We can do FI, Afghanistan and Iraq - 11sqn

[Razor61]

Typhoon declared combat ready by 1st July 08 due to success in the USA.
99.3% success/serviceability rating in Green Flag.

http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/TyphoonProvesItsAirsurfaceCapability.htm

[Finger Poking]

Wing Commander Gavin Parker, Officer Commanding XI Squadron, said that during pre-exercise training at Davis Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, his squadron worked (Riddiculous Hours for little reward or praise in order to further himself) closely with 17 (Reserve) Squadron, the Typhoon Operational Evaluation Unit, also based at RAF Coningsby, and over a two-week period dropped a total of 67 munitions, comprising 43 Paveway II bombs, eight enhanced Paveway IIIs and 16 1,000 lb (454kg) free fall weapons. He said:
"It has been an outstanding success. The aircraft loved the hot and dry conditions. It achieved a 99.3 per cent strike rate at Davis Monthan, which means we achieved 99.3 per cent serviceability. We only lost two sorties, one due to high wind (which apparently can't be stopped by any Ginger no matter how much I stamped my feet) when no-one flew, and the other to a technical failure - again, unprecedented in my knowledge and experience (normally I will fly anything and have instructed my drones to do the same. Push Push Push...... I want to play Station Commander soon)."




Lets see how many PVR's are submitted when the chaps get back to work...........

[Pongochap]

We're saved - hallelujah. The operational output of RAF FJ will be more than a GR4 in Qatar and the RN manning Harriers in the 'Stan....'.

You guys are amazing... and all at a cost (at best) of £125m each.

Eactly what we need to sit in the wheel and be talked on....

Or

Take on the immense air threa....

Er.... Well, at least there’s plenty of Chinooks, Merlin’s awesome and always ‘S’, there’s loads of AH spares and the replacement for Lynx is....

Oh well.....



Hurrah, 'the king is dead - long live the king'

[Truckkie]

WOW! Must have been hell doing all those trials in the USA! Probably on expenses - thought we had weapon ranges in the UK!:confused:

At least we're sending them to the 'operational environment' of the Falklands - should get some awesome combat experience there.

And all for the cost of £125M per airframe!!!:mad: Which roughly equates to:-

New DAS, avionics upgrade and new wings for 6 X C130Ks or

New DAS, software upgrades and enhancements for 8 x C130Js or

2 off the shelf CH47s or

2 Merlins or

8 Puma upgrades or

60 fully modified, combat proven Mi-17 utilty helicopters from a ex-Soviet republic.

Still - Typhoon will look good at the airshows and holding QRA in the FI. (Or maybe waiting for the next media-friendly Bear-F incursion)

:mad:nts

[30mRad]

Maybe this is a WAH Truckie, but there aren't ranges in the UK we can deliver PGMs against realistic target sets in realistic release envelopes. Garvie is a huge island, and Aberporth is a barge in the sea - neither of which give realistic trg.

Regards

[Craven Moorhed]

It's not like OC 11 to be spouting utter bo11ox now is it ? :rolleyes:

[Audax]

What a pathetic set of comments by some seriously sad people, particularly Pongochap. For heavens sake, systems need to be proved and if you can't do it at home, you have to go elsewhere.

I would lay money on the fact that the majority of the previous posters have never been deemed as capable of flying and operating a single seat fighter--I could well be wrong but I don't really care. :ugh:

[Pongochap]

Errr.... No, you're right, I'm in the Army (I don't think we have fast jets??? - I'll check). I'm not bad at circuits though....

Besides, I'd rather fly on operations than travel the world on exercise and wear flying suits at airshows.

You miss the point old bean. The frustrations are not with self-justification of the Typhoon display team per se. It's that priorities with procurement are so clearly misplaced.

No-one is suggesting the demise of the FJ world. But so much money for so little capability when the rest of us are stagging on and off non-stop op tours in less than capable helicopters that cost far more (but not £125 million) than the very capable Blackhawks you're in formation with - is more than a little frustrating.

Sorry, to be clear operations do not include Q/exercises in the States or saying you can go 'to the Falklands'.

[knowitall]

"No-one is suggesting the demise of the FJ world. But so much money for so little capability when the rest of us are stagging on and off non-stop op tours in less than capable helicopters that cost far more (but not £125 million) than the very capable Blackhawks you're in formation with - is more than a little frustrating."


well as Land control the budget for SH i suggest you point the finger of blame closer to home!

[BEagle]

Audax, thank heavens there are some people with commonsense still posting on PPRuNe! So many comments from kids and wannabees these days.....

As a taxpayer, I'm delighted that the astonishingly expensive EuropHoon has achieved such results in such a short time. Hopefully it will soon be deployed to operational theatres in support of ground forces and will subsequently vapourise the odiferous mediaeval throwbacks of the Taleban with consummate ease.

Yes, the UK's transport aircraft and helicopters are getting utterly shagged out. But good to know that EuropHoon will soon be doing the business.

[The Helpful Stacker]

It's that priorities with procurement are so clearly misplaced.


Ok, starter for 10.

When was the contract signed for the procurement of the Typhoon?

Was it,

a) In 1998, a little bit before the current problems in the Middle East kicked in?

b) 1945, its the reason the Germans surrendered dontchaknow?

c) Jellyfish?

:ugh:

Its been repeated many, many times both here and Arrse that unfortunately (or fortunately depending on how you look at it) the terms of the initial contract for Typhoon were so watertight that to reduce our production total would cost us almost as much in penalties as to just take delivery of the aircraft.

What has also been said many times is that rather than cheap sniping at an aircraft that is a much needed replacement for the sadly departed Jaguar, the soon to depart Tornado F3 and no doubt a portion of the GR4 fleet, the shots should be aimed squarely at the government for putting the military into a situation where it is operating well above the limits of the defence assumptions made not that many years ago but without any real additional funding to carry these tasks out.

