Peter Collins and the Eurofighter Typhoon?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peter Collins and the Eurofighter Typhoon?
Does anyone know if Peter Collins has flown the Eurofighter Typhoon? I ask because he has previously been very impressed with the Mirage 2000 Flight Control System and has said that that of the Rafale is even better. I'm interested in how the Typhoon compares to the Rafale in this respect.
Obi
Obi
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a real shame. He has already stated that the Rafale has the best and the Mirage the second best FCS of any aircraft he has flown to date. It would be nice to see how the Eurofighter stacks up. Oh well!
Flight have already had their Typhoon flight, and gave it to Craig Hoyle, their defence editor (good guy, great communicator, sharp mind), and not to Pete Collins.
They can't really expect a second bite at the cherry.
And perhaps EF GmbH thought that Collins' Rafale flight test lacked credibility, and didn't feel that a pilot who retired from military test flying 20 years ago, and whose most recent frontline tour was on the Gen 1, steam driven, analogue Harrier might not be especially well qualified to evaluate the jet?
They can't really expect a second bite at the cherry.
And perhaps EF GmbH thought that Collins' Rafale flight test lacked credibility, and didn't feel that a pilot who retired from military test flying 20 years ago, and whose most recent frontline tour was on the Gen 1, steam driven, analogue Harrier might not be especially well qualified to evaluate the jet?
TYPHOON
I would think a more credible test write-up would come from a practising Chief Test Pilot of a large UK Company who flies the sortie. Presently current on a couple of RAF types, and numerous previous tests on many European and US fast jet and advanced trainers.
As opposed to the defence editor who in effect goes along for the ride as a passenger!
As opposed to the defence editor who in effect goes along for the ride as a passenger!
I was surprised at the choice that Flight made, though I don't begrudge Craig getting the best jolly any aerospace writer has had in recent years....., though I'd agree that the viewpoint of any trained and qualified mil pilot would have been more useful than his.
But perhaps EF GmbH specified what sort of passenger they'd accept? Round about that time, the people getting Typhoon rides were folk like James May....
However, since Flight have had their shot at Typhoon, why should they get another - just because Collins was breathlessly enthusiastic about Rafale (and, frankly, made some pretty silly remarks)?
To me, this just highlights the fact that a magazine as prestigious and important as Flight should have a more current TP, with more recent and more relevant experience.
Someone who has flown a modern, glass cockpit, multi-role fighter operationally, who has flown aircraft of Typhoon's class and whose military test flying experience encompassed 'fitness for purpose' testing and evaluation, rather than research test flying (Boscombe rather than Bedford - Pax River rather than NASA Ames). You make a big deal of PC's experience - what would the two RAF types he's current on be? King Air and Global Express, no doubt?
As to fast jets, his operational tours were on Harrier GR3, SHar FRS1 and (I believe) Lightning. He flew Mirage 2000 while at ETPS more than 20 years ago. Apart from a handful of one off flight tests for the magazine, I'd question how wide his experience of contemporary fast jets and advanced trainers really is. And, to me, his conclusions on Rafale reflected a lack of any real baseline for proper comparison.
I would not for one microsecond claim to be fit to lick PC's boots, nor am I suggesting that I would in any way be better suited to flight testing anything, but my own lack of qualifications should not bar me from being able to take a sober look at other people's suitability to do so.
RAF pilots flew Rafale in the UAE last year. Your supposition that "Perhaps Typhoon (is) not as good as advertised against The French!" could not be more wrong.
But perhaps EF GmbH specified what sort of passenger they'd accept? Round about that time, the people getting Typhoon rides were folk like James May....
However, since Flight have had their shot at Typhoon, why should they get another - just because Collins was breathlessly enthusiastic about Rafale (and, frankly, made some pretty silly remarks)?
To me, this just highlights the fact that a magazine as prestigious and important as Flight should have a more current TP, with more recent and more relevant experience.
