PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - JSF and A400M at risk?
View Single Post
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 13:03
  #105 (permalink)  
Tim McLelland
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
You summed-up the situation precisely in your earlier post Jackonicko - JSF would be a great asset in an ideal world with limited resources. Typhoon however, is good enough, it really is as simple as that.

It seems to be the problem with so many of these threads, that people chime-in with what they assume to be some dazzling response, when they've merely repeated points that have been raised earlier in the thread. This, sadly, was precisely what WEBF did when he added his rather snotty comments aimed at myself. Just to set the record straight, I'm not in the military and never have been. However, I'm entitled to a view just like any other member of the public, and if some people don't agree that's fine. I do however, think it extremely childish to constantly repeat this "are you in the military because if you're not, then you're stupid and I know better than you" mantra. It's pointless and wrong. Being a member of the armed forces doesn't make anyone any more qualified to make a judgement, indeed it could be argued that such people are less qualified, as they're not looking at things from a wide perspective.

WEBF might think it's arrogant to say that the JSF/Typhoon decision will not be made by the military but there we go - sorry but it's true, and it is indeed a good thing that the decision will not be left to the military. Decisions such as this one have to be made by politicians - it's not a simple choice based on a straightforward comparsion between the F-35's and the Typhoon's performance. The decision has to take into account a whole range of considerations, not least the huge cost, and the very difficult task of predicting where foreign policy might take us over the life-span of the new aircraft. I keep repeating (because it's true!) that this saga is not about simply picking whatever aircraft is "best" as there is no ideal solution. It's about choosing the right option to suit our needs and our resources.

Oh, and I do apologise if my traditional preference for the using the shorthand term "BAe" offends some people. I thought it would be self-evident that I was actually aware of the fact that BAe are now BAE Systems, but it seems some people can be a little too pedantic for their own good!
Tim McLelland is offline