Of course you could just resort to default "bin the Typhoon and spend the money we won't have saved due to penalty clauses on knacker old Mil-8's" until the cows come home, which will keep the government happy as it diverts the attentions away from its poor funding of our armed forces towards a bit of good old cap badge bickering.:ugh:

[davejb]

Not having a pop here, but one thing about the news release did make me chuckle a wee bit -

But whether we rush out to Theatre in two years, three years or five years, well that is for others to decide. We offer choice."

- I couldn't help but find this definition of 'rush' a teensy bit amusing.

Dave

[airborne_artist]

But whether we rush out to Theatre in two years, three years or five years, well that is for others to decide. We offer choice."

F:mad:ck me - I can remember in Spring 1982 coming up off a Tube train to ground level and seeing chalkboards say "All members of the Royal Marines and Parachute Regt re-called from leave" That's what we call rush.

[X-Rating]

Well done chaps. Ignore the knockers. You have finally delivered an aircraft that is relevant to today's operations as well as tomorrow's. Expensive insurance premium perhaps, insufficient number of Naval aviators definately, but forget the snide cowardly personal attacks above.

[N Joe]

"When was the contract signed for the procurement of the Typhoon?

Was it,

a) In 1998, a little bit before the current problems in the Middle East kicked in?

b) 1945, its the reason the Germans surrendered dontchaknow?

c) Jellyfish?"

Much as it pains me to agree with a storeman, THS's point is valid. However, can we use the same excuse for JSF? With overstretch being so severe, surely we must focus our procurement on the assets we NEED to meet our commitments (AT, SH, ISTAR etc) rather than the status symbols we WANT.

N Joe

[Jackonicko]

£125 m?

Utter, utter, total and utter Bollocks from the usual coalition of the witless.

Tranche 1 jets flyaway price was £45 m. Tranche 2 was £42.4 m.

Even programme cost (including all of the R&D, sims, support contracts et al) is just over £19 Bn, which, divided by the 232 we're contracted to buy is a shade over £80 m per jet.

To get to a unit programme cost of £125 we'd have to slash the purchase to 152 jets (cancel Tranche 3 but still pay for it) or experience inflation that would make Michael Foot or Dennis Healey blush.

[Pongochap]

Jackonicko you tit... So I'm from the



coalition of the witless.


Ok, well, if you really want to know...


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/30/eurofighter_now_with_bombs/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/30/eurofighter_now_with_bombs/)


If all 232 are delivered, the cost to the taxpayer per Typhoon in RAF service would be an eye-watering £140m. Understandably, there is speculation that the partner nations may decide to cancel the third tranche of orders. That would result in the UK getting 144 jets and save perhaps £2bn from the total British bill, leaving individual Typhoons price-tagged at £125m each

That's at best of course. I'm sure that isn’t true though.


Given that we yesterday passed 100 dead in Afghanistan your appalling FJ self grandiose is, as ever, tedious.

I will therefore resort to emergency banter.



This is isn't just your 'flying club' gentlemen....

[davejb]

Come on Pongochap, don't beat around the bush - you disagree with Jackonicko, don't you?

[Archimedes]

Pongochap, with the greatest respect, that was written by Lewis Page.

Page was right. It isn't true. Page's understanding of air power generally, let alone individual aircraft procurement programmes, ranks alongside Harold Shipman's understanding of the correct protocols in geriatric care... His basic premise that there is something wrong with procurement is fair enough, but his analysis is often based on ground somewhat shakier than the San Andreas Fault.

Although the figures are open to interpretation and debate, the highest figure given by a credible source is £62m per aircraft (this was the NAO) although this figure was arrived at by a different accounting method to the one they'd used before (and since?) which gives figures more akin to Jacko's.

Anyway, to my original point - I believe that Stu Atha's comments may be missing an 'or' between 'Rush out to theatre' and 'in two years'

[NutLoose]

Deliverance (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=70659)

Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 354


Truckie, have you stopped taking those meds? And 2 Chinooks for 125 mil, not when we buy them!


Last edited by Deliverance : Yesterday at 19:31.


Does that price include Storage for the said Chinooks :rolleyes:

[Jackonicko]

Pongo,

Quoting Lewis Page? You're the tit, old boy. He is Generalissimo of the coalition of the witless and you are demonstrably one of his witless admirers. My figures are accurate. His are a mix of invention and mischief.

Page is a biased, anti-RAF, clueless tw@t.

If you want to nail your colours to that mast, go ahead, knock yourself out. :rolleyes:

[jwcook]

Jacko I don't know why your holding back so much...:ok: that level of cluelessness deserves more... ROTFLMAO!!:E

I can see myself using "Generalissimo of the coalition of the witless and you are demonstrably one of his witless admirers" bit.. is it copyrighted?

BTW Glad to see it performing it should help with exports etc..

cheers

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Support for the journo..............imagine that.............what a strange stance for most PPrune folk :rolleyes:

[Truckkie]

I'll stop taking the meds when I see Typhoons operating in the CAS/XCAS role over the desert supporting our boys on the ground during the many TICs:ok:

The only winge with Typhoon is that it's too late, procured before the current operations developed and too expensive.

It might be the best thing since sliced bread on weapons delivery but QRA in the FIs is hardly a combat proving ground, neither are weapon trials in the states.

Bearing in mind that we are comitted to Afghanistan for at least another 10-15 years do we really need 100+ FJs? I only seem to remember seeing around a sqn's worth actually in-theatre.

I think if you ask the blokes with their feet on the ground in the badlands what they would rather have you would probably be suprised.

Is it a sqn of unproven electric jets that may provide support or

More C130s for resupply, admin and op moves? More SH for battlefield support and casevac? More AH for close support? More UAVs for ISTAR and CAS?

We are stuck with a cold war era, expensive legacy fighter which will be pressed into the Ground Attack role (does it have a gun yet?:ugh:)

For those in the RAF and the wider service who think we will ever be able to mount operations against a credible air threat are seriously deranged. The armed forces are stretched to breaking point engaged in two serious operations. We do not need Typhoon in vast numbers - we need to win the current fights first.

[ZH875]

We are stuck with a cold war era, expensive legacy fighter which will be pressed into the Ground Attack role (does it have a gun yet?:ugh:)

It has always had a gun. To be the mass and balance of a gun, with the electric characteristics of a gun, and fit in the place of a gun, you can only fit a gun. Ballast was never an option. Very clever this fly-by-wire stuff.




