Eurofighter Typhoon
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: JMC Mining Ship, Red Dwarf. 3 million years from earth.
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eurofighter Typhoon
Now as the Typhoon is slowly and eventually here and is started to be delivered to RAF Squadrons, I was wondering what the verdict on this aircraft is?
I saw it for the first time at RIAT last year and I though it was a very impressive piece of kit.
LJ
I saw it for the first time at RIAT last year and I though it was a very impressive piece of kit.
LJ
London Jets,
Er............ seeing as how they have only got 4 with the OEU at Warton, maybe a little premature in such questioning?
flyboy007,
Oh so wrong...............................
Er............ seeing as how they have only got 4 with the OEU at Warton, maybe a little premature in such questioning?
flyboy007,
Oh so wrong...............................
More than 4!
Guest
Posts: n/a
London Jets
Don't expect too much of a serious respnse in early replies - the aircraft (more than 4, and ever increasing, you twit prOOne) are building up as you might expect. Let's not get into the spiral thread of 'about time/BWOS/better from the US/etc'. We're getting it - it'll be good - it'll be enduring (given Gov expenditure) -and I'll wager it'll be the yardstick of omni-role aircraft for many years to come. Not in the soon years, but from around 5 years or so hence. (Given Gov investment).
Could be a decent argumentative thread providing it doesn't develop into another silly knocking-shop.
Don't expect too much of a serious respnse in early replies - the aircraft (more than 4, and ever increasing, you twit prOOne) are building up as you might expect. Let's not get into the spiral thread of 'about time/BWOS/better from the US/etc'. We're getting it - it'll be good - it'll be enduring (given Gov expenditure) -and I'll wager it'll be the yardstick of omni-role aircraft for many years to come. Not in the soon years, but from around 5 years or so hence. (Given Gov investment).
Could be a decent argumentative thread providing it doesn't develop into another silly knocking-shop.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Word from 17 (F) Sqn is that they love it. Despite it still having numerous restrictions and bugs, they are very impressed so far and can't wait to get away from their BAe 'nannies'.
Apparently, a couple of Typhoons gave a pair of F-15Cs a real shock recently. However, this was only 'see and avoid' coz their not cleared for any ACT yet!
Regards,
M2
Apparently, a couple of Typhoons gave a pair of F-15Cs a real shock recently. However, this was only 'see and avoid' coz their not cleared for any ACT yet!
Regards,
M2
smartman, (irony?)
T'was 4 when I was up there, and that was VERY recently....................
T'was 4 when I was up there, and that was VERY recently....................
Guest
Posts: n/a
prOOne (prune?)
I was trying to point out to you that there is more than one RAF Typhoon outfit at Warton, and that there ARE more than four jets on board, and that London Jets question was perfectly valid - and answerable (didn't you get to talk with the guys?) Let neither of us fall into the trap I allude to in my last sentence of my previous post!!
Cheers
I was trying to point out to you that there is more than one RAF Typhoon outfit at Warton, and that there ARE more than four jets on board, and that London Jets question was perfectly valid - and answerable (didn't you get to talk with the guys?) Let neither of us fall into the trap I allude to in my last sentence of my previous post!!
Cheers
smartman (?),
The point that I was trying to make was that the Typhoon is not entering service with Squadrons throughout the service. When I was at Warton there were 4 jets allocated to 17 (R) OEU. There were some folk for 29 (R) OCU hanging around and some BAES flown jets being used by all concerned.
Certainly spoke to lots of the guys, thats why I was there.
They do like it, they can't do all that much with it yet but that's all part of the plan.
Not Typhoon knocking.
The point that I was trying to make was that the Typhoon is not entering service with Squadrons throughout the service. When I was at Warton there were 4 jets allocated to 17 (R) OEU. There were some folk for 29 (R) OCU hanging around and some BAES flown jets being used by all concerned.
Certainly spoke to lots of the guys, thats why I was there.
They do like it, they can't do all that much with it yet but that's all part of the plan.
Not Typhoon knocking.
There's a disparity between numbers of aircraft handed over off PFAT and numbers accepted, and then there's the question of how many actually make it onto 17(R)'s line each day. I was chatting to a journo mate t'other day who's been asking BAE for a pic of four 17 Squadron jets together on the line for some time, and who was frustrated at their inability to provide such a thing.
But whether it's all four 17 jets and one 29 jet or a smaller number than that, it is too early to have any more than a very 'provisional' view of how the aircraft is doing.
It's certainly late. It's also very limited at the moment - no weapons, no helmet, no IRST, no DVI, (no real sensor fusion) and minor glitches are imposing temporary limits on ops. Quite what there is to OT&E is questionable. It's unlikely to be ready in time for the rescheduled squadron stand up dates. It's unlikely to have the required A-G capabilities by the time the Jag bows out.
BUT
It sounds as though it's a great flying machine, it's showing great promise in many areas, the radar's better than most of us dared expect at this stage, credible solutions to many of the problems are in place and the serviceability has allowed a phenomenal flying rate. Some catch-up is likely, and the aircraft may be very much more useful even by Summer 05 when it hits Coningsby.
