eurofighter

[thecontroller]

see

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5262120.stm

i thought the eurofighter was a (costly) dead duck and the only reason the government is sticking to it is to save face (and uk jobs)??

i thought that the thing was too complex and not needed nowadays (end of the cold war, fighting guerillas in the desert/towns now)

??

[Lone Kestrel]

Just goes to show how wrong you can be!!

[A2QFI]

I suggest that the Saudis are buying them to save the RAF from having to take delivery of them. Having worked at BAe, in Middle East Military Sales, I can suggest that there is a strong probability that 'contract facilitation fees' - or whatever they are called in 2006, have had as much to do with the purchase, as any actual need for this equipment in the Sandpit!

[Lone Kestrel]

A2QFI,

Where do you get your info from?

[bongof4]

Looks like PPruNe is about to be treated to a nice long thread fuelled by people without a clue what they are talking about!

I hope Lone Kestrel gets a decent response.

Over to you A2QFI.

[A2QFI]

I got it by working at BAe Warton in the late 80s and being involved in negotating sales and contracts, in countries other than Saudi Arabia, which was not an area in which I was involved. Very senior management only for there! The concept of "the cost of doing business" - Commissions or call it what you will, and the use of local 'agents', was used then and is alive and well SFAIK! It works and lands contracts - why change it?

[Lone Kestrel]

bongof4,

It just that I have to laugh at some of the comments made about Typhoon on this forum. I presume many of them are made by people who have not flown the ac or even have any direct, or even indirect, knowledge of its performance/capability or introduction into service. I have, and have also flown the majority of the US F Series jets on numerous occasions. I can assure you Typhoon is more than a match for all of them.

To suggest that the RAF does not want the 24 or so Tranche 2 Typhoon off-take that will initially be going to Saudi shows a lack of knowledge of the RAF’s current/future frontline requirements. The deal will no doubt require the running on of Tornado F3 to cover the FEAR shortfall and will also put more pressure on many young pilots to leave the Service as the possibility to fly Typhoon slips a few years. However, the deal appears to be good for UK PLC and given the current STP and EP difficulties the RAF will no doubt have to take the short term pain no matter how unpalatable it may be. You never know we might even manage to get a better jet out of the deal in the long term if the Saudis push for some of the Gucci kit.!!

[rudekid]

bongof4,

It just that I have to laugh at some of the comments made about Typhoon on this forum. I presume many of them are made by people who have not flown the ac or even have any direct, or even indirect, knowledge of its performance/capability or introduction into service. I have, and have also flown the majority of the US F Series jets on numerous occasions. I can assure you Typhoon is more than a match for all of them.

To suggest that the RAF does not want the 24 or so Tranche 2 Typhoon off-take that will initially be going to Saudi shows a lack of knowledge of the RAF’s current/future frontline requirements. The deal will no doubt require the running on of Tornado F3 to cover the FEAR shortfall and will also put more pressure on many young pilots to leave the Service as the possibility to fly Typhoon slips a few years. However, the deal appears to be good for UK PLC and given the current STP and EP difficulties the RAF will no doubt have to take the short term pain no matter how unpalatable it may be. You never know we might even manage to get a better jet out of the deal in the long term if the Saudis push for some of the Gucci kit.!!



Doesn't disguise the fact that this white elephant doesn't improve the RAF's operational capability for some considerable time. I'll take your assurance that it's better than the equivalent US aircraft (although many wouldn't) but it won't be delivering any effect for ages. Seeing as it first flew in 1986, it's hardly an impressive achievement is it?

Still, enjoy your time at RIAT for the next few years. The rest of the Air Force will be on Ops...:mad:

[lightningmate]

rudekid,

Think you need to review your quoted first flight date, it was a while ago but not that long ago.

lm

[nigegilb]

Don't know much about Typhoon, I do know the F series ac have been out there doing a good job for many years. Just wondered how the Typhoon compares against something a bit more modern like Raptor? I assume lone kestrel has not flown F-22A.....