...It is Ammunition for that gun that we need.....

[jwcook]

Trukkie,

To be honest the Typhoon isn't the best machine for Afghanistan/Iraq where transporters, armoured cars, APC, a-10's, apaches etc are needed... but they were not the equipment needed during the Falklands! sea harriers were just able to suffice, the argument then was we needed two huge carriers, fighters, awacs.


Just having Transport aircraft/a-10's/apaches also wouldn't be too clever in many realistic scenarios involving any half credible opposition air platforms, If you had a couple of those shot down, you'd soon be saying quite rightly where is the air cover...?

Simple answer is that you need is a variety of aircraft and ground forces working together, but its not simple...

Your not going to get shiny new kit for everything every few years, this is a problem with large purchases measured in decades - but this is how it works now!.

Iraq and Afghanistan are conflicts that sprung up out of nowhere, you can only really plan for 'sensible' (in sensible I mean likely) conflicts, to use these theaters to show bad planning of equipment is grossly unfair.

You should really be having a go at those who choose to send forces to fight in stupid places for the wrong reasons, they really should be better at picking their wars:eek: only choosing wars that suit the equipment we bought...:), and refusing any that are not quite right.. smell iffy, not in our primary interest, just to be in the gang etc

In short Typhoon will provide a broad capability for years to come, and it provides lots more than just shiny new jets, and as for price they work out Cheaper than those 8 Chinooks:ugh:, so lets see which reach foreign soil first!!.

Cheers

[Jackonicko]

JW,

I waive all copyright on said phrase. ;)

Before I rewrote my post I called Pongo and his mate "the coalition of the unwitting", which was a bit more witty, but was also a bit kind. You need to describe a worse degree of brainlessness when slagging off those who accept Page's lunatic ramblings uncritically.

The figure of £42.4 m per Tranche 2 jet was originally produced by the NAO, when the guidelines of what to include gave what was, as near as damn it, a unit flyaway cost (though in uK terms, this still includes elements that would be kept out of a US unit flyaway figure). This figure of £42 m (£45 m for Tranche 1) tallies with the equivalent official German, Italian and Spanish unit flyaway costs, and is, as you'd expect, slightly lower than the leaked original price for Austria. I have had that price confirmed in writing by the Typhoon IPT, and I have confirmation, in writing, from the IPT (in response to an FOI request) that the current NAO figure does include elements that mean that it is NOT anything like what we'd expect in a unit flyaway or unit production cost.

[Roland Pulfrew]

If any of the Typhoon knockers haven't read Page's book I recommend it as a right riveting piece of ................................... FICTION. The bloke obviously has a chip on his shoulder. The book is full of some truths, half truths, rumour and inaccuracies. It was written to sell, not to report facts. It is written from a narrow perspective. If nothing else it was good for a laugh. And "Yes, I have"!

Anyone who quotes from "theregister.co.uk" is leaving themselves open to ridicule, even at a quick first glance the article highlighted by pongo chap is wrong. The Nimrod MR1 was not mothballed in the way implied in the article. 203 Sqns jets were mothballed after years of service when Britain withdrew from Malta. And then they were supposed to be converted into the AEW3.

Page's assertion on Typhoon costs in that article is based around disingenuous mathematics - I think Jacko's NAO report is a somewhat more reliable source!

And for all those that say we need more of this and more of that NOW (Trukkie) you are probably correct. However you are naive if you think that even if the government gave us the money and said "do it now" that we would see those helicopters or aircraft in anything less than 3, 4, 5 - shall I keep going? - 6 years. You cannot just walk into your local weapons dealer and say I want XX more Hercs and YY more Chinooks please and expect them to be delivered immediately - that is simply naive.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Bearing in mind that we are comitted to Afghanistan for at least another 10-15 years do we really need 100+ FJs? I only seem to remember seeing around a sqn's worth actually in-theatre.


One would hope that operations to mend something that may have been better left unbroken do not deflect our preparedness for core defence of our national interests. While affording the Typhoons being delivered now may be difficult, there won't be the facilities around to build them 10 to 15 years hence: not unless we increase the programme costs even more.




We are stuck with a cold war era, expensive legacy fighter which will be pressed into the Ground Attack role (does it have a gun yet?) For those in the RAF and the wider service who think we will ever be able to mount operations against a credible air threat are seriously deranged. The armed forces are stretched to breaking point engaged in two serious operations. We do not need Typhoon in vast numbers - we need to win the current fights first.

Yes, we do need to win the current fight but if only equipping, training and preparing for that means that we lose the next fight that may be of direct national interest, we will have lost. There is a bigger picture; you just have to see it. What do they teach you lads these days?

[Pongochap]

Ok, how about...

Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550056/Typhoon-delivers-the-fright-stuff.html)
The National Audit Office has estimated that the Typhoon will cost the British taxpayer £19.67 billion, for an anticipated 232 aircraft, making it the most expensive weapons project in British history. In 2004, British overspend on the aeroplane reached £2.3 billion.

Oh no... Lewis Page rules the world!

Ok then NAO (http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/03-04/0304195.pdf)
Typhoon is now expected to cost £19,670 million (£2306 million more than approved) and was delivered in June 2003 (54 months later than approved).


JackoF**cko said:
the 232 we're contracted to buy is a shade over £80 m per jet. To get to a unit programme cost of £125 we'd have to slash the purchase to 152 jets (cancel Tranche 3 but still pay for it)

Oooooh look. JSF. Well we definitely need - ah....

Well that's all right then. Bargain. Good to see smart procurement in action.

Anyway, the reason I get frustrated at such 'we're fully operational' nonsense has nothing to do with the money.

Having worked closely with and having the utmost repsect for the GR4 guys and many Yank FJs the grandstanding of the Typhoon fleet is pathetic. Again, all understand the need to maintain FJ, Fleet (and possibly Trident).

It is that you have the audacity to 'big yourselves up' whilst the 'real' military has fought abroad for the last 5 years. What is it - no hotels?

