Kraziman,
My point was simply that you indulged in a spot of Typhoon bashing using points that weren't providing entirely accurate parallels, a depressingly frequent event on these means. I don't see offering a contrary point of view as equating to being a member of the 'Typhoon Fanclub'.
I'd just point out the following in answer to your response, if I may:
1. You implied that the Hornet had full clearance in 1980 -i.e. , it was cleared to use the full range of A-G weapons then intended to be available to it in 1980. I merely pointed out that it didn't. The point about VX-5 and its recommendations about the possible suspension of the programme was made to point out that in 1982, a full two years after your date, the F/A-18 was still facing some challenges/issues - just like Typhoon.
2.
Other countries don't care about how the RAF plan to introduce it. You told us (possible customers) it would be multirole. It wasn't (block 5 in 07). Fact.
First, not just the RAF - the other nations played a key role in this. Second, the key word is
possible - frankly, we (the European nations who'd stumped up the money for it) weren't going to spend scarce defence money integrating capabilities ahead of schedule for people who might not buy the thing anyway.
Express a desire to buy it, on condition that the kit is integrated, and you might have found a multi-role airframe in service when required - the question being whether you believed that the company could deliver what you wanted, when you wanted (the Singaporeans, for instance, concluded that they didn't believe what BAE, as Eurofighter's representatives, told them about when certain bits of kit would be integrated). And I'd have been a bit wary on that one...