We can do FI, Afghanistan and Iraq - 11sqn
And you can be sure that Typhoon will be in Afghanistan soon, albeit not tomorrow. It will be a fantastically capable aircraft in whatever role we fit it out for, and the best FJ we've had in the RAF ever.
But it's cool to slag it off...........
But it's cool to slag it off...........
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: your mother's bedroom
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko is talking balls as usual. With the current rate of inflation, there is no chance whatsoever of his 42 million pounds figure, which is based on figure several years ago btw. Think 60 million, or $180 million US dollars, for a non-stealth, non-bombing plane, non-carrier plane. Outside of Europe and countries that are too rich for their own good, cough Saudi Arabia, who's going to buy this ****e?
Furthermore, asking the Typhoon to do ground bombing is the equivalent of asking a showy prancer to move dirt on a hillside in Dartmoor. It just wouldn't do.
The EF is NOT stealth. When the Russian stealth jet comes out in 2015-2020, and the Asian ones past 2020, the EF would be consigned to the dustbin of history. Not bad, a 7 year gap between groundpounding IOC and obsolescence. That's return for 19 billion pounds of research alright.
And comparing it to the FRENCH Rafale as a means of argument is laughable. Just because a one legged cripple can bounce along faster than a guy with no legs and a skateboard doesn't mean he's going to win the Olympics of air battle.
Furthermore, asking the Typhoon to do ground bombing is the equivalent of asking a showy prancer to move dirt on a hillside in Dartmoor. It just wouldn't do.
The EF is NOT stealth. When the Russian stealth jet comes out in 2015-2020, and the Asian ones past 2020, the EF would be consigned to the dustbin of history. Not bad, a 7 year gap between groundpounding IOC and obsolescence. That's return for 19 billion pounds of research alright.
And comparing it to the FRENCH Rafale as a means of argument is laughable. Just because a one legged cripple can bounce along faster than a guy with no legs and a skateboard doesn't mean he's going to win the Olympics of air battle.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Sure, there is a million to one chance we that Ivan or Carlos may attack next year but there is a certainty that Terry will be attacking tomorrow
As has already been said (by myself as well as others) the money for the Typhoons was already spent before Iraq/Afghanistan kicked off. There has never been the option of binning Typhoons in order to spend the money on SH or AT assets because had the Typhoons been binned the penalty clauses would have cost almost as much as taking delivery of the aircraft/
Instead of blaming the purchase of Typhoon on all the woes of the Armed Forces adjust your sights and point your wrath at those who are actually responsible, the government. The Armed Forces of this country were committed to operating in two different theatres at a level well above those decided and budgeted to after the last round of defence assumptions made by, you've guessed it, the current government.
As someone who spent the majority of his career working with SH I too would like to see more money spent on SH and AT assets but I'm not so stupid as to think that cancelling the purchase of some Typhoons would somehow magically give the Armed Forces a big pot of money to spend. I'm also not so short-sighted not to realise that a replacement is needed for the Jaguar (RIP), some elements of the Tornado GR4 fleet and also the Tornado F3 fleet and a project to replace such aircraft is invariably going to be long and more importantly, expensive.
Instead of posters like yourself constantly having a pop at the nasty old RAF and their new aircraft why don't you do some research, work out who the real culprit is in the saga of poor funding for the Armed Forces and start firing in their direction, or is that too simplistic?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 68
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on stacker -
every so often some Charlie sits down for a defence review, which involves creating a fantasy world that bears little resemblance to reality, and is then used to determine force structures for the next umpty ump years. Quite often this involves losing capability, such as not needing fighters as enemy bombers will be taken out by missiles, and so forth.
The reduction in capability can provide a welcome cash boost, so handy when you want to prop up a wavering marginal constituency - it tends to have a knock on effect when you get sent at zero notice to recapture the Falklands and by sheer good fortune you haven't quite finished flogging your carriers off.
Once a few such cock ups have been experienced the government, far from learning these stunningly simple lessons, promptly goes and invades a part of the world that has happily swallowed invading armies whole for the past few millenia, attempting to achieve what will be the first ever away match victory in that neck of the woods on a shoestring.
It's the government, start to finish - the FJ v Mud movers, CV v FFG, Landie v, errr, Shank's pony arguments are all symptoms of the underlying issue - if the forces were properly funded for the jobs they are given, or they were only tasked in line with their capabilities, then nobody would have to argue about who got what slice of the pie.
every so often some Charlie sits down for a defence review, which involves creating a fantasy world that bears little resemblance to reality, and is then used to determine force structures for the next umpty ump years. Quite often this involves losing capability, such as not needing fighters as enemy bombers will be taken out by missiles, and so forth.
The reduction in capability can provide a welcome cash boost, so handy when you want to prop up a wavering marginal constituency - it tends to have a knock on effect when you get sent at zero notice to recapture the Falklands and by sheer good fortune you haven't quite finished flogging your carriers off.
