 жыл бұрын

The EF has a tailhook but it's only for arrested field landing!

Its like choosing between a Porsche and an f150 pick up they both excel in their respective role despite being multirole a super hornet lacks certain things to be proper air superiority fighter and the eurofighter is not the best in ground attack roles but if i really had to choose between the two and since i am no expert in fighter planes and military stuff i would pick eurofighter typhoon simply for its awesome looks and performance

This channel deserves a lot more subscribers

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

I really appreciate this comment!

Great video. Love it!

F-22 vs. EF might be a better comparison. I’d like to see an F-22 vs. F-35A video, or F-18E/F vs. F-35C & F-35B video.

@quinndenver4075

2 жыл бұрын

It wouldn’t be much of a competition

Range and Payload * Range. Also, I don't think Germany has decided to buy anything yet.

The super hornet is a versatile fighter and will be around for some time to come.

The versatility of the F/A-18 is incredible.

Totally agree with DC. Great video man. Two very capable air-planes that, thankfully, are here to protect our lives against external threats. Thank you so much! take care, stay safe, bs cool.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Well said!

*ONE HAS TO LOOK AT PRICE VALUE AND LONGEVITY MAY LIKELY GO TO THE SUPER HORNET BECAUSE OF A LONGER LIFE SPAN.*

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

A fair point and I added cost in my next versus video. Thanks for commenting.

The 7th factor and to me the tie breaker is cost effectiveness. The F18 E/F is at 66MM per unit while the Typhoon is at a efty 105MM. That's serious money. Its obvious why the German Military is going on a mixed fleet. Dollars. They get a fantastic ground attack airplane that can take on anything around the world in sky and with the Typhoon they protect their economy and lets make mistake about it, the Typhoon is in the top 5 when it comes to air superiority. This is very well thought off ! Congrats!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you much appreciated!

Nice video with clearly explained 👍

Amazing content mate,I love it keep it up

As soon as I saw that you have 6 categories, I knew it would end up in a tie.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting. Next versus Video is coming out Monday and will also have six categories- - and won’t end in a tie. Let me know what you think when you watch it

Both very different, capable fighters but if I were to choose it would be the Eurofighter. The new captor-E AESA radar will be the largest & one of the best on the market which will give the Eurofighter the edge. The Meteor missile is widely regarded as the best air to air missile on the market aswell. Brimstone edge out Hellfire too.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Agree with your points and I was going to give the sensors edge to the Eurofighter but Captor-E is not fully implemented on all Eurofighters yet so had to go with present day - thanks for commenting!

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog Even the Eurofighter's Captor M radar, is the most powerfule in its class, still able to beat the F-22 in BVR Fights, and with the Eurofighter having IRST inbuilt not taking up a hard point, and with IFF MIDS DPS DASS VIC and more, plus with the helmet ( Striker 2 ) better then the F-35 G2 Helmet, the Eurofighter when all get the Captor E the Eurofighter will be untouchable. One more thing the only jet that comes close to the Eurofighter is the F-22, but the F-22 is old and outdated. As a surprises to some stealth is not the best way to win, its the jet with the better specs better weapons better Hardware Software and better Training for the pilot.

@Orion-gw7kg

4 жыл бұрын

faron tilley Is everything you say Anti-American or against American jets?

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@Orion-gw7kg 1st what are you going on about. 2nd It's not may fault the US don't make that great of jets. 3rd Just talking facts and facts don't lie.

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@Orion-gw7kg If you want a run down of how the Eurofighter stands up to and can easily beat the F-22, just ask nicely.

Very informative and unbiased. Thx for the clip, Sir.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

Wow!!!nice video n good information Bro..good luck!!!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks and welcome

The German decision to include the Super Hornet says a lot about the priority they place on the reliability of the platform as well as the ability of the company (Boeing) to maintain technological upgrades - still in reliability. And remember, the other alternative the Germans were considering was the F-35. It seems that payload and dogfighting maneuverability were enough to sacrifice stealth and even better sensors.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and your analysis - I think the decision not to purchase the F35 has to do with Germany and France working on the FCAS 6th generation fighter. My sense is they didn’t want to buy the much more expensive F-35 and went for the F-18 as a good enough option until the FCAS becomes a reality.

@dbp_pc3500

Жыл бұрын

It’s not only about Aircraft capability, i would say it’s also very political. We have seen many countries choosing the wrong aircrafts just to avoid political conflicts.

When I was younger my dad took me up in his hornet man what a ride a few years ago I got to go up in the euro fighter and to be honest a tie is the correct final score both are amazing aircraft.

@comsubpac

3 жыл бұрын

I find that very very unlikely since such a flight literally costs around 100 000 Euros and you would have needed clearence by a certified doctor and the ministry of defense. You can't make joy rides in fighter Jets.

@perin99

3 жыл бұрын

When I was younger my dad took me up in his Apollo 11. We docked on Mars where I had a quick spin in his Millennium Falcon.

Really enjoyable video.

If I was going to war I would rather be in the Typhoon. The Meteor missile is a game changer and the shear speed of the Typhoon would always get it out of trouble against the F_18 Super Hornet. Ross

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Fair points and it is hard to argue against the Typhoon's intercept/fighter capabilities. That Meteor missile is impressive!

@bradleyanderson4315

3 жыл бұрын

Relatively easy to certify the Meteor for use on the F 18. Plus the US is developing the Aim 260 AMRAAM replacement currently.

@maliburallye350

3 жыл бұрын

The meteor has not been tested in real combat!

