Naval Typhoon

[Rocket2]

So the idea isn't quite dead yet then

Eurofighter Naval Version Makes Debut - ASDNews (http://www.asdnews.com/news/33692/Eurofighter_Naval_Version_Makes_Debut.htm)

No catapaults required just a ski-jump - shame the UK still can't afford it

[green granite]

Must be cheaper to modify the obsolescent trance 1 Typhoons than buying new F35's though...................................................... ....... possibly?

[kenparry]

Oh yes, just a few minor mods. Vectored thrust, beefed-up structure, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

How much then, BAe? Oh, not more than £xx billion.

That's OK, then.

[bobward]

High commonality, wasn't that what a certain Mr McNamara said when talking about a USAF and US Navy F111 a few years ago....

:=

BAES here's your starter for 10 (billions?)

[green granite]

Do read the article before posting kenparry

The modifications required are limited and include a new, stronger landing gear, a modified arrestor hook and localised strengthening on some fuselage sections near the landing gear, as well as updates the EJ200 engines.

[Goprdon]

Perhaps BAe would offer these modifications on a fixed price contract.
We ,UK , could probably afford them if we were not giving 'ring-fenced' aid to India and China.

[Sideshow Bob]

The modifications required are limited and include a new, stronger landing gear, a modified arrestor hook and localised strengthening on some fuselage sections near the landing gear, as well as updates the EJ200 engines.

That's the cheap stuff dealt with, now lets talk about the software modifications :hmm:

[Wholigan]

The modifications required are limited and include a new, stronger landing gear, a modified arrestor hook and localised strengthening on some fuselage sections near the landing gear



To reduce the aircraft's approach speed and the resulting landing loads the study envisages the introduction of a thrust-vectored variant of the Eurojet EJ200 engine.


Mayhap those changes do constitute kenparry's stated requirements of:


Vectored thrust, beefed-up structure


-- so maybe he did read the article?

[andyy]

Sounds like one of those BAE dream sheets like Skyhook & SCADS

[Lima Juliet]

Let's look at the picture then...

http://www.asdnews.com/data_news/ID33692_600.jpg

and now compare the landing gear to this and you'll see why this will be a disaster or a very-very-very expensive retrofit modification...

http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/1196889.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921F7C3FC3F69D929FD24552FC22A79364C1A16318BD1 94844D2FEA03C59BE678DAE30A760B0D811297

Look at the difference in travel between the oleo types and also the ground clearance. The Typhoon will be leaving bits of external tank and landing gear door on the wires after every trap. Quite frankly the gear, and the mounting points, on Typhoon will not be up to the job if this "mock up" picture is anything to go by.

LJ

[grandfer]

No mention of any wing-folding mods .If it could be done , I reckon it would be better than the F-35 , for a start it looks better ! :ok::ok:

[theloudone]

If BAE were tasked with it, the carrier would be out of service !
And would it then be axed as too costly ? :confused:

[oldgrubber]

how about this one instead, at least the navalised version development is already underway.

When a sword arm is worth it (http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/whensword-arm-is-worth-it/426073/)

[Heathrow Harry]

Navalised Typhoon = Madness

it would take years, require zillions in R&D and testing and that's before Sailor Sam and the boys add all the extras (or more acurately "differents") that they would want to be able to operate on a carrier

Some nutcase wrote earlier this week that you'd have to move the canards so that the pilot would have a good view over his shoulder on a turn to approach.............

If we have to have carriers buy the F-18 and don't change anything- at least it works

[Willard Whyte]

Pretty sure Rafale M could be had for a great deal less than a 'Typhoon M'.

It would also be nice for us to be able to kick BAE Systems in their figurative ballocks for a change.

I'm guessing this deal isn't going to go ahead, unless the French are keeping very quiet about it:

26 Septemper News - Libya to order 13-18 French Rafale fighter jets in $3.24 b deal (http://www.26sep.net/news_details.php?lng=english&sid=21981)

[green granite]

The point I was making, Mr Wholigan, was that the vectored thrust Eurojet EJ200 engine has already done some testing at Eurojet's facility so it's not an unknown leap into the future or very expensive since it already exists.

My apologies to kenparry if I misread his post's inferences

Interestingly it's the Indian Navy that appears to be interested, so maybe we should let them pay for the development work and then buy them as off the shelf items, although even then I suspect the MOD could manage to screw it up and treble the price.