Once a few such cock ups have been experienced the government, far from learning these stunningly simple lessons, promptly goes and invades a part of the world that has happily swallowed invading armies whole for the past few millenia, attempting to achieve what will be the first ever away match victory in that neck of the woods on a shoestring.
It's the government, start to finish - the FJ v Mud movers, CV v FFG, Landie v, errr, Shank's pony arguments are all symptoms of the underlying issue - if the forces were properly funded for the jobs they are given, or they were only tasked in line with their capabilities, then nobody would have to argue about who got what slice of the pie.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Mr Browne also said that the Harrier force was being withdrawn from the country - having first been deployed to Kandahar airfield in November 2004 as he was "very mindful of the strain" that the extended deployment had put upon the crews. They will be withdrawn by next spring and replace them with Tornado GR4s.
Word on the street is that the puffer jet will be in Afghanistan for at least another year, and will be replaced by the Tonka as they are pulled from Iraq. Taking an AD squadron of Typhoon and turning them into mud-movers will take time
at 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can i propose a 'middle way' in this very polarised fight?
It seems that we have one bunch who think the airframe's ace (which it is), relevant (which it might be) and cheap (hmmm), and might well cure third world debt. They are opposed by a bunch who think it's rubbish, (not sure that'll stick), irrelevant (which may - or may not - be true at this precise second but cannot be garaunteed forever), expensive (tricky) and caused cancer.
One side is bouyed by announcements such as the recent one, the other somewhat irked by it, on the grounds that the system has yet to deploy at a time when all the rest of us are deploying.
Therefore i suggest the following:
1. We all accept that Typhoon was bought with all the best intentions, it's a great aircraft and cancelling or reducing the order wouldn't save a bean.
2. The aircraft has been extensively modified and should soon be able to employ A-S weaponry in theatre.
3.The aircraft has yet to do so.
4. Like all communities - those that fly and maintain the beast are a mixture of great lads, good lads, average lads and the odd oxygen thief. (lads = generic for boys and girls)
This will placate all those that think it's wonderful, and all those that would sooner point out that it hasn't yet done the job for which we are repeatedly told it's fit for purpose.
This can all change when it does actually deploy, does the job and everyone starts slagging off a new platform. In the meantime i suggest a moratorium on the somewhat naive 'It's rubbish' cries and the equally naive, and a little bit grating 'It's great and can do x, y and z headlines'
That being said, not slagging it off/ defending it will get a little boring.
It seems that we have one bunch who think the airframe's ace (which it is), relevant (which it might be) and cheap (hmmm), and might well cure third world debt. They are opposed by a bunch who think it's rubbish, (not sure that'll stick), irrelevant (which may - or may not - be true at this precise second but cannot be garaunteed forever), expensive (tricky) and caused cancer.
One side is bouyed by announcements such as the recent one, the other somewhat irked by it, on the grounds that the system has yet to deploy at a time when all the rest of us are deploying.
Therefore i suggest the following:
1. We all accept that Typhoon was bought with all the best intentions, it's a great aircraft and cancelling or reducing the order wouldn't save a bean.
2. The aircraft has been extensively modified and should soon be able to employ A-S weaponry in theatre.
3.The aircraft has yet to do so.
4. Like all communities - those that fly and maintain the beast are a mixture of great lads, good lads, average lads and the odd oxygen thief. (lads = generic for boys and girls)
This will placate all those that think it's wonderful, and all those that would sooner point out that it hasn't yet done the job for which we are repeatedly told it's fit for purpose.
This can all change when it does actually deploy, does the job and everyone starts slagging off a new platform. In the meantime i suggest a moratorium on the somewhat naive 'It's rubbish' cries and the equally naive, and a little bit grating 'It's great and can do x, y and z headlines'
That being said, not slagging it off/ defending it will get a little boring.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Meadows
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Valid points orca, but your post and AA's above it seem to suffer from the mistaken assumption, popular amongst Typhoon critics, that Typhoon was only ever intended as an A/A platform and a couple of years ago someone decided to stick a bomb on it. This just isn't true.
It was designed to be A/A capable first to replace F3 (about now), under the assumption that Harrier and GR4 could cover the A/G side, then the A/G capability could be brought on - but it was always intended to be multi-role. In fact I remember the argument years (10+) ago about whether it would be multi-role or swing-role.
The current reality of 2 wars and the continual salami slicing of A/G sqns has meant that the A/G capability is now needed ASAP.
It was designed to be A/A capable first to replace F3 (about now), under the assumption that Harrier and GR4 could cover the A/G side, then the A/G capability could be brought on - but it was always intended to be multi-role. In fact I remember the argument years (10+) ago about whether it would be multi-role or swing-role.
The current reality of 2 wars and the continual salami slicing of A/G sqns has meant that the A/G capability is now needed ASAP.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude,
Couldn't agree more. My angle is simply that those that want to knock the system or it's operators can do so but will achieve nothing. At the same time it's proponents might want to throttle back on the sales pitch until it has actually deployed.
