Eurofighter Entry To Service
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eurofighter Entry To Service
When does the shiny new jet actually enter service. First it was 95, I quite looked forward to flying it then. First saw EAP in 88, couldn't wait.
Then it was EF 2000, still a chance I thought.
It then went to EF and 2002 with staged capability, I was long gone sadly by then.
So when does it actually turn up Tacanless and gunless?
Ghost
(Maybe in another life, who knows I might get to see it enter service)
Then it was EF 2000, still a chance I thought.
It then went to EF and 2002 with staged capability, I was long gone sadly by then.
So when does it actually turn up Tacanless and gunless?
Ghost
(Maybe in another life, who knows I might get to see it enter service)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Probably, and sadly, at least a decade after you wanted to get your hands on it. But if it all eventually works (have faith Carruthers), and Tranche 3 with all its promise materialises (have yet more faith), then the need for a UK JSF would become even more debatable.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanx dude! As a former worker at the altar of the mighty Waddo temple I found it somewhat depressing that I was in my job for 2 1/2 years and the jet slipped 3 in that time.
Yep, its all my fault! Me and that dreadful Mr White armed with his case. Still, the gravy train will run on for a couple more years for all the bureaucrats (had to get my diktshunary out for that one). They will be swanning around Europe to all the best conferences whilst the boys on the frontline hope and pray that when the jet gets into service it won't have the IOS probs of the F-3. Ahh, a 128k RDP those were the days!
Best of luck, it was fun whilst it lasted. Just remember the 2 buckets: 1 to put money in, the other sh*t. When either gets full leave, sadly in the RAF the money one always seems to lag behind.
Ghost
Yep, its all my fault! Me and that dreadful Mr White armed with his case. Still, the gravy train will run on for a couple more years for all the bureaucrats (had to get my diktshunary out for that one). They will be swanning around Europe to all the best conferences whilst the boys on the frontline hope and pray that when the jet gets into service it won't have the IOS probs of the F-3. Ahh, a 128k RDP those were the days!
Best of luck, it was fun whilst it lasted. Just remember the 2 buckets: 1 to put money in, the other sh*t. When either gets full leave, sadly in the RAF the money one always seems to lag behind.
Ghost
Jacko,
The number of times the 'no gun' line has appeared (usually followed by your correcting this) is surprising - have none of the usual suspects published info to the effect that the gun is back in? I can't recall seeing anything in print in any of the likely sources. Perhaps time for a small piece somewhere correcting the view? Or is the gun appearing on a very low key basis indeed, with minimum publicity desirable, so the only suitable site for dissemination of info is a place such as this??
The number of times the 'no gun' line has appeared (usually followed by your correcting this) is surprising - have none of the usual suspects published info to the effect that the gun is back in? I can't recall seeing anything in print in any of the likely sources. Perhaps time for a small piece somewhere correcting the view? Or is the gun appearing on a very low key basis indeed, with minimum publicity desirable, so the only suitable site for dissemination of info is a place such as this??
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Janes:
"RAF announced in May 2000 that no ammunition would be procured for Eurofighter's cannon, despite installation of Mauser in Tranche 1 aircraft. Decision had been reversed by 2002".
"RAF announced in May 2000 that no ammunition would be procured for Eurofighter's cannon, despite installation of Mauser in Tranche 1 aircraft. Decision had been reversed by 2002".
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at a conference once were a guest speaker from a large company was talking about project mangament. I dont remember his name but ill always remember what he said.
He said that he would never authorise a project that was expected to last more than 2 years as the longer a project last the more unforseen problems will occur, more project creep will appear and most importantly the original business requirement for the projects existance will have changed radically within two years.
Okay, this two year rule may not be very effective in the aero industry when your talking about a decade just to get the plane off the ground even if your using off the shelf components. But the overall business requirment rule of changes every 2 years is something ive seen time and time again. By the time ive built something people dont want it anymore as its been superceded by events.
The lesson to be learned by this is expect large multiyear projects to always go belly up.
He said that he would never authorise a project that was expected to last more than 2 years as the longer a project last the more unforseen problems will occur, more project creep will appear and most importantly the original business requirement for the projects existance will have changed radically within two years.
Okay, this two year rule may not be very effective in the aero industry when your talking about a decade just to get the plane off the ground even if your using off the shelf components. But the overall business requirment rule of changes every 2 years is something ive seen time and time again. By the time ive built something people dont want it anymore as its been superceded by events.
The lesson to be learned by this is expect large multiyear projects to always go belly up.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Archimedes,
Interesting though that the latest National Audit Office Report, dated 4th December 2002, (See page 87) states that the gun has eliminated for a saving of £32 million.
Quote: "Provision of integration of new weapons and sensors not contained within original approval (includes Conventionally Armed Stand-Off Missile (CASOM), Advanced Anti-Armour Weapon (AAAW), Low Level Laser Guided Bomb (LLLGB), Thermal Imaging Airborne Laser Designator (TIALD)) (+£239m); Deletion of requirements for gun (-£32m), 1500L fuel tank (-£16m) & CRV7 rocket (-£2m)"
Whether they are behind the drag curve or the decision to drop the gun has been reinstated I do not know.
Interesting though that the latest National Audit Office Report, dated 4th December 2002, (See page 87) states that the gun has eliminated for a saving of £32 million.
Quote: "Provision of integration of new weapons and sensors not contained within original approval (includes Conventionally Armed Stand-Off Missile (CASOM), Advanced Anti-Armour Weapon (AAAW), Low Level Laser Guided Bomb (LLLGB), Thermal Imaging Airborne Laser Designator (TIALD)) (+£239m); Deletion of requirements for gun (-£32m), 1500L fuel tank (-£16m) & CRV7 rocket (-£2m)"
Whether they are behind the drag curve or the decision to drop the gun has been reinstated I do not know.
Last edited by ORAC; 6th Dec 2002 at 15:27.
Down here in Custard Country there has been TV coverage of the new facility at Devonport for refiting Trident submarines. There has been a MAJOR cost over-run, and a time slippage. A defence journalist was quoted on local TV as saying that a large part of the blame must go to -
"......The MOD, who have not only moved the goalposts, but also changed the rules of the game and threw in an hour on injury time as well."
The MOