Originally Posted by
orca
Hi Buster - from my recent time in Capability jobs my view is that the multi nation constructs and procedures surrounding Typhoon have been an impediment to getting the warfighter battle winning equipment on time and at a reasonable price.
Perhaps shambles was a poor choice of word as it implies disorganisation as opposed to organised to the point of impotence. (Noting that there are national channels for Typhoon mods etc of which I’m fully aware and seem to me to be the exceptions that prove the rule).
FWIW NAO and OGC reviews seem to broadly align with my opinion. (Which is just an opinion that I am unlikely to foist on others but equally unlikely to change!)
Still not convinced that we’ll end up seeing Performance, Time and Cost savings from a ship building partnership with Australia (where they build the ships on the other side of the world to a unique sensor and weapon fit) but it would cheer me up if we did.
Yours,
Orca.
ORCA, this explanation is both much appreciated and quite understandable.
I have worked on both Panavia Tornado and Eurofighter Typhoon programmes and as with most things you don't get positives without the negatives. However, it is still my view that the positives have given us two extremely capable aircraft including large export revenues that we would otherwise not have benefited from.
I do agree though that Typhoon in particular has been 'held back' to a degree by lack of ambition and funding of the 4 nations. Even now, some 14 years after EIS it is only beginning to catch up with the latest technology and weapons fit.
This did not affect Tornado quite as much due to the Cold War environment. I have not been involved with TP400 but this seems also to have been affected by the even more complex 5 nation consortium.