Eurofighter - a cold war 'relic'?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Jacko, airspace.
The RAF is being squeezed out of the southern North Sea. Too crowded. I'm surprised they didn't close CY as well. You need to get further north for the clear airspace required for large super-cruise AD in, relatively, sterile airspace. And LI/LU also give easy access to all the scottish hills/LFAs and the ranges (Spadeadam, Tain etc).
--------------------------------------------
That's a bit simplistic. let me give some of the background as I understand.
Back in the late 70/80s the RAF got NATO to pay for the hardening of our main bases (HAZ/PBF etc). Coltishall did not qualify as the Jags were part of the AMF and, come the war, were supposed to fly of to Norway etc. So no hardening was done.
Later, when the USAFE started to run down, the idea arose to move the Jags to Woodbridge/Bentwaters, which were hardened and, supposedly, well equipped. The cunning scheme was to sell Colt to the council as a replacement for Norwich airport and use the money to fund the move. As an extra, the value of the land at the MQs at Horsham St Faith would soar. As I recall, they had got a very good proposal from a builder wo would build new quarters for Neatishead elsewhere, demolish the patch and build a few hundred new houses on the site.
That all fell through for 2 reasons. One, the council tried to be clever and demanded that, effectively, they be given Colt for free or they would insist it be returned to farmland. They so p****d of the MOD they even investigated the cost - including how much they could get selling the runway as hardcore. The second reason was the cost of the move to BT/WD was going through the roof when they looked at rewiring to 220V, building a new Ardour engine bay etc, plus the USAF had gutted the place and took all the good stuff home. I believe it was all called off as the price was escalating through about 200 million.
In the meantime, however, all work services had been suspended and the place was starting to go downhill.
As far as airspace goes, CS is not ideal for doing AD. The airspace is very constricted, and totally booked just to fit in CY flying. It has reasonable access to Donna and Cowden, but, with the move to medium level PG weapons, they are not ideally located (for land or airspace) and the proposed new East coast air route will make them almost impossible to use. The much more preferable locations are all north of B1 with close access to Spadeadam and ranges to the north.
When the decision was taken to make the Eurofighter a JAG/F3 replacement, it was also decided it would operate as 3 wings. The decision then came down to which bases to refurbish to accommodate them. CY, LI and LU were all hardened and had lots of new MQs etc. CS basically had nothing going for it.
I don't know the present position/politics reference HSF and CS, but I am sure someone will know.
The RAF is being squeezed out of the southern North Sea. Too crowded. I'm surprised they didn't close CY as well. You need to get further north for the clear airspace required for large super-cruise AD in, relatively, sterile airspace. And LI/LU also give easy access to all the scottish hills/LFAs and the ranges (Spadeadam, Tain etc).
--------------------------------------------
That's a bit simplistic. let me give some of the background as I understand.
Back in the late 70/80s the RAF got NATO to pay for the hardening of our main bases (HAZ/PBF etc). Coltishall did not qualify as the Jags were part of the AMF and, come the war, were supposed to fly of to Norway etc. So no hardening was done.
Later, when the USAFE started to run down, the idea arose to move the Jags to Woodbridge/Bentwaters, which were hardened and, supposedly, well equipped. The cunning scheme was to sell Colt to the council as a replacement for Norwich airport and use the money to fund the move. As an extra, the value of the land at the MQs at Horsham St Faith would soar. As I recall, they had got a very good proposal from a builder wo would build new quarters for Neatishead elsewhere, demolish the patch and build a few hundred new houses on the site.
That all fell through for 2 reasons. One, the council tried to be clever and demanded that, effectively, they be given Colt for free or they would insist it be returned to farmland. They so p****d of the MOD they even investigated the cost - including how much they could get selling the runway as hardcore. The second reason was the cost of the move to BT/WD was going through the roof when they looked at rewiring to 220V, building a new Ardour engine bay etc, plus the USAF had gutted the place and took all the good stuff home. I believe it was all called off as the price was escalating through about 200 million.
