EFA delays

[trailfinder]

Further delays are expected to the delivery and operational use of the RAF's new Eurofighter aircraft, according to a BBC investigation. . .The Ministry of Defence is even withholding part of its payments for the programme until the continuing problems are rectified.

BBC Radio 4's Today programme says manufacturers BAE Systems may even have to pay damages because of the delays.

The Eurofighter, the most expensive project in British military history, has been dogged by delays since it was conceived in 1984.

Defence minister Lewis Moonie has admitted to the Commons there had been "slippage" but he is confident the Eurofighter will enter service this summer.

But a senior defence official told the BBC the MoD was resigned to the fact that the project will be delayed for another year.

BBC defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan said that even when the plane was ready, the first Eurofighters would remain in the factory for a further two years for testing.

Jet shortage

There are plans to set up an RAF base in a corner of the factory to allow the MoD to claim that the Eurofighter had entered service, he added.

The main hold up has been production of the fully kitted out aircraft, known as IPA1, as opposed to prototypes already seen at airshows.

IPA1 was supposed to fly last August, but still has not left the ground.

The RAF was supposed to start training in March, with first deliveries in June.

Aviation consultant John Lake said: "That simply is not going to happen."

He says the delays will leave the RAF short of jets as there is little evidence that anyone is making arrangements to cover the expected capability gaps.

But Tim Ripley, of Lancaster University, says there is still the chance that BAE Systems could pull the project back closer to schedule.

Inevitable delays

"It is far easier to recover from these types of issues at this stage.

"Once you go beyond June then the knock-on effects will start to kick in and the bow wave will start spreading throughout the RAF."

Bruce George, chair of Commons defence select committee, insists that despite 42 months delay the programme is not in deep trouble.

"Delays in these complicated processes are inevitable," he said.

"One thing is certain that if it does slip, BAE will have liquidated damages which I am certain will be claimed and will have to be paid.

"I believe they will be operational in 2006."

The MoD said it was disappointed by delays to the flight of IPA1 and was assessing the implications for the rest of the Eurofighter programme.

A spokesman for BAE Systems confirmed some money had not been paid by the MoD but said he did not like the word "withheld".

[sad spaniel]

Same old same old. Why do the Government let BAe get away with it all the time. Just buy Yank gear. It's far superior now and has been for 25 years. F16 block D will do just as much as EFA and probably looks smaller on the radar. :) :)

[Gainesy]

"Dog Bites Man" story.

[keiysersaucy]

I hope the RAF people in procurement are enjoying their consultancy jobs with yet another company that has sold us delayed kit, that no doubt will not work, and will not perform as well as us off the shelf kit. Cynical, yes, but born of experience.

[TimC]

Fook it, lets just buy the Gripen. Aren't we building some parts of it for the swedes anyway?

Edited coz even £*** getes censored now! :)

[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: TimC ]</p>

[Fg Off Max Stout]

Bad idea TimC. That would be as criminally insane and damaging as the cancellation of TSR2, which was at a similar stage of development and had just as promising a future. You do know the TSR2 farce don't you? BTW Gripen is not really in the same league as EF Typhoid, is it.

[Booger]

The old "TSR2" chestnut... I love that one. I heard it was 75 years ahead of it's time, could do Mach 6, go 5000 nautical miles AND had a thought controlled weapons system.

It's the perennial "one that got away" story - Ya gotta let it go people, IT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING!!

BTW, How's ASRAAM coming along? :)

[BEagle]

The TSR2 did everything it was expected to - and more. Except that it was killed by Wislon, Healey and Brown. And, of course, that self-interested person Earl Mountbottom who undermined the RAF's need for TSR2 on each and every occasion, producing little Buccaneer models to demonstrate that we could have 4 Buccaneers for every TSR2. Yes- or probably a couple of dozen Chipmunks either!

But it's the usual story from 't Bungling Baron Waste o' Space! EFA - Ever Fewer Airframes or Evaded Farnborough AGAIN is becoming a real sad joke. Like every other BWoS product it's late, underperforming and over budget.....

Gripen and F-35? Makes sense, doesn't it! I wouldn't be surprised to see the first F-35s in squadron service before the first TypHoons are in RAF squadron service at RAF bases - not in a hangar at Warton!

How's the Nimrod 2000 coming along, Bungling Baron BWoS? It's now 2002, you'll note!!

[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: BEagle ]</p>

[trailfinder]

someone, somewhere appears to rattling some journos' cages.... .-------------

The Times. .February 14, 2002

Eurofighter cost to UK taxpayers jumps to £21.5bn. .By Michael Evans, Defence Editor. . . .THE cost to British taxpayers of the Eurofighter combat aircraft programme has jumped to £21.5 billion, according to the latest Ministry of Defence estimate. . .The increase caused astonishment among Opposition MPs. James Gray, the Conservative defence spokesman, intends to ask the Government for an explanation.