Good video, hoped for a bit more in depth, but still good. Also nice trick " you break the tie " , hehe. Well ... here s my contribution : Super hornet F is a two seater, while eurofighter has none (trainer has just same cockpit back) , super hornet manouvrability at low altitude is probably superior to typhoon , also at low speeds. The theorical top speed... is just that...theorical. Real combat speed with payload are way lower, and closer eachother, still typhoon probably faster. F18 is also more survivable, due to towed decoy and other features you didn t mentioned. Being able to perform every role (even tanker !) Makes f18 more useful in all situations, needing less of them, while ef2000 need other planes to fulfill roles it can t do. 1 positive for ef2000 too : Its hand down a far better interceptor , a rare role nowdays, but still worth mentioning.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and your analysis. This was my first ever "versus" video so I wanted to see if it was a viable format for future videos, and it looks like it is, so I will be expanding on the format.

@samobergant

4 жыл бұрын

Daniele Delfino good comment but as far as I know Eurofighters have towed decoys implemented in their left wings as a part of DASS (I hope I have the correct abbreviation) so it’s defence system.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

@@samobergant yes part of the Pratorean system: kzread.info/dash/bejne/fKtl2KijoNS4d6Q.html

@motorisme846

4 жыл бұрын

"EF a better interceptor". Correct. It's originally purpose. With modifications thereon.

@bradleyanderson4315

3 жыл бұрын

@@samobergant it isn't spoken about much but US fighters also have the ability to use a towed decoy.I just found that out in another video in the last month.

Eurofighter for sure. It has a smaller radar cross section wich is very important nowadays

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

Not really Stealth is still weak in a fighter, if you want I could go in to more detail, for example the Eurofighter vs F-22, and or why using the max range of a BVRM is one of the biggest mistakes that a pilot can make in a fight.

@markbrown351

4 жыл бұрын

@@forzaisspeed and your experience???

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@markbrown351 Kid you stupid or stupid. Facts are Facts you might want to learn some.

@jakobliftz

4 жыл бұрын

The Radar Cross section oft the typhon Is less than the half of the super hornet‘s and in Ponte of steath the typhon ist comperable with chinas and russias 5th gen Fighters thats a fact and if you dont belive read a Little Bit about the typhon

Well done Sir! Great video👏 Cant go wrong with either but I think the euro fighter would be the one i would personally take into combat

@masterofpuppets7295

4 жыл бұрын

It would depend on the scenario

solid analysis

The EF was conceived as a superiority fighter, like the F15 and the F22, because EU already had then a ground attack plane: the Panavia Tornado plus a myriad of other lesser models. The retirement of the Panavia has forced the EF to take over its duties. Good planes are those that are able to perform. Well kn duties initially not envisaged

Would love to see you do a Gripen / F16 comparison

Good job!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks you!

as a reliability engineer i have to comment on that aspect. the airframe hours has nothing to do with reliability. It just means that the structure has been built to 'absorb' a certain number of stress cycles. Generally, the more cycles, the heavier the aircraft will be. For reliability- this is to do with how long an aircraft can operate without loss of critical function. Its usually between 5 and 30 hours. BUT, its useless having a very reliable aircraft if it isnt available. Availability is the most important aspect here. This is a measure of how often the aircraft is flight ready. The time to repair and conduct of scheduled maintenance relates to the availability BUT if you have no spares and no crew and need complex facilities, then the time to repair and maintenance dont matter either. Modular design, inherently strong design and minimisation techniques to keep vibrations low- along with vibration isolated systems all go towards reliability and availability. But if you cant support the capability, none of those features matter. My understanding was that the eurofighter made availability a priority, and when the original F18 was designed and built, the emphasis was lesser than today. that being said, the f18E/F has an advantage in that it can apply lessons learnt from the original- in effect addressing all the weaknesses that previously existed. The SAAB Gripen is a good example of an aircraft that was designed with reliability and availability as primary concerns. it can be maintained easily, supplied easily, and has a track record of excellent reliability with a mean time between failures of between 10 and 25 hours. The F35 is AIMING for 12 hours. So far its at about 8. You might be shocked, but the mean time between failures for the F111 is 0.6 hours, and the F16 is 2 hours. These arent critical failures though. - source- 'the logistics of war' ebook.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank your your thoughtful and detailed comment, I will get that ebook!

I personally like the P-51 Mustang. Pound for pound the greatest aircraft ever built.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

P-51 is a legend. Did you know that the man who was the lead designer on the P-51 also designed the F-86 and F-5? Check out this video: kzread.info/dash/bejne/f4iH2rCFkbSdiag.html

you severely underestimate the Rhino's maneuverability: While roll rate is only *slightly* reduced compared to the Legacy Hornet, it is still a very crisp. Also, and usually even more important in a dogfight: Sustained turn rate is higher in the Rhino.

@gary0050

3 жыл бұрын

Hornets aren't really that great

@almightyIrie

3 жыл бұрын

@@gary0050 at what? Hunting goldfish?

@jockstrapp21

3 жыл бұрын

@@almightyIrie A US Hornet pilot who flew the Typhoon on exchange made fair comparison , in the end he said that although the "nose pointing" of the Hornet was better, it only allowed for a fleeting shot against a Typhoon - the sheer power & energy envelope of the Typhoon makes it a tricky opponent . Still love US Navy tail-hookers , can launch & recover from both steel & concrete. True all rounders

Please add the important category of aircraft range/endurance to your comparisons. Good straightforward video. Thank You.

@PilotPhotog

2 жыл бұрын

Will do and thanks for the feedback!

great video - reliability, service life and cost - very big factors to consider... Would love to see comparisons of the F-18 Super Hornet and the EuroFighter and Dassault Rafale to the f-16 and F-15E or whichever F-15 is the latest version in service...

If used in tandem they will be used in different roles. They are both excellent aircraft but the Eurofighter would air superiority and the Hornet would be interdiction/air support and SEAD/DEAD.

@themitri5643

3 жыл бұрын

with S 3/4/500 those are just dead.

The Vote as a Canadian would have to go to the Super Hornet. The Dual role as fighter and ground attack would be needed as to the fact that Canada would only buy one type of fighter jet to fit all roles.