In the meantime, however, all work services had been suspended and the place was starting to go downhill.
As far as airspace goes, CS is not ideal for doing AD. The airspace is very constricted, and totally booked just to fit in CY flying. It has reasonable access to Donna and Cowden, but, with the move to medium level PG weapons, they are not ideally located (for land or airspace) and the proposed new East coast air route will make them almost impossible to use. The much more preferable locations are all north of B1 with close access to Spadeadam and ranges to the north.
When the decision was taken to make the Eurofighter a JAG/F3 replacement, it was also decided it would operate as 3 wings. The decision then came down to which bases to refurbish to accommodate them. CY, LI and LU were all hardened and had lots of new MQs etc. CS basically had nothing going for it.
I don't know the present position/politics reference HSF and CS, but I am sure someone will know.
Last edited by ORAC; 11th Jul 2002 at 12:43.
So it won't be long before there'll be no fighter bases south of clogs-and-whippets land? The only bases in civilisation will be those of the heavies, some bombers in Rutland and Learning Command?
But more decent places for the dung-eaters to take over and ruin?
But more decent places for the dung-eaters to take over and ruin?
Last edited by BEagle; 11th Jul 2002 at 06:50.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dung-Eaters? I appreciate your upset Beagle but......
Ok, so they way we are going, we'll be closing everything south of Catterick. So what?
The airspace in Southern England, is getting more and more crowded by the day. Da Government , is looking to create more runways/airports to service the increase in air traffic, and frankly, do the FJ's want to be operating in an envioronment where a lot of the workload, is taken up looking out for conflicting traffic?
This is a tiny island, and free airspace is rapidly becoming a precious commodity.
So, how about this.
How much would it cost, for us to LEASE an airbase, from one of our new NATO allies? I'm thinking of Poland here, especially the North. If you get your TPC's out, you'll see the area below the Baltic, and west of Kaliningrad, which includes an ENORMOUS area of absolutely nothing. I flew over that, in an Iskra some years ago. Absolutely nothing for miles, no farmers to upset for the muddies, and a lot of very clear airspace up to FL400 for the Air Defence gods.
Cost of lease would be cheap, and certainly less than opening/re-opening a new airbase in the South. If anyone flying a MFI bomber in the big house wants to know more, I can certainly get some info.
Failing that, let's look at bases in the former colonies for the same sort of exercise.
At the end of the day, it's all about space to train, and there is still a lot of it about, well within one Tanker hop.
Tony
Ok, so they way we are going, we'll be closing everything south of Catterick. So what?
The airspace in Southern England, is getting more and more crowded by the day. Da Government , is looking to create more runways/airports to service the increase in air traffic, and frankly, do the FJ's want to be operating in an envioronment where a lot of the workload, is taken up looking out for conflicting traffic?
This is a tiny island, and free airspace is rapidly becoming a precious commodity.
So, how about this.
How much would it cost, for us to LEASE an airbase, from one of our new NATO allies? I'm thinking of Poland here, especially the North. If you get your TPC's out, you'll see the area below the Baltic, and west of Kaliningrad, which includes an ENORMOUS area of absolutely nothing. I flew over that, in an Iskra some years ago. Absolutely nothing for miles, no farmers to upset for the muddies, and a lot of very clear airspace up to FL400 for the Air Defence gods.
Cost of lease would be cheap, and certainly less than opening/re-opening a new airbase in the South. If anyone flying a MFI bomber in the big house wants to know more, I can certainly get some info.
Failing that, let's look at bases in the former colonies for the same sort of exercise.
At the end of the day, it's all about space to train, and there is still a lot of it about, well within one Tanker hop.
Tony
Last edited by solotk; 11th Jul 2002 at 06:48.
There's still plenty of airspace in the South West. FTS work could happily take place at Yeovilton or Chivenor....
You're right about certain areas in the East of Europe making good training airspace - and the need for vast chunks of airspace for EF to conduct training. But if we tanked it over to the East, perhaps the dismally low refuelling rate might need improving?
I guess I've been lucky to have done tours at Abingdon/Benson, Brize, Scampton and Wattisham, plus time at Brawdy, Chivenor, Coningsby, Honington and Wittering - and only brief visits to bases oop Nawrth or in Jockistan!
You're right about certain areas in the East of Europe making good training airspace - and the need for vast chunks of airspace for EF to conduct training. But if we tanked it over to the East, perhaps the dismally low refuelling rate might need improving?
I guess I've been lucky to have done tours at Abingdon/Benson, Brize, Scampton and Wattisham, plus time at Brawdy, Chivenor, Coningsby, Honington and Wittering - and only brief visits to bases oop Nawrth or in Jockistan!
The airspace over the South West is less crowded than other parts of the UK.
Apart from personnel rentention issues, one of the arguments for keeping the Sea Harriers at Yeovilton (which, according to my journo mate, was under consideration BEFORE the shameful decision to retire them early) was the close proximity of a massive exercise area for ACM which covered Devon, the Bristol Channel and parts of Somerset and Cornwall (I think!). This area, I was told, is used pretty much exclusively by the RN and USAFE.
Is there any reason why the RAF cannot use it?
Apart from personnel rentention issues, one of the arguments for keeping the Sea Harriers at Yeovilton (which, according to my journo mate, was under consideration BEFORE the shameful decision to retire them early) was the close proximity of a massive exercise area for ACM which covered Devon, the Bristol Channel and parts of Somerset and Cornwall (I think!). This area, I was told, is used pretty much exclusively by the RN and USAFE.
Is there any reason why the RAF cannot use it?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 11th Jul 2002 at 22:31.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The more I think about the east, the better I like it.
Why comes to Polska? Apologies to Malcolm Bradbury
1. Loads of blimmin airspace and varied terrain
2. Poles mad keen for more integration
3. English widely spoken, Country has come on leaps and bounds
4. Easy access to the rest of Europe, Finmark and the baltic states.
5. Lots of other Air Forces around, for dissimilar ACT, all flying the kit you are most likely to come up against.
6. Potential customer for EF, nothing like having it demoed on a regular basis.
7. Cheaper Fuel
8. They need hard Western moolah
9. They LOVE the RAF, absolutely, and without reservation, something to do with a summer 62 years ago, it's deeply engrained in their psyche.
10. 2 hours flying time from the UK, or less depending on your throttle setting.
Well, thats my 2 zlotys worth anyway.
Oh , and here's a piccie of a previous deployment to the territory.....
http://aviation.pol.pl/jpg/88/88508.jpg[/IMG]
Photo copyright Pawel Bonyark http://aviation.pol.pl/photo/place/deblin98.htm
Why comes to Polska? Apologies to Malcolm Bradbury
1. Loads of blimmin airspace and varied terrain
2. Poles mad keen for more integration
3. English widely spoken, Country has come on leaps and bounds
4. Easy access to the rest of Europe, Finmark and the baltic states.
5. Lots of other Air Forces around, for dissimilar ACT, all flying the kit you are most likely to come up against.
6. Potential customer for EF, nothing like having it demoed on a regular basis.
7. Cheaper Fuel
8. They need hard Western moolah
9. They LOVE the RAF, absolutely, and without reservation, something to do with a summer 62 years ago, it's deeply engrained in their psyche.
10. 2 hours flying time from the UK, or less depending on your throttle setting.
Well, thats my 2 zlotys worth anyway.
Oh , and here's a piccie of a previous deployment to the territory.....
http://aviation.pol.pl/jpg/88/88508.jpg[/IMG]
Photo copyright Pawel Bonyark http://aviation.pol.pl/photo/place/deblin98.htm
Last edited by solotk; 11th Jul 2002 at 09:42.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airspace
There's still plenty of empty airspace at our South Atlantic 'colony'.