The sharp rise was disclosed as the MoD agreed that there was going to be a further slippage in the Eurofighter handover date. The first production version should have been ready in August last year, but now is not expected until next month. Handover of the first Eurofighter to the RAF will not be until July or later.

The RAF is to buy 232 of the multirole aircraft which have been developed by a consortium from Britain, Germany, Spain and Italy.

The cost of the programme announced in 1998 when the order for the Eurofighters was confirmed, was £15.9 billion, making it the most expensive equipment project embarked on by the MoD. The previous most costly programmes were the Tornado aircraft, at about £12 billion, also involving European collaboration, and the construction of four Trident ballistic missile submarines for £10 billion.

The increasing cost of the Eurofighter has been monitored by the National Audit Office in its annual MoD major projects report. The latest figure of £21.5 billion, which was confirmed by an MoD official, has been passed to the audit office, although it will not be made public until next month in the annual major projects report.

The audit office and the ministry said that the big rise in the overall cost of the programme was due to a new accounting method. That included an estimate of inflation for the whole period in which the Eurofighters were being produced.

The Defence Ministry official said that the last Eurofighter would come off the production line in 2014. The figure of £21.5 billion, he said, was based on the current estimate of inflation throughout that period.

An audit office official said that the last figure the office had received from the MoD and published in a report was £18.8 billion. However, he said, the figure had gone “unnoticed”. He said the new accounting method, which included an assessment of likely depreciation, was a more honest way of presenting the cost of a huge programme such as the Eurofighter project.

Mr Gray said Eurofighter was a Cold War aircraft. “But we’ve got it for the next 50-odd years and it’s vital that the MoD stops the cost from spiralling.”

Paul Keetch, Liberal Democrat defence spokesman, said: “Parliament must be told why the cost has risen so much.”. . . .--------------------------------------------. .I concur with Beags, Gripen might not be as capable on paper but surely better to have an effective, functional aircraft than one which won't acheive its full potential until some distant unspecified date...

just my 2 pence worth

[lucky_b*]

Why not copy the french idea of bringing an aircraft into service that underperforms and then upgrade it in place as they did with the Mirage 2000!

Oh! We already did with the F3!

[Perky Penguin]

When I worked in a certain Middle East country we bought Jaguars for £7 million each (I know the price 'cos I saw the export VAT invoice that came with the aircraft papers). At the same time we could had early F16s for $7 million each. By the way the Jaguar was bought for Air Defence (!) and sold by the same BAe that sold the Lightning to Saudia Arabia for ground attack! Amazing salesmen you have to say!

[Megaton]

Nimrod 2000, EF2000..looks like the year 2000 wasn't a good one for aircraft production.

Has anyone seen/heard the latest unit cost for a Typhoon?

[trailfinder]

The last Major Projects Report put it at £57.9 m per unit for 232 aircraft.

[Golden Monkey]

Just out of curiosity, is the UK version of the Eurofighter still destined to go into service without a gun?

Are we the only member nation of this project with that spec for production aircraft?

[Megaton]

£57.9 m per unit !!!!! I thought we were buying this because it was going to be cheaper than the F15. Presumably, ths is before logisitic and mission support costs. Is this the figure for an operational EF with functioning DAS, radar, air and ground weapons or is this the airshow aircraft cost?

[bad livin']

Realistically speaking, when is the full production standard aircraft, with Meteor etc, voice, and all the other good things above and beyond basic spec, now meant to get to the front line? Can the F3 force take the punishment in their now diminished state?

[trailfinder]

HP

Yep,

That's just the procurement costs. In Service Support not included....not sure about the full spec costs though.

[Charlieboy]

SSS as far as I am aware the Typhoon was originally due to be fitted with a single MauserWerke BK-27mm cannon, however this was scrapped as the MOD's better judgment prevailed, apparently with the capability for ASRAAM's and Sidewinders, a gun is a secondary consideration. Not being a pilot (yet) myself I would not know the use of a gun in comparison to missiles but with full payload you can only have 5 ASRAAM's on a Typhoon (I think). Seems a bit underarmed for an advanced multi-role aircraft, but hey what do I know.

[Golden Monkey]

Thanks Charlieboy,

I know things have moved on considerably since those days, but I seem to recall the USAF looking somewhat silly after deciding that the F4 was such a capable missile platform it had no need for a gun either.

Aerial engagement matters aside, with the Typhoon being a true multirole aircraft I would have thought a cannon for opportunistic air-to-ground work would have been a non-negotiable requirement.