I can remember various presentations by either RAF or Bae whilst at Uni and later during FT etc and always got the impression that the A-A would have primacy and the A-G side would 'sort of sort itself out'. Just the impression i got, probably harsh or invalid.
Either way you are absolutely right, we need more OS and more pods at the moment. Then again other posters are correct in saying that we'll need the fox 3 shooter at some point.
Me? I don't believe it's rubbish, don't believe it's flawed as a concept, and if it's on QRA it can clearly hack it A-A. However I won't believe it works A-Mud until it drops a real bomb on the opposition. (Deliberately etc) (Or - for the purists/ doctrine geeks - it delivers a non-kinetic (boring) effect in theatre) When it does i shall be the first to offer the chaps a beer.
Couldn't agree more. My angle is simply that those that want to knock the system or it's operators can do so but will achieve nothing. At the same time it's proponents might want to throttle back on the sales pitch until it has actually deployed.
I can remember various presentations by either RAF or Bae whilst at Uni and later during FT etc and always got the impression that the A-A would have primacy and the A-G side would 'sort of sort itself out'. Just the impression i got, probably harsh or invalid.
Either way you are absolutely right, we need more OS and more pods at the moment. Then again other posters are correct in saying that we'll need the fox 3 shooter at some point.
Me? I don't believe it's rubbish, don't believe it's flawed as a concept, and if it's on QRA it can clearly hack it A-A. However I won't believe it works A-Mud until it drops a real bomb on the opposition. (Deliberately etc) (Or - for the purists/ doctrine geeks - it delivers a non-kinetic (boring) effect in theatre) When it does i shall be the first to offer the chaps a beer.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An impressive sight all bombed up at Nellis:-
http://www.nellis.af.mil/shared/medi...-003%20(2).jpg
http://www.nellis.af.mil/shared/medi...-003%20(2).jpg
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
232 or not?
All,
So much ink has been expended on "232 Eurofighters - too many?" stories over the last few years, it has been accepted as a statement of truth that we have in fact ordered 232 Typhoons.
However, I have two questions:
(i) Has anyone actually signed a contract for Tranche 3? I've not heard of one and therefore we presumably haven't ordered the T3 jets, and therefore we've not actually ordered 232 Typhoons.
(ii) Do the Saudi jets (72), count against the UK offtake of 232 - leaving us with 160 (if - and only if - we sign for T3?)
S41
So much ink has been expended on "232 Eurofighters - too many?" stories over the last few years, it has been accepted as a statement of truth that we have in fact ordered 232 Typhoons.
However, I have two questions:
(i) Has anyone actually signed a contract for Tranche 3? I've not heard of one and therefore we presumably haven't ordered the T3 jets, and therefore we've not actually ordered 232 Typhoons.
(ii) Do the Saudi jets (72), count against the UK offtake of 232 - leaving us with 160 (if - and only if - we sign for T3?)
S41
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
Now that the GR7/9 theatre replacement has been sorted out, surely the CH47 Herrick RIP must be just around the corner?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: u.k.
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What other helicopter the UK owns could fill the requirements placed on the Chinny? High ambient temperatures, high altitude, long range flights and with heavy loads. Certainly nothing at Benson could fill those shoes let alone anything Teeny Weeny Airlines owns
How about German CH53s and Spanish CH47s?
78/28 Sqn(whoever!) are due in-theatre sometime before the end of the millenium.
Not a huge fan of the Merlin, but hopefully it will provide something more meaningful than the SK. Despite great crews, the carson upgrade does little more than allow it to be little practical use somewhere different and allow Nu Labour the opportunity to announce they have sent more helicopters to the Stan.
Not a huge fan of the Merlin, but hopefully it will provide something more meaningful than the SK. Despite great crews, the carson upgrade does little more than allow it to be little practical use somewhere different and allow Nu Labour the opportunity to announce they have sent more helicopters to the Stan.
S41, no, Tranche 3 has not been signed for yet. The Saudi aircraft can't, AIUI, be deducted from the UK buy unless the contract is renegotiated: the other partner nations could argue that the UK has renaged on its deal to buy 232 - upon which the workshare deal was agreed, and thus demand a reallocation of work to reflect the changed figures.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jesus........Never heard so many 'Anal' people moan, groan & whine, if we were locked in the same room together, I'd probably end up topping myself......Cheer up FFS, smile, be happy or something, there's dead people more cheerful than some of you lot!! It's getting depressing......
Anyway....I'm glad the RAF has this multi-role capability, it's about frikin time. Good on them, jolly frikin good chaps, at least someone's happy with what they've got.
Anyway....I'm glad the RAF has this multi-role capability, it's about frikin time. Good on them, jolly frikin good chaps, at least someone's happy with what they've got.
