058 - Eurofighter Typhoon 

Manolo G. Thanks! 🙏

Really!?!? At least when having 1!, 1 Fuel Drop Tank! And I thought, when having Full Weapons and Fuel Loads (2 or 3 Drop Tanks), it is limited to the 5,5 / 5.5 G:S (G:s)! True or not!?!? But Wow! 2 Drop Tanks and 9 G!, Wow! : )

The Typhoon is amazing, in Australia one of top Hornet pilots said after flying one he'd rather go to war in a typhoon then the Super Hornet, enough said. They are pretty amazing

@@Jabba1625 Super Hornets are rather something for nations that do not need a 1st line jet. Australia got them rather cheap.

@@Sedna063 it's just one of those things, I wish after the F111 saga that we had gotten the strike eagle F-15E, Australia is without that air ground capabilities now also (but the F-35 is supposed to fill that gap), don't get me wrong, those super Hornets are a nice bit of equipment. I never understood how this this government works apart from being bought out wholesale by the mining and fossil fuels sector. Super Hornets are ok. The F-35 has a bit of potential but has so many bugs to iron out, like airframe parts not lasting as long, and so on, but these are just a IMO, as I am only a armchair expert if that, best of wishes and cheers

Good to know! Believe Enzo mentioned he wasn't sure.

Also, the Gripen fielded the Meteor missile in 2017. The first aircraft to do so, but the current in-service version of the Gripen does not have an AESA radar. The up-coming E and F versions do.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Yeap! He said, he wasn't sure about it ("I might be wrong about it") or something like that!

@@andersnoren6070 The E/F version of the Gripen will use the same IRST sensor as the Eurofighter

@@AdurianJ Actually, although they are both made by Leonardo, Typhoon uses the older Pirate long wave IRST while Gripen E/F uses the newer mid and long wave Skyward-G

Nikola16789 it’s quite spectacular hey... saw it last year in the UK. Been in love with it ever since.

You're welcome.

One can hope!

Cue the James Bond theme music... 😆

You're welcome! 🙏

Retrofitting the legacy Hornet with the Super Hornet's engines would have been a massive and costly undertaking. It's not just the size but the required infrastructure, such as the FADEC that the Hornet did not use. Don't believe it was ever even a consideration.

From what I have heard is they are having and had a lot of issues developing the new ASEA radar for the Typhoon.

@@mississippirebel1409 it has been a very long process, but that's the way it goes. I'm just glad we're getting the AESA

@@mississippirebel1409 The radar has been trialled and works perfectly well (the radar in the Gripen E is a smaller version of the Captor-E, the Typhoon's AESA radar). The issue has been money to do the upgrades. It looks like the Captor-E Radar 1 is being adopted by the majority of the user base, but the UK is going to upgrade to Captor-E Radar 2, which will include electronic attack and other advanced features from the UKs Brightadder project. The Germans are apparently interested in the UK radar as well. The Qataris will be the first with Captor E.

Thanks!

You're welcome! 🙏

😱

You can't shoot what you can't see. There's a reason why in the 1980s the Luftwaffe developed their own stealth aircraft prototype. The only reason they didn't can the Typhoon design was because the cost of developing stealth aircraft and the amount of $$ invested into the Typhoon already at that point. The Typhoon is a dated design and was never future proof. Stealth was the future as soon as the Nighthawk and B-2 were revealed. Europe chose to stick to the Typhoon design due to $$ and political considerations, not out of foresight. If Stealth wasn't the future then the Chinese, Russians and the British/Swedes wouldn't all be designing stealth aircraft. Typhoon was and is a dated design. Great if your Europe and don't expect to fight the US but not acceptable for Russia/China.

You bet! 🙏

🙏

At 1,700 rounds per minute a half second burst will burp around 14 rounds per minute. The M61 fires at around 6,000 and takes a half second to spool up to max RPM, so in a half second burst it has to ramp up from 0 to 6,000, let's guesstimate 3,000 rounds RPM average RPM during the duration of the burst. That's 50 rounds. That's a 36 round advantage before the M61 even reaches max RPM.

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD Look at the weight of shell as well.

@@dogsnads5634 5,12 kilograms per second for the Vulcan (for the average RPM estimated spool time, once you hit max RPM it becomes 10,24 kg/s) 3,64 kilograms per second for the BK 27.

