Last year I published the pictures taken at Decimomannu airbase during Starex exercise, of the kill markings on two MB.339CDs clearly showing the silhouettes of three (2+1) F-2000 Typhoons (virtually) shot down during training engagements that took place inside the ACMI range.
This time I suggest you having a look at the following video, appeared on Youtube, showing a dogfight during exercise Winter Hide 2011 in Grosseto involving at least one F-16 MLU of the RDAF (Royal Danish Air Force) and one F-2000 of the Aeronautica Militare (Italian Air Force, ItAF), ending with what seems to be the virtual downing of the Italian Typhoon by means of gun.
Although interesting, the video, that generated a lot of comments on both Twitter and various forums, doesn’t prove the F-16 is better than the Typhoon in an air-to-air scenario, for the same reasons I already explained in the above mentioned post about the presumed F-2000 kills by the MB.339CDs: unless we actually know the RoE (Rules of Engagement) that were used for that Winter Hide 2011 mission, we can’t truly understand what led the F-16 in such a position to be able to get a shot at the Typhoon.
By the way: did you notice that the first 1 vs 1, in the first part of the video, terminates at an altitude below 3.000 feet (according to the Radar Altimeter)?
Hi David, I’ve been in Grosseto for the Media Day held in occasion of Winter Hide 2011; during the briefing Col.Morelli (4° Stormo Commander) presented two videos, similar to the one you have just published.
The two videos rapresented a 1 vs 1 dogfight; the first was a Typhoon gun kill , the second was a Danish F-16’s one.
Both the commanders (Italian and Danish) underline exactly what you have written: in both cases one pilot made some “plus” combat manouvering than the other and viceversa; this doesn’t mean that one plane is better than the other.
Anyway it’s intersting to tell that the Danish commander admitted the Typhoon is a good 1vs1 fighter excpecially at medium/high altitudes…
Hi all,
I dont understand why there’arent videos about italian typhoon victory in dogfights posted on yuotube. It’s boring to watch only dogfights among greek and turkish f-16s, or french mirages flying low altitudes.
Our aviation should release the video where the typhoon “won” on the F16, so many ignorants will stop to insult our Aeronautica Militare Italiana for nothing.
But probably they still didn’t understood that importance of internet and to have good image by people.
Thanks.
What the pilot tells is basically that the F16 does have a chance against the Eurofighter at “lower speeds” -In other words: Usually not
The Viper is not a good slow speed fighter – that’s what Hornets are known for. Vipers had energy and range advantages over their contemporaries, including Mig-29s. Vipers are still deadly energy fighters, maybe not as good as Typhoon but close enough that good tactics can determine the outcome.
You people are forgetting some key points:
1. Anytime you are in an ‘on any given day’ situation where pilot skill and the randomness of dynamic air combat can produce a lopside Sopwith-kills-Raptor condition, you are fighting at a bad point in the envelope because you WANT your kills to be easy, predictable and totally dominant. And this is achievable, provide you stay in a regime where the technology matters more than pilot skill. For the Typhoon this is BVR with an F-Pole weapon which is 3-5 times farther reaching (and has a two way datalink besides) compared to the AIM-120C5/APG-66V on the F-16AM.
2. The profile you fly is the mission you will fight. If you are flying with A2G munitions on your jet, you’re essentially defensive and non-competitive in the A2A regime because you are supersonics thermal and G restricted with the targeting pod and racks, even before you take into account drag and wingloading. No supersonics = no pole boost = dead duck to a dedicated Air Superiority jet whose intercept at 40K and Mach 1.3 makes his weapon another 50% farther reaching (earlier shooting) than your best BVR shot.
3. The S2A threat predominates. Always. If you are flying over an active IADS, you have no margin for entry to the SAM WEZ and no hope of playing round-and-round-we-go visual fights in particular. Indeed, given the flat-plate effect of hassling highlights your visual signature to easily TEN TIMES what it would otherwise normally be visible at (WWII P-51 drivers coming south along the raid column could see Luftwaffe interceptors wheeling above and around the bomber boxes from upwards of 70nm away) and this alone brings more attention than you can survive from the ‘outside shooter’ threat. Such hawking the fight is considered unsportsmanlike in training but if you only fight as you train, and you teach yourself to resolve all air combat on the basis of 1v1 ‘my turn rate checking account vs. his’, you are going to win or lose the battle on 3-4dps of difference which equals 90-120 degrees of turn, minimum. If you train to hold the guy by the nose while your double attack or loose deuce buddy axes him from the back, you win in 40-60` to turn, maximum, and that’s a TIME DIFFERENTIAL of 5-6 seconds vs. 20+.
THINK people. This kind of display is LOMD idiocy put on for the entertainment of the stupid.
Certainly the Typhoon is one of the highest-performance fighter aircraft in the world. But the Viper still has fangs. For an “old” design, the Viper is still very competitive with anything flying except F-22 BVR.