eurofighter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are getting off the point here. We will not be in a conflict against the USA so having something that can win a turning fight against an F-15/ F-22 is just as un necessary as the capability its self. Unless there is a change in culture and significant investment in the supporting data sets required and supporting ISTAR the long range punch is rendered impotent.
In the last few years what has our AD force achieved?
The airframe is not as robust as say a Jag or Tornado and will not make it a good bed fellow with the Ground Attack role.
Some of the ac systems require specialist equiment which will make deployed ops difficult.
I agree with the previous comment.........enjoy the air displays whilst the rest of us support ops.
In the last few years what has our AD force achieved?
The airframe is not as robust as say a Jag or Tornado and will not make it a good bed fellow with the Ground Attack role.
Some of the ac systems require specialist equiment which will make deployed ops difficult.
I agree with the previous comment.........enjoy the air displays whilst the rest of us support ops.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Saudi deal makes it worthwhile for us to continue to bring on Typhoon. With the amount of 'surprises' in the Middle East over the last 15 years, the type may end up going head to head.
But we could do with a bit of balance: Please may we have some new helicopters - soon?
But we could do with a bit of balance: Please may we have some new helicopters - soon?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator
...At the risk of repeating the inter-war rolling 'no war for 5 years' approach)...
It was the Four Year Rule
Sorry for that
My A2 History was all about Appeasement and Neville
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
[QUOTE=jindabyne] But do you have a crystal ball that tells us there will be no conflict arising in the next 1 - 30 years in which an aircraft such as Typhoon will not be needed by the RAF? QUOTE]
If we modify the 1-30 and substitute 6-30 then we fit the pre-WWII profile.
I believe it is more important to have projects running on a slow stream rather than all in service and then a procurement freeze followed by a rush to try and catch up.
Moving FRES forward by 2 years still leaves a 4-year gap.
Dribbling Typhoon in means that the flow will continue for longer and can be ramped up much more easily (by diverting RSAF ac). The same was true of the F3. At the time OC Eng was real p*ss*d with diversion of airframe however history proved him wrong; we did not need them all at once, or at all!
If we modify the 1-30 and substitute 6-30 then we fit the pre-WWII profile.
I believe it is more important to have projects running on a slow stream rather than all in service and then a procurement freeze followed by a rush to try and catch up.
Moving FRES forward by 2 years still leaves a 4-year gap.
Dribbling Typhoon in means that the flow will continue for longer and can be ramped up much more easily (by diverting RSAF ac). The same was true of the F3. At the time OC Eng was real p*ss*d with diversion of airframe however history proved him wrong; we did not need them all at once, or at all!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats my point.............When the fire engine arrives ahead of all the other fire appliances it is very embarrasing to find out the hoses are too short and they have the wrong fire extinguishers on board.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Originally Posted by mcidiot
It was the Four Year Rule
Another success story was the aircraft carrier, however the author criticised Germany for not persevering in its development.
In the modern context this bears out what I was saying; get the proper aircraft in slowly and not all at once when they age and become a maintenance liability from the outset.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by nigegilb
Why not by a raptor?
The current cost, or "fly away cost" for one additional F-22 stands at about $137 million.
The current cost, or "fly away cost" for one additional F-22 stands at about $137 million.
My post about joining in the F-22 program was meant tongue-in-cheek as a analogy to the ever-popular F-35 drama currently playing out.
You are right about the unbelievable cost of each F-22. That's why we'll only wind up getting a 1/3 of the numbers of what we wanted. But when they started adding in all the bells, et al, the time and thus price went through the roof. Not much different than the Typhoon, in my opinion.
But, damn, the F-22 will make one helluva good cup of coffee!