Perhaps there should be longer and more frequent detachments to play..sorry practice down there. Or is it too windy and cold and devoid of women for dets. Still there'd be plenty of sheep for the 'dung-eaters'.
CM
Perhaps there should be longer and more frequent detachments to play..sorry practice down there. Or is it too windy and cold and devoid of women for dets. Still there'd be plenty of sheep for the 'dung-eaters'.
CM
Gentleman Aviator
And of course many of the Cabinet and Defence Ministers represent Jockinese constituencies.........
And remind me which Station the Scottish VCDS commanded......
Clearly such things could NEVER be a factor.........
But I DO recall hearing that when the SAR world had comms which could facilitate a single RCC, the staff solution was Northwood. Oh no, came the Ministry's reply we've just closed a SAR Flt at Leuchars, we've got to put the single RCC in Scotland.......
And remind me which Station the Scottish VCDS commanded......
Clearly such things could NEVER be a factor.........
But I DO recall hearing that when the SAR world had comms which could facilitate a single RCC, the staff solution was Northwood. Oh no, came the Ministry's reply we've just closed a SAR Flt at Leuchars, we've got to put the single RCC in Scotland.......
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's it, I can't stand it anymore. WEBF, please, please, please go somewhere, and do something either: a) Reproductive b) Productive or c) Imaginative. But please, stop posting on threads (That's all of them) that you have no knowledge of.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't dislike you, I just think that based on your own military expertise (Couldn't last 2 weeks), you should have the sense to Shut T F U.
Now, my question:
Who "In the know" can tell me when the OCU is "Actually" going to get it's fine craft? I understand this might be close to the chest at the moment, and if so, that's fine. But, an earlier poster has a good point; If "The Baron" has buffooned it, then the contract is written such that they have to pay! And So They Should! But will they be forced to? I doubt it. The parallels to the introduction of the "Fighting Fin" are uncanny, and we all know how that went!
WEBF: Don't feel hard done by, you can always log off, if you'd actually passed, you'd have probably had banter, better than mine, first hand for the rest of your career! (Just a guess).
Rota
Don't misunderstand me, I don't dislike you, I just think that based on your own military expertise (Couldn't last 2 weeks), you should have the sense to Shut T F U.
Now, my question:
Who "In the know" can tell me when the OCU is "Actually" going to get it's fine craft? I understand this might be close to the chest at the moment, and if so, that's fine. But, an earlier poster has a good point; If "The Baron" has buffooned it, then the contract is written such that they have to pay! And So They Should! But will they be forced to? I doubt it. The parallels to the introduction of the "Fighting Fin" are uncanny, and we all know how that went!
WEBF: Don't feel hard done by, you can always log off, if you'd actually passed, you'd have probably had banter, better than mine, first hand for the rest of your career! (Just a guess).
Rota
Answer to Jackonicko's Q.
Relieved of command of EF due to impromptu display at BAe Warton (Ie. Sacked and moved into position of less responsibility).
A total lack of flying discipline.
Some say he should have gone when he nearly wrecked a BBMF Spit by running too much boost on a ground run and tipped it on its nose - Great bit of Test Pilot work.......
LJ
Relieved of command of EF due to impromptu display at BAe Warton (Ie. Sacked and moved into position of less responsibility).
A total lack of flying discipline.
Some say he should have gone when he nearly wrecked a BBMF Spit by running too much boost on a ground run and tipped it on its nose - Great bit of Test Pilot work.......
LJ
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some FACTS !!
Regarding MMH/FH & MTBF, the requirements were originally written into the Aircraft's Development Spec which is what the DA's were built too. i.e. features designed in from day one by the techies supported by experienced, mostly ex-service engineers lobbying at every junction of the Design phase. CS & S in their current form have had nothing to do with it.