Someone who has flown a modern, glass cockpit, multi-role fighter operationally, who has flown aircraft of Typhoon's class and whose military test flying experience encompassed 'fitness for purpose' testing and evaluation, rather than research test flying (Boscombe rather than Bedford - Pax River rather than NASA Ames). You make a big deal of PC's experience - what would the two RAF types he's current on be? King Air and Global Express, no doubt?
As to fast jets, his operational tours were on Harrier GR3, SHar FRS1 and (I believe) Lightning. He flew Mirage 2000 while at ETPS more than 20 years ago. Apart from a handful of one off flight tests for the magazine, I'd question how wide his experience of contemporary fast jets and advanced trainers really is. And, to me, his conclusions on Rafale reflected a lack of any real baseline for proper comparison.
I would not for one microsecond claim to be fit to lick PC's boots, nor am I suggesting that I would in any way be better suited to flight testing anything, but my own lack of qualifications should not bar me from being able to take a sober look at other people's suitability to do so.
RAF pilots flew Rafale in the UAE last year. Your supposition that "Perhaps Typhoon (is) not as good as advertised against The French!" could not be more wrong.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, Flight International has done an article from a ride in Typhoon, but it did not "choose" to send the defence editor rather than its tame test pilot. When the ride was offered (by the RAF with support from BAE) a TP ride was requested as first preference, but turned down by the service and company. And by no means was the resulting article in any way dressed up as a proper flight test - fun thought it was thanks.
The aircraft flown was a Tranche 1 Block 2 jet, so not really frontline representative - that's what we'd like to see now for the magazine please, Eurofighter.
Pete has had some past Typhoon project experience, having evaluated the type’s control laws on a large motion simulator before first flight, and also tried the current simulator at Coningsby a couple of years ago. And with the recent Rafale experience, who better to have a go?
Whatever you might like to believe, Jacko, there is no queue of current, rated service TPs cleared and offering to do evaluations like Rafale for magazines. I suspect most of them are a bit busy with the day jobs.
The aircraft flown was a Tranche 1 Block 2 jet, so not really frontline representative - that's what we'd like to see now for the magazine please, Eurofighter.
Pete has had some past Typhoon project experience, having evaluated the type’s control laws on a large motion simulator before first flight, and also tried the current simulator at Coningsby a couple of years ago. And with the recent Rafale experience, who better to have a go?
Whatever you might like to believe, Jacko, there is no queue of current, rated service TPs cleared and offering to do evaluations like Rafale for magazines. I suspect most of them are a bit busy with the day jobs.
To me, this just highlights the fact that a magazine as prestigious and important as Flight should have a more current TP, with more recent and more relevant experience.
Craig,
Firstly, I could have found you half a dozen blokes who could have done a better job than PC did on Rafale.
Secondly: Who better than PC to evaluate Typhoon?
Anyone who can tick some or all of the following boxes.
Someone with frontline AD experience
Someone who has flown a frontline FJ this century (excepting one off flight tests)
Someone who has flown one or more of the following types - F-15, F-16, F/A-18, MiG-29, Gripen, Rafale.
Someone who realises why it was a bit over-the-top, and bizarre to conclude that: "If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale," given his actual operational flying experience.
Someone who can write, but who might stray just a little less far from the kind of measured and calm analytical approach you’d expect from an ETPS graduate - whether or not they were actually TP qualified.
I'm a bit surprised that no-one has yet tracked down one of the operational Typhoon pilots who have already flown Rafale.... I bet those blokes have a tale to tell....
Firstly, I could have found you half a dozen blokes who could have done a better job than PC did on Rafale.
Secondly: Who better than PC to evaluate Typhoon?
Anyone who can tick some or all of the following boxes.
Someone with frontline AD experience
Someone who has flown a frontline FJ this century (excepting one off flight tests)
Someone who has flown one or more of the following types - F-15, F-16, F/A-18, MiG-29, Gripen, Rafale.
Someone who realises why it was a bit over-the-top, and bizarre to conclude that: "If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale," given his actual operational flying experience.
