The Eurofighter Typhoon beat the F22 in real tests!

[Youtube]

News about the new Typhoon  radar, CAESAR (Captor Active Electronically Scanned Array Rada)r:

Read: http://www.eurofighter.com/downloads/Update1-2007_FINAL.pdf

[EUcitizens]

bobsyouruncle :

"My son's with BAE over in the states, so I follow these things a little closer than most, and I must say that most of these claims are completely based on rumor and speculation. The Typhoon is certainly a great plane (been a long time coming, though) and a source of pride for the UK, but the Raptor is also quite spectacular, based on things I've read, what bits I've watched, and what my son shares with me from time to time. He's not allowed to reveal many things, but what he can absolutely boggles my mind. Its capabilities, both offensively and defensively, are startling, and seem to be, at least on paper, the equal of the Typhoon. And I've got odds that none of it will matter, as we are going to be allied with the USA for a long while."

Youtube:

"bobsyouruncle" is an American

Priceless to listen to the made up story though 

 

bobsyouruncle:
 
"Not an American, Youtube, but I've considered the move, so I'd be nearer my boy. Why would you make that claim?"

-To end your discussion, "bobsyouruncle" is 100% an American........

[Youtube]

Dozer, an F-22 Testpilot seems to be talking about the youtube F-22 video we posted before: 
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E</a>
€

dozerf22 said this on 11.september 2007 - 01:27:15 AM - link: http://www.fencecheck.com/forums/index.php?topic=6835.msg159156;topicseen

OK - on to the youtube video.  Give me a break!!  Yep it's expensive - so what?  What's a pilot's life worth when his country sends him to war?  What's his experience worth to the same country?  Of course it's expensive per copy when you buy less, it'll only get more so (ref. the B-2).  Of course I'd like to have more than 183.  War in Iraq & Afghanistan hurts the funding, if Islamic extremist would just disappear this wouldn't be such an issue...be nice to have that funding.  Part of the extension to the program was lack of support from DOD and civilian leadership at the time of cutbacks and our peace dividend through the 90's, there was certainly plenty of blame to go around - bottom line it wasn't a top priority and the program suffered as a result.  If it had been a priority all along I believe it would have been different (it's amazing what we can do when we focus).  So what about the computer & avionics, upgrades & modernization programs have been a part of every military a/c program from the day it's born - no revelation there.  Why wouldn't we modernize or take advantage of newer / faster / better hardware & software? (Wouldn't we be criticized for NOT modernizng if we didn't have a plan?  Of course).  And what a/c isn't dated from the day it appears based on how fast technology is advancing, you can buy a top of the line computer today and within 18 months its outdated, just how can ANY a/c keep up with that??  All of the problems they mention - fixed or there's a plan in place to mitigate.  Same on the canopy, he could have gotten out if he needed to, it's called canopy jettision, they make it sound like he would have died if the jet caught on fire.  They didn't want to risk damaging the a/c by jettisioning the canopy so easier to cut it open (by the way that problem is fixed too).  Like all a/c you find problems as you go. 

As I have said before, show me ONE other a/c without problems (those without sin cast the first stone) and I'll stop the rant.  I've never said it's the number 1 a/c in the world, I've simply said if given the choice, there's no other a/c in the world I'd want to go into combat flying.  Read what you want from that.  How about this - I put the person who made the video in a Eurofighter, and me in a Raptor, with a combat load, and we go up and start 100 miles apart - fights on, real missiles and bullets and lets see who wins - if they're that confident they should have no problem with that challenge.  But something tells me they might show up DNIF that morning unable to fly.   

Propaganda is just that.  The Eurofighter & other modern a/c are extremely capable a/c as are their pilots - I'll talk to them all day about capabilities and who can best who (makes for great story telling in the bar too!). 

But consider this - with all these modern a/c being produced / fielded - they just prove our argument we NEED this 5th gen fighter called the F-22 and it's not a cold war relic, we're behind the power curve with our older a/c - hmmm, how about that! 

[bobsyouruncle]

Based on what spurious information? You're quite wrong, but humor me and state why you're making such a claim.

[Youtube]

Your name "bob" says it all, southern USA, but admins on forums can also often see what country users come from.......Just like the F-22 isnt invisible with its stealth, neither are internet users.

[bobsyouruncle]

You aren't up on Cockney rhyming games, are you mate? An administrator may see an IP address, but what, if anything, does that have to with my home country? And why would he or she have such a keen interest in where I'm from or where I reside? I feel I've become a part in someone's childish game. I originally just read your post and thought it was awfully one-sided, and added my take. Sorry if it got you ruffled.

[EUcitizens]

bobsyouruncle :

"My son's with BAE over in the states, so I follow these things a little closer than most, and I must say that most of these claims are completely based on rumor and speculation. The Typhoon is certainly a great plane (been a long time coming, though) and a source of pride for the UK, but the Raptor is also quite spectacular, based on things I've read, what bits I've watched, and what my son shares with me from time to time. He's not allowed to reveal many things, but what he can absolutely boggles my mind. Its capabilities, both offensively and defensively, are startling, and seem to be, at least on paper, the equal of the Typhoon. And I've got odds that none of it will matter, as we are going to be allied with the USA for a long while."

Youtube said:

"bobsyouruncle" is an American. Priceless to listen to the made up story though  

bobsyouruncle said:
  
"Not an American, Youtube, but I've considered the move, so I'd be nearer my boy. Why would you make that claim?"

Admin said: "To end your discussion, "bobsyouruncle" is 100% an American........"

bobsyouruncle  
Based on what spurious information? You're quite wrong, but humor me and state why you're making such a claim.

OK bob, since you asked for it, I will.

- All posters in a forum and every other place on the net leave a signature in form of an IP-address. You claim to be from the UK, but forum-software say you write from the US. Here is an example:

- Since you keept claiming to be from the UK even though the forum show you are not, i took a look at your comments:



- Now, if i check where this message is sent from, i get this:  



- Lets take a look at another message from you "BOB".



- And if we check where this message is written from we get this:



- So perhaps now you can understand why i have a hard time to believe you are from the UK "bobsyouruncle", and given both messages come from Lockheed Martin, the company behind the F-22, I will consider you to be a "concern troll" from Lockheed Martin Corporation.



- If you wonder what a "concern troll" is i can refer you to the Wiki definition:

Concern troll

A concern troll is a pseudonym created by a user whose point of view is opposed to the one his/her sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view (for example, Democrats or fans of the Prius), and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals but with some "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group. [9]

For example, in 2006 a top staffer for then-Congressman Charlie Bass (R-NH) was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass's opponent Democrat Paul Hodes on several liberal NH blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH." "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable. Bass ended up losing the election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

bobsyouruncle:  
Based on what spurious information? You're quite wrong, but humor me and state why you're making such a claim.

- I hope that answered your question "BOB".

[EUcitizens]

Due to manipulative behavior from what appears to be several Lockheed Martin computers, posting on EUcitizens.eu will now require a full login, and members will no longer be able to modify or delete own posts, furthermore i regret to inform you that "bobsyouruncle" have been banned, trolls like that cannot be accepted on this board.

Forum moderator

[EU citizen]

bobsyouruncle :

"My son's with BAE over in the states, so I follow these things a little closer than most, and I must say that most of these claims are completely based on rumor and speculation. The Typhoon is certainly a great plane (been a long time coming, though) and a source of pride for the UK, but the Raptor is also quite spectacular, based on things I've read, what bits I've watched, and what my son shares with me from time to time. He's not allowed to reveal many things, but what he can absolutely boggles my mind. Its capabilities, both offensively and defensively, are startling, and seem to be, at least on paper, the equal of the Typhoon. And I've got odds that none of it will matter, as we are going to be allied with the USA for a long while."

- Seems like Lockheed Martin dont like us to talk about "High rider 10" - How the Typhoon beat the F-22.......

One can only ask if its corporate policy for Lockheed Martin to troll forums like this?

[EU citizen]

More sources about the Eurofighter Typhoon vs. the F-22.