The Production Aircraft Spec is largely the Development spec (MOD held on very tightly to the hard to achieve bits) plus all the add ons of change proposals, well over a 100 last time I looked. Little changes like the AS role, new weapons, avionics, addressing obsolesence etc, you name it, its on the list!
These modified the Dev Spec and were embebbed in the Production Spec, in some cases before the feature had been built or tested in a DA, 'if you want the contract ' !!
So, don't underestimate the size of the Technical task moving from Dev to Prodn in the timescales involved. Add in the fact that the 'acceptable price' and new features required significant redesigns (airframe and equipment) for large scale manufacture and you begin to understand why things are not happening quite as fast as planned.
None of the above is meant to try justify the slips to programme.
No appologies for the biased perspective, two sides and all that!!
The Production Aircraft Spec is largely the Development spec (MOD held on very tightly to the hard to achieve bits) plus all the add ons of change proposals, well over a 100 last time I looked. Little changes like the AS role, new weapons, avionics, addressing obsolesence etc, you name it, its on the list!
These modified the Dev Spec and were embebbed in the Production Spec, in some cases before the feature had been built or tested in a DA, 'if you want the contract ' !!
So, don't underestimate the size of the Technical task moving from Dev to Prodn in the timescales involved. Add in the fact that the 'acceptable price' and new features required significant redesigns (airframe and equipment) for large scale manufacture and you begin to understand why things are not happening quite as fast as planned.
None of the above is meant to try justify the slips to programme.
No appologies for the biased perspective, two sides and all that!!
Foreplane,
Just want to get this straight...
MMH/FH, MTBF and other costs of ownership which BAE use as sales points are ALSO SPECIFIED for the DA aircraft?
The DA aircraft should achieve these figures more easily because they are less ambitious and don't incorporate the 'untested' mods and developments to which you refer?
The DA aircraft fail to meet these figures?
LJ,
Thanks, was astonished that BAES seemed to have lost both of its 'in-at-the-ground-floor', 'totally familiar with every aspect of development' TPs in recent years. Was KH's display work up (for ILA) at the end of a development hop really such a serious lapse in flying discipline? Or was it an excuse for him to be pushed for 'political reasons' or was it a 'tip-of-the-iceberg'/final straw-camel's back' thing.... ?
No bites on 'sorry tails'? Sorry, 'sorry tales'.......
Just want to get this straight...
MMH/FH, MTBF and other costs of ownership which BAE use as sales points are ALSO SPECIFIED for the DA aircraft?
The DA aircraft should achieve these figures more easily because they are less ambitious and don't incorporate the 'untested' mods and developments to which you refer?
The DA aircraft fail to meet these figures?
LJ,
Thanks, was astonished that BAES seemed to have lost both of its 'in-at-the-ground-floor', 'totally familiar with every aspect of development' TPs in recent years. Was KH's display work up (for ILA) at the end of a development hop really such a serious lapse in flying discipline? Or was it an excuse for him to be pushed for 'political reasons' or was it a 'tip-of-the-iceberg'/final straw-camel's back' thing.... ?
No bites on 'sorry tails'? Sorry, 'sorry tales'.......
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: north west england
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My old man is a groundspike at Warton & KHs name is apparentley mud & as popular as a floater in a
swimming pool.
On landing back at Warton he was alledgedley suspended and escorted to the main gate by security for an incident over Salmesbury.
Vaguely remember similar treatment with Dave Eagles years ago when on his last flight took PO6 through Mach 1 over Warton & caused plenty wongas damage to residents windows. He did however become my hero for number of years & still get wood thinking of it.
The above is only rumour from Warton staff & not set in stone so if anyone knows better please correct me
swimming pool.
On landing back at Warton he was alledgedley suspended and escorted to the main gate by security for an incident over Salmesbury.
Vaguely remember similar treatment with Dave Eagles years ago when on his last flight took PO6 through Mach 1 over Warton & caused plenty wongas damage to residents windows. He did however become my hero for number of years & still get wood thinking of it.