[jindabyne]

I suggest that the Saudis are buying them to save the RAF from having to take delivery of them. Having worked at BAe, in Middle East Military Sales, I can suggest that there is a strong probability that 'contract facilitation fees' - or whatever they are called in 2006, have had as much to do with the purchase, as any actual need for this equipment in the Sandpit


Rubbish, big man! Of course there are agents and commissions, and as you imply, it's a part of big business - any business. It went on in your time, it went on in my time, it still goes on, it always will; and in anticipation, it has nothing to do with so-called slush funds. That agreed(?), your comments concerning the RAF and in-theatre need are way off the mark. But then I seem to recall that you never were a fan of the product.

Slightly off-topic, but it has been mentioned on a different thread and will no doubt surface here, there are very similar parallels that can be drawn between this deal and that of the Tornado, with which I was closely involved at desk level; and IMHO, Lone Kestrel is right on all counts, in particular by implying that the long term benefits outweigh the short term pain - by miles. No doubt those that were caught up in the early 1980s will disagree, and I understand - but the point remains.

[Pontius Navigator]

Looks like PPruNe is about to be treated to a nice long thread fuelled by people without a clue what they are talking about!
I hope Lone Kestrel gets a decent response.
Over to you A2QFI.

What an odd thread. Everyone seems to be replying to something that someone else didn't say.

Seems Dutch, but who talked about Typhoon performance or not wanting Typhoon?

From a military perspective the machine is available now for a limited operational capability but no immediate operational requirement. We have Jaguar etc to cover while the FOC is delivered. In the short term therefore we do not need the full complement of aircraft. At the risk of repeating the inter-war rolling 'no war for 5 years' approach, it is better to have aircraft coming into service than in-service and costing.

Should push be required then I am sure we would re-appropriate the SA order much as we did with the Turkish battleship at the outbreak of WWI (mind you probably pissed the Turks off big time).

[jindabyne]

PN

Seems Dutch, but who talked about ----------------not wanting Typhoon?


A2QFI did

I suggest that the Saudis are buying them to save the RAF from having to take delivery of them.

[Lone Kestrel]

nigegilb,

No I have not flown F-22 but I know they want to play with Typhoon!!!

[brickhistory]

Might I suggest a joint partnership with the US regarding the F-22? Then you'd have an in with the most modern fighter around for now and have some real capability. And the gun comes with bullets!



No, that's alright. I'll show myself out........

[A2QFI]

Rubbish, big man! Of course there are agents and commissions, and as you imply, it's a part of big business - any business. It went on in your time, it went on in my time, it still goes on, it always will; and in anticipation, it has nothing to do with so-called slush funds. That agreed(?), your comments concerning the RAF and in-theatre need are way off the mark. But then I seem to recall that you never were a fan of the product.

We are agreed - there is money moving around outside the written contract! I have heard that it might suit the RAF to delay delivery of some aircraft, by letting them go to another customer and easing the cash flow problem, if there is one! When I was at Warton ( I left in 1989) there was no product to have a view about - just an EFA demonstrator! I understand that the aircraft is great for pilots to fly, but it is in limited service ? years late and £?Billion over budget. Does some pilots enjoying life make the project good value for money and is it something that meets our overall military needs at a time when we are short of proper APCs, SAS Chinooks and many other items of equipment, large and small?

[Lone Kestrel]

brickhistory,

In an ideal world!!!

[jindabyne]

A2QFI

I absolutely agree about the shortage and woeful underfunding of equipment that is needed in those combat zones into which our Prime Minister has taken us. 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? Most 'Western' country's procurement policies (with regard to modern fast-jet procurement) indicate that they have no such vision, which kind of gives me the feeling that we are not isolated in our thinking. Whilst it might be unfashionable to talk of insurance capability, my own view is that the argument is as valid now as ever it was. Yes the priority now is defeating the terrorist threat, but IMHO it would be foolish not to maintain a capability (equipped, trained and ready) for wider conflict. It would appear that on the one hand our present Government is rightly commited to both strategies, but won't commit the necessary funding (ie, morally bankrupt). On that, I hope we both agree?