[gashman]

What a bonkers idea. How about we make sure it can do everything from the non-moving non-saline predictable environment of an airfield first and then move on to other stuff.

The foreplane comment shows how ill informed some of these posters are. The things sit forward of the seat. As for thrust vector to reduce landing speed? The leading edge slats motor themselves back up when the gear travels to increase landing speed at the moment, because with them out the nose is too high to safely see the runway. The slow speed capability is already there, the forward visibility is not and thrust vectoring would only increase the weight of the jet (which further increases the stresses on the airframe etc). Besides, add salt water to stuff that wasn't designed to operate in that environment from the start and it will break.

Buy a tried and tested platform rather than getting typhoon to do yet another job. Jack of all trades etc...

[LookingNorth]

Everybody knows that all good navy jets have a certain air of brutish menace about them. Typhoon is just too dainty and pretty looking, and therefore bound to be useless. Having seen how often they break in the gentle hands of the RAF I'm 100% sure that Jack, or Indian Jack, could reduce them to their constituent parts with a mere sideways glance.

[davejb]

It'll look bloody strange the first time the cat fires and the bottom of the airframe shoots off the front of the boat leaving everything from the central tank upwards still sitting there.

Maybe if they superglued one of Massey-Ferguson's best onto the bottom it'd do?

[jindabyne]

Being very close to this in 1996, I know that the then required development was prohibitably expensive, if achievable at all. Good brains were put to the task (not mine). So I wonder what the spin is now?

[tonker]

When will we ever learn. It ain't off the shelf, so it ain't for purchasing.

[Jimmy Macintosh]

There's nothing to worry about here, Mr Fox has already stated that unless a budget is set and the funds are there they will not purchase anything.

So great, go for it, I guess this one will probably take as long to enter service as the original Typhoon, but it will be paid for and will be in budget. Unless of course Mr Fox isn't telling the truth.

[F3sRBest]

It would also be nice for us to be able to kick BAE Systems in their figurative ballocks for a change.

Lovely.... now stand up in front of the thousands of hard-working employees whose jobs you would just LOVE to screw over and say that!

[A and C]

BAe cant deliver on time or on budget, I worked (hard) for an airline like that, it went bust and I was on the dole.

Nothing personal but you must face the fact that just because you work (hard) for BAe your job should be protected for life.

[Doctor Cruces]

Jimmy,

How dare you? Mr Fox is a politician. How could you imply he may not be entirely forthright with the facts?

:=
;)

Doc C

[Heathrow Harry]

Poor Mr Fox made the dreadful mistake of being gung-ho in opposition and being the "expert" on defence

he probably figured (as is usual) that he'd get Energy or Single Mums but Dave just dropped him right in it and also covered his right wing flank

Same thing happened to poor Michael Gove at Education - that'll teach him to write smart articles in the "Times"

[FB11]

No, there really is something good about it...Those orange and green bits in the roundals look ace.

Do you think India would mind if we copied it?

And that big NAVY word on the tail? A carrier based aircraft, flown to an aircraft carrier, that floats on the sea and deploys for more than 2 weeks at a time? Flown by the Navy?

Ridiculous. What are they thinking?

[Father Jack Hackett]

Nobody wants to see BAE employees on the dole but I felt the same way about the poor folk who worked for MG Rover (formerly owned by BAe). Despite their best efforts, the product just wasn't competitive any more due to a lack of commitment by management. As a parallel, I know there are a lot of talented and dedicated people at BAE, who strive to get the product out on budget and schedule. However the corporate entity that is BAE Systems has consistently let this country and it's defences down and we simply cannot indulge another half-arsed, nebulous BAE project when the obvious answer is to buy something that has been clearly shown to be fit-for-purpose and available within the schedule and budget.

Survey the (literal) wreckage of MRA4 and the 25 year exercise in depressingly regular disappointment that has been Eurofighter and try to extol to the nation that paying BAE to bastardise a product that still isn't working as advertised in it's original form is a good idea.

[backseatjock]

Navalised Typhoon was being touted as an option for India's requirement, rather than UK one, during recent Aero India show. The carrot of heavy involvement in picking up from where early UK studies left off was being dangled, rather obviously, in front of Indian industry's nose.

If packaged together with a bigger Typhoon sale to India, the economics may not be quite so whacky after all.

[Rigga]

Its probably more cost effective and easier to make the carrier fly to up to the Dart.

And BAE would do it for the same cost - initially.

[Piltdown Man]

BAE Speak "A key design driver for navalised Typhoon is the commonality at 95 per cent with the land variant."

You & Me Speak "95 per of the components used have the same name"

Did you know that there are fairies at the end of runway at Warton?

PM

[Willard Whyte]

Lovely.... now stand up in front of the thousands of hard-working employees whose jobs you would just LOVE to screw over and say that!

Right, so we owe them a living. Get real or get out.

[Heathrow Harry]

Willard is correct

they can't make things people want when people want them and at a price people can afford

Like so many other companies BAe has reached the end of the road with aircraft manuafacture - we just don't want to pour more of our money into a bottomless pit

[theloudone]

I totally agree, but will the Government ever learn !
Bae needs to move with the times now.

[draken55]

"BAe has reached the end of the road with aircraft manufacture - we just don't want to pour more of our money into a bottomless pit"

We have already "invested" tens of millions into the F-35 in the belief that this will give us a chunk of the West's next major combat aircraft. BAe is to provide aft fuselage and empennages, horizontal and vertical tails, crew life support and escape systems, EW systems, fuel system, and Flight Control Software. So unless the US cancels the entire programme, BAe will remain in the business of aircraft manufacture for some time.

The UK still aims to buy the F-35C once we spend the money to alter the new carrier(s) for the PM's favoured "cats and traps".

[Willard Whyte]

D55, All true, but we aren't buying Lightning II from BAES (they are a subcontractor). Thank God*.

And before any wipe-ass smart-ass says, no, I do NOT mean Gordo f'inBroon.

[madlandrover]

It'll look bloody strange the first time the cat fires and the bottom of the airframe shoots off the front of the boat leaving everything from the central tank upwards still sitting there.

Wonderful :D

[Jetex_Jim]

We have already "invested" tens of millions into the F-35 in the belief that this will give us a chunk of the West's next major combat aircraft. BAe is to provide aft fuselage and empennages, horizontal and vertical tails, crew life support and escape systems, EW systems, fuel system, and Flight Control Software. So unless the US cancels the entire programme, BAe will remain in the business of aircraft manufacture for some time.

Wonderful news for BAE but how much of a guarantee is that for the UK?

BAE are only as British as BP. They are an international company that will put the work where it generates the most profit, which may NOT be in the UK.

[backseatjock]

For all the criticism of BAE on this thread, it does seem to do rather better in manufacturing and delivering to customers overseas, which now accounts for about 80% of its business.

Media reports this week quoted a study which showed BAE just behind Lockheed Martin when it comes to international sales. It is also the biggest overseas supplier to the US forces. The story can't be all bad!

[Father Jack Hackett]

Well seeing as they're doing so well, UK PLC doesn't need to pay over the odds for their disappointing products anymore and we can consider buying kit from companys who can make a decent stab at delivering what we wanted, when we wanted it and for not much more money than we agreed to pay for it in the first place!

[green granite]

For all the criticism of BAE on this thread, it does seem to do rather better in manufacturing and delivering to customers overseas, which now accounts for about 80% of its business.


Agreed, but then overseas customers don't have the MOD to screw things up.

[Mend em]

Tonker - presumably you don't want the F35 then, it still being in development. You'd rather wait until it's been in service for say a couple of years before placing an order?

[Mend em]

Father Jack - just like Lockheed then, or is delays and budget growth OK when American (or at least when not British)?

[backseatjock]

Father Jack – the UK already has one of the most open defence procurement systems around, with none of the protective government support that you see in other markets such as France or even, dare I say, the US which adopts a ‘buy American’ policy.

Have you ever considered that may actually be one of the problems!

[Rigga]

...The 95% commonality bit...

All the nuts and bolts most of the rivets and fasteners, the canopy and the tail - will likely be the same.

The engine, the landing gear, the arresting gear and the main frame and wing structures are all that need to be different!

95% by description count - not by bulk of change.

[backseatjock]

To add to comments already made on this thread, the concept of a navalised Typhoon relies on a thrust vectored variant of the EJ200 engine to allow for a much reduced approach speed.

