RAF TYPHOON DEMO 2014 - MARCH 14TH (airshowvision) 

There pilots not plane drivers

Kyle Holmes I think you mean "they're pilots not plane drivers". Fucking clown. I guess you are American or that English isn't your first language, and that's why you're not able to spell or understand blatant fucking irony?

You wouldn't know if there is a list/calender available of every airshow in the UK would you? I would like to know what is coming where and when. Thanks.

ianrkav britishairshows.com has a full list of all displays and is updated regularly.

retrogamer33 Ok thanks for that.

You're welcome :-)

That's what I always say,Lol:-)

Belíssimo...

It's just a name, a pilot doesn't stick to one jet he changes all the time.

Kyle Niquette Roughly 1/4 of each partner nation's Typhoons are twin seat aircraft. I've had nothing to do with Typhoon for 10 years, but the original plan was to have twin seat aircraft able to operate in crew training roles plus more complex missions that would benefit from having 2 crew to share the workload, plus also operate the same as a single seat aircraft as required. Defense cuts may have altered these plans though. Unlike a lot of twin seat combat aircraft, both cockpits are almost identical. The 'command eject' selector lever and the hud image projector (which projects an image to see 'through' the front seat headrest) were 2 of the few differences I can remember in the aft cockpit.

lol, single-sweaters

Typhoons eat f22 for breakfast

ragasdapper Keep thinking that. In carefully controlled environments the Typhoon can hold it's own. With no restrictions the F22's performance is overwhelming........... At least that's what the German pilots had to say.

ragasdapper don't forget it is flying empty here.

Alessio S yes but they are not even trying the jet is not allowed to break the sound barrier over land

David Smith Snap With no restrictions Typhoon xD

British Aerospace/BAE.

+Nathan Lawrence Eurofighter made by Airbus group

Was referring to the British (RAF) Typhoons. Usually whatever nation the aircraft belongs to it is constructed there by one of their aerospace firms. However the UK played a major role in the development of the Typhoon, along with other countries in addition.

+Nathan Lawrence Airbus and BAE did never fusion and both companies lead the production of their parts in the project Eurofighter in their own responsibility.

. . . that's just the letters on the side. The display pilot (Noel Rees in this case) will use many different borrowed aircraft in the run-up stage to the display season. Only one pilot is chosen for the displays each year, and only he can display the aircraft.

Pocok4 +Pocok4 70 percent carbon fiber. The canard is used for controlling the airplane and not to reduce rcs. The F-35s body is shaped as a supercritical wing and if you didn't notice already...the bodies of the F-14 and F-18 provide 40 percent of their lift. The Eurofighter is an F-102 with a canard (like the wright flyer) slapped on it.

Pocok4 If you do not know that you are supposed to capitalize "English" then you shouldn't tell people how to write. "wishfull," "isnt," "concenrs," "understend," et cetera are all spelled incorrectly The F-14 was thin...and it was also designed as an interceptor while the F-35 was not. The F-18 is not thin. It uses chines. Learn what "stalling" is. Thick wings are better for slow speeds. Look at every stol aircraft ever built. A thick body is perfectly suited for a plane that is not designed for high top end speed. Your "active radar cancellation" is not going to be good enough. The F-35 is a post dogfighting aircraft. Like it or not fighters are going to be using lasers, thrust vectored missiles, and will direct groups of drones more and more in the future. The Eurofighter will be a huge target with its vertical tail fin and exposed nozzles. It will be the first thing seen and it can't outrun and outmaneuver lasers. The F-16XL from the early 80's was a better plane than the Eurofighter.

Pocok4 Your horizontal component of lift turns you and it doesn't matter whether that comes from your wing or not. You bank and pull back unless you want to slam the rudder or use thrust vectoring. Delta wings create drag like no other in sustained turns. I'm not arguing that the F-35 is a better dog fighter than the eurofighter. That isn't what it will be doing. The future isn't about guns or conventional missiles. It is laser, railgun, and thrust vectoring missiles. I didn't say anything about the turbines in the Eurofighter. The nozzles do stick out in plain sight. The top speed and supercruise of the Eurofighter aren't anything like the F-22. The F-104 could supercruise and so could the F-16XL. You're talking about internet hearsay on redflag and on computer simulations from people who've never touched the F-35 or SU-35.

