The complexity and objectives that come with air power make warship planning seem simple. However, there is no doubting that the UK is facing a challenge: it is quite unclear how we will transition from the fighter aircraft we currently have to those we require.
The fourth-generation Typhoon, which is already ageing, is produced by the UK, Germany, Italy, and Spain. The RAF determines that it can afford to preserve more than 90 of its typhoons in a state that could allow for flight. It was handed 160, but 53 were the Tranche 1 type, which was never very effective for ground warfare and is now virtually being phased out.
These days, the Typhoon can at least carry a variety of devastating weaponry, such as the well-known Storm Shadow standoff cruise missile (although we have handed a lot of ours to Ukraine) and the long-range Meteor air-to-air missile.
| Attribute | Eurofighter Typhoon T1 | Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II |
|---|---|---|
| Photo | Eurofighter Typhoon RIAT 2016 | F 35A Lightning II |
| Country | Germany | United States |
| Manufactured | 2003 โ Present | 2011 โ Present |
| ICAO | – | F35 |
| Price | $90 million | $115.5 million |
| Avionics | BAE Systems Tranche 2 avionics | JSF Cooperative Avionics |
| Engine | 2x Eurojet EJ200 afterburning turbofan | 1x Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 |
| Engine Type | Turbofan | Turbofan |
| Power | 13,500 pound-force | 43,000 pound-force |
| Max Cruise Speed | 1147 knots / 2,124 Km/h | 1043 knots / 1,932 Km/h |
| Travel Range | 2,047 Nautical Miles / 3,791 Km | 1,500 Nautical Miles / 2,778 Km |
| Service Ceiling | 65,000 feet | 65,000 feet |
| Rate of Climb | 62,600 feet/min | 40,000 feet/min |
| Take Off Distance | 91 meters | 168 meters |
| Landing Distance | 213 meters | 213 meters |
| Max Take Off Weight | 23,500 Kg | 31,751 Kg |
| Max Payload | 6,486 Kg | 8,160 Kg |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 1,642 gallons | 2,760 gallons |
| Seats – Economy | 2 seats | 1 seat |
| Exterior Length | 4.71 meters | 15.7 meters |
| Wing Span | 5.28 meters | 10.7 meters |
The F-35B, which is jointly operated by the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force (RAF), is the only other aircraft we have. It is the sole fifth-generation, contemporary fighter in Britain. Since no other model can be launched from our no-catapult carriers, we have the B model, the vertical-thrust variant.
The issue with the B is that fans and flaps are found where you would expect to find guns and gasoline. In addition to having a permanently smaller battle radius and weapon load-out than the other models, it is also more expensive to purchase and operate. Additionally, we currently only have three weapons that we can equip it with: a British short-range missile, a mostly British smartbomb, and an American medium-range missile.
Unfortunately, these weapons cannot be carried in the internal weapons bays, thus if they are utilised, the plane is not stealthy. We don’t have access to firearms. We currently only have 34 F-35Bs, four of which are test aircraft housed in the United States. For present, we have placed an order for 48.
Only 30 of the roughly 100 jets are actually modern, which is not the kind of air power that will dissuade Vladimir Putin. Specifically, we need fifth-generation stealth jets equipped with a variety of powerful weapons and specialised equipment if we want to suppress his air defences and fight his army in the Gulf or Libyan style, which involves destroying his troops and armour from the air without a response, unlike Ukraine, which is a bloodbath of drones and artillery.
Tempest is expected to be a large, powerful creature. Compared to the Typhoon’s comparable measurements of 11.09 meters and 620 miles, it is expected to have a wingspan of 16.5 meters and a combat radius of up to 1240 miles. It is therefore large and ambitious based on what we now know.
The only strategy we now have for the future is the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), which is a trilateral project involving Japan, Italy, and ourselves. In order to replace our numerous current fleets, this is expected to create a sixth-generation manned fighter jet, called “Tempest,” which will go into service in the middle of the 1930s. Saudi Arabia and Canada have recently expressed interest, and Australia has now “been briefed.”
European countries looked for ways to counter the Soviet Union’s constant threat of war during the Cold War. In the meantime, the United States sought to replace its ageing fleet of aircraft with a multi-role aircraft across the Pacific. The Eurofighter and F-35, respectively, provided the solutions they needed.
THE F-35 LIGHTNING II
This fifth-generation fighter ensures US dominance in air and land operations by fusing speed, agility, and cutting-edge stealth technologies. The majority of US fighters (A-10, F-16, F/A-18, and AV-8B) in all branches of the military are expected to be replaced by the F-35 Lighting II.
The jet has intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities in addition to electronic warfare. Sustaining air superiority is crucial to maintaining international security. The F-35 is built to combat known and present dangers to this stability.
THE EUROFIGHTER TYPHOON
Every side in a conflict aims to outmanoeuvre their adversaries, and this has been the case for ages. In order to produce the greatest European fighter jet, European nations banded together and funded research and development of the Eurofighter in the 1980s in response to a more armed and sophisticated neighbour.