Already ‘bench tested’ thrust vectored EJ200s can apparently be fully integrated into Typhoon’s advanced FCS, allowing pilots to fly the steep approach path while the FCS manages engine nozzle position.

Take off would require a ski jump deck rather than catapult. Detailed piloted simulations, some of which were shown at Aero India recently, show the aircraft can take off in this way with a full weapon and fuel load!

[xerox25]

Are you a bunch of idiots ? Your only chance to save the FAA is to buy the Rafale, and doing a deal with France to build 2 carriers, one for you and one for France !!! It will be the most cost effective solution !

YOU WILL NEVER GET THE F-35 !!!!!!!! :ugh:

Should you be english for not understand that ! :rolleyes:

[Father Jack Hackett]

Sometimes overruns and cost rises can't be helped, such as the shenanigans resulting from the Germans prevaricating over Eurofighter in the early nineties and the general bun-fight over workshare on this and other multinational projects. However, notwithstanding political and ministerial pressures and wrangling, you still expect the company to produce the goods. Typhoon still isn't deployable in the A/G role and now they're pi$$ing about with carrier variants.

I totally opposed the decision to axe MRA4 but if BWoS had conceived a more achievable design that could have been fielded nearer 2000 than 2010 then the dilemma wouldn't have arisen.

The same SoS (Portillo) who foisted MRA4 on us also insisted on foisting a smaller number of problematic and less capable Mk3 Merlins on us instead of a greater number of Chinooks for the same money (the RAF's preferred choice).

Why buy Apaches off the shelf from Boeing when you can get Westlands to build them for twice the price?

Army Wildcat = white elephant.

I don't disagree that we should be wary of the promises of any company, foreign or domestic, who are touting for business but you cannot deny that the defence of this nation has been harmed by politically motivated procurement choices.

[LeCrazyFrog]

Detailed piloted simulations, some of which were shown at Aero India recently, show the aircraft can take off in this way with a full weapon and fuel load!

I suppose those "detailed simulations" were not made by the industrials...:hmm:
My basic aviation history knowledge tells me that navalising an aircraft is never straightforward, you never get what you paid for, if at all... and although I wouldn't have put it as vehemently as xerox, I think there is a bit of common sense there... you're good at playing rugby, frogs are good at making planes...:E

[F3sRBest]

OK, here goes!

A and C

BAe cant deliver on time or on budget, I worked (hard) for an airline like that, it went bust and I was on the dole.

Nothing personal but you must face the fact that just because you work (hard) for BAe your job should be protected for life.

I have absolutely no doubts about that! I have worked on both sides and have seen the best and worst of both but I have never seen any of the machiavellian conspiracy theories spouted by many on here. And I DO agree that if BAES can't deliver then it should pay the fair consequences.

Father Jack

However the corporate entity that is BAE Systems has consistently let this country and it's defences down and we simply cannot indulge another half-arsed, nebulous BAE project when the obvious answer is to buy something that has been clearly shown to be fit-for-purpose and available within the schedule and budget.

Agree BAES not blameless but this is NO WAY a one-sided argument!! half-arsed and nebulous fits better for MoD most of the time.

Willard Whyte

Right, so we owe them a living.

Absolutely not, but in your bile and vitriol you forget there are real people behind the logo, the vast majority of whom try and do a good job both for their company but also for those that use the kit.

Get real or get out.

I am far more real than you I fear.

Green Granite,

For all the criticism of BAE on this thread, it does seem to do rather better in manufacturing and delivering to customers overseas, which now accounts for about 80% of its business.

Agreed, but then overseas customers don't have the MOD to screw things up.

And there you have it ...........NAIL.......HEAD!! :)

I really would love to see those who post on here and love to criticise actually be in the positions of those they spend so much time picking on and do a better Job!

:)

[Willard Whyte]

You're like a bent nail.

[oldgrubber]

All this is academic when the UK aren't interested anyway and the Indians have their own indiginous naval aircraft.

Eurofighter Offers Technology Transfer; U.K. Rejects Naval Eurofighter Variant in Favor of F-35 JSF | India Defence (http://www.india-defence.com/reports-5006)#

[F3sRBest]

You're like a bent nail.

Oh come now, please at least try and respond constructively! :)

[Heathrow Harry]

I'm with Xerox on the fact that we'll never get an F-35 - its a boondoggle that will eventually be killed by the Yanks

We should maybe be looking at the Gripen and the F-18