@Leopardmadcat

4 жыл бұрын

Normally I would agree with you, but with the US slowly devolving into a fascist/dictatorship Canada cannot afford to trust our defense to a state next door that may one day decide they need "room to grow" and can effectively disable our aircraft with a push of a button (like Russia did to Iraq in Desert Storm). That and the Hornet is too slow and short ranged, we need something with legs.

One word: perspective. Fourth gen fighter aircraft was ushered in by jets like the teen series of US fighters. Other countries sat back and watched until they were abled to catch up with their own r&d versions. This resulted in the forward canard, delta wing designs you see dominating all of the last of the 4 gen fighters. These jets were late to the game and designed for a romanticized fight that will never happen. Meanwhile, during and prior to there development, stealth took priority in the US resulting in new rams, bvr capabilities, 3D thrust vectoring smart missiles, and non cooperative target recognition systems, to name a few, all of which superseded the super manueverability edge you see in fighters like the EF Typhoon. To further illustrate this point, the US could've updated the F15, F16, and F18 to their most maneuverable versions in the F15 s/mtd, F-16 vista, and F18 harv leveling the playing field but they chose not to because as stated, in their view, it won't make any difference in battle. My final verdict: the EFs performance excels at many things, while the F18 does just about everything good enough.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

I like your analysis on later 4th gen fighters and this could be an analysis for an upcoming video. Thanks for your comment!

Starting off by saying that the F/A-18 is my favorite aircraft of all time, that being said... in 1v1 BFM Rhino vs Eurofighter... The Superbug is gonna have an uphill battle, The main advantage the Hornet is gonna have against the Eurofighter is in a low-speed, low-altitude rate fight. If he can drag the fight under 10,000 feet and under 300 knots he might have a pretty good shot. preferably closer to 200, which might not actually be that far-fetched. If the fight starts off beyond the visual range, assuming both aircraft survive then it's not unlikely that they wouldn't end up merging at a fairly low altitude, and maybe not that fast, because in order to defend against an enemy missile you have to cash in altitude, and pull Gs which is also going to bleed your airspeed. So maybe if the Hornet plays his cards right, he might get to fight to his strengths. The hornet has enough nose authority coupled with the helmet-mounted queuing/high off-bore AIM-9x is a very deadly combination. The Aim-9x is supposed to be very maneuverable and very resistant to flares. BVR it's kind of a tough call, the block 3 super hornets might not have the high-end speed the Eurofighter does so it can't lob its long-range missiles as far, but the Super Hornet has a good jammer, it's RCS is actually pretty damn low and it has a fantastic AESA radar. All that being said, I'd probably put my money on the Eurofighter, although I have to stress this, the Hornet can definitely win. Especially once the AIM-120D and AIM-260 enter service, but the fact is that the Eurofighter has better high speed, high altitude performance, so at high altitude, the Hornet doesn't really stand any chance. Now, as a multi-role strike fighter, I think the Super Hornet is the baseline for what aircraft should be measured against. It is so versatile, for years it served as the only combat aircraft on US carriers. It is a fantastic air to the ground platform and with the block 3 upgrades, integrates perfectly with all the sensor fusion and networking of today. It is a tough rugged workhorse, but it's also incredibly sophisticated as well. Fortunately, I doubt these two will ever shoot at each other in anger.

My pick overall is the Eurofighter. I think it's the more capable air to air fighter out of the two especially when you consider the new meteor missile and with the latest ground attack weapons/enhancements i'd say its at least as good as the Super Hornet in that role. Although as someone rightly pointed out I wouldn't like to go up against either of them!

@FAL87

4 жыл бұрын

And its home grown. In times like these we (germany) should consider to give money to european companies to push the economy.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Good points and thanks for commenting!

Nice Video ... I would definitely prefer the Eurofighter

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you and thanks for your vote/feedback!

Don't forget, the Super Hornet can also be configured an advanced EW platform (Growler), and the Eurofighter is about 50% more expensive than the Rhino.

@dnocturn84

4 жыл бұрын

100k for the Eurofighter, while every purchase is benefical for the German industry/economy and for European partner countries, who developed the EF with Germany together in the first place, against 70k for a SH without benefits. Pretty sure the ratio is still in favor of the EF judging from the German perspective.

I think the hornet wins because like you said, it is designed to be a fighter, attack, patrol, tanker, etc. While the Eurofighter is specifically a fighter.

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

The Eurofighter is a Swing-Roll Multi-Roll Fighter, meaning its a Fighter / Bomber / Policing / Support / Ground Attack, jet.

In sensors would’ve been a good idea to include target pods available to each aircraft, also the pirate gives a massive advantage and believe it should’ve got the euro fighter over the line in 3

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Fair points and thanks for commenting. Sensors was the one area I had the hardest time with.

@glennridsdale577

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog You're way out of date.

@davewolfy2906

4 жыл бұрын

@@glennridsdale577 But he was only three days before you.

@glennridsdale577

4 жыл бұрын

@@davewolfy2906 Forgive me, but was that meant to be funny? Because I'm struggling to think it was a serious comment.

The fact that Germany is looking for a replacement for the Tornado, I would say the Super Hornet was a good choice as the Tornado is Germany’s dual role strike fighter. The better air to air capabilities if the Eurofighter is probably why Germany ordered more of them. I think the PM actually made a reasonable choice. The SH makes a good choice to replace the Tornado and the (improved) EF a good replacement for the older EFs that are having issues.

@damedusa5107

3 жыл бұрын

I love the tornado. Best looking brute of a plane. Very effective at its job too. Would rather I new upgraded version of it.

My home town cleveland 6:46 . Chances are I was there that day. I NEVER miss the airshow.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

That's awesome and thanks for pointing that out!

This is very interesting and I never knew some of the facts in the video.