This one is from

September 12, 2007 - (Flight International)- Blue sky thinking - http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2007/09/12/2932307.htm

- Its very long but here is the part confirming the Typhoon and Raptor have flown together:

US deployment: The RAF's 17 Sqn OEU has routinely deployed two aircraft and around 30 personnel to the USA to operate alongside US fighters including the Lockheed MartinF-22A Raptor. "The vast majority of this work is about making sure that the integration of the two platforms is working," says Walker. Asked how the fighters compare, he says: "If you want to say that stealth is a determining factor then Typhoon stands second to the F-22. But I think that as we do more work, the Typhoon will more than hold its own. It's the balance of how you use it, rather than what it is."BAE Typhoon project test pilot Mark Bowman sees even less of a capability gap. "The F-22 is three times the cost, but you would struggle to see any advantage in the cockpit design - the cost is there to maintain stealth," he says. "Typhoon is most likely equivalent, if not better. Upcoming commitments for the UK Typhoon force include involvement in a UK combined qualified weapons instructor course and possible participation in a Red Flag exercise in the USA. "We want to integrate with a multinational package and are always looking for a way to challenge the aircraft and the pilots," says Atha

- Here is a picture of the quoted pilot:


- The picture above is from a eurofighter newsletter, notice where Mark Bowman is from, he is a "test pilot from BAE Systems Warton" - Now where did we hear about such a pilot?:

Source:  www.eurofighter.com/news/article221.asp or 2 - Friday 10 June 2005

In early 2005, Eurofighter Typhoon made its first transatlantic deployment. Under the 'Exercise High Rider' nickname, the Air Warfare Centre (AWC) conducts routine trials work on the United States western ranges, taking advantage of significant overland airspace, good weather and instrumented range infrastructure to maximise operational test and evaluation output from these facilities.

Exercise High Rider 10 took place at the United States Naval Air Weapons Range China Lake in California. Taking part in the deployment were the Harrier GR7 and Tornado GR4 aircraft of the AWC's Fast Jet and Weapons Operational Evaluation Unit (FJWOEU) based at RAF Coningsby and a Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft from the Typhoon combined test team.

The aircraft was deployed from BAE Systems Warton, crewed by a BAE Systems test pilot and a Typhoon Operational Evaluation Unit 17(R) Squadron pilot. BT005, a twin-seat series production aircraft, made the transatlantic crossing with the help of RAF VC10 and Tristar refuelling assets, before conducting an unaccompanied transit across the USA from Bangor Maine to China Lake, stopping to refuel at Little Rock Arkansas and Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico. The Eurofighter Typhoon began flying again immediately after its arrival undertaking trials work to evaluate the aircraft's weapon system in an operational environment.

Exercise High Rider 10 recovered to the UK at the end of the deployment.

- Perhaps now you can understand why he said this:

BAE Typhoon project test pilot Mark Bowman sees even less of a capability gap. "The F-22 is three times the cost, but you would struggle to see any advantage in the cockpit design - the cost is there to maintain stealth.Typhoon is most likely equivalent, if not better.

And now add this report from

"internatinal AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45. - ISNB: 1-880588-91-9 (casebound) or ISBN: 1473-9917.

"more recently, there have been repeated reports that two RAF Typhoons deployed to the USA for OEU trails work have been flying against the F-22 at NAS China Lake, and have peformed better than was expected. There was little suprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-boresight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight, but the aircraft did cause a suprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a suprisingly long rate. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BWR engagement was canceled, and "the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more .

- When this incident was reported on a website frequented by front-line RAF aircrew a senior RAF officer urged an end to the converstaion on security grounds"

[EU citizen]

Only a "few" F-22 bugs are mentioned in the movie ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIvgBbXKL5E ) to keep sources closer to 2007 (and because file was only allowed to be 100 MB), but here is a list of more relevant info from 2003. They say they have a plan to fix these bugs, but its the same bugs thats repeated in 2007, so if you wonder why the F-22 always fly soo slow in videos (unless they play it 3-5 times faster than recorded), here is why:

GAO 2003 - http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03603t.pdf

However, problems have surfaced related to some overheating concerns during high-speed flight-testing, reliability, avionics that perform radar, communication, navigation, identification and electronic warfare functions as well as excess movement of the vertical tails. Modifications are being made to some test aircraft to address some of these problems. For now, however, testing in some areas is restricted. In 2001, we reported on continuing increases in aircraft weight and that more frequent maintenance than planned on the aircraft was being required. We also reported on structural inadequacies in the aft (rear) fuselage and on problems with the separation of some materials within the horizontal tail section and cracking of the clear section of the canopy. In 2002, we again reported that the F/A-22’s performance could be affected by increased aircraft weight and maintenance needs as well as a potential problem with “buffeting”, or excessive movement, of the aircraft’s vertical tails. We also continued to report on problems with the separation of materials within the horizontal tail section and cracking of the clear section of the canopy. We reported last month that the F/A-22 developmental program did not meet key performance goals established for fiscal year 2002 and continues to confront numerous technical challenges, specifically:

• Avionics instability: Software instability has hampered efforts to integrate advanced avionics capabilities into the F/A-22 system. Avionics control and integrated airborne electronics and sensors are designed to provide an  increased awareness of the situation around the pilot. The Air Force told us avionics have failed or shut down during numerous tests of F/A-22 aircraft due to software problems. The shutdowns have occurred when the pilot attempts to use the radar, communication, navigation, identification, The cost limitation, before adjustment under the act’s provisions, was $43.4 billon. Performance Issues and electronic warfare systems concurrently. Although the plane can still be flown after the avionics have failed, the pilot is unable to successfully demonstrate the performance of the avionics. Therefore, the Air Force has had to extend the test program schedule. The Air Force has recognized that the avionics problems pose a high technical risk to the F/A-22 program, and in June 2002 the Air Force convened a special team to address the problem. According to the team, the unpredictable nature of the shutdowns was not surprising considering the complexity of the avionics system. The team recommended that the software be stabilized in the laboratory before releasing it to flight-testing. The team further recommended conducting a stress test on the software system architecture to reduce problems and ensure it is operating properly. The Air Force implemented these recommendations. Further, the Air Force extended the avionics schedule to accommodate avionics stability testing and it now plans to complete avionics testing in the first quarter of 2005. However, Air Force officials stated they do not yet understand the problems associated with the instability of the avionics software well enough to predict when they will be able to resolve this problem.

• Vertical fin buffeting: Under some circumstances, the F/A-22 experiences violent movement, or buffeting, of the vertical fins in the tail section of the
aircraft. Buffeting occurs as air, moving first over the body and the wings of the aircraft, places unequal pressures on the vertical fins and rudders.
The buffeting problem has restricted the testing of aerial maneuvers of the aircraft. In addition, unless the violent movement is resolved or the fins strengthened, the fins will break over time because the pressures experienced exceed the strength limits of the fins. This could have an impact on the expected structural life of the aircraft. Lockheed Martin has developed several modifications to strengthen the vertical fins.

• Overheating concerns: Overheating in the rear portions of the aircraft has significantly restricted the duration of high-speed flight-testing. As the F/A-22 flies, heat builds up inside several areas in the rear of the aircraft. Continued exposure to high temperatures would weaken these areas. For example, a portion of the airframe that sits between the engines’ exhausts experiences the highest temperatures. This intense heat could weaken or damage the airframe. To prevent this heat buildup during flight-testing, the aircraft is restricted to flying just over 500 miles per hour, about the same of the speed as a modern jet liner, and significantly below the supercruise requirement. Currently, the F/A-22 flies with temperature sensors in those areas of the aircraft and slows down whenever the temperature approaches a certain level. The Air Force may incorporate a modification that adds copper sheets to the rear of the aircraft to alleviate the problem. The Air Force began these modifications in January 2003 and plans to complete them by July 2003.

• Horizontal tail material separations: F/A-22 aircraft have experienced separations of materials in the horizontal tail and the shaft, which allow the tail to pivot. Because the separations reduce tail strength, the Air Force restricted flight-testing of some aircraft until it had determined that this problem would not affect flight safety during testing. The Air Force and the contractor initially believed that improvements to the aircraft’s manufacturing process would solve this problem. However, the Air Force has determined that it could only solve this problem by redesigning the aircraft’s tail. The Air Force plans to conduct flight-testing of the redesigned tail between February 2004 and April 2004.