Witless/brainless - you ****.

Well, I'm off on Ops again shortly.

Oooooooh nice desk. Guess I won't be seeing you there.....

Have a nice airshow.... (and it helps if you put the gear down)

[jwcook]

Good luck pongo and keep safe.

Cheers

[davejb]

You should really be having a go at those who choose to send forces to fight in stupid places for the wrong reasons, they really should be better at picking their wars:eek: only choosing wars that suit the equipment we bought...:), and refusing any that are not quite right.. smell iffy, not in our primary interest, just to be in the gang etc

That's the crux of the whole matter - we're still trying to maintain a balanced self defence force, while the government commit us (seemingly willy nilly) to conflicts that require a different balance of COIN style forces, coincident with the small problem of being able to afford neither.

It's unfortunate that we then tend to tear each other apart, when the problem is simply that we can't do everything we're tasked to accomplish thanks to the politicos who display a wilfull disregard for what is achievable.

Perhaps it would help if we had some 'tear an MPs throat out with your teeth' stickers made up?

Dave

[2Planks]

And also don't forget that the smartest contract lawyers work for industry not the Government so even if we did cancel we'd end up paying anyway...........

[Stitchbitch]

6 x En PW II and a self designating capability? Sounds good, does any other allied single seat fast Jet bring this much to the party? Well done Guys and Girls :ok:

Pongochap, good luck & keep your head down out there.

[HEDP]

Question is,

Is it wise to put this much into a single seat platform to bring it to the party?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

EOSM,

Whilst I seldom miss an opportunity to rip the **** out of our green/dark blue brethren I suspect when you sober up you may look at your last post, in the context of this thread, who it was aimed at and where he/she is about to depart to and wonder what possessed you to make such a silly comment :=

[AR1]

Given that we were pretty sure we could drop a couple of bombs from the 'Bombphoon' why send it to the USA to practice?

We've got the biggest live range in the world, with people on the ground who need the help.

Send it now.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

AR1

Outstanding..............and if we miss the odd time, well who gives a f@ck :rolleyes:

[Archimedes]

I think the chaps on the ground would probably want to be certain that the Typhoon was going to deliver as advertised - better to know rather than be 'pretty sure'...

Mr Putin has rather spoiled the deployment to Afghanistan. Gordon's prudent defence spending means that we don't have enough AD squadrons.

Remember that the official government position post SDR and SDR New Chapter (i.e. before the Russians found the fuel and aircrew to resume their
long range flights) was that we'd need at least five AD squadrons to maintain QRA and a satisfactory level of defence of UK airspace in the post Cold War era, and taking account of the post 9/11 threat.

So, logically, we now find ourselves with four AD squadrons (if we include XI) to deal with a far greater set of challenges than the five squadrons deemed necessary to meet a much lower threat level.

It's all very well rehearsing the usual inter-service blue-on-blue and blaming the Typhoon force and the aircraft itself, but the problem, quite simply, is that the government, led by a man who claims that nobody has greater respect for the forces than he does, has left the RAF facing the dilemma of attempting to put one squadron in two places at once, and has helped to ease the problem by delaying the delivery of the Tranche 2 airframes.

It can find the money to bail out a failed bank (to protect votes in its heartlands) and can suddenly discover a few billion to offset the effect of the abolition of the 10p tax band (to protect its core vote), and can double the quango budget over the course of ten years, but it seems unwilling to and incapable of finding the money to provide the kit needed - FJ, AT, SH and the array of kit required by pongochap and his colleagues - despite the fact that it has committed the nation to two wars.

Typhoon isn't the issue here, with respect - it's the way in which the government goes about its business.

And breathe....

[Mr Grim]

6 x En PW II and a self designating capability? Sounds good, does any other allied single seat fast Jet bring this much to the party? Well done Guys and Girls :ok:


I know a zero seat turbo jet that can do 4. Is that any use? Oh it also stays on station a lot longer and can do lots of other things.

And costs about 10% of a Typhoon (maybe 20% if you count attrition:E) to buy and much, much less to operate.

[nunquamparatus]

Ok, for what little it's worth.........

Really pleased for the RAF that they managed to get Typhoon into service avoiding all the 'Savings in Efficiency' that this government just loves ("A pound spent on Defence is a pound wasted" to quote Gordon Brown) and it is, undoubtedly a fantastic aeroplane with a significant AD capability. The fact that it doesn't have the legs or the Multi-role potential of a Strike Eagle is because it was designed to defend the UK ADR - not the Air Force's fault, but good on them for trying to make it MR and, therefore, more use than tits on a fish.

What annoys people (Army, RN, RAF (non-AD FJ and everyone else)) is the ridiculous attitude of some of the people associated with this aircraft. It appears to be a hangover from the Lightning/Phantom/F3 "We're Air Defenders don't you know" and the assumption that because you are not flying AD FJ that you must be pond-life. Can't say I've experienced it yet personally from the F2 crowd but had enough from the F3 fleet. A pyschologist will probably tell me that it is a throwback to infancy - like the two-year old with a new toy that won't share but likes to shove it in your face.

When the F2 gets its undercarriage dirty/sandy and starts to support the significant numbers of UK military personnel risking life and limb in the service of HMG (like the GR community (Fly Navy) or the SH community (oh, Fly Navy again) then, by all means, cock-on. Until then, please, stop making yourself look silly and grow up.

[davejb]

Archimedes - spot on.
Numquam - he was pretty mild mannered AFTER putting his mask on too!

[SammySu]

Outstanding..............and if we miss the odd time, well who gives a f@ck :rolleyes:

Anyone on the ground, because if you miss you hit your own guys.........:ugh:

[davejb]

Errrmmm,
yes - I think that was the point being made...

[nunquamparatus]

Dave JB,

I've always wanted one of those silky, red kung fu jacket thingys too. But we digress...............:cool:

[davejb]

I bought one in Gib 20 years ago -
my ex-wife looked better in it than I did mind....
- now I'd settle for the wierd rickshaw car I think...

[nunquamparatus]

I tried jumping out of a filing cabinet once (in an imitation of the great man/dog) but caught my wedding tackle on the drawer handle.......

Didn't have quite the same effect on the crowd as I'd hoped.

[dessert_flyer]

So when are we actually going to see it deployed for real?????

[Mr Grim]

and there endeth the thread, for noone could answer!

[jwcook]

Depends what you mean by deployed, its already has been deployed for QRA, if you mean deployed on combat operations by the RAF in a foreign country for a long tour of duty and has actually engaged the 'enemy', then it hasn't done that yet.:)


The real question is would flying a pair over to sandy places and dropping a couple of bombs, satisfy everyone, or does it need something a bit more substantial?.

Cheers

[VinRouge]

Like not whinge about having to go to the states?

[dessert_flyer]

Well the title of the thread is FI, Afghanistan and Iraq, so when is it going to do any of those????

[LateArmLive]

My money is on it turning up in Afghanistan sometime in the Autumn of 2009 :)

[airborne_artist]

Word on the street is that the puffer jet will be in Afghanistan for at least another year, and will be replaced by the Tonka as they are pulled from Iraq. Taking an AD squadron of Typhoon and turning them into mud-movers will take time

[LateArmLive]

But it's already a capable OS jet......if you believe the propaganda :suspect:

[Phochs3]

Taking an AD squadron of Typhoon and turning them into mud-movers will take time


I thought most of XI were ex-OS types anyway??

[Beermonkey]

I think you'll find that the majority of the Typhoon Force are ex-OS types.

Nothing like equality of opportunity......

[Like-minded]

Ha. Ha. From my operational experience, there are a lot of problems with this mindless nipple tooting.

>>"It has been an outstanding success. The aircraft loved the hot and dry conditions. It achieved a 99.3 per cent strike rate at Davis Monthan, which means we achieved 99.3 per cent serviceability. We only lost two sorties, one due to high wind (which apparently can't be stopped by any Ginger no matter how much I stamped my feet) when no-one flew, and the other to a technical failure - again, unprecedented in my knowledge and experience (normally I will fly anything and have instructed my drones to do the same. Push Push Push...... I want to play Station Commander soon)."


Hot and dry are the *best* conditions for the EF, it's no wonder that it has high availability rate. But was the exercise carried out in wartime conditions (limited crew etc) or was it merely a validation exercise of weapons? Why should anyone boast about availability rates during weapns validation? Was there OPFOR?

Outrageous statement decanting all good sense from the second best air force in the world.

[Like-minded]

Whenever i read something by Jackonicko, I give a hollow laugh and then beat my Black Labrador senseless. This is the same man, often kicked to the curb on Airliners.net and other respected forums, who continues to waffle and prefabricate facts here.

Journalism integrity is dead, all hail the opposite of Jackonicko.

Everyone knows the EF is hideously overcost, over 100 million pounds each, is kept on life support as far as development is concerned, and so late that it missed the next year's prom as well.

When will we see EF over Iraq for example? When I lead a spearhead of F-15s in, bomb the **** out of the camel muckers and liberate the country! Then perhaps those sunburned types will buy the EF (can't sell them stealth, old chap).

[Green Flash]

I know a zero seat turbo jet that can do 4

I thought it was a turbo prop? Or have there been, ahem, 'developments'?

[Mr Grim]

Quote:
I know a zero seat turbo jet that can do 4
I thought it was a turbo prop? Or have there been, ahem, 'developments'?


You are, of course, correct. After I posted this I realised I had made a mistake but was too lazy to change it! Maybe the next one will be jet!?

I think Typhoon manning is fairly balanced with a fair number of ex AD, a fair number of ex F-series guys and some jag mates they couldn't fob off anywhere else :}) with the primary A/A sqn having more AD guys and the primary A/G sqn having more A/G guys (go figure!)

[Biggus]

A few thoughts.....

First of all I am not trying to 'knock' the aircraft, pilots, or groundcrew. But can we trust our lords and masters to tell the entire truth? There is a tremendous amount of pressure from the top for Typhoon to 'achieve', and give a return for all that investment. Getting it operational is one of CAS's top priorities...

So what if, while it is an excellent airframe/engine combination, it is having a massive amount of teething troubles (and I am not saying it is, just asking the question 'what if....') with its systems, avionics, software, superious warnings, etc.

Would anyone actually come out and say so? Or would it be it be a case of Emperors new clothes?


Is there any hard evidence in the public domain that there may be problems...

Problems with nosewheel lowerings, landing with the gear up (supposedly impossible in this aircraft, even if the pilot forgets), the dropping of a sonic boom over shrewsbury as a rapid descent is required (where was the emergency 02 system?)......

I heard a tale that when the first Typhoon was handed over, F700 to CAS etc, a few years back, in front of all the press, etc, when everyone had gone home it was pushed back into the hangar as it wasn't actually ready for a few more months.....not sure if that is true or not, maybe somebody can confirm/deny.

My point is, did anyone actually expect anything other than 'good news' to come out of the latest briefing. That might be true, but can we take it at face value?

Another thing, achieving 99.3% of your sorties doesn't mean you had a 99.3% serviceability rate. If I know that 1 in 4 of my jets falls over on start up, I have 6 ready to go for every 4 ship planned. I might well get 4 away every time, but on many occasions have to use all 6 to achieve it. So, 99.3% of sorties achieved, but maybe a serviceability rate of 75% or less????

[Stitchbitch]

Is this the glass half empty thread??:ugh:

[X-Rating]

Biggus,

Whilst it hurts to admit this about the junior Service, I believe that:

Typhoon is the most capable combat aircraft ever operated by our armed forces and provides excellent 'future proofing'

Typhoon pilots are a likeable modest bunch, unlike some fellow thrust vectorers, who do not over claim for their aircraft

The previous mentioned sqn cdr is a good egg, who when in PJHQ was respected and had more moral courage in his little finger than a vat full of PPRUNERS!

There said it; I'll never admit the above publicly and we need carriers with or without JSF (back in character now).

[Biggus]

X-rating,

Let me be pefectly clear, I was not making, or trying to make, any personal attack on OC 11 Sqn, whom I am sure is a fine individual....