[nigegilb]

How long do you think British troops will be in Afghanistan, needing SH, AT, CAS? 10 years? I think HCDC got it right by criticising political decisions behind procurement. Typhoon already looks out of date compared to Raptor. Why did we insist on parallel production of Apache ac? The eventual spiralling costs could have been used to pay each worker £1m and still have acquired Apache for less money direct from US. Problem behind your argument is that servicepeople are being killed regularly, are ill-equipped and short of all of the above assets.

[A2QFI]

Jindabyne. If we need some response to a threat for the next 1 - 30 years what is going to cover it from now until year 5? I suggest it won't be the Typhoon. I am not far enough up the food chain to know about these things or squander squillions on my ideas! If Typhoon is the answer then what is the question? I note that the sale was greeted with the usual press reaction. Not "This important contract will ensure that RSAF is appropriately equipped to meet the Kindom's military requirements for the next ?? years" but "This important contract will ensure the security of vital jobs in the North West for some years to come"

[Phoney Tony]

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.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Exactly!

Is anybody watching China or listening to Russia?

[nigegilb]

Why not by a raptor?
The current cost, or "fly away cost" for one additional F-22 stands at about $137 million.

[seafuryfan]

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?

[mcidiot]

...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

[Pontius Navigator]

[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!

[Phoney Tony]

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.

[Pontius Navigator]

It was the Four Year Rule

I don't have the books to hand to confirm that however I did find an interesting reference that focussed on the French. Essentially as earlier adopters of a modern defensive strategy they placed their faith and their money in the Maginot Line. The British and the Americans, by maintaining an isolationist stance delayed their armed forces modernisation and were able to develop more appropriate systems. The fighters being a success story and the tank, arguably a failure.

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.

[brickhistory]

Why not by a raptor?
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.

[nigegilb]

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.

[jindabyne]

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.

[tonyosborne]

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...

[Jackonicko]

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.

[boswell bear]

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?

[Raymond Ginardon]

[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 :-)

[Pontius Navigator]

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.

[Green Meat]

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. :ugh:

[Lone Kestrel]

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.

[brickhistory]

[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 :-)


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?!)

[Pontius Navigator]

Brick - PM

[Pontius Navigator]

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.

Was it the B(I)8 Canberra that we had to scrap because it was not our money that bought it and the USA could prevent onward sales?

Of course the USA then did exactly that when they sold the Matador to Spain.

[Raymond Ginardon]

[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?!)

Indeed, competition is highly desirable.

I have been told by suitably empowered people "STOP asking for the gun, you're not going to get it - now go away!". However, I still occasionally, and completely accidentally, mention the lamentable lack of gun in my scribblings (in the vain hope that someone 'up there' will do something about it).

Ray :-)

[ballonio]

vbmenu_register("postmenu_2787343", true);

nigegilb, Typhoon has been against the F22 in China lake, Typhoon surprised the F22 with radar lock and F22 cried off home claiming to be unstealthed anyway, although the next days scheduled two on two was cancelled, the USAF decided they didn't want to play out no more

[Lone Kestrel]

Beadwindow!!!

[nigegilb]

Ballonio, that is encouraging. First I'd heard of the Typhoon against F-22. Everything I had read, suggested the opposite.

[NoseGunner]

Before everyone gets too excited about selected Typhoon stories it is undeniable that F22 is far superior in the air superiority (supremacy/dominance/whatever) role and always will be - its not just the current operational capability.

I think it is also quite clear that Typhoon will be far more capable and flexible in the air to ground role.

Lastly, only an employee of Lockheed Martin would deny that F22 is far more expensive than Typhoon.

If you asked me which one I would want to fly it would be F22 every day of the week (damn you Dan!)

If you asked me which one I think the RAF (UK PLC) should buy it would be Typhoon, without a doubt, and I find it hard to understand anyone who thinks otherwise.

:)

[ZH875]

it is undeniable that F22 is far superior in the air superiority (supremacy/dominance/whatever) role and always will be
:)

Yep, and President Bliar is the best thing to have happened in GB for a long time. French People are great, and terrorists do not exist.