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD whatever your kitchen sink calculation it seems pretty much consensus that this gun was chosen above a gatling design because it will consistently throw 4kg of ammo in the first half second and a Vulcan only 2kg with constant fire rate aka a more predictable burst pattern. The general assumption being that this split second is what will hit or miss the target. I also think a major difference are the rounds which are specifically high explosive type with the idea that one hit will kill a normal fighter aircraft and a burst should ensure 1-3 hits. In the end it probably does not make much of a difference, though, I think it may be some weird historic leftover that the US airforce prefers smaller calibre but high fire rates high velocity while German and British air forces always liked to have a higher calibre cannon type guns for their fighters. I think there was some plans for smart ammo for that Mauser aka self guiding shells but not sure if it ever was more than some engineers dream.

@@mangalores-x_x "this gun was chosen above a gatling design because it will consistently throw 4kg of ammo in the first half second and a Vulcan only 2kg with constant fire rate" - it's still 14 rounds versus 25 rounds in the first half second (3000 RPM avg/ (60 * 2)), around 3.7 kg versus 2.5 kg. Not that much of a difference. I'd say the gun was chosen over the Vulcan because of weight and bulk (the feed system for the Vulcan is massive) and also "not made here syndrome". No point in going to the Americans for a gun when the gun doesn't even matter that much. "weird historic leftover that the US airforce prefers smaller calibre but high fire rates high velocity while German and British air forces always liked to have a higher calibre cannon type guns for their fighters" - it's important to note that the Americans did use a revolver cannon in 20mm in their fighters, the M39, after WWII had shown the 50 cals to be at a disadvantage.

I'm still scratching my head...

I bet you were tempted to respond like Iceman did to Goose and Mav's MIG story! 😂

@@simflier8298 😲

It's amazing to see it do a high AoA, low speed crawl-past, then hit the burners and go vertical :)

@@MongooseTacticool I can only imagine!

I know Japan and China are also working on some stuff but I can’t really think of anyone else

Actually, there are currently two parallel developments going on, one being the "Future Combat Air System" developed by France, Germany and Spain, while the competing aircraft is called "Tempest" and is currently under development in the UK and Italy. Both are at a very early stage of development though, more or less still the concept phase. They're both slated to enter service in the 2040s, and personally, I expect both programs to merge at some point in the future. Developing two competing European designs had been a mistake in the 1990s, and it will still be one in the future, but that's just my personal opinion. By the way, both are supposed to be sixth-gen designs, concentrating on network-centric warfare, a "loyal wingman" concept of escorting UCAVs and so on.

Sweden is also involved in the Tempest

@@exhorderhd Everything is in the Bondo and plywood phase with lots of paint, for the ones that have actually made mock-ups before doing any EMD work. Given the fact that the Typhoon fleet still doesn't have AESA radars, despite them installing and demoing one in 2007, there is something going on among the European EF partner nations. "Clearly, studying how to keep Eurofighter operationally relevant “for decades to come” without replacing its 20-year old mechanically-scanned radar leaves a glaring gap in its market credibility, yet Eurofighter continues to evade the issue. At a press conference at the Paris Air Show on Wednesday, Eurofighter officials refused to say when, and if, the Leonardo Captor-E active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar developed for Eurofighter will be procured by the four partner nations. " www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/203668/aesa-radar-still-lacking-as-eurofighter-looks-to-future-improvements.html

There is no better fighter than another for weather conditions in flight. I know Rafale can start without difficulty in very cold condition (tested in Himalayas and northern Finland during winter), but I can't tell for Eurofighter. Rafale is less expensive than Eurofighter.

India ordered 36 Rafale jets with training and extras that works out at $250 million dollars per jet. Yep they really drive a hard bargain. The Rafale is a great jet but this deal is stuck in quicksand and Indian pilots need time to integrate hence it has been badly managed.

We did an episode on F-16s in general and do not have plans to dig deep into individual blocks. But yes, we'll have to get Wags back for an update.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Thanks for the reply! Would be nice to have maybe a mini update small interview with Wags would be awesome but regardless I'm looking forward to the F-35 episode!