Ah well.

[bakseetblatherer]

I think the big problems of having no gun are:. .1. the cost of supplying a precision machine manufactured lump of steel to take its place (which has to be lifed etc. like every other part of the a/c) will be not insignificant. . .2. When going against a helo with decent IR supression that hovers or lands a gun is the only way to go (that is why the F3 had an air to ground gun mode fitted for ops in FRY).. .Balance this against:. .1. Only very occaisional snap shot guns- we wanna kill them at 50 miles with AMRAAM (or meteor?) (but maybe it will happen more often with an agile a/c, I dunno).. .2. The damage that firing guns (gas and vibration) cause to sensitive kit (I know that should be sorted out but it probably is not!).. .Funnily enough the MOD has gone for the cheaper option, even if the savings are going to be very small <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> and it will have to be upgraded later;. .same thing different a/c <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[unclebuckhead]

I'm taking bets on whether JSF beats EFA into service, any offers. I have also heard that in order to speed things up (EFA) there will be no air to ground capability.

[Charlieboy]

Well if thats true they may as well not bother, by the time EFA gets anything close to finished not only will JSF beat it into service, JSF will probably have been pentioned off. <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

Still heres looking hopeful <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[Min Decent Ht]

A few corrections to previous statements; although this is still only my opinion:

CB- EFA's standard air-to-air fit is 2 ASRAAMs and 4 AMRAAMs/Meteor, plus 2 other pylons for missiles if required, and/or 3 hardpoints for fuel tanks. Equals, a lot of capability.

But so did the F4, on paper anyway.

The gun will still be fitted to the first batch of delivery aircraft to the RAF. The second and third is open to debate. Its the same 27mm cannon as the Tornado but with some nice modifications, including linkless ammo = more rounds carried. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> . .I know that when other agile fighters get involved in a scrap they rely on the gun a lot, especially if its an American built, rotating, "get some!", thing. Perhaps some boffin worked out that EFA will be going supersonic all the time so it won't stay around to turn and burn. Yeah right. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[Jackonicko]

The gun and supporting the gun are 'back on'. The cost quoted includes support contracts. The figure of £57.9 m includes R&D costs, without those (eg for every extra a/c beyond 232) it's nearer £40 m. Even £57 m is cheaper than Israel's last F-15Is or the Saudi F-15S, is still less than 2/3 the cost of an F-22 and cheaper than Rafale.

It may be that the aircraft will be very late (or just late, depending on who you believe) and it may be that there are still unresolved technical problems, but it does seem as though it will be a super aircraft in its primary role. The real question is how its coming in the OS role, and what manner of capability gaps will be left when Jag goes, while we wait for EF to gain maturity in the air-to-ground role.

The EF is sposed to pick up 'significant A-G capability by 2007' yet has not dropped or carried a single A-G weapon yet, and it's unlikely that they've even written the software....

[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: Jackonicko ]</p>

[Muff Coupling]

Ditch it ...UAVs will rule!! <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

[Admin Guru]

Firstly I have to comment on all your obvious short comings in budgetry/financial knowledge! You are professional aircrew after all and should concentrate on flying rather than the difficult world of money, of which I am rather knowledgable. Tied in with this of course is politics and military/civilian contract writing.

If EF is late then there will be financial penalties to be paid by those companies involved, to compensate for its operational date slipping.. .We will have to just live with this as anyone with knowledge of these matters would accept readily. The same problems plague ANY modern project; Chaps these are no longer the days of the bouncing bomb and equipment cannot be procured at the whim of the RAF aircrew that want it so badly. See also the delays with JSF and F-22 for further evidence.

As for the gun issue, I understand this is being redressed so please get your facts straight. The recce versions of the F3 get by without a gun!. .Furthermore the 4 AMRAAMs it can carry should negate the need for a gun anyway. Surely the last air-air guns kill was in Korea!

Bad Living - I refer to my Falklands thread which refers to the F3 as a very capable fighter by a number of people.

For those doubting the air-gnd capability! Of course its going to be good at it, its brand new! Technology always gets better with time - simple fact; my laptop is better this year than the one I bought 2 years ago.

There are some very interesting facts on the EF on the RAF website. I suggest you check it out before replying.

[BEagle]

Last A/A guns kill in the Korean War? Ever heard of a little trouble spot called Viet Nam, you half-wit? And please, what is the recce version of the F3 when it's at home? Pray tell - it's news to me......

[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: BEagle ]</p>

[Seven of Nine]

AG. ."recce version of the F3". .Do you know something the rest of us don't?. .Doh.