[RonO]

Jacko,

You said "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"

You are not correct in stating fixed production costs from Tranche 3 are included. As with any procurement program with fixed costs, the more that are built, the larger the base to amortize the costs over.

Amortization is not a hard concept to understand: fixed number divided by the number built. Therefore more built = lower average.

Bottom line, the average cost to the UK of building the first 144 Typhoons is £64.8m. No need for any qualification.

Or about $120m at today's exchange rates.

F-22's aren't for sale right now and even if they were, nobody has mentioned a price. I'd guess at least $150m.

[NoseGunner]

ZH875

Are you really saying that Typhoon is better than F22 in the air to air role?? Seriously? Just as an opener I would say F22 wins on:

1. Height, speed and manoeuverability
2. Stealth
3. Second generation AESA

The only thing I can think of that Typhoon has that the Raptor doesn't is an IRSTS and by the time that becomes useful its too late!

I am genuinely interested to hear why you think Typhoon is more capable.:confused:

[ORAC]

The F-22 is unexportable for security reasons. The latest AWST reports that the idea of selling it to Japan look impossible both because of Congress security fears and, even if approved, it would vost at least $1 billion to change the avionics to incorporate tamperproof black boxes.

So the USAF may have the best airplane, but it will never get any export sales, leaving the top end market to the Typhoon, Rafale, SU-30/33 etc.

And there is a distinct possibility the F-35 will end up in the same boat.....

[nigegilb]

With a unit cost of $130 million, the F-22 is unlikely to be a major player on the export market, and although Congress is moving towards rescinding the prohibition on overseas sales of the Raptor, the US government will still have to decide what technology is releasable. With production set to end in 2012 after just 183 aircraft, less than half the USAF's stated requirement, exports could keep the line open, but Japan is the only realistic prospect.
Exportable F-22
Repeal of the so-called Obey amendment would allow the US Air Force to fund Lockheed to develop an exportable configuration for the F-22, but the aircraft would still have to compete for any Japanese order against the latest F-15 and F/A-18 variants, as well as the Dassault Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon - all fourth-generation fighters by Lockheed's reckoning.


Full article

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/08/01/208167/Farnborough+review+Taking+the+fifth+.html

[Jackonicko]

Ron,

The unit price of Tranche 1 was £45.45 m (excluding R&D, production investment, etc.) and of Tranche 2 it's £42 m. Those are official, audited figures.

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, and the MoD have said that these included fixed costs from all three Tranches, but that these are now divided by the total number of aircraft in Tranche 1 and Tranche 2 only, making them an inaccurate average.

NB: The MPR 05 figure is some £20 m higher than ALL other available Typhoon figures. It's £15.7 m higher than the previous year's figure. There has been no increase in costs to account for that, only a change in the way in which the figures were drawn up. Eurofighter GmbH's Programme Director has challenged the £64.8 m figure in print.

I suspect that a full explanation will appear in print soon enough.

[RonO]

Jacko, you need to go to accountancy school 101 to learn about amortization. Right now the concept is clearly beyond you.

Must be a comfort to the MoD to know you have their back. Anytime they want to figure out how much they've spent they can call you. So much nicer than dealing with those nasty green shade Treasury types. Plus you'll tell them they have more in the bank than they reckon. 144 Typhoons times £20m less each = £2.8billion. Sweet - they can run out & buy more wokka's. Or C-17s.

[BenThere]

C-17 program needs some sales PDQ or Boeing's shutting down the line.

Competition, as has been mentioned, is an excellent antidote for price excesses and performance degrades. By all means, build the Eurofighter, and make it better than the F-22.

Ensuring interoperability, in the form of common AGE, refueling, etc., should remain a driving criterion, but I have no chauvinistic desire to insist on American designs prime contractors if the better solution is available from Europe or Asia. The whole purpose of defense spending is to defend the free world, not to make money or create jobs. Sometimes we forget that.

[jwcook]

What aircraft has the Typhoon trained (DACT) with so far.