Also agree about minding the neighbors out there - China and/or India within a generation, Russia maybe somewhat later. It's nice to have the proper tools in the shed or at least be able to get them at short notice vs. asking the bad guys to wait while we catch up.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You get what you pay for. I don't doubt the capability of Typhoon against the F15 and Russian equivilants, but it seems to me after casually researching the subject the Raptor wins hands down against Typhoon. And we are spending £28 Billion on the program.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,528
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I don't doubt the capability of Typhoon against the F15 and Russian equivilants, but it seems to me after casually researching the subject the Raptor wins hands down against Typhoon.
There's no point- I'm out of here.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: In the Doghouse...
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I may add a point, I was fortunate to watch the BAE Systems demo of the Typhoon at Farnborough, not the 29 Sqn one but the twin-seater tooled up with 6x 1,000lbs and that was an impressive sight, if there is one thing this jet will deliver, the ability truck bombs wherever they are needed, twice the number of LGBs than a GR4, and its able to guide them itself...
Nige,
I hope you talk less bol.locks when it comes to Hercs.
The total UK Typhoon programme cost was last given as £19.4 Bn (NAO MPR 2004. Omitted from MPR 2005 for reasons of commercial confidentiality). We are not "spending £28 Billion on the programme."
The unit price of Tranche 1 was £45.45 m (excluding R&D, production investment, etc.) and of Tranche 2 it's £42 m.
The last proper NAO average UPC was £49.1 m in major projects report 2004, though it included production investment costs and some weapons system costs, and so was higher than equivalent US UPCs, which don't.
The last NAO UPC (in major projects report 2005) was given as £64.8 m, but included fixed costs from Tranche 3, while being divided by the total number of aircraft in Tranche 1 and Tranche 2.
The F-22's cost dipped in FY2006 to a flyaway of $129 m according to the the USAF (though other sources give a higher figure) and with a Unit Weapons System Cost of $154 m. The next batch are expected to cost $141 m/$171 m, and the average is $156 m/$183 m.
About double the cost of Typhoon.
I hope you talk less bol.locks when it comes to Hercs.
The total UK Typhoon programme cost was last given as £19.4 Bn (NAO MPR 2004. Omitted from MPR 2005 for reasons of commercial confidentiality). We are not "spending £28 Billion on the programme."
The unit price of Tranche 1 was £45.45 m (excluding R&D, production investment, etc.) and of Tranche 2 it's £42 m.
The last proper NAO average UPC was £49.1 m in major projects report 2004, though it included production investment costs and some weapons system costs, and so was higher than equivalent US UPCs, which don't.
The last NAO UPC (in major projects report 2005) was given as £64.8 m, but included fixed costs from Tranche 3, while being divided by the total number of aircraft in Tranche 1 and Tranche 2.
The F-22's cost dipped in FY2006 to a flyaway of $129 m according to the the USAF (though other sources give a higher figure) and with a Unit Weapons System Cost of $154 m. The next batch are expected to cost $141 m/$171 m, and the average is $156 m/$183 m.
About double the cost of Typhoon.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but to the layman something designed so many years ago and put into service a decade or so behind schedule it's difficult to believe it to be cutting edge.
If it is a match for the latest US kit for how long will it stay that way?
If it is a match for the latest US kit for how long will it stay that way?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Green and Pleasant Land
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=brickhistory]
But, damn, the F-22 will make one helluva good cup of coffee!
QUOTE]
Brick - yes, but Typhoon makes a MUCH better cup of tea. And that's what's important to us (well, Brits anyway).
Ray :-)
But, damn, the F-22 will make one helluva good cup of coffee!
QUOTE]
Brick - yes, but Typhoon makes a MUCH better cup of tea. And that's what's important to us (well, Brits anyway).
Ray :-)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Boswell, we have a long history of taking in technology that has lots of promise but does not work as advertised and then making it work.
Think of software. Typhoo came in as a late Beta version. It is now, arguably at version 1.x. We expect version 2.0 and are already looking to version 3.
It is quite likely that Version 1.x will work better than version 2.0 when the latter is first delivered, not least because there will be new things to learn. Version 2.1 will then be better than 1.x and soon much better etc.
Once we have a good brew of tea we will be able to keep up with the competition until such time as a completely new way of brewing tea is created. We shall then have to consider buying or replicating this new product.
It might, for instance, be a small man-controllable UAV, launched from the A4xx and carrying AAM etc.
Think of software. Typhoo came in as a late Beta version. It is now, arguably at version 1.x. We expect version 2.0 and are already looking to version 3.
It is quite likely that Version 1.x will work better than version 2.0 when the latter is first delivered, not least because there will be new things to learn. Version 2.1 will then be better than 1.x and soon much better etc.
Once we have a good brew of tea we will be able to keep up with the competition until such time as a completely new way of brewing tea is created. We shall then have to consider buying or replicating this new product.
It might, for instance, be a small man-controllable UAV, launched from the A4xx and carrying AAM etc.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this talk of the US F series is rubbish. If it is the case that the Flygvapnet are scaling down their numbers requirement for Gripen, lease the surplus incorporating the Norwegian longer-legged mods and use an aircraft whose build-programme is partly British in any case. 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dorset
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What we all seem to be forgetting that we are where we are.
Tranche 1 and 2 Typhoons are either already paid for or are on contract and therefore it would probably cost more not to get them – even if it was cost neutral to pull out there would be no more money for a replacement.
Defence procurement is often more than just ‘Defence needs’, Political reality is a way of life – live with it.
We all know that the EP is overheated and we are not in an ideal world where we always get what we want – hence the need for UORs.
No one has a crystal ball that can tell them what weapon system will be needed for the next conflict so we need to ensure that the platforms and people are adaptable (Vulcan as a tanker for example).
Buying American is not always the best deal, let us wait and see how JSF technology transfer goes when the RAF want to add a national only capability.
Tranche 1 and 2 Typhoons are either already paid for or are on contract and therefore it would probably cost more not to get them – even if it was cost neutral to pull out there would be no more money for a replacement.
Defence procurement is often more than just ‘Defence needs’, Political reality is a way of life – live with it.
We all know that the EP is overheated and we are not in an ideal world where we always get what we want – hence the need for UORs.
No one has a crystal ball that can tell them what weapon system will be needed for the next conflict so we need to ensure that the platforms and people are adaptable (Vulcan as a tanker for example).
Buying American is not always the best deal, let us wait and see how JSF technology transfer goes when the RAF want to add a national only capability.
Guest
Posts: n/a
[QUOTE=Raymond Ginardon]
Ray, I want the RAF to get the Typhoon, not buy the F-22. Besides brewing up a better cup of tea, competition is the best way for the aerospace industry to progress. If Boeing/Lockheed become the only players in the West, they will get even more arrogant and less responsive to the customer than they are now.
And as to the Typhoon, get your politicians to buy the gun support equipment. Having a gun for 'ballast' is one of the silliest things ever!
(Since the Typhoon has been so long in coming, perhaps someone could approach your HLF for a substantial grant and you could then get the bullets?!)
Originally Posted by brickhistory
But, damn, the F-22 will make one helluva good cup of coffee!
QUOTE]
Brick - yes, but Typhoon makes a MUCH better cup of tea. And that's what's important to us (well, Brits anyway).
Ray :-)
QUOTE]
Brick - yes, but Typhoon makes a MUCH better cup of tea. And that's what's important to us (well, Brits anyway).
Ray :-)
Ray, I want the RAF to get the Typhoon, not buy the F-22. Besides brewing up a better cup of tea, competition is the best way for the aerospace industry to progress. If Boeing/Lockheed become the only players in the West, they will get even more arrogant and less responsive to the customer than they are now.
And as to the Typhoon, get your politicians to buy the gun support equipment. Having a gun for 'ballast' is one of the silliest things ever!
(Since the Typhoon has been so long in coming, perhaps someone could approach your HLF for a substantial grant and you could then get the bullets?!)