My point, no doubt badly made, was, given the 'political pressure' on the Typhoon project can we expect to hear anything other than 'good news' about it?

Maybe there is nothing but good news to hear, I don't know. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the aircraft. My (hypothetical) point was that if there was anything wrong with it, would we actually expect anyone to say so....??

Glad to hear, from both the UK and RAFs point of view, that it is indeed 'the biz'!!!

Also, believe it or not, I am one of those in light blue that welcomes the prospect of the RN getting two decent size carriers.....!!! And I am quite happy to say so!!

[CirrusF]

The acclaimed air-to-air capability will only serve to annoy the friendly residents of Cumbria. The untested air-to-surface capability won't even tickle the hostile residents of Afghanistan.

Just how many Cobra's, light surveillance aircraft, and trained AAC pilots could we have got for each Typhoon/RAF pilot?

[Mr Grim]

Cirrus - I think 6 x 1000lbs delivered accurately on your head would be a pretty good tickle. And it is tested, or didn't you read the article?

To be a really useful as a CAS aircraft it needs more (different) weapons to provide the flexibility that CAS requires. A gun, 500lb class and 1000lb class EPW/EGBU weapons would be an extremely good start - followed perhaps by 250lb then some cluster bombs. IMHO. Guess they won't get CBUs, though! Obviously also need a good pod (no, TIALD doesnt count) and good connectivity. Endurance and, to a lesser extent speed, are also useful.

From that wish list Typhoon is already OK and is only going to get better as more weapons/fits get tested and cleared.

ps if you don't have a gun then you could use rockets and pretend;).

[Geehovah]

At the risk of appearing flippant:

Humphrey, I want you to send our chaps out to Bignobostan. The locals are being difficult and we need to bring out the staff from the Embassy. Send in some pointy jets and stop those beastly Migs buzzing the weekly G&T resupply flight. Show them that Britain still has some get up and go.

Ah, there’s a problem there Minister.

Yes Humphrey?

Well, we can get them there in our nice new transport aeroplanes and once they are there we can move to and from the capital in our new helicopters but………

Yes Humphrey?

Well, the Tornados are all broken, waiting for a few new parts. Well, spares are just so expensive these days. And we didn’t bother taking delivery of those Typhoons as the Cold War had finished. It seemed so much better to let those workers sit and drink tea rather than build aeroplanes we didn’t need. And this new-fangled JSF is just sooooo expensive. So we thought we could do another mid life update on Tornado. We could then add a few extra spares to cover for the ones we didn't buy when we didn't need them.

Well can't we just borrow some pointy jets from the Americans like we've always done?

Oh no Minister that would never do. You see, President Obama is a big golfing chum of the Chief Minister of Bignobostan and he wouldn't want to upset him.

So you see Minister…………….

No, it could never happen……………………………

On a serious note:

Rules of War 101

1. Establish a permissive air environment.
2. .....................

[daveb77]

Quote: Problems with nosewheel lowerings, landing with the gear up (supposedly impossible in this aircraft, even if the pilot forgets)

Not if said driver turns 'nagging Nora' off!!

Quote: The previous mentioned sqn cdr is a good egg.

Think you might want to speak to EVERY one of their groundcrew, and 'probably' some of their junior aircrew (unless of course they're after their S/L) and i thing you'll find otherwise!!! the words C**T, Wa**er, To**er, P**ck etc are often heard when in conversation about said CO!
One aim and one aim only is Stn Cdr, Balls to who he pisses off...

And by the way i'm not XI! :} thank god!!!!!

[CirrusF]

Cirrus - I think 6 x 1000lbs delivered accurately on your head would be a pretty good tickle. And it is tested, or didn't you read the article?

Yep, sure it can make a huge bang, at huge cost, when it is occasionally available, and with a long tail maintaining at a distant airbase. But how often do you *really* need to make a huge bang in current theatres and in all the most likely future theatres? What is need right now is CAS helicopters, based in forward operating bases close to troops on the ground, plus light surveillance and comms relay aircraft with long loiter times.

[X-Rating]

DaveB77

I can only presume that you are poisonous passed over little chap that perhaps did not do to well at school. Why on earth would anyone wish to post such a warped note. Don't know what the equivalent of 'waste of rations' is in the RAF, but whatever it is, it applies to you.

[daveb77]

Q-Rating quote:

I can only presume that you are poisonous passed over little chap that perhaps did not do to well at school. Why on earth would anyone wish to post such a warped note. Don't know what the equivalent of 'waste of rations' is in the RAF, but whatever it is, it applies to you.


What on earth are you on about? I'm only assuming you've never drank Stella before? Get yourself off to bed fella and we'll chat in the morning! Unless you're at work???

[Finger Poking]

Clearly your defending someone you don't know.

The guy is a chopper. Totally agree with Daveb77 and I do fly with him.

He is miles away from me in the echelons of power so my position is not jealousy so now, comment on my actual first hand perspective......



Or shut the F*ck up and don't comment when you don't know.

[insty66]

Just how many Cobra's, light surveillance aircraft, and trained AAC pilots could we have got for each Typhoon/RAF pilot?

How many times does it have to be said, that canceling Typhoon will not save anything? Contract Lawyers sorted that out a long time ago.

The RAF might as well take delivery of all 232 and store the excess, this would allow for a much longer period of service and any major upgrade program ( because they will happen) would not affect the front line levels available.

[Clockwork Mouse]

Wow! You serving Crabs are certainly not squeemish about pooing on your own doorstep!

[X-Rating]

What a pleasant little chap Finger Poking is; the problem with anonymity is that is seems to inspire fellows to descend to a place that seems to contrast with the higher instincts that we who serve promote and hopefully practise. The schaden freude part of me quite enjoys witnessing an exchange that reflects so badly on the junior service, but then again it does a disservice to the very many crabs I have had the privilege to fly with, yes on operations, before someone tries to get to some operational moral high ground.

I know the previously mentioned individual very well and happen to disagree with the character assessments/assassinations posted previously. Can we pse leave it at that! In the parlance of our shared professions, 'STOP STOP STOP', 'TERMINATE, 'KNOCK IT OFF'. Please don't continue the discourse it reflects badly on all of us who are proud to serve.