I think it would be worth discussing weapons and other sensors. Some Eurofighter have the Pirate IRST which has some insane capabilities and I think if it was armed with this as well as Meteor and ASRAAM the Horn et would have a very hard time. A close in dogfight might go to Hornet due to its excellent high alpha and low speed manouverabilty, and with AIM9X and AMRAAMs it is not a push over. Will happily concede the Hornet is a more reliable and robust airframe, I couldn't envisage the Typhoon withstanding any sort of battle damage and still flying. Probably an under appreciated performance metric is rate of climb, which is the Typhoons speciality

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your comment and analysis - the PIRATE system is an incredible sensor suite and offers many advantages, rate of climb is a huge factor as well - you can merge/intercept or disengage as needed if you have superior rate of climb...I did mention rate of climb briefly in the video but may make it a separate category in future videos. Thanks for commenting!

I think Growler is the reason, Germany's gonna buy Super-Hornet. Also I want to see a dogfight between USN F/A-18E & Luftwaffe EF-2000.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your comment and I agree about the Growler...F/A-18E vs EF2000 would be an epic battle!

@glennridsdale577

4 жыл бұрын

Happens at Red Flag from time to time, I believe. Germany IS NOT "going to buy" Super Hornet. It's just KK ejaculating prematurely.

i'm somewhat surprised Germany didn't opt for the next version of the F-15

@goodputin4324

4 жыл бұрын

It can't carry nuclear weapons

@brandonhill2183

3 жыл бұрын

@@goodputin4324 actually yes it can

Good video, pretty objective, ( the fact that im retired Marines not withstanding), I'd fly the Super Hornet, simply because they're much more rugged and reliable than the Typhoon which has been plagued with maintenance issues, and the the Super Hornet will see the Typhoon, before the Typhoon sees the Super Hornet, two huge game changers.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and thank you for your service!

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

Question If you where in the military, then what is your Rank - Number - Name, just to check, I fucking hate it when people say they are or have been in the military, but are just doing stolen Valor, I never take any person word for it especially on youtube.

last category: costs

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Great point!

@wingwong2556

4 жыл бұрын

F/A 18 is imported from US which should have no cost advantage.

@supertatze2960

4 жыл бұрын

@@wingwong2556 and the ef is good for the europe economy, what especially matters now

The most important factors: -availability -ID the enemy 1st -shoot 1st -kill 1st Speed and maneuverability are much less important

Honestly it seems like they both serve complimentary roles and on paper I’d say they’re a great match for any air force.

Despite Eurofighter being much more expensive both to buy and to operate I would still go for it. I might be a bit biased here as I am European and Typhoon is indeed my favourite aircraft but here are my reasons: with its slow implementation of the MBDA Meteor BVRAAM and the Captor-E radar it has a large advantage over the SH with AIM120D (I wonder how AIM240 will perform) in BVR combat. A bit reworked wings design has also improved Typhoon’s low speed handling and manoeuvrability which is now close if not nearly even with SH’s, while its delta design gives the Eurofighter an edge at higher speeds. When it comes to A-G the Hornet definitely is better but with recent upgrades, especially with the lates deliveries to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (I hope I got that right) the Phoon considerably closes the gap. I’d also not give the SH a clear point with sensors but give it a tie as Typhoons have shown great results in radar detection and also Captor-E is used in at least half of the air forces that use the aircraft (SA, Kuwait, Britain, and now Germany when their 90 new ones will be delivered). I’d also like to mention the pilot interface which is superb in Typhoons but I don’t know how good compared to the Super Hornet and would be glad if you covered that topic. And last but not least, I think that Striker II helmet (and also version I) does make a hell of a difference, allowing the pilot to also use voice control, it makes the need for night vision goggles redundant, it improves the situational awareness and gives the pilot an ability to lock targets from obscure angles. I’d say that both aircraft are extremely good and don’t perform much differently in general, moreover I think that this goes the same for all gen 4.5 fighters. Germany has also given a great example of why to buy each aircraft.

Both are amazing fighters, but RELIABILITY is the MOST important category. Narrow win goes to the Super Hornet!

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting!

I'll take the one that has a drinks holder ashtray and USB charger

@jamesbrennan4707

4 жыл бұрын

Lol touche

@davewolfy2906

4 жыл бұрын

They both have Martin Baker, you never know!

@johnny_pilot

3 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣

@bokiNYC

3 жыл бұрын

Bow about seat warmers? 😂

Ty for using metric numbers as well, makes it easier for europeans 👍🏼

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

erm does the number 31stop here ?? i been waiting ages for this bus ?.

You forgot to include the cost per Unit $$$? Both are formidable fighters, if the Eurofighter were redesigned for carrier duty, it would lose some of it's advantages.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Good point and a metric I need to include in future videos, thanks for commenting!!!

@mayanseabee

4 жыл бұрын

@Steve Trott based on evaluation, what would you say is the determining point. One vs the other?

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

You mean like the Rafale vs Rafale M for example The Rafale has 14 Hard Points but the M type has 13 due to the bigger landing gear, needing more room.

@mayanseabee

4 жыл бұрын

@@forzaisspeed that, and also the fact that the F18 is a multi-role jet. It can easily be transformed or adapted for a variety of roles, depending on the mission, without affecting the $$ pocket.

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@mayanseabee The Eurofighter is not just a Muilt-Roll jet its also a Swing-Roll jet meaning it can do air to air missions and air to ground Missions with out needing to come land, plus it the Best jet aswell so you have a jet with the best specs and can do everything, plus more.

I think both aircraft do their respective job immensely well. However, and this is just an opinion, if I had an air force, I would use the Typhoon specifically what it was designed for - a dogfighter. In the right hands, the Typhoon has the ability to take control of the skies and deny the enemy any air supremacy. Excellent power, energy, turn rate, maneuverability, super cruise - this is the Typhoon's forte. The Super Hornet was designed as a multi-role fighter, so, basically, it is a jack-of-all-trade. This is not to knock the Super Hornet because again, in the right hands, this aircraft can give any enemy fighter a very hard time with its combination of power, sensors, avionics, and low-speed maneuverability. So, for my air force, the Typhoon has the air superiority role and the Super Hornet has the multi-role of attack, fighter, and electronic warfare.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Well said and I think this is exactly what Germany is thinking: kzread.info/dash/bejne/hXeKy5epkrCTpLQ.html

The canard / delta setup is like the bullpup rifle - tail-planes ahead of the main wing , like the rifle grip in front of the magazine. America has never done that with their planes or rifles, almost like it's not godly :D

Great info. I wonder how the F16 would compare to the Euro fighter.

