LO.
Did you take me to mean someone in particular?
I merely mean the kind of f*ckw*ts who seriously suggested that EF Typhoon was lacking because it didn't have F-22 levels of all round LO, and who erroneously (and probably knowingly so) sugggested that aircraft like the F-16 were more agile, or that aircraft like the F-15E promised to be less expensive. The kind of idiots, in other words, who seriously suggested that the F-16 could have fulfilled the role.
If the cap fits, it won't fall over deaf ears, as my old granny said.
Best bit of today's programme:
"The nearest we could get to Typhoon was this children's computer game."
I thought that Smartman and his cronies let anyone fly the rig.......
The fact that EF Typhoon originated during the Cold War merely means that it was designed to cope with the very worst conceivable A-A and A-G threat, while the RAF requirement ensured that it had credible and robust out-of-area and forward deployed capabilities.
Yes it's late. Yes the A-G capability is still years away. Yes the quadruplication of final assembly and flight test is barking. Yes kow-towing to the Germans and Italians and Spaniards on workshare has added to both costs and timescales. But it's simply not fair to try and paint the aeroplane as being any more troubled than other modern fighter programmes.
And while the French (bless 'em) have managed to get about eight Rafale Ms into squadron service, they didn't have the Germans to slow them down.