🙏

exhorderhd also the typhoon is super skinny and the intakes look 10000% different

That's correct Tranche 1 has limited A2G capability using Paveway LGB. The UK used these over Libya. The UKs Tr2 and Tr3 have had the P3e upgrade under Project Centurion which allows them to use Paveway II, EPWIII, Brimstone and Storm Shadow. The same upgrade allows them to use Meteor, Asraam CSP and Spear. Germany, Spain and Italy haven't got the P3e upgrade, but they'll have to in due course.

And Paveway IV...

Unlike the UK, Italy is still flying the Tornado and Harrier in the A2G role, plus we have the AMX for low cost/missions in relatively uncontested airspace, so it makes sense they wouldn't have plugged in all the goodies that the RAF has.

We have working Airframes? Flinten Uschi overlooked one?

Well, I hope you can because it's going to be awhile yet!

@@FighterPilotPodcast I can wait. :)

I thought there was already an F35 episode....or was that the F22?

@@jefe142 Neither. We did a "4th vs 5th Gen" episode that featured both but they have not had their own shows. Yet.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Ahh okay, that must be what I was remembering. Looking forward to a full interview on the F35!!! (And all the others along the way ofcourse). Keep up the great work!!!

Oh yeah. The typhoon is the closest 4th gen to the F-22 in terms of capability. The Eurofighter is no joke。

@@EEEEEEE354 For acceleration and climb rate, I agree. For everything else, the vast canyon of capability between the 2 is so unfairly on the F-22's side, it isn't a debate between the 2 communities of pilots who fly them. Every Typhoon driver knows that they would be a target and nothing else for the Raptor. They're just happy that we're all working together and that they don't have to face that type of threat.

@@LRRPFco52 The sustained turn rate of the EF is said to be better than the F-22, which is what allowed LW pilots to outmaneuver it in mock fights. The F-22 has better nose pointing ability though, thanks in large part to its thrust vectoring engines. So any WVR fight between the two is said to be very difficult for both, and pilot mistakes tend to decide the winner.

@@bellator11 The F-22 was dominant in the BFM they did at Red Flag Alaska. One of the more senior Typhoon pilots was able to stay dominant in some of the set-ups, which may have been perch start advantage to the EF (3000ft height and rear quadrant position, both aircraft heading the same direction). In butterfly and all neutral merges, even younger F-22 pilots were dominant against Typhoons. F-22 pilots in that joint training remained silent as a professional courtesy so that a continued friendly relationship would be there to welcome other nations as well, rather than create a bragadocious "Raptor-smash" culture that deters allies from wanting to play. The Luftwaffe squadron told their maintainers to strip the birds of any external stores so they could match the F-22's excess thrust advantage. In BFM, they do prearranged set ups to help both sides learn to prosecute or defend as a training opportunity. They never are "which airframe is better" tests in an operational setting. Even the totally slick Typhoon does not have Instantaneous or Sustained Turn Rate advantage over the F-22, especially the higher you go. You can compare slick airshow Typhoon STR at sea level to combat-configured F-22 demos, but neither of those has any real practical implication on performance at FL250 and above where it really matters in a 1970s 4th Gen setting pre-AIM-9L. Typhoon pilots say the EF is kinda wheezy once you get higher, whereas the F-22 doesn't think twice about accelerating to Mach 2.25, or super-cruising at Mach 1.8 above the contrail band. There is so much excess thrust, more airflow mass, far bigger engines, and take-off weight is normally around 5000lb less than total thrust in AB. Once it is at 50% fuel, you're looking at a 55,000lb bird with 70,000lb max thrust, with engines that were optimized for thin airflow at 60k altitude. None of the Combat Configured Typhoon metrics match the F-22 just looking at raw performance, which is the lowest bar of comparison.

@@LRRPFco52 Sorry but all of that is mere conjecture without any source to back it up. LW pilots claim superior sustained turn rate, which is what allowed them to dogfight with the F-22 on equal terms. Crucially this claim is backed up by aerodynamic data, such as a rather significant advantage in wing loading (312 vs 377 kg/m2), which is important in regards to both lift to weight and induced drag. In terms thrust to weight, this is 1.15 for the EF at full fuel, and 1.12 for the F-22, so the EF has the advantage here as well, albeit very minor.

In dcs plane take longer to speed up and are faster to slow down if that makes sense.

Japan had its heart ripped out after the war, it’s just a clone of a western nation now, McDonald’s on every street like most nations that get absorbed into the American empire

@@admiralkipper4540 Right... Have you ever been to Japan? Calling it a clone of the USA is pure laughable. But what do expect from someone with a fascist flag as there image?