I question your giving the win in maneuverability to the Eurofighter. You left out that fact that deltas will bleed off a lot of speed in a turning fight. Versatility you gave to the Super Hornet but you left out that it is carrier capable which for is a big one. As a pure traditional fighter I would put the Eurofighter as slightly better than the Hornet but the Hornet's better radar is a big deal in modern combat. But then you also have the Meteor weapon system for the Eurofighter so I would give it a slight edge. But as a multi role fighter the Super Hornet wins.

@TheNitrox88

3 жыл бұрын

I assume you haven't seen both aircraft in action. Though you are right with the high energyloss of a delta wing in sub sonic, the f18 is nothing near the manouverability at any speed. The cons of the delta wing are mostly canceled out by its unstable design. And the huge engines do the rest. In Supersonic the difference is even bigger. Even the f22 does not match the EF's manouverability, as it was proven in dogfight trainings.

@dyren7437

3 жыл бұрын

The eurofighter is able to sustain 9G's at angels 30 bro. Its T/W is so high it doesnt even slow down when above 400 knots. No matter how hard you pull. Same with for example the f16, but then even better.

@quinndenver4075

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheNitrox88 you are high if you think it can outmaneuver an f-22. While the delta wing allows for great aoa it also has a substantial increase in drag while maneuvering compared to other wing designs.

@TheNitrox88

2 жыл бұрын

@@quinndenver4075 i don't have to imagine. It was already tested and proven in practice. Sorry to disappoint you. Also the main problem with the high drag of the delta design is solved by the extreme aerodynamic instability. So the camber is increased in turns instead of decreased. Every other problem/disadvantage of a delta wing like vortexes are also applicable to the f22 because it also has delta wings.

@jeppekjersgaard8597

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheNitrox88 The germans had some raptor salad for lunch

For me it's the Typhoon. Don't get me wrong I love the F18 and fly it as my 'go to aircraft' in DCS however the Typhoon would rule the skies in all aspects and can still perform the multi role. Add the fact it has the IRST system to detect stealth aircraft and the new Capture E radar system along with the new weapons such the AG Brimstone and AA Meteor beats the Super Hornet for me

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and I agree about the Captor-E it is a beast of a radar, the only thing is it does not appear to be widely installed yet. I'm working on the Rafale video next and I too fly in DCS - which I understand is getting the Eurofighter! Stay safe!

@quasar_33b

4 жыл бұрын

Side note the Germans don't use the IRST its not fitted to any of there aircraft

@positroll7870

4 жыл бұрын

@@quasar_33b Germany wanted to save money in the early 2000s and thus is currently using IRST/ EuroFirstPirate via a pod solution. Meaning they have sensor pods to put under the wings of part of the fleet (1/2?) when needed. In case of war with Russia, you'd have groups of 4 aircraft flying together, 2 of them with the IRST and exchanging the targetting data with the other 2. Most likely an upgraded internal version will be part of the newly ordered EFs.

@bradleyanderson4315

4 жыл бұрын

@@positroll7870 So they have lost one of those 13 carrying stations if they want to self designate for guided weapons?

@damedusa5107

3 жыл бұрын

Posi Troll apparently the uk are going alone on an even better version that the rest of the partners aren’t involved in. The new system meant to be even better. God the money that gets spent on these things.

Super Hornet is the reliable "do it all" work horse capable of doing anything from anywhere, reasonably well. The Eurofighter is slighly more optimized for Air Superiority and requires somewhat more ideal working conditions.

Always loved the Hornet. And in my opinion, it is the overall winner. Versatility is a major key, and it goes beyond just dogfighting. The Hornet will have the ability to launch ground strikes efficiently, and fight off defending air forces at the same time. This also seems more efficient as not as many planes will need to be used in a squadron attack. I'm no expert or anything, but the cost per aircraft and quantity needed is far more efficient than needing a fleet of bombers AND (more expensive) air fighters to protect them. It will also lower the amount of aircraft losses / human life if things did get sticky. The radar detection/ tracking system may be only slightly better, but that's still big. When things are happening that fast and at that speed, a few seconds mean a lot (trying to put my bias aside). PS. Payload is great, but if a plane does go down, all those weapons go with it. On top of that, the Eurofighter is noticeably more expensive and those missiles aren't free either. Therefore, each loss of a Eurofighter is more financially devastating for the military (call it a higher risk, higher reward kind of thing).

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Well said and thanks for commenting - I will have to include cost in my next versus video because that is a significant factor.

@jamesbrennan4707

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog You're welcome! Loved the video and you did touch upon cost per aircraft, I just happened to wonder about additional costs such as replenishing weaponry, and now that I think of it, maybe even flight range / fuel costs.

If there was the F-16XL, it would be an interesting comparison to the Eurofighter. They seem more similar.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

That would be interesting, thanks for commeting!

@alexanderfederowicz

3 жыл бұрын

Amen Brother !!! That XL Version should have been given extra Thrust Vectoring, and even a Stronger Engine ! It Should then have Replaced F-16's for the U.S. only... With Full Super Cruise a variant of it should have also been converted over into a similar role of the F-35... Can you see the F-35 with the Aerodynamics of the F-16XL ???

@mootame9430

3 жыл бұрын

Politics killed those deserving experimental jets. Even the YF23 Black Widow which was better than the F22 according to experts was cancelled.

Eurofighter every time. I would like to see Eurofighter against the Rafale, nice job as always

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you and next video is on the Rafale - a bio/history followed by EF vs Rafale, I appreciate your feedback!