On review, this posting might sound a bit pompous, but I like the chap, am proud of all our armed forces, and am IT iliterut.

[Finger Poking]

Fair play. Enough is enough.

One thing. Ask any of the engineers on XI and I bet you can't find a single one who does like the bloke?

They have all been Shat on repeatedly in order that he furthers himself.



I'm done now. Store Away.

[CirrusF]

How many times does it have to be said, that canceling Typhoon will not save anything? Contract Lawyers sorted that out a long time ago.

The RAF might as well take delivery of all 232 and store the excess, this would allow for a much longer period of service and any major upgrade program ( because they will happen) would not affect the front line levels available.

I'm not arguing about that - clearly it is way too late to make any savings now. But the point remains that Typhoon is a staggering waste of money on a no longer existent threat, and a lot of questions need to be asked about the lead times and lack of flexibility and reactivity in military procurement programs.

[Jackonicko]

No requirement?

Yeah, because we no longer need UK AD, or a QRA capability. When's the last time Russia sent any 'Bears' over? Oh wait ......

We no longer need AD on the Falkland Isles, because the Argentinians don't have any designs on las Islas Malvinas. Oh wait ......

And as for an affordable, deployable, multi-role Fast Jet, why on earth would we need one of those? Oh wait ...... :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Staggering waste of money? £19 Bn for 232 jets. Unit flyaway £42 in Tranche 2. Cheaper programme cost than Rafale.

[CirrusF]

Sure, there is a million to one chance we that Ivan or Carlos may attack next year but there is a certainty that Terry will be attacking tomorrow

[LateArmLive]

And you can be sure that Typhoon will be in Afghanistan soon, albeit not tomorrow. It will be a fantastically capable aircraft in whatever role we fit it out for, and the best FJ we've had in the RAF ever.

But it's cool to slag it off...........:mad::yuk:

[insty66]

But it's cool to slag it off...........

Nail, head, hit!

[Like-minded]

Jacko is talking balls as usual. With the current rate of inflation, there is no chance whatsoever of his 42 million pounds figure, which is based on figure several years ago btw. Think 60 million, or $180 million US dollars, for a non-stealth, non-bombing plane, non-carrier plane. Outside of Europe and countries that are too rich for their own good, cough Saudi Arabia, who's going to buy this ****e?

Furthermore, asking the Typhoon to do ground bombing is the equivalent of asking a showy prancer to move dirt on a hillside in Dartmoor. It just wouldn't do.

The EF is NOT stealth. When the Russian stealth jet comes out in 2015-2020, and the Asian ones past 2020, the EF would be consigned to the dustbin of history. Not bad, a 7 year gap between groundpounding IOC and obsolescence. That's return for 19 billion pounds of research alright.

And comparing it to the FRENCH Rafale as a means of argument is laughable. Just because a one legged cripple can bounce along faster than a guy with no legs and a skateboard doesn't mean he's going to win the Olympics of air battle.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Sure, there is a million to one chance we that Ivan or Carlos may attack next year but there is a certainty that Terry will be attacking tomorrow

Gosh I'm glad you don't have any influence over defence procurement.

As has already been said (by myself as well as others) the money for the Typhoons was already spent before Iraq/Afghanistan kicked off. There has never been the option of binning Typhoons in order to spend the money on SH or AT assets because had the Typhoons been binned the penalty clauses would have cost almost as much as taking delivery of the aircraft/:ugh:

Instead of blaming the purchase of Typhoon on all the woes of the Armed Forces adjust your sights and point your wrath at those who are actually responsible, the government. The Armed Forces of this country were committed to operating in two different theatres at a level well above those decided and budgeted to after the last round of defence assumptions made by, you've guessed it, the current government.

As someone who spent the majority of his career working with SH I too would like to see more money spent on SH and AT assets but I'm not so stupid as to think that cancelling the purchase of some Typhoons would somehow magically give the Armed Forces a big pot of money to spend. I'm also not so short-sighted not to realise that a replacement is needed for the Jaguar (RIP), some elements of the Tornado GR4 fleet and also the Tornado F3 fleet and a project to replace such aircraft is invariably going to be long and more importantly, expensive.

Instead of posters like yourself constantly having a pop at the nasty old RAF and their new aircraft why don't you do some research, work out who the real culprit is in the saga of poor funding for the Armed Forces and start firing in their direction, or is that too simplistic?

[davejb]

Spot on stacker -
every so often some Charlie sits down for a defence review, which involves creating a fantasy world that bears little resemblance to reality, and is then used to determine force structures for the next umpty ump years. Quite often this involves losing capability, such as not needing fighters as enemy bombers will be taken out by missiles, and so forth.

The reduction in capability can provide a welcome cash boost, so handy when you want to prop up a wavering marginal constituency - it tends to have a knock on effect when you get sent at zero notice to recapture the Falklands and by sheer good fortune you haven't quite finished flogging your carriers off.

Once a few such cock ups have been experienced the government, far from learning these stunningly simple lessons, promptly goes and invades a part of the world that has happily swallowed invading armies whole for the past few millenia, attempting to achieve what will be the first ever away match victory in that neck of the woods on a shoestring.

It's the government, start to finish - the FJ v Mud movers, CV v FFG, Landie v, errr, Shank's pony arguments are all symptoms of the underlying issue - if the forces were properly funded for the jobs they are given, or they were only tasked in line with their capabilities, then nobody would have to argue about who got what slice of the pie.

[airborne_artist]

Mr Browne also said that the Harrier force was being withdrawn from the country - having first been deployed to Kandahar airfield in November 2004 as he was "very mindful of the strain" that the extended deployment had put upon the crews. They will be withdrawn by next spring and replace them with Tornado GR4s.

And on the 13th I wrote:

Word on the street is that the puffer jet will be in Afghanistan for at least another year, and will be replaced by the Tonka as they are pulled from Iraq. Taking an AD squadron of Typhoon and turning them into mud-movers will take time

So my source was pretty accurate, by the looks of things. Not surprising since he's the :mad: at :mad: :ok:

[orca]

Can i propose a 'middle way' in this very polarised fight?