@@gregduncan however you look at it Japan before the war and Japan after the war age barely the same nation

well we occupied them for a couple decades. That's the main reason it worked.

And no failure more magnificent than the immediate collapse of the WW2 alliance and antagonization of the Soviets and Chinese. We're all lucky that nuclear war hasn't destroyed civilization.

It's indeed the APU exhaust.

Not at this time, no.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Aw, alright. Thanks for the response!

@@gml6040 Fibs or no Fibs have you flown one. Even though every Aircraft is the same generally, Pilots do say they have there own nuances or personalities, like any other comparable machine that operates, IE Car.I wouldn't be surprised if it is true what the pilot is saying. I'm sure there are times when pilots break the rules or get themselves in an uncomprimising position where they put themselves in, or shouldn't have, thus learning other capabilities that they may have never known before.

@@gml6040 Why would any one provide a source to military aircraft???

@@gml6040 Why are you assuming I'm taking anything face value, I was just referencing to your assumptions???

@@gml6040 Have you flown The EF Typhoon.

yeah that's misjudged time. I'm sure it feels very fast when you're there. I'd be surprised if it accelerated over 12 m/s^2 straight and level.

Probably would not want to cover the same aircraft twice.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Understood, what about If you ever could get some stories from other pilots that have use her, just some expiernces rather than going over the whole aircraft again?

@@Mightymamba Our show is topical, meaning each episode covers a particular subject, so something like that would have to be bonus content or something similar...

@@FighterPilotPodcast Of course I understand and thanks for replying as always, you guys do great and so do the guest.

Highly doubtful.

Good point, especially since Canada and France are so closely connected.

@@derekorr1 ...oh yeah, duh. Got my wires crossed on that one. Maybe Canada should the Rafale!

Unfortunately the eurofighter exited the competition due to NORAD security requirements. www.aerotime.aero/clement.charpentreau/23884-airbus-withdraws-eurofighter-typhoon-from-canadian-tender

The aircraft that makes the most sense for Canada right now would be an F-35C without carrier launch and recovery systems (landing gear, reinforced hook). The reason is that the F-35C has more endurance than a Hornet or SH ever will, since it has the huge wings, and the sensor suite in the F-35 is unmatched by any other aircraft being manufactured right now, to include the ability to track low earth orbit satellites. F-35Cs up north would be an amazing NORAD capability, while also providing seamless interoperability between USAF/USN/USMC/UK RN/UK RAF/RoNAF/Norge AF/JSF operators for Canadian Forces contingents.

It wasn't a Captor E in 2007. It was a prototype they developed. The final development began sometime in 2014 or 15 I think. The UK pledged the money and then Germany came on board. The Captor M was deemed satisfactory. And to be fair, its a very good radar. But to keep competitive you need to have an AESA nowadays. The UK plans to buy the Captor E Mk II. Germany to buy the Captor E Mk I. Obviously I don't know how they want to finance it with Corona.

@@Sedna063 If they ever get the Captor AESA fielded, it will provide a significant advantage in A2A since it has the ability to articulate its field of regard to the side, which allows certain employment of BVR missiles that provides continuous tracking for the missiles without the target aircraft ever getting RWR trigger for missile launch warning, without the need for the EF to maintain frontal closure with the threat aircraft. You can basically pre-notch with an offset in your flightpath while giving CW illumination for AIM-120 and Meteor, both of which have pretty brutal no-escape zone parameters using this technique. Basically set up a high altitude separation so the BVR missile can climb into a ballistic arc into higher, thinner air. The launch aircraft immediately offsets while the missile goes into max V0, which keeps you away from any threat BVR missile NEZ parameters as you continually guide the missile into its terminal phase, where the active radar will activate and go "pitbull" on the target on its own, with only 3-4 seconds of missile approach warning on a missile well above Mach 3.2. Pilot can't do anything really at that point other than hope it doesn't hit the cockpit. The launch aircraft can maintain significant separation (dozens of nautical miles) throughout this engagement, especially working with wingmen who can offset for follow-on tactics as needed, having also fired at their targets in the same manner. It's not as good as how the F-22 and F-35 do it, but the next best capability set.

@@LRRPFco52 AFAIK Kuwait got the first operational jet with the Captor E scan. I don't think we can compare the F-22 and F-35 avionics suite because they horribly classified.