And the problems it has are as nothing compared to those now afflicting the F-22 and JSF......
What does amaze me is the thought that because of all the delays, personnel from No.17 (R) are reportedly already being posted 'as originally scheduled before the delays' at a time which is now only partway through the OT&E process. Having invested millions in converting an officer to the Typhoon, and giving him the relevant experience to be (say) the CO or XO of this unit, with the intent that he would 'see the process through', I'm amazed that this nominal and entirely generic officer should not simply be extended in post to complete his job, rather than being posted out now.
It might be good for his individual career path (maybe spending an extra 18 months as OC/XO 17 would torpedo his chances of making Group Captain?) but as a tax-payer I'm scandalised because having to convert someone to take over a job like this seems like a massive waste of money, and represents a potential cause of further delays and problems. I'm also unconvinced that there's a massive pool of blokes with the right programme/project and flying experience to be able to do jobs on 17, and none will have had the exposure to the 'process so far' that the blokes now on the unit have gained.
I'm also astonished that with aircraft availability as it is, more weekend flying isn't being undertaken in order to make up for time lost earlier in the programme. It might be hard on the individual guys, but there are wider interests at stake, I'd have thought.
But whether it's all four 17 jets and one 29 jet or a smaller number than that, it is too early to have any more than a very 'provisional' view of how the aircraft is doing.
It's certainly late. It's also very limited at the moment - no weapons, no helmet, no IRST, no DVI, (no real sensor fusion) and minor glitches are imposing temporary limits on ops. Quite what there is to OT&E is questionable. It's unlikely to be ready in time for the rescheduled squadron stand up dates. It's unlikely to have the required A-G capabilities by the time the Jag bows out.
BUT
It sounds as though it's a great flying machine, it's showing great promise in many areas, the radar's better than most of us dared expect at this stage, credible solutions to many of the problems are in place and the serviceability has allowed a phenomenal flying rate. Some catch-up is likely, and the aircraft may be very much more useful even by Summer 05 when it hits Coningsby.
And the problems it has are as nothing compared to those now afflicting the F-22 and JSF......
What does amaze me is the thought that because of all the delays, personnel from No.17 (R) are reportedly already being posted 'as originally scheduled before the delays' at a time which is now only partway through the OT&E process. Having invested millions in converting an officer to the Typhoon, and giving him the relevant experience to be (say) the CO or XO of this unit, with the intent that he would 'see the process through', I'm amazed that this nominal and entirely generic officer should not simply be extended in post to complete his job, rather than being posted out now.
It might be good for his individual career path (maybe spending an extra 18 months as OC/XO 17 would torpedo his chances of making Group Captain?) but as a tax-payer I'm scandalised because having to convert someone to take over a job like this seems like a massive waste of money, and represents a potential cause of further delays and problems. I'm also unconvinced that there's a massive pool of blokes with the right programme/project and flying experience to be able to do jobs on 17, and none will have had the exposure to the 'process so far' that the blokes now on the unit have gained.
I'm also astonished that with aircraft availability as it is, more weekend flying isn't being undertaken in order to make up for time lost earlier in the programme. It might be hard on the individual guys, but there are wider interests at stake, I'd have thought.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weekend flying wouldn't fit in with the civvy engineers and their hours! Unless this has been solved since, I know some of the Techies that 1st went to Warton were 'concerned' over this required change to our business. The previous posts concern over cost would pale beside weekend overtime costs. Probably!
And the problems it has are as nothing compared to those now afflicting the F-22 and JSF......
It's certainly late. It's also very limited at the moment - no weapons, no helmet, no IRST, no DVI, (no real sensor fusion)
And just what are the original, planned in-service dates of these 3 aircraft then?
Lucky its a 'great flying machine' though.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: JMC Mining Ship, Red Dwarf. 3 million years from earth.
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it seems like I've started a good debate here, I only asked about the aircraft because I don't know too much about it, that is apart from seeing it at RIAT last year when it put on a superb display. One of the most manouverable aircraft I have ever seen.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with Jacko's point on the wastefulness of replacing expensively trained aircrew before their training costs have been amortised - no organisation for profit could afford to pursue the path the RAF takes. Almost the entire front line aircrew strength are retrained every 3 to 5 years and this has been going on since before 1970 solely to feed a pyramid career system that gives every aircrew a crack at making high rank. Most do not make it past Sqn Ldr but by that time they have been out of the front line so long that their skills have faded. If they get past Wg Cdr they will soon be lost forever as far as the front line is concerned.
If the service now needs to cut back it could do so to its' advantage by changing the career structure and leaving aircrew in the front line longer. What is wrong with professional aircrew and a suitable pay structure to tempt them to stay? There would still be room to put a few budding senior officers through the front line and the training costs would be minimised. The best motivated aircrew do not wish to be staff officers.