@lars9966

4 жыл бұрын

Easy to say. Eurofighter better in... maneuverbility, radar, engines, weapons and and and... Rafale can carry 2 more fuel tanks than eufi

4:14 You forgot that eletronically scanned radars can target multiple targets at once while mechanical can do that only inside a small angle.

Minus the canards, the Eurofighter fuselage appears to be taken from the F-16 with dual engines added.

🇩🇪: I‘ll take both!🤓👍

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Yes! A great problem to have and thanks for commenting!

Try to find a Typhoon pilot that would swap to a Hornet.... In the merge if the fight is allowed to go slow the hornet has a single fleeting chance before its game over with excess thrust and turn rate.

@chrisprice217

4 жыл бұрын

Hi agree For years the f15/f16 ruled the skies but the Typhoon and Rafale are the next generation . Not come up against a new hornet but in Typhoon these otherwise excellent F16-18 aircraft cant compete eg need to back off power at 400ish knots at 9g turn as still rapidly accelerating and turn radius becomes rather big. But that is the point with the Typhoon you sometimes have too much power... never - ever heard that before..

@chrisprice217

4 жыл бұрын

Hopefully all academic and will only "play" with each other. The Hornet does also have the big advantage of being able to land at sea - I for one feel a bit homesick when a ling way off the coast.... Do like the videos though and friendly and informed people 😀

The video was well done. I think it's difficult to compare an updated 70s design with 90s design, and a carrier based aircraft with a land based aircraft, though.

@PilotPhotog

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and yes they are dissimilar aircraft from different eras but the inspiration behind the video was Germany's announcement to get the Super Hornet and keep using the Eurofighter.

Looks like both planes supplement each other well. Thanks for the video. Also as mention by others, the German SH deal isn't finalized yet. The parliament has a say in this. Btw. How about a comparison between the Gripen and the SH/EF/Rafale?

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment and suggestion for a future versus video - I am releasing a Rafale video next and plan on versus videos on Gripen, SH/EF/Rafale as well. Regarding the German SH deal, I also plan on making an update video as well when things sort out due to the current global situation. Stay safe!

If i were a country needing to buy a new fighter that isnt an f-35, it would without question be an f-18. Canada and australia agree with me.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Great point and thanks for commenting!

@sagmilling

4 жыл бұрын

Canada is evaluating replacing old FA18 (CF18) with a new aircraft, is will choose between (currently) Grippen, Super Hornet, or F35. Very slow process, probably another two years before the choice is made (after next election?).

@anotheruser9876

4 жыл бұрын

The reason why Canada is looking at the F/A-18 Super Hornet is because they currently have the legacy ones. The transistion to the Super Hornet would be a small one compared to switching to Typhoon, Gripen, Rafale, or F-35. That being said, the most logical choice would be to convert to Typhoons considering the role the RCAF has, intercepting Russian planes over the Arctic (QRA needs top speed). Its NATO role can also be performed through the use of the 13 hard points. Say PilotPhotog, what are the differences in operational range between the two?

@Mako2-1

4 жыл бұрын

another user yeah i disagree. The superhornet’s better in my opinion. Better maneuverability. More rugged design. Better payload. And smaller radar cross section.

@amsuther

4 жыл бұрын

Well...we actually got both.... The RAAF has 72 F35's on the way and our mix of existing 24 Super Hornets and 11 Growlers. An each way bet. The Super Hornet was a logical and valuable stepping stone from the Classic F18 and continued to allow us a strike capability (albeit not exactly the same) replacing our F111's.

How can you break the tie simple- Captor E

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

A good argument and I had the hardest time deciding in the sensors category

@garwhittaker3743

4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotPhotog And striker 2 to go with it my friend , and it also has a great defensive suit ...great video.