This delta-winged warplane can engage in dogfights and surface attacks because of its ability to fly beyond visual range. Because of its supercruise capabilities, it can go faster than Mach 1 without using its afterburner.
The aircraft currently acts as the backbone of NATO’s European air defence. It also aids in covering the Middle East, the United Kingdom, and the South Atlantic.
Similarities Between Typhoon and F-35
Apart from having a one-man crew, the two are very different in terms of similarities. In fact, these two planes were designed to serve different purposes. They are just as deadly in spite of this.
Differences between the F-35 and Typhoon
Both aeroplanes are amazing, yet they differ in a few respects. The first is that the two are slightly different in price.
The Eurofighter is more expensive than the F-35, yet it is still reasonably priced to fly and maintain. In contrast to its rival, the Eurofighter is more agile and nimble. Despite this, the F-35 has the first look-first shoot-first kill edge because of its sophisticated avionics and ability to operate stealthily.
IDENTIFYING THE CRITICAL ISSUES
The debate begins by noting three severe challenges. The first challenge revolves with deciding the the site of operations. If the involvement is within Europe, do the aircraft require the dimensions and range planned for Indo-Pacific operations? This raises worries regarding whether involvement in such a faraway place is even required or useful.
CAN WE ADVANCE TO SIXTH-GEN TECHNOLOGY?
The second problem looks into the sustainability of shifting straight from fourth-generation fighters to sixth-generation technology within a decade. Historically, the United States took considerably longer and leaned on many aircraft models to reach fifth-generation features. While improved techniques, like establishing ground-based labs such as Replica, are intriguing, obtaining sixth-generation capabilities by 2035 appears unduly ambitious.
A more realistic schedule implies early to mid-2040s for fifth-generation capability. Furthermore, historical patterns imply a possible cost surgeโsimilar to the Typhoon project, where costs climbed by 75%, resulting in forecasts of UK investment skyrocketing from ยฃ25bn to ยฃ44bn. This equals to the cost of four Dreadnought submarines or seven times the price of two aircraft carriers.
Even with all this spending, manufacture might deliver only 100 jets, each costing over ยฃ400m, making their practical utility uncertain.
IMMEDIATE ACTIONS UNTIL 2045
“What should be done now, given the long lead times for advanced technology?” is the final question posed by the third issue. Purchasing additional fourth-generation Typhoons to assist European and local companies is one recommendation. However, military officers are hesitant because these jets are unable to resist sophisticated Russian S-series anti-air missile systems.
THE F-35 DEBATE
Attention moves to the F-35 family, deemed extremely proficient yet contentious. Pilots appreciate its performance, but others, including armchair experts, vent displeasure. Despite misgivings, most Western nations eligible to purchase the F-35 have grabbed the opportunity, showing its superiority over fourth-gen jets. The conspiracy claim of a “kill switch” is dismissed as unsubstantiated, arguing for deliberate decisions about the U.S. cooperation.
Plans to provide carriers with these systems, guaranteeing interoperability with F-35Cs, were formulated between 2010 and 2012. An estimated ยฃ2 billion was spent on each carrier, which is equivalent to building brand-new ships. Opponents contended that these expenses were not justified by the cost reduction from choosing F-35Cs versus F-35Bs. The UK is now considering its options in light of this lost chance.
VARIANT-SPECIFIC DIFFICULTIES
- F-35B: Its weapons and range are limited.
- F-35A: Incompatible with aircraft carriers, limited to runway use.
- F-35C: Suitable for carrier operations, this aircraft has weapons and range similar to the F-35A, but it is less expensive to purchase and run. However, arrester lines and catapults are required for carriers.
The National Audit Office eventually revealed that the cats-and-traps pricing was exaggerated. It’s pretty obvious that we could equip our ships with cats and traps at a reasonable cost, especially now that the US has figured out the essential electric catapult technology.
The best course of action, in my opinion, would be to start purchasing a sizable fleet of F-35Cs so that we could deploy a full carrier air wing and yet have an ample supply of fifth-generation aircraft on hand to handle any RAF missions that may arise. Since many other countries are receiving the B, we might progressively give our F-35Bs to someone else who desired them.
In our carrier air wings, catapults and traps would also address a number of other problems. We would be able to operate air-to-air tankers, most likely uncrewed ones like those used by the US Navy, and replace the inadequate option of deploying Crowsnest helicopters with fixed-wing radar planes. Air tanking increases the carrier’s range and greatly improves the safety and adaptability of air wing operations.
Though they will be lighter than those needed for the F-35C, Project Ark Royal is currently investigating alternatives to launch airborne early warning, tanking, and electronic warfare drones with a catapult. Why couldn’t we do both?
Both RAF and RN would wind up being far more powerful if we did.
However, we could still be too corporately ashamed of our catapult flip-flopping from fifteen years ago to make another one. Or maybe it’s not okay to spend any money right now. This appears to be the case in light of the recent announcement to pay off our amphibious ships. I don’t think any of this is particularly “war footing.”
Therefore, we may get F-35As for the RAF, which is what they truly want anyhow, and continue to fly F-35Bs off our carriers if we refuse to equip our ships with catapults in order to operate superior, less expensive F-35C. That idea would work, but it would produce more ships and have fewer payoffs.
At about the same time, other alternative systems are coming together. One is the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), a European program spearheaded by France, Germany, and Spain that develops sixth-generation fighter aircraft and air combat systems. Similarly, the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program in the United States. I’m not seeing any real discussions about joining either of those. By the way, these are all “optionally crewed” aeroplanes. Pilots aren’t going extinct anytime soon.
Of course, there are also a plethora of uncrewed and drone possibilities. These are growing quickly, and they could do so even more quickly if we make better use of our numerous SMEs. Japan and Germany have already reached agreements on what is now referred to as the Gen 6 “small platform.” These aren’t a replacement right now, but they are the solution if you’re looking for “cheap” and “mass.”
They can assist, but they are unable to close what appears to be a developing competence gap. Additionally, they won’t cost ยฃ400 million each.
These, however, are diversions. We need something better than fourth-generation fighters, and we need it now, not in ten or twenty years. More F-35s are the only thing that fulfils the bill; the version is irrelevant. The more you examine the political, economic, and prosperity justifications for GCAP/Tempest, the more you know how important it is to make it succeed.
However, the more you consider its ambition and complexity, the more you realise that it cannot be our sole strategy after fourth generation.
Assuming the F-35s haven’t been altered so dramatically during construction that they are still capable of flying, we will at least still be here when the few billion-pound Tempests finally arrive if we acquire them and make the necessary investments in their supporting infrastructure and personnel.
Or, like we always do, we can wring our hands, claim it’s all too costly, and simply accept a persistent capacity gap.
- Also Read : The 10 Best Cities to Visit in Spring 2025
- The Secret Superfoodโs for a Healthier Heart
Whatโs Better About the Eurofighter Typhoon
The Eurofighter delivers an enviable level of maneuverability and efficiency. The aircraft is designed with the possibility of future upgrades and capabilities in mind. It excels against the F-35 in these areas:
Speed
The jet features twin EJ200 power plants, each capable of producing a staggering 90Kn of thrust. This means that the typhoon can reach speeds up to twice that of sound, with a top speed of Mach 2. It can attain a speed of 1,100mph slightly under 3 minutes after take-off- you blink and miss it.
Maneuverability
Did you know that the plane is highly unstable and was intentionally designed that way? To some, this is a great disadvantage, but it makes the plane highly agile and maneuverable.
Furthermore, this reduces drag while increasing lift at subsonic speeds, making the aircraft suitable for short take-offs and landing (ideal for aircraft carriers). At 64,993 ft, the Eurofighter enjoys a higher cruising ceiling and a broader range of 1,802 miles than the F-35โs 1,379 miles.
Lower Costs
Despite costing more per unit compared to the F-35 ($106 million/$94 million), the Eurofighter is way cheaper to operate and maintain in the long run. It also consumes lower amounts of fuel and isย more dominantย in any dog fight.
Whatโs Better About The F-35
Stealth
What is stealth? By no means am I referring to โstar-warsโ or โAvengerโ kind of stealth- thatโs years ahead. By employing a mix of design, technology, and tactics, the F-35 can elude or mix enemy capabilities of locating and destroying the craft.
Through basic designs such as having an internal fuel and weapons bay, embedded mission sensors, external shape, etc., the lightning II can achieve unprecedented stealth permeance.
Weapon Capacity
At 29,002 lb. when empty and 70,107 lb. mission ready, the F-35 is more than capable of housing a wide range of bombs and missiles internally. Depending on the mission environment, thereโs the option of carrying up to eight StormBreaker weapons externally on its wings.
The 6th Sense
Sensor fusion allows this stealth warcraft to scan heat signatures from other aircraft, analyze it then decide the threat level- all while being miles away. If the onboard computer determines thereโs a threat, it communicates to other F-35โs nearby. Pilots and ground crews have heightened situational awareness.
The jets never hunt alone, always as a pack. In no scenario can an enemy manage to sneak on any single aircraft. This means fewer jets are needed to cover vast amounts of airspace.
Conclusion
There is controversy around the F-35 program. Over its 60-year lifespan, it is anticipated to cost over $1 trillion, making it the most costly US defence project. Proponents of the idea say it will transform the game, although that hasn’t been shown yet.
In 2011, the UK’s Royal Air Force used the Eurofighter for the first time in combat over the deserts of Libya. It has an amazing payload, is quicker, less expensive to run, and can be modified to match changing combat requirements.
However, the nature of air combat is dynamic, and at this time, stealth will be more important than speed. The F-35 is therefore better equipped to compete with and surpass the Eurofighter in this situation.