If the service now needs to cut back it could do so to its' advantage by changing the career structure and leaving aircrew in the front line longer. What is wrong with professional aircrew and a suitable pay structure to tempt them to stay? There would still be room to put a few budding senior officers through the front line and the training costs would be minimised. The best motivated aircrew do not wish to be staff officers.
ftrplt,
" it's showing great promise in many areas, the radar's better than most of us dared expect at this stage, credible solutions to many of the problems are in place and the serviceability has allowed a phenomenal flying rate."
That's the key point. Better radar performance than expected at this stage. No sorties lost to radar snags. Better than expected MTBF, lower than expected MMH/FH, etc. That's VERY different to F-22.
And the lack of weapons has more to do with the arcane procedures still being used in order to expant the RTS/MAR than with an inherent problem. Test aircraft have fired IRIS-T, Winder and AMRAAM, and have carried Paveway II. That's very different to F-22, too.
"Lucky its a 'great flying machine' though."
I don't want to nitpick with such a selective quoter (I said it "sounds as though it's a great flying machine" - how would a journo who hasn't flown it be able to say that it was - I can only pass on what people who have flown it have said). Presumably you think it would be a better aircraft if it was a sluggish, slow, unmanoeuvrable, tortoise that the pilots hated? You'll be pleased that the JSF which Oz has ordered is so dramatically overweight, but perhaps you should press for a STOVL JSF buy - that's even more bloated....
" it's showing great promise in many areas, the radar's better than most of us dared expect at this stage, credible solutions to many of the problems are in place and the serviceability has allowed a phenomenal flying rate."
That's the key point. Better radar performance than expected at this stage. No sorties lost to radar snags. Better than expected MTBF, lower than expected MMH/FH, etc. That's VERY different to F-22.
And the lack of weapons has more to do with the arcane procedures still being used in order to expant the RTS/MAR than with an inherent problem. Test aircraft have fired IRIS-T, Winder and AMRAAM, and have carried Paveway II. That's very different to F-22, too.
"Lucky its a 'great flying machine' though."
I don't want to nitpick with such a selective quoter (I said it "sounds as though it's a great flying machine" - how would a journo who hasn't flown it be able to say that it was - I can only pass on what people who have flown it have said). Presumably you think it would be a better aircraft if it was a sluggish, slow, unmanoeuvrable, tortoise that the pilots hated? You'll be pleased that the JSF which Oz has ordered is so dramatically overweight, but perhaps you should press for a STOVL JSF buy - that's even more bloated....
Jacko,
the point I was trying to make, and you haven't answered, is what are the comparable development timelines of the two aircraft (Typoon and F22, dont care about JSF) - when did both aircraft commence development and what was the planned in service dates.
THe F22 has fired weapons also, and I have also heard from operators, that it is a great piece of kit. I would suspect you (nor I) are in a realistic position to make a valid comparison between the two airframes, both on development issues and REAL TIME capability.
On JSF, my position is clear; I believe the RAAF fast jet force is going to be wheezing badly around 2010 and the JSF will be nowhere near its planned capability level for many years after that.
I believe the JSF will work well for the USAF as a second tier airframe, for the RAAF as a primary (and only) airframe it will suck royally. They will regret not buying F15E's in the late 90's.
the point I was trying to make, and you haven't answered, is what are the comparable development timelines of the two aircraft (Typoon and F22, dont care about JSF) - when did both aircraft commence development and what was the planned in service dates.
THe F22 has fired weapons also, and I have also heard from operators, that it is a great piece of kit. I would suspect you (nor I) are in a realistic position to make a valid comparison between the two airframes, both on development issues and REAL TIME capability.
On JSF, my position is clear; I believe the RAAF fast jet force is going to be wheezing badly around 2010 and the JSF will be nowhere near its planned capability level for many years after that.
I believe the JSF will work well for the USAF as a second tier airframe, for the RAAF as a primary (and only) airframe it will suck royally. They will regret not buying F15E's in the late 90's.
The original target dates for both aircraft are irrelevant, since the end of the Cold War allowed both programmes to be restructured and realigned. Depending on which figure you use, either aircraft could be claimed to be 'more late' than the other. Recent slippage has been broadly the same, however.
The F-22 may eventually be a great piece of kit. At the moment, however, it's royally plagued by unreliability (having only just achieved the modest MTBF goal set for it) and unserviceability, and is missing key capabilities, while the unit cost is still shooting through the roof.
All of the F-22 operators I've spoken too are extremely enthusiastic about the aircraft's potential and promise as a weapons system, but not one of them has offered any praise of the aircraft as it is today as a flying machine.
At least we agree on the JSF for Australia. It's not too late to change horses and buy a Typhoon or two, and by the time you get them, they will be a superb aircraft and weapons platform.
The F-22 may eventually be a great piece of kit. At the moment, however, it's royally plagued by unreliability (having only just achieved the modest MTBF goal set for it) and unserviceability, and is missing key capabilities, while the unit cost is still shooting through the roof.
All of the F-22 operators I've spoken too are extremely enthusiastic about the aircraft's potential and promise as a weapons system, but not one of them has offered any praise of the aircraft as it is today as a flying machine.
At least we agree on the JSF for Australia. It's not too late to change horses and buy a Typhoon or two, and by the time you get them, they will be a superb aircraft and weapons platform.