@masterofpuppets7295

4 жыл бұрын

Don't worry PilotPhotog, you were right to give the edge to to the the apg 79

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

Just a run down of the Eurofighter vs one of only 2 jets really that come close to the Eurofighter the F-22, just to show just how good the Eurofighter really is. The Eurofighter is the best, it can do everything. Some Example's to show why the Eurofighter is king, few years reading reports and papers and speaking with pilots themselves on the matter, and all can be found online Paper's and Reports open to read. The Eurofighter and the F-22 both can take off and go straight vertical, something that kid's say only the F-22 can do, it's not. The Specs of the Eurofighter vs F-22 for example and some others to compare. Speed / Eurofighter - 1550 mph - Mach 2.0 TMS. F-22 - 1495 mph - Mach 1.95 TMS. Rafale - 1381 mph - Mach 1.8 TMS. F-16 - 1500 mph - Mach 1.95 TMS. F-35 - 1200 mph - Mach 1.56 TMS. Altitude Ceiling / Eurofighter 65,000 f. F-22 63,000 f. Rafale 50,000f. F-16 50,000+f. F-35 50,000f. Sustained Turn Rate / Eurofighter - 28.5 D/S. F-22 - 27 D/S. Rafale - 27 D/S. F-16 - 18 D/S. F-35 - 11 D/S. Instantaneous Turn Rate / Eurofighter - 36.5 D/S. F-22 - 35 D/S. Rafale - 36 D/S. F-16 - 26 D/S. F-35 - 26.5 D/S. There where some examples of how different jet's line up, now focusing more on the Eurofighter vs F-22. Engine Thrust / Eurofighter 21,500 ibf x2. F-22 35,000 ibf x2. Plus the Eurofighter's EJ200 Engines are the most advanced. And most jets the Eurofighter F-22 Rafale F-35 and so on can all Supercruise. Eurofighter is lighter and smaller so has a better power to weight ratio. The Eurofighter has better range / Combat and A to B. The Eurofighter Has a Better Dive/Cilmb Rate with better energy hold. G's and -G's. Eurofighter 9+ and -3.5G's. F-22 9+ and -3.2G's. Most jet's can pull 9+ G's but only some can high -G's. Hard Points / Eurofighter 13. F-22 8. Gun / Eurofighter x1 27mm with 150 rounds. F-22 x1 20mm with 480 rounds. Missiles BVR - WVR / Eurofighter BVR Meteor Missile the best in the world x2 ranges 1st 150km for fast agile Targets 2nd in testing showed to go 300km for other Targets, The Biggest NEZ of 60km, Speed of Mach 4.5, more Agile then the AIM-120D, as well the Meteor uses a ramjet meaning it maintains power to the target, WVR the ASRAAM Faster then the AIM-9X and more agile between 5 to 55km, and the ASRAAM is a 6.5inch diameter vs the 5inch on the AIM-9X so about a 70% more volume rocket propellant, meaning a longer burn time. F-22 BVR AIM-120D 1x range Maxed at 160km a NEZ of 20km, and a speed of Mach 4, WVR AIM-9X more agile under 5km. And both AIM-9X and ASRAAM use a IR seeker, so heat seeking and the ASRAAM and newer 9X's able to be used as LOAL and LOBL with the ASRAAM being able to outperform the 9x in 180 over the shoulder launches, and with the ASRAAM using IR imaging to better its ability. But no pilot will use the full range of their missile, like the 150+km on the Meteor or the 160km on the 120D due to the low chance of really hitting anything, and giving the enemy longer for the RWS's to pick it up and just do a 180 run, making the distance longer for the Missile, you'll want to fire within about 100 - 70km or even 50km, to have a higher chance for the Missile to hit and last time for the enemy to have to counter. This is what I find funny is that people say, ( well this jet can fire from hundreds of miles away and kill it before ) NO, it's Bullshit their are the one's that don't know fuck about RWS's - MTT or even Defences, older 3rd gen jets with old as shit RWS's yes probably, but not 4th gen or 3rd gen with advanced or one of the most advanced RWS's ever in it, and plus again people that say from hundreds of miles away, don't know missiles. Just to point out that the numbers on all missiles like the 120D Meteor R-77 PL-15 and so on, all have a range of what it can do with still the ability to hit a target ( effective range ), but most of the time it's in good weather conditions, so ranges will very. Eurofighter uses the Striker 2 Helmet more advanced and able to lock on to targets and fire with out lining the jet up with the target, and has night vision built in, with out needing a different piece of equipment on the pilots head. F-22 is outdated and old the hardware and software is not there to be able to use the Helmet to lock on and fire like the Eurofighter can, so the F-22 needs to line up to lock and fire. Radar / The Eurofighter uses one of the best Radars out today, able to pick up the F-35 and F-22 from distance, and able to track a multi group of targets at once, plus the new Captor E Radar will and is one of the most powerfule Morden Radars for the Future. F-22 has a good Radar picks up the Eurofighter from distance as well, but cant handle as much as other radars can, but still can track lots of targets. Plus the Eurofighter has many different radars at different wave's, around the Jet's body, helping it in RWS's and able to see a 360 decrease around the Jet, and has a voice system control as well, plus the Eurofighter being able to fire Missiles then turn more then 90 dec and still having other systems on the body guiding the Missiles to the target, as well as the Striker 2 gives the Eurofighter a bigger advantage in a BVR fight, but the F-22 does not have a IRST like the Eurofighter so the F-22 is blind in the heat seeking area and does not have other systems around the body to help guide any missile after it turns beyond its radar sight, so making the F-22 again having to stay pointing at the enemy getting closer and closer to it, and with the Eurofighter have IFF DASS MIDS LDP and IRST as well as the mean radar and others the Eurofighter is just getting better and better, as well as its specs and proformas. In War Games not just Rad Flag and in friendly training Between the Eurofighter and F-22 both have won against each other over the years, with some Eurofighter Pilots with a joke about having Raptor States for lunch, for Dogfighting and BVR Fights. Design / Eurofighter was designed for Air Dominance and does have some stealth in the design having the smallest RCS against the Rafale and Gripen, with the Wing Design on the Eurofighter it is 20% more efficient then your wing design on the F-22, The Eurofighter is 1 of 2 jets the other being the J39 the Eurofighter in the same mission go from air to air then air to ground with its payload, the F-22 its one or the other. The Eurofighter can do all the F-22 can do plus more, The Eurofighter has better specs better Missiles better Hardware and Software plus is used by the best the RAF. Plus the F-22 is to expensive for the US to upgrade and keep maintaining, the F-22 was stop being made years ago, plus stop training for the F-22, but the Eurofighter is still being maintained and still being updated with newer and newer Hardware and Software. some points, going in to more about why using the max range of a BVRM is bad and some reasons why. 1st, The BVRM air to air missile has a bad hit rate at distance, so just cause a missile's range is 150km no pilot will fire at 150km, some mean reasons why BVRM's have a bad hit rate at distance, the longer you fire the more time and distance it has to travel, so a 1 stage rocket will slow down faster and be less agile over a shorter time then a 2 stage rocket but for the Meteor it uses a ram jet so does not have to worrie so much, for example the 120D is a 1 stage rocket it burns for a few seconds to get up to speed, then no more energy so any turns it has to make will bleed energy slowing it down lowing the chance to hit the target, and the 20+G that some missiles can do, is not as agile as you think, again down to the speed of the Missile even a slite turn the Missile is pulling high G's due to small wings and speed fighting the air to turn even with Thrust Vectoring it still loses energy, and the Meteor uses a 2 stage rocket, with the ability to throttle the energy but having a ram jet it keeps the power going all the way to the target so increasing the hit rate, so when you fire and the enemy sees it due to the RWS, the enemy will counter to lower the chance of a hit, that is one of the mean reasons why BVRM's have a bad hit rate at distance and that fireing one at max range is not the best thing to do. 2nd, The Eurofighter uses the much better Meteor, the F-22 uses the older 120D, now the ranges are close 150km for the Meteor and 160km for the 120D, but in tests the Meteor has been able to go up to 300km, thanks to the 2 stage and ram jet and able to throttle the energy. 3rd, The Eurofighter's Radar is one of the most advanced, it can see the F-22 from distance, and the F-22's radar is good not as good as the Eurofighter, but the F-22 having stealth, it will see first, but seeing first means nothing. 4th, The F-22 will see the Eurofighter, but out of range for the 120D, and the F-22 would have to get closer, to the Eurofighter, and the Eurofighter would have seen the F-22 on radar, as the F-22 is needing to get closer, still BVR, again the Eurofighter uses one of the most advanced radars out today, and most pilots will fire about 80 to 60km with a BVRM, to have a better chance to hit, but still having a bad hit rate for air to air missiles. 5th, The Eurofighter would have seen the F-22 and started to counter, again still in BVR range but close enough for both missiles to have a chance to hit. 6th, The Meteor being more advanced and harder to jam and trick, vs the 120D that is easier to trick and jam, and with all up to date jet's have RWS's and Defences like Toes DRS Flares Jammers Chaff some agility to out manoeuvre the missile. 7th, The Eurofighter holds more Meteor's then the F-22 holds 120D's, plus the Eurofighter is better in specs and performance, plus have the ability to fire a BVRM with the helmet, but the F-22 can't, needing to line the Jet's radar up with it. Just a quick run down to show why stealth does not work for a fighter jet, and to show why the Eurofighter is king.