• Airlift support requirements: The Air Force estimates it will not meet the F/A-22 airlift support requirement—a key performance parameter.8 The
airlift support requirement is that 8 C-141 aircraft or their equivalents would be sufficient to deploy a squadron of 24 F/A-22s for 30 days without resupply. Today, the Air Force estimates that 8.8 C-141 equivalents will be necessary.

• Impact of maintenance needs on performance: The F/A-22’s performance may also be affected by maintenance needs that exceed established
objectives. The Air Force estimates that the F/A-22 should, at this point in its development, be able to complete 1.67 flying hours between maintenance actions and 1.95 flying hours by the end of development. However, aircraft are requiring five times the maintenance actions expected at this point in development. As of November 2002, the development test aircraft have been completing only .29 flying hours between maintenance actions. Therefore, the development test aircraft are spending more time than planned on the ground undergoing maintenance.

[EU citizen]

Here is more facts about the F-22, this one is wirtten by retired USAF Colonel Everest Riccioni, a legendary fighter pilot and designer, who pioneered supersonic cruise technology and the F-16 Lightweight Fighter Program:

DESCRIPTION OF OUR FAILING DEFENSE ACQUSITION SYSTEM AS EXEMPLIFIED BY THE HISTORY, NATURE AND ANALYSIS
0F THE USAF F–22 RAPTOR PROGRAM A NATIONAL TRAGEDY — MILITARY AND ECONOMIC, March 8, 2005

http://www.pogo.org/m/dp/dp-fa22-Riccioni-03082005.pdf

- the report is found at: http://www.pogo.org/p/defense/da-050301-fa22.html

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The F-22 Raptor acquisition provides a classic example of the inability of our Department of Defense to develop and field a modern weapon relevant to our present and foreseeable wars. The saga of its course through conception, design, development and testing is the subject. Almost every ill in the DoD system is made manifest by the F-22 acquisition. Resolutions to the problems are clear, and they are remarkably simple. The F-22, an outgrowth of the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF), was conceived as the air superiority aircraft to replace the F–15 fleet, and to give the US the ability to conduct Offensive Counter Air Operations deep inside Russia during the Cold War. To this end, the ATF was designed to possess 4 major characteristics (so called requirements, really desires) — 1. Extremely High Airbattle Maneuverability and Performance, 2. Very High Stealth, 3. A Significant Supersonic Cruise Combat  Radius, and 4. Exceptionally Modern High-Technology Avionics to support lethality and to   provide pilot awareness for survivability. The set of requirements were (predictably) too ambitious to be met. A cost limit placed on each aircraft was $35M, to purchase a fleet of 750 to 800 aircraft for $40B. To help maintain the cost limit and to ensure its extremely high performance, a weight limit was set at 50,000 lbs. The desires and constraints violated basic laws of physics and aeronautical engineering, and could not be met. The immediate results were that the weight (typically) swelled to 63,000 lbs and the cost soared for two reasons

— a) the cost was grossly underestimated by Air Force Systems Command, and
-  b) it was continually misrepresented to seduce operational Air Force commanders, The Congress, and The Public into believing the aircraft was affordable.

The cost distortions rose from its advocacy limit of a Total Program Cost of $50 Million to the most recent statement by the Chief of Staff of the USAF of $257M (GAO report $361M in 2006, note by EU citizen). Despite an increase of funding from $40B to $70B, the number of purchasable aircraft fell from the initial combat need of 750 aircraft to 275 aircraft (183 in 2007, note by EU citizen) and the evidence is that it will likely drop to 180 or 150 aircraft. These force levels cannot provide air superiority against any major world power. Hence the current fleets of fighters—the F-16, F-15, and the USN F-18 (two of these weapons systems are still in production) cannot be replaced. The planned cost misrepresentations were distorted by a factor of 5!