@@Sedna063 Yes, Kuwait is the only Typhoon operator with the AESA. We can compare OSINT-available specs on F-22 & F-35 enough to make some main conclusions, particularly factoring RCS, reduced IR sig, and their sensor suites into the equation. VLO unobserved approaches into NEZ parameters is something no other fighters have, with maybe the J-20 as an exception, and J-20's IR and RF sig reduction are highly questionable currently. Even the latest 4th Gen+ US fighters equipped with bigger AESA radars, LITENING pods, and advanced data links working together are unable to detect F-22s and F-35s until right about on the edge of visual range with their sensors, which is too late already, considering they have been a target from anywhere between 80-200+ nm before any distance was closed. That's a scary reality for any nation not on the US's good side. A single, small task force comprised of F-22As and F-35s could erase an enemy air force for sport in a matter of hours at the time of their choosing, and there wouldn't be much they could do about it.

Correct. According to a quick search on Wikipedia, 24 Tranche 2 Eurofighter Typhoons had been delivered to Saudi Arabia by 2011.

So does Austria

@@Vardeth805 Austria has the Tranche 2 models? I thought the Austrians were disappointed with their Tranche 1 birds and looking to acquire new planes rather than more Eurofighters.

@@doncalypso you're probably correct there. He actually mentions the UAE and Austrian Typhoons later in the interview.

@@doncalypso Austria bought a few used Italian Tranche 1s.

From what I have heard is that they have had a lot of issues developing the new ASEA radar for the Typhoon and even when it becomes available it won't be as capable as the ones on the F-35, F-22 and F-18 Super Hornet. But it's still going to be an AESA radar which means it will be a big upgrade.

@@Jam_Gordon true especially with regards to ground attack which the RAF have been doing regularly in Syria for a few years. Ok my bad re gun, i was obviously still stuck in the past. 😊 even if planes don't rely on guns anymore, still usefull, ie air policing and warning shots

The RAF (actually the Treasury) looked at dropping the BK27 but decided against it. The Germans are even worse funded than the Brits! ;)

@@mississippirebel1409 Captor E will be way more capable than the F-18 and F-22 radars as they are a whole lot older. But the F-35 APG-81 is the one to beat. That's why the UK is developing the Radar 2 version of Captor E to include electronic attack along with other features. Money is the main issue. But Captor E will come with a mechanical swashplate that will give it some very useful capabilities, particularly field of view.

@@lordtemplar9274 The decision to remove the BK-27 was stopped fairly quick after the Treasury realised it would cost more to develop a weight that would replace the gun on the aircraft to avoid CoG problems. The RAF were happy with that, you'll find loads of videos on YT of RAF Typhoon ground strafing with it.

It got canceled 2-3 years ago. It was pretty far in development. They even have shown Screenshots.

@@realQuiGon That's a shame, but thanks for the info

I don´t think there will be a Typhoon for DCS. The one in development was from the guys who did not even manage to finish the Hawk. Also Eagle Dynamics has really high conditions on realistic systems behaviour. And for modern jets like the Typhoon there is just way to much classified stuff. Otherwise doing the Typhoon or even the Raptor for DCS would be a no brainer.

@@realQuiGon wrong.

@@ray4lsd What's wrong?

The Eurofighter engine EJ200 is in par with the F414 of the. Super Hornet, which are at 13000 lbf dry or 22000 lbf on afterburner. On the other hand, the F110 engine of the F15 is way higher at 17155 lbf dry or 29400 lbf afterburner.

@@fritzdave9357 but typhoon still has better power to weight ratio ?

Only if it is not in afterburner.

@@FighterPilotPodcast Thank you! Love you're podcast. Super informative and cool content. If that number is true, doesn't fuel and range become a big problem? Quite frankly, I think it's some bull on the "cruise" word. I bet it's got it lit up to get mach 1 plus for that speed. Anyway, thanks again man.

They bought F-35 (finally).

As far as I know the voice recognition software never had any functions of firing weapons, so they did think ahead a bit there.

*TFK-90 The British "Eurofighter" Concept was called P.110 and was very similar to the Gripen.

@@spookyNorbert It is TKF-90 Stands for Taktisches Kampfflugzeug 90 (tactical fighter 90) 90 because it was intended for the 1990s. Right P.110, forgot the name, thanks!