Someone who can write, but who might stray just a little less far from the kind of measured and calm analytical approach you’d expect from an ETPS graduate - whether or not they were actually TP qualified.
I'm a bit surprised that no-one has yet tracked down one of the operational Typhoon pilots who have already flown Rafale.... I bet those blokes have a tale to tell....
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There must be huge implications for whom you let fly your aircraft, especially if they are in a position to be making a public comparison.
Are they impartial ? Are they consulting for one of the companies involved ? I have no idea, but what you and I would like to know about the relative merits of the aircraft are likely to be very tightly controlled by those with massive vested (primarily commercial, but also political) interests.
hugel
Are they impartial ? Are they consulting for one of the companies involved ? I have no idea, but what you and I would like to know about the relative merits of the aircraft are likely to be very tightly controlled by those with massive vested (primarily commercial, but also political) interests.
hugel
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacko, with respect, I think you are being a bit naive here. Go ahead and actually find out if any of your half dozen blokes who could have done a better job (current pilot mates, presumably) would actually be allowed to write for a magazine, using their own real names. I think the answer will be a big fat non on all counts.
If you don't like the calm, analytical style of Flight's TP reports then the thing to do is not read them. And when you don't like one, don't keep banging on about it for four bleeding months. This just feels like petty character assassination.
If you don't like the calm, analytical style of Flight's TP reports then the thing to do is not read them. And when you don't like one, don't keep banging on about it for four bleeding months. This just feels like petty character assassination.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone who has flown a modern, glass cockpit, multi-role fighter operationally, who has flown aircraft of Typhoon's class and whose military test flying experience encompassed 'fitness for purpose' testing and evaluation, rather than research test flying ...
He talks of the importance of endorsement and the impact of getting Chuck Yeager to help sell aircraft: recounting stories of dering-do for the potential customers and their influencers. The impression I got was that it wasn't experience on the type that was important, but simply credibility as a brilliant aviator.
I'm interested in this discussion simply because of the implications as piece of excellent PR, or a disappointing blow , depending to whose aircraft you show allegiance.
hugel
Spruce:
Two thirds of the six names I'd have suggested were chaps who have retired recently.
As to 'petty character assassination' I'm not questioning PC's character or motivation, I'm just providing a little balance.
His piece has received massive prominence (printed in Flight, repeated in full in one of the issues of the Daily at Dubai, and ad nauseam across the net and in the blogosphere), and Dassault have exploited it remorselessly and have encouraged its wider dissemination. A few gentle rejoinders and corrections on line isn't 'banging on', and it reflects what has been, in my experience, a widely held unease with the piece. Very many people shared my concerns about the article.
The entire point is that this was NOT in any way measured, calm, or analytical (unlike your own stuff, which is unimpeachable).
Instead you had a TP who hasn't flown a frontline jet for more than 20 years, whose frontline experience was on the Harrier GR3 and SHAR FRS1, and whose post ETPS test flying was at RAE (later DRA) Bedford where his job was pure Aerospace Research flying. He did not serve at Boscombe Down and thus gained no experience of clearance/assessment/’operational fitness for purpose’ testing. You had a TP who had not flown anything remotely comparable with Rafale, so no wonder he thought that it was the best thing he had flown. Put me in a PC-21 and I'd rate it the best turboprop trainer I'd ever flown.....
Collins' military test flying career ended in 1993 when he joined Fokker (F60 & F70 airliners), moving to Dornier (Do 328 turboprop and 328 Jet), then to KLM, before joining Raytheon as UK TP/project pilot on the ASTOR Sentinel.
A distinguished senior TP judged that he had: "little recent, relevant experience that would provide him with any real basis for comparison with the Rafale."
Despite this, PC felt happy to conclude that: “If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale.”
He backed this with what my TP source described this as "bad Test Pilot analysis."
Flight enthusiastically validated this OTT conclusion, however, using the coverline "Rafale Rules" and the teaser “Why we think favourite for UAE fighter contest is most complete combat aircraft we have flown.”
I admire your loyalty to Flight, but this article was a joke, and the way in which it was handled marked a poor judgement call, though one of your advertisers must be delighted by it.