Pocok4 I'm not debating 'vs' arguments here - it's just not worth it. 'A carbon fibre hull (airframe)' - please explain how that contributes to stealth. Carbon composites, can allow certain wavelength radar waves to pass through the skin. Great - but what about the mass of angled metallic structure, fasteners, pipes, wires, avionics boxes, etc, inside, that would create a mass of random reflections, in all directions? It may sound odd, but the Typhoon's composite skin (I know this is public knowledge) has a very thin metallic reflective layer under the paint. It's foreplanes are also titanium (not composite) - they have a RAM coated leading edge. The Typhoons 'S' shape engine intake tubes are mainly aluminium & have a large area of RAM coating inside to prevent the engine compressor blades (being such a good 'random' radar reflection sources) from being exposed. The Typhoon is designed for 'head-on' stealth, not 'all-aspect' stealth. Engine nozzle heat absorbing material? F22 & F35, yes. Typhoon, no. Again - I am only confirming what is already in the public domain. This only refers to airframe 'physical' stealth. Emission stealth is a whole different subject, of which I have little 'hands-on' experience'. The F22's all-aspect stealth airframe has a largely reflective coating (which is why it's so carefully shaped), but where reflections cannot be adequately controlled, a RAM coating is used. I have no experience of F22 work though.

I am guessing by you're comment that you are clueless about the Typhoon and it's capabilities

What language was that?

So glad some one else is noticing that XD... Its so annoying.

Steve Boyd Show us the videos of typhoons you have filmed and posted and show us how its done.. Im betting you have never even been to an airshow.

***** good on you mate why do we have to have America bugging in all of the time !!! the americans use there aircraft and we use are own

muppetrolf Piss of muppetrol you know nothing. You say its bad but your reason you have given before are invalid in prev arguments. Decent? The typhoon is one of the most advanced fighter bombers in the world and is well loved by the RAF so they have not been missing out go back to your hole!

Useless Euro junk. That's how it is.

Britain is retiring it? wtf are you on about? This aircraft is most definitely not being retired you fuckwit. The Typhoon is most definitely capable against anything you care to put it up against... and I mean ANYTHING!!!

Britain is retiring it? wtf are you on about? This aircraft is most definitely not being retired you fuckwit. The Typhoon is most definitely capable against anything you care to put it up against... and I mean ANYTHING!!!

Doesn't need it. Its already capable of pulling far more G's than a human pilot could ever handle.

boltar2003 Most aircraft are.

Thrust vectoring has been developed for it to some level of readiness but the people who did it have not yet convinced the partner nations that it is worth the cost. It has some beneficial effect on fuel use especially at take off and at some heights and speeds but it's not considered to be all that important for combat as far as I can tell because when you turn you lose energy so you try not to get into that situation in the first place. I am only paraphrasing what I've read.

t43562 I've read that too "somewhere" but the true goal of thrust vectoring is to have total control at all energy levels. Especially at slower speeds. You want to be able to point the nose at an enemy at will to put weapons on him. This all sounds great but I would argue that thrust vectoring may be "1 up'd" by fighters using helmet mounted targeting. This Typhoon, along with many other fighters, really doesn't need to maneuver much for a pilot to fire a missile at an enemy who might be flying right next to him. And then there's the next level of this technology coming soon in the F-35. The pilot can look right through the aircraft without making any kind of maneuver at all and fire away at you. You can't hide from that kind of nightmare. I guess time will tell but I suspect the Typhoon will get some kind of thrust vectoring before it's services are no longer needed! No doubt a great plane...

FrakU2 I think they just need a better hang brake.. ;)

Rafale a beauty? Why didn't they tuck that ugly refueling boom somewhere?.

nina colvin I'd always assumed it was a flag pole - for quickly unfurling a certain flag...I'll say no more!

nina colvin Yes that fixed fuel probe on Rafale is quite ugly and probably causes significant drags as well.

b k To have a fully retracting probe quite a lot of internal space is required to accommodate the probe. The nose of any combat aircraft is usually filled with the radar processing computers, so maybe there just wasn't enough space inside the Rafale's small nose for a fully retractable probe.