Naa I don't see it , sure it has canards but what else is even close to Gripen on P.110 , it also is not mentioned in any books on Gripen development so any other information then rumors would be appreciated.

@@simonandersson824 Hmm maybe I'm wrong on that one, I cant remember where I read about it, was quite a while ago, could just be wrong information then. But they do have some similarities like the intake design, position of wing and canards (although different wing shape). Maybe just the same problems leading to similar design. I edited the first post

TKF90 came out just after the UK ACA which looked very similar.

I’ve gotten better in the couple years since.

True, but as difficult as it is to nail down willing guests we were simply happy to have anyone come on. There's always going to be something we miss.

guys I love the podcast, I just realised my comment came over quite negative, so apologies for that! Thanks for taking the time to put it together for us non flying folks!

@@20valver Not a problem. 😎

@@FighterPilotPodcast maybe I can get you two "for the price of one". A Spanish-Brit combo

Well, for starters I had to Google it--is that enough of a comment?

@@FighterPilotPodcast thanks

@@digitalavatar5699 Sorry, I'm just not familiar otherwise.

@@FighterPilotPodcast it's an alternative to aging MIG . This is the video in Bahrain Airshow - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vVpXdhVW7P4.html Thanks for responding ,

Yeah and I read a comment today about a American paying out on the Typhoon, Eurofighter Typhoons are fking awesome, better choice then what Aust has at the moment, the Super Hornet. Wish we had at least strike eagles,

No we call them Canards too lol 🇬🇧

Good to know, thanks.

And what is the F21?

Lockheed Martin Legacy Version of F16 Fighting Falcon being sold to india .

@@gorillafuckabitch2247 Gotcha.

What about the f19?

...Sorry, not following, can you please elaborate?

The Euro fighter is faster than the Rafael. I think the Eurofighter speed is Mach 2 .2 .

@@gorillafuckabitch2247 Ah, okay. Didn't interpret that from your original post.

Okay

Dogs Nads well, you‘re right that the requirements dictated an a2g role from the very start - not just for the British, the Germans, even at that early stage, wanted to use it to replace their fighter-bomber F-4F Phantoms as well. However, the core design requirements revolved around the idea that it was supposed to be superior against Flanker and Fulcrum at all altitudes. A2A was the main concern at this point, so I would argue that Enzo wasn‘t entirely wrong on that one. Of course, the end of the Cold War caused havoc to the program.

So you know more that a typhoon pilot you idiot go back to sleep! You need to take up knitting that's more your style and leave everything else to the pilot who obviously knows what he is talking about.

@@terrywainman6050 As it happens, Dogs Nads is quite correct. Easy to find if you could be bothered looking, however, that does require research and reading.

@@terrywainman6050 It is not rare at all that professionals are very into their little part of the profession and rarely knows the rest than their day to day stuff dude.

No the german pilot is right. That s funny how people try to rewrite history. The typhoon was made for a2a rôle from the beginning to replace tornado f3 and phantom. Only lately it became and with a lot of difficulties multirole it is simply not made for that. Rafale has been thought from the beginning as multirole that s why french left the programme they did not need a pure fighter. And they needed a carrier based aircraft which the the typhoon is unable to do because it is top heavy. That s reality and german fighter is right and knows his stuff.

That's ok.

It'd be great for our two militaries training-wise!

They don't need to be that powerful the typhoon is a lot lighter, the typhoon can out climb the f15 65,000 ft per minute to the f15 50,000 ft per minute

Given that the F15 is a lot heavier, it does not need to be so big.

I am sure a Boeing 747 has even more thrust per engine! You have a smaller, lighter aircraft, the F-15 needs bigger engines because it lugs a larger air frame around.

@@mangalores-x_x The 747-8I has the GEnx with 296 KN (x4). The original F100 came with 65 KN.

A Volvo truck has a much bigger engine than a Ducati motorbike but guess which is faster🤓

So you favor the Rafale.

@@FighterPilotPodcast I had the chance of very closely seeing both, inside out, observed then in non-air show demonstrations (for military purposes) and I had the honor of working for a company which made plenty of parts for Rafale. Due to my past occupation I always had those and other insights on operational capabilities, data fusion and EW suite . Plus, lots of interactions with the fighter community in Greece. So, at the end, the Rafale could only have been my favourite!