Maybe the Typhoon will have the edge as it will inevitably catch up with better sensors and versatility in time. I think a Typhoon comparison with the F16 would be closer in genre maybe? That would be an interesting video. Get on it my man!😀👍Subscribed.

Can you make a comparison between F-16V Block 70 vs F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block III?

In Germany we say: Dieser Kommentarbereich ist nun offizielles Eigentum der Deutschen Republik

@jfulcrum7269

4 жыл бұрын

Gutten telefunken baiten longen , shwaitze bachen tag , ochtenn!

Dont just judge on performance the electronic warfare capabilities and avionics that are known

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Good point and thanks for commenting, let me know what you think of the video when it comes out.

@thesupermaninthecloud6856

4 жыл бұрын

I genuinely think American is hiding a lot more technologies in its military equipment than European nations do

I'm an American my vote still goes to the eurofighter. But I think a better competition would have been a eurofighter against the F-22 as an air dominance airplane. keep up the good work

A good video, though I’m not sure comparing a primary air superiority plane with a small navalised fighter ;) Subscribed

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the comment and subscribing! The SH and EF are dissimilar aircraft, the idea for the comparison was based on the video I did about Germany’s decision to get the SH and EF. More versus videos on the way!

What does "keep it civil" mean? Sorry, English isn't my first language, I'm American.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Lol it means don’t insult other people or attack them personally - just be critical of their view and not them.

@MegaJJ1968

4 жыл бұрын

Behave. Show good manners. Like your parents tought you. Don’t insult people who disagree with you. Actually, I find it as a good idea to give such a reminder.

You miss one big note. Rate of clib always give tell us how powerfull the engine is. Eurofighter rate of climb is 62,600 ft/min. Super Hornet rate of climb is 44,882 ft/min. Super Hornet with 45° wing angle and jet engines F 100-PW-229 wll have next characterstic: Max Speed: ~2.7 M Rate of climb: 75,219 ft/min Thrust/weight: 1.24 If change air angle, combat range will increase from 449 ml to 550 ml. If we increase wing area to 733 sq ft combar range will go to 754 ml. For 100% increase wing area you will increase range for 80%. In that case because of each 1 m2 of wing it will increase weight for 50 kg. Trust/weight will be 1.18. Super Hornet need nose like F 35. Than will get radar with bigger area that is mean greater radar range.

Does somebody know the range of the Eurofighter and the super hornet?

Speed is everything to shot down your enemy and make it back home 🚀🚀

why not compare this euro fighter to f-15 eagle.. super hornet is an aircraft carrier jet..

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Inspiration for this video was Germany's announcement about the Super Hornet and Eurofighter. I will do more of these since the format has been well received, and I've noted EF vs F-15 as an upcoming comparison. Thanks for commenting!

@mangalores-x_x

4 жыл бұрын

Tell that to the Swiss...

Super hornet. There is more op options for it, which is way germany is paying them. Euro fighter don't have much put into it, just a better dog fighter.

@JulesD92

4 жыл бұрын

Bullshit

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

Kid the Eurofighter uses the F/A-18 as Toilet Roll.

@rayhan_2k841

4 жыл бұрын

Or because Germany cant afford it....plus the EF is constantly being upgraded especially the RAF FGR4 typhoon

@forzaisspeed

4 жыл бұрын

@@rayhan_2k841 If you read in to it, that Germany might not go for the F/A-18 is due to, 1st Taking jobs from the Germans, 2nd Sending the money to another Country. Plus its not looking good for Boeing either, Boeing is basically running out of money due to orders - parts - life Cycles on its jet's in service are getting to there end, and that people are looking in different areas to replace them with. Plus the Germans don't really want to wait for parts to come from the US, when they need then for example, that's more money more time and it lowers the all round combat ready rate of the jet.

Question: Where did you get the opinions of the "Blue Angel" pilots preferring the legacy Hornet over the SH? I haven't seen any comments by current Blues on the future move being a negative one, especially regarding energy management or maneuverability.

@PilotPhotog

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting and a great question: and to be clear the legacy hornet can fly (or is approved to fly) inverted for longer periods of time as well as being slightly more maneuverable. The Super Hornet is of course more powerful and will do things in airshows that legacy hornets could only dream of, but here are a couple of articles. One from the Navy times, and one from a fighter pilot who's flow both types of hornets: www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2019/04/21/blue-angels-begin-the-shift-to-super-hornets/ and sofrep.com/fightersweep/ask-fighter-pilot-hornet-vs-super-hornet/