British Aerospace have repeatedly said that navalising the Typhoon would be relatively straightforward. Please don't respond with the inevitable "well they would say that" as even British Aerospace is no longer in a position to make wild claims in the hope that the Treasury will fund them.
No, I've been personally briefed on the solution....it isn't one, it's laughable, and a Heath-Robinson solution too.
The JSF is an over-priced and unproven design which is already promising to offer nothing that can't be achieved with the Typhoon. Stealth capability is a pointless luxury and VTOL/STOL is something which belongs to the days of the Cold War. The Times article draws your attention to the JSF's lack of firepower when compared to the Typhoon, and also highlights the delicious prospect of our government paying more than two billion quid every year for two different strike aircraft over the next decade. Hmm...
I think you'll find that
Typhoon is also an "overpriced and unproven design" - how many Ops do you see it proving itself on, seeing as though it's already "in-Service". Don't get me wrong, as an AD platform designed last Century (for today's, not tomorrow's threats BTW) it's got good capability. As an A/G platform it's maturing, nothing more. Sit down, do some sums and the Eurofighter flyaway cost is huge (last conservative estimate 160m GBP all-in!!!). If JSF ever comes in at $300m a piece I will eat my hat, regardless of what you believe written in The Times! Oh, and JSF aint VTOL sunshine, it's STOVL - go read again.
So, all in all, you're ashamedly misinformed and revelling in the fact that a well regarded broadsheet news article has seemingly supported your fragile opinion on a debate that you have no expertise or wisdom in.....ergo, you're an armchair enthusiast and, whilst I respect your right to have an opinion, I think you're pretty bonkers.