AFAIK the list is:-
UK Hawks
US F-15 Lakenheath!!
French Mirages 2000 late august!!
F-22 china lake
F16 singapore evaluation.

Any others

Cheers

[brickhistory]

What aircraft has the Typhoon trained (DACT) with .......
Any others
Cheers

Well, there was the odd FW-190 and Bf-109.............oh sorry, wrong forum!

I always thought it odd that the Luftwaffe agreed to Typhoon's name......

[jwcook]

Well why would they agree, we were at war with them at the time.. :\

As for the Eurofighter typhoon The Germans also had an aircraft in WWII called the Typhun it was a spotter plane.. IIRC

[BEagle]

EF2000 Bureaufighter was named 'Typhoon' after a meeting between 'they-who-eat-Sauerkraut' and others some years ago..........

UK: "We need a name for this new jet. We don't think that Spitfire II would be terribly suitable, so we suggest a name following on the 'wind' tradition started by Tornado. How about 'Tempest'?"

t-w-e-S: "Nein. We are with this not happy being. Verdammte Englanders did my father in his Me262 mit ein Hawker Tempest shoot down. Ve suggest Sturm!"

UK: "No, sorry old chap. Too many memories of Storm Troopers goose-stepping across Europe..... We'd prefer 'Hurricane'"

t-w-e-S: "Nein. This is not possible."

UK: "OK - something else then. How about 'Typhoon'.....?"

t-w-e-S: "Nein! You also had those in the Second Weltkrieg. Ve do NOT vant unser aircraft so named being....

UK: "Ah - but you had a 'Typhoon' or rather 'Taifun' as well. Me 108 Taifun, if you recall....!"

t-w-e-S: "Himmel! Sie haben recht. Ve did indeed. Perhaps ve can consider this?"

UK: "OK - perhaps. Or what about 'Cyclone'? No-one had any aeroplane called 'Cyclone'?"

t-w-e-S: "Hmm. Sehr interesting. Zis ist perhaps OK. Ja - ve are liking 'Cyclone', oder, wie sagt man auf Deutsch, 'Zyklon'. Ve can fur das Singleseaterflugzeug 'Zyklon A' have, und fur das Doppelseaterjagdbomberflugzeug, vielleicht 'Zyklon B'......"

UK: "Ahhh - we don't think that would be a terribly good name. We want to sell our jet overseas. We don't think that 'Zyklon B' would go down terribly well with some of our potential customers. Such as Israel....."

t-w-e-S: "Ach so. Perhaps then ve should agree on 'Taifun'!"

UK: "Yes. ‘Typhoon’ it is then. Spot of lunch, old chap?"

t-w-e-S: "Danke"

[Jackonicko]

The Germans haven't agreed the name Typhoon.

Officially they still use the name Eurofighter.

The official Luftwaffe website page on the aircraft

http://http://www.luftwaffe.de/portal/a/luftwaffe/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN48P8wDJgFgBhvqRUJGglFR9X4_8 3FR9b_0A_YLciHJHR0VFAFVBgkE!/delta/base64xml/L3dJdyEvd0ZNQUFzQUMvNElVRS82XzdfMTBK

makes no mention of the names Taifun or Typhoon at all.

The name Typhoon was initially agreed for export aircraft, and was then adopted by the UK. Since then Tifon/Tifone have been used by the two Mediterranean partners, though Spain also uses the numerical designations C16 and CE16, and in Italy, the official name seems to be Eurofighter 2000, with 'Il Tifone' also used and recognised, but usually in a secondary way in official pubs (see www.aeronautica.difesa.it/SitoAM/Default. asp?idnot=15411&idsez=1776&idarg=&idente=1398).

[s.d.porter]

The crypto key management system applicable for the RAF Eurofighter accronym is TLKMS. Which means to no suprise "Typhoon Local Key Management System, which will provide the keys for all cryptos fitted to the aircraft in a single operation.

As far as RAF is concerned Typhoon it is, I guess the Europeans can call it what they like.

With reference as to whether the Typhoon is superior to another aircraft is irrelevant. If its fit for purpose and carries out its role all other considerations are noise.