The 4 major characteristics were not met. The soaring weight increase ruined two of the requirements.
The 26 percent increase in gross weight led to a wing loading and thrust-to-weight ratio that are totally comparable to those of the F-15C. That means there was no increase in performance or maneuverability for reasons of physics. The weight increase caused a decrease in fuel fraction from a very proper 36 percent to 29 percent—a little low even for a subcruising fighter. The highly touted Supercruise characteristic was failed. The USAF hides it behind an aspect of supercruise rather than stating its supersonic radius with combat allowance and landing reserves. The 50-year-old F–104A-19 can match the F-22’s supersonic cruise radius! Stealth was not fully achieved because in being the largest fighter in the sky it is the most visible. It is “visible” to infrared sensors and identifiable by its sound. Its radar can be sensed by high-tech Russian sensors. Its radar signature is admittedly small in the forward quarter but only to airborne radars. The aircraft is detectable by high-power, low-frequency ground based radars. The avionics system is a semi-success, but it was improperly integrated and uses old state of the art chips. It will require complete replacement and  redesign into a federated system using modern chips.

- since this source is from March 8, 2005, not all numbers are correct now, the state of the F-22 project is even worse today! A few updated numbers are written in red..........

[EU citizen]

More on the Typhoon vs. the F-22:

Source: EADS (company behind Typhoon)

The Eurofighter- praised by pilotsThe impressions of pilots who have flown the Eurofighter are summed up graphically by Craig Penrice, test pilot at BAE Systems, in the words, "When you land after flying it, you are beaming with pleasure."

The Eurofighter has also received praise from unexpected quarters, which makes it even more significant: General John P. Jumper, Commander-inChief of the US Air Force, said after flying the Eurofighter that he was impressed with it. Right after his flight on the Eurofighter on 20 July 2004, Jumper said, "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter." In particular, Jumper praised the Eurofighter's agility, manoeuvrability, acceleration and precise navigation.

And recently the General praised the Eurofighter once again, in March 2005: "The Eurofighter is very impressive." He reserved special praise for the performance of the aircraft in aerial combat. According to the General, the European jet is easy to fly, even under heavy loadings- "It was developed for that. The version that I flew, with its avionics, the colour display systems - everything was top-class. The agility of the aircraft in close aerial combat was truly impressive." The Commander-in-Chief of the US Air Force made direct comparisons on this occasion between the Eurofighter and the latest American fighter aircraft, the F-22 Raptor. He said that the Eurofighter was extremely agile and also very advanced from the technological point of view. Although the two aircraft have different designs and are used operationally in slightly different ways, in his view the Eurofighter and the F-22 are both "hightech aircraft" of the highest level. General Jumper is the only pilot in the world to have personally flown both aircraft types.

Alot of different sources have this quote of jumper: "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter."  - but you wont find it on WIKI, since F-22 fanatics "control" both the article on the F-22 and the Eurofighter Typhoon, and they will delete all statements not to the favour of the F-22.
 

[EU citizen]

2 new Typhoon movies (not from here):

Towards the front line
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAhybO2aEiE" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAhybO2aEiE</a>

Anything else...Is something less
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s71FYZDvCw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s71FYZDvCw</a>
- Seems to be BAE productions.......

[mr.euro]

Perhaps look into "Air Forces Monthly - January 2007" also:

"The MoD said it would not be putting Typhoons up against the Indian Airforce Su-30s as a one on one fight. However, it did happen and there is HUD video to prove it. Apparently two inexperienced Typhoon pilots returned with big grins on their faces, the Su-30s were toasted, all the Su-30's air display antics amounted to nothing, the Typhoons proved too nimble and too powerful for the Russian aircraft. The Typhoons were also not clean configured.
During the Typhoon's visit to the US in 2005 it was pitted againt the F-22, this was not officially confirmed. The Typhoon could not see the F-22 but could detect that it was being painted by the F-22 and took "appropriate" measures with defensive aids. In one on one combat the Typhoon did the same job as on the Su-30, the F-22 could not handle the Typhoons close in and were shocked. It did not go all the Typhoon's way but the Americans had a sobering encounter, with the F-22 sacrificing much for stealth"........................

- Needs to check quote first, but try to look into it........