A balancing point of view is that "The evaluation was rather cursory and the concluding superlatives are more journalistic than real conclusions and recommendations. If he would risk his life in any combat situation based on the evidence of what he actually saw...... words fail me!”
The 'Rafale Rules' piece marked a real departure from the high standards set by Flight's previous TP, the great John Farley, who might have been away from operational flying for many years, but whose air power brain and insight put yours, mine and Collins' to shame. I wonder how he'd have rated Rafale?
Two thirds of the six names I'd have suggested were chaps who have retired recently.
As to 'petty character assassination' I'm not questioning PC's character or motivation, I'm just providing a little balance.
His piece has received massive prominence (printed in Flight, repeated in full in one of the issues of the Daily at Dubai, and ad nauseam across the net and in the blogosphere), and Dassault have exploited it remorselessly and have encouraged its wider dissemination. A few gentle rejoinders and corrections on line isn't 'banging on', and it reflects what has been, in my experience, a widely held unease with the piece. Very many people shared my concerns about the article.
The entire point is that this was NOT in any way measured, calm, or analytical (unlike your own stuff, which is unimpeachable).
Instead you had a TP who hasn't flown a frontline jet for more than 20 years, whose frontline experience was on the Harrier GR3 and SHAR FRS1, and whose post ETPS test flying was at RAE (later DRA) Bedford where his job was pure Aerospace Research flying. He did not serve at Boscombe Down and thus gained no experience of clearance/assessment/’operational fitness for purpose’ testing. You had a TP who had not flown anything remotely comparable with Rafale, so no wonder he thought that it was the best thing he had flown. Put me in a PC-21 and I'd rate it the best turboprop trainer I'd ever flown.....
Collins' military test flying career ended in 1993 when he joined Fokker (F60 & F70 airliners), moving to Dornier (Do 328 turboprop and 328 Jet), then to KLM, before joining Raytheon as UK TP/project pilot on the ASTOR Sentinel.
A distinguished senior TP judged that he had: "little recent, relevant experience that would provide him with any real basis for comparison with the Rafale."
Despite this, PC felt happy to conclude that: “If I had to go into combat, on any mission, against anyone, I would, without question, choose the Rafale.”
He backed this with what my TP source described this as "bad Test Pilot analysis."
Flight enthusiastically validated this OTT conclusion, however, using the coverline "Rafale Rules" and the teaser “Why we think favourite for UAE fighter contest is most complete combat aircraft we have flown.”
I admire your loyalty to Flight, but this article was a joke, and the way in which it was handled marked a poor judgement call, though one of your advertisers must be delighted by it.
A balancing point of view is that "The evaluation was rather cursory and the concluding superlatives are more journalistic than real conclusions and recommendations. If he would risk his life in any combat situation based on the evidence of what he actually saw...... words fail me!”
The 'Rafale Rules' piece marked a real departure from the high standards set by Flight's previous TP, the great John Farley, who might have been away from operational flying for many years, but whose air power brain and insight put yours, mine and Collins' to shame. I wonder how he'd have rated Rafale?
"Collins' military test flying career ended in 1993 when he joined Fokker (F60 & F70 airliners), moving to Dornier (Do 328 turboprop and 328 Jet), then to KLM, before joining Raytheon as UK TP/project pilot on the ASTOR Sentinel.
"
I think not, F70 & F100 maybe? And Pete was the Flight Test Pilot for Air UK / KLM uk flying the former CAA Fleet Test Schedules. I can't remember if he was limited to the Fokker fleets (50, 70, 100) as I'm sure I sent him on the BAe146, ATR's & 737's - but I stand to be corrected.
"
I think not, F70 & F100 maybe? And Pete was the Flight Test Pilot for Air UK / KLM uk flying the former CAA Fleet Test Schedules. I can't remember if he was limited to the Fokker fleets (50, 70, 100) as I'm sure I sent him on the BAe146, ATR's & 737's - but I stand to be corrected.