[bad livin']

AG - saw your F3 article and do not disagree; I meant that the force as it stands is in various mod states, growing old, limited in numbers and overstretched in commitments. The oft rumoured SEAD upgrade in the future perhaps?

[Alf Aworna]

AG please get some cred along with a life. Your 'joke' is wearing a bit thin now. You might want to check your history on your precious Falklands where you may find a few SHAR guns kills during the 1982 conflict. Oh and I think the chaps at Colt might disagree with your idea that the pilot doesn't get what he wants, quickly and at minimal cost. But you'd know all about that wouldn't you - you really are a cunning stunt (spellcheck that).

[Alf Aworna]

Can we get back to EFA now?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Yep, there were several gun kills by Sea Harriers during the Falklands...

[ 14 February 2002: Message edited by: WE Branch Fanatic ]</p>

[A Civilian]

I belive that they were technically 'kills' but they were on the ground at the time <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

As for ASRAAM the americans are going the opposite direction and wondering why they need short range missles at all. With limited housing on the F22 & increasing use of AEW there looking at duel role missles starting at medium range class and going upwards to the meoter(if it arrives) class.

[DESPERADO]

Recce version of the F3, thats the best one so far AG. You are the daddy. So utterly stupid, and yet everyone continues to bite. Very funny post. . .After the Malvinas thread I was sure that you are F3 mate, now I know it. Still think that you are a nav.. .The no guns kills one is a good'un for getting some of the more 'experienced' contributors going. Got all the demagraphics in one hit again.. .Keep up the good work.

[trailfinder]

Yes AG, your laptop might be better, but the SR for it was not written in the mid-80s.

I'm not aircrew either but I suspect know a bit t more than you do about procurement and problems with complex projects - such things should not be readily accepted. MOD might get liquidated damages (emphasis on might, given the contractor) but that does not compensate for the operational capability gap it leaves us with.

Oh and I concur with a post on a previous thread - you are a wind up merchant.

[MarkD]

It's not quite on directly comparing say F-15 with EFA, as a European built aircraft has payroll and other taxes reverting to HMG et al whereas an imported aircraft might have a bit of UK avionics which returns 2/5 of 1/3 of ****** all, plus [see C-17] there might be usage restrictions...

[WE Branch Fanatic]

There were gun kills of Argentine Skyhawks (flying at the time) in the Falklands..

Source: ONE HUNDRED DAYS by Admiral "Sandy" Woodward

[ 15 February 2002: Message edited by: WE Branch Fanatic ]</p>

[Archimedes]

And there was at least one anti-helo gun kill in Desert Storm (by an A-10).

[Jackonicko]

AG: You are a £uçkin' comdey genius, son!

"For those doubting the air-gnd capability! Of course it (Eurofighter)'s going to be good at it, its brand new! Technology always gets better with time - "

AND

"There are some very interesting facts on the EF on the RAF website. I suggest you check it out before replying."

Of course! The RAF website. Why did none of us think of turning to such an unbiased, reliable and remarkably detailed source of information. Alternatively, perhaps the Eurofighter websight would offer equally unbiased information?

Or we could listen to aircrew posting here who probably have friends and colleagues already doing EF jobs, either with AWC, as desk officers in Handbrake House or at Strike, or with the IPT, and who probably have a good 'handle' on exactly how the programme is going?

Or even to journos who've seen IPA 1 sitting in the shed and chatted to the engineers, who have sat in DA2, interviewed the MD Eurofighter and other programme figures, and who may even have interviewed some of the RAF officers referred to above.....

Perhaps since you think that adding air-to-ground capability is so easy, you'd like to go and help BAE do it right, and explain to everyone else how come writing A-G software (for GR4, for example) and integrating modern weapons can be so problematic? When EF has yet to drop a single bomb, perhaps you'll justify your faith in the aircraft's performance in the A-G role? You may be right, but it's too early to tell, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest that five years is too little time to get it right!

And since air to ground capability is directly proportional to advancing technology, perhaps you'd care to explain to your aircrew colleagues at C*****hall why their TIALD integration was better than the initial (later) integration on GR4?

With regard to the "difficult world of money, about which you are rather knowledgable", perhaps you'd detail for us thickies the penalties paid by BAE for the late delivery of the GR4, and for the failures to meet various programme milestones, or paid for delays on MRA4, to justify your contention that Eurofighter GmbH will be paying 'financial penalties'? Or perhaps you'd explain how late programmes can ever end up costing the MoD extra money, surely the contractors should pay any such costs?

[ 15 February 2002: Message edited by: Jackonicko ]</p>

[TimC]

"Recce version of the F3" http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/rotfl.gif

AG, please come out with some more gems like that. Desperados comment "So utterly stupid". Just makes it funnier :) .