It seems that we have one bunch who think the airframe's ace (which it is), relevant (which it might be) and cheap (hmmm), and might well cure third world debt. They are opposed by a bunch who think it's rubbish, (not sure that'll stick), irrelevant (which may - or may not - be true at this precise second but cannot be garaunteed forever), expensive (tricky) and caused cancer.

One side is bouyed by announcements such as the recent one, the other somewhat irked by it, on the grounds that the system has yet to deploy at a time when all the rest of us are deploying.

Therefore i suggest the following:

1. We all accept that Typhoon was bought with all the best intentions, it's a great aircraft and cancelling or reducing the order wouldn't save a bean.
2. The aircraft has been extensively modified and should soon be able to employ A-S weaponry in theatre.
3.The aircraft has yet to do so.
4. Like all communities - those that fly and maintain the beast are a mixture of great lads, good lads, average lads and the odd oxygen thief. (lads = generic for boys and girls)

This will placate all those that think it's wonderful, and all those that would sooner point out that it hasn't yet done the job for which we are repeatedly told it's fit for purpose.

This can all change when it does actually deploy, does the job and everyone starts slagging off a new platform. In the meantime i suggest a moratorium on the somewhat naive 'It's rubbish' cries and the equally naive, and a little bit grating 'It's great and can do x, y and z headlines'

That being said, not slagging it off/ defending it will get a little boring.

[Mr Grim]

Valid points orca, but your post and AA's above it seem to suffer from the mistaken assumption, popular amongst Typhoon critics, that Typhoon was only ever intended as an A/A platform and a couple of years ago someone decided to stick a bomb on it. This just isn't true.

It was designed to be A/A capable first to replace F3 (about now), under the assumption that Harrier and GR4 could cover the A/G side, then the A/G capability could be brought on - but it was always intended to be multi-role. In fact I remember the argument years (10+) ago about whether it would be multi-role or swing-role.

The current reality of 2 wars and the continual salami slicing of A/G sqns has meant that the A/G capability is now needed ASAP.

[orca]

Dude,

Couldn't agree more. My angle is simply that those that want to knock the system or it's operators can do so but will achieve nothing. At the same time it's proponents might want to throttle back on the sales pitch until it has actually deployed.

I can remember various presentations by either RAF or Bae whilst at Uni and later during FT etc and always got the impression that the A-A would have primacy and the A-G side would 'sort of sort itself out'. Just the impression i got, probably harsh or invalid.

Either way you are absolutely right, we need more OS and more pods at the moment. Then again other posters are correct in saying that we'll need the fox 3 shooter at some point.

Me? I don't believe it's rubbish, don't believe it's flawed as a concept, and if it's on QRA it can clearly hack it A-A. However I won't believe it works A-Mud until it drops a real bomb on the opposition. (Deliberately etc) (Or - for the purists/ doctrine geeks - it delivers a non-kinetic (boring) effect in theatre) When it does i shall be the first to offer the chaps a beer.

[Mr Grim]

Agreed. BUT when it does drop a bomb on the bad guys, does it have to land with its gear down to count???:}

[dessert_flyer]

With the merits and flaws of this aircraft discussed, the burning question still prevails, which is when?????

[Razor61]

An impressive sight all bombed up at Nellis:-
http://www.nellis.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/080603-F-8732E-003%20(2).jpg

[PTC REMF]

Now that the GR7/9 theatre replacement has been sorted out, surely the CH47 Herrick RIP must be just around the corner?

[taxydual]

Razor61

Impressive indeed.

Shame the Taliban ain't at Nellis!



Nice pic all the same, thanks for sharing.

:ok:

[Squirrel 41]

All,

So much ink has been expended on "232 Eurofighters - too many?" stories over the last few years, it has been accepted as a statement of truth that we have in fact ordered 232 Typhoons.

However, I have two questions:

(i) Has anyone actually signed a contract for Tranche 3? I've not heard of one and therefore we presumably haven't ordered the T3 jets, and therefore we've not actually ordered 232 Typhoons.

(ii) Do the Saudi jets (72), count against the UK offtake of 232 - leaving us with 160 (if - and only if - we sign for T3?)

S41

[The Helpful Stacker]

Now that the GR7/9 theatre replacement has been sorted out, surely the CH47 Herrick RIP must be just around the corner?

What other helicopter the UK owns could fill the requirements placed on the Chinny? High ambient temperatures, high altitude, long range flights and with heavy loads. Certainly nothing at Benson could fill those shoes let alone anything Teeny Weeny Airlines owns.

[PTC REMF]

What other helicopter the UK owns could fill the requirements placed on the Chinny? High ambient temperatures, high altitude, long range flights and with heavy loads. Certainly nothing at Benson could fill those shoes let alone anything Teeny Weeny Airlines owns


How about German CH53s and Spanish CH47s?

[minigundiplomat]

78/28 Sqn(whoever!) are due in-theatre sometime before the end of the millenium.

Not a huge fan of the Merlin, but hopefully it will provide something more meaningful than the SK. Despite great crews, the carson upgrade does little more than allow it to be little practical use somewhere different and allow Nu Labour the opportunity to announce they have sent more helicopters to the Stan.:ugh:

[Archimedes]

S41, no, Tranche 3 has not been signed for yet. The Saudi aircraft can't, AIUI, be deducted from the UK buy unless the contract is renegotiated: the other partner nations could argue that the UK has renaged on its deal to buy 232 - upon which the workshare deal was agreed, and thus demand a reallocation of work to reflect the changed figures.

[TiffyFGR4]

Jesus........Never heard so many 'Anal' people moan, groan & whine, if we were locked in the same room together, I'd probably end up topping myself......Cheer up FFS, smile, be happy or something, there's dead people more cheerful than some of you lot!! It's getting depressing......http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/cwm13.gif

Anyway....I'm glad the RAF has this multi-role capability, it's about frikin time. Good on them, jolly frikin good chaps, at least someone's happy with what they've got.