The above is only rumour from Warton staff & not set in stone so if anyone knows better please correct me
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My last job in the RAF was to do with EF. I was in post for a little over 2 and a half years. Sadly FOC slipped 3 years in that time!
Yep it was my fault; I should have been more forthright with my views but after 300 b**locks at the start of the meeting my arguments always started to lose impact. (Oops given my ID away)
Anyway, the view I always took was that EF would be a massive step forward for the RAF when it worked to spec. It would actually put us ahead of the 15Es and late generation 16s for a short while. Sadly the delays mean that the short while is becoming non-existant. And some of the procurement decisions for EOC leave one firmly boggled!
Were I a new lad on the street, EF would have been a massive lure to join the mob. Sadly, having been fortunate to have been on an exchange and done my share of punting around the sky in the odd yank hot pursuit ship, the thought of 10 years of in service development was enough to tip me over the edge and nail myself to the airline cross.
All I saw in my time was cost cutting that would only lead to more overstretch and more unfulfilled dreams. (What a load of old b**locks that was -- See haven't lost my touch) I hope EF reaches its potential because it will be a lot of fun to fly for the boys in the next decade. Even Beags will have retired by then. Sadly, with the Iron Chancellor, the prospects of continued funds for in-service development are looking quite bleek. A reduction in numbers will be sweetened with platitudes about more funds for future capabilities....don't hold your breath.
Oh well, off to the beach...I was lucky enough to pick up another choice posting abroad when I escaped.
Ghost
Yep it was my fault; I should have been more forthright with my views but after 300 b**locks at the start of the meeting my arguments always started to lose impact. (Oops given my ID away)
Anyway, the view I always took was that EF would be a massive step forward for the RAF when it worked to spec. It would actually put us ahead of the 15Es and late generation 16s for a short while. Sadly the delays mean that the short while is becoming non-existant. And some of the procurement decisions for EOC leave one firmly boggled!
Were I a new lad on the street, EF would have been a massive lure to join the mob. Sadly, having been fortunate to have been on an exchange and done my share of punting around the sky in the odd yank hot pursuit ship, the thought of 10 years of in service development was enough to tip me over the edge and nail myself to the airline cross.
All I saw in my time was cost cutting that would only lead to more overstretch and more unfulfilled dreams. (What a load of old b**locks that was -- See haven't lost my touch) I hope EF reaches its potential because it will be a lot of fun to fly for the boys in the next decade. Even Beags will have retired by then. Sadly, with the Iron Chancellor, the prospects of continued funds for in-service development are looking quite bleek. A reduction in numbers will be sweetened with platitudes about more funds for future capabilities....don't hold your breath.
Oh well, off to the beach...I was lucky enough to pick up another choice posting abroad when I escaped.
Ghost
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonicko
Seems we are agreed on my first point. 
The Dev Spec figures still apply to the production aircraft, so in theory its harder to acheive with a far more complicated overall package.
The contract requires that all the spec requirements must be demonstrated (some items not so,- sliding scale of importance, a claim can be submitted supported by evidence) to the customers satisfaction (this applies to all spec aspects). Where the DA's have a prodn representitive feature and a realistic measure can be made, and NETMA agree, it is acceptable to use the DA. In all other cases the MOD's say 'no chance' (insert your own choice of words) we'll wait to see the real Mccoy.
So with a Design that has moved on significantly from DA's you need, in a lot of cases, the finished article.
Add to this the fact that the full spec functionality is not able to, or needs to be, cramed into one DA airframe, it becomes a little harder to move it forward.
It is in EF's best long term interest to produce the most capable package at a price and having a tight spec with financial penalities is a big incentive.
Too many of the current players witnessed the F2/3 entry into service and the in-service development fiasco. Politics aside, the contract is sound enough to prevent this with EF. Rose tinted glasses doffed.
The Dev Spec figures still apply to the production aircraft, so in theory its harder to acheive with a far more complicated overall package.
The contract requires that all the spec requirements must be demonstrated (some items not so,- sliding scale of importance, a claim can be submitted supported by evidence) to the customers satisfaction (this applies to all spec aspects). Where the DA's have a prodn representitive feature and a realistic measure can be made, and NETMA agree, it is acceptable to use the DA. In all other cases the MOD's say 'no chance' (insert your own choice of words) we'll wait to see the real Mccoy.
So with a Design that has moved on significantly from DA's you need, in a lot of cases, the finished article.
Add to this the fact that the full spec functionality is not able to, or needs to be, cramed into one DA airframe, it becomes a little harder to move it forward.
It is in EF's best long term interest to produce the most capable package at a price and having a tight spec with financial penalities is a big incentive.
Too many of the current players witnessed the F2/3 entry into service and the in-service development fiasco. Politics aside, the contract is sound enough to prevent this with EF. Rose tinted glasses doffed.
Foreplane,
I'm kind of heartened that you think the contract is tight enough to prevent another F2 fiasco, but do you think it's tight enough if, as I've heard alleged but with no evidence, the £85 m penalty for missing the ISD was waived?
Jacko!
I'm kind of heartened that you think the contract is tight enough to prevent another F2 fiasco, but do you think it's tight enough if, as I've heard alleged but with no evidence, the £85 m penalty for missing the ISD was waived?
Jacko!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackonicko,
I think there's 6 months grace on the end of Jun date, which is why the push is on for Dec. Also I don't think it matters which Nation gets its a/c first.
Regarding the contract, it is very tough, the tools are there if there is a willingness to use them. There is no doubt who pays in a straight spec non-compliance, either compensation (cashback or give us this & we'll call it quits) or fix it.
Further to the original thread of it being a relic, who considers current build F-15's a relic. A classic example of an excellent platform with bags of potential and internal capacity to take advantage of developments in the down-sizeing & capability of avionics. The basic airframe is the same, with no-doubt improvements applied over the years.
I'm not aware of anybody down-playing the aerodynamic performance of EF.
I think there's 6 months grace on the end of Jun date, which is why the push is on for Dec. Also I don't think it matters which Nation gets its a/c first.
Regarding the contract, it is very tough, the tools are there if there is a willingness to use them. There is no doubt who pays in a straight spec non-compliance, either compensation (cashback or give us this & we'll call it quits) or fix it.
Further to the original thread of it being a relic, who considers current build F-15's a relic. A classic example of an excellent platform with bags of potential and internal capacity to take advantage of developments in the down-sizeing & capability of avionics. The basic airframe is the same, with no-doubt improvements applied over the years.
I'm not aware of anybody down-playing the aerodynamic performance of EF.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just been listening to journomate Andy Gilligan (Ex Telegraph) talking about some of the problems still associated with Eurofighter.
Tailplane de-laminating , Missile not available, boxheads not contributing etc etc. When exactly are we going to have the first EF squadron in service again?
Tailplane de-laminating , Missile not available, boxheads not contributing etc etc. When exactly are we going to have the first EF squadron in service again?
Asked around a bit at Farnborough on the Keith Hartley thing. No-one I spoke too thought that the display in question was remotely 'hairy' and all suggested that the lapse in discipline was no more than token. Rumour central suggests that the display impressed the evaluation team then at Warton hugely (they'd only flown DA 4 which doesn't have the latest FCS software) and KH's show helped reassure them about Typhoon's agility. They liked it so much they've now bought it.....
Hence marketing people were busy thanking KH when security arrived to confiscate his pass and escort him off site.
PS: Was the four-ship at Farnborough any more legal, since it wasn't worked up or practised and involved at least one aircraft not cleared to fly in formation..........
Hence marketing people were busy thanking KH when security arrived to confiscate his pass and escort him off site.
PS: Was the four-ship at Farnborough any more legal, since it wasn't worked up or practised and involved at least one aircraft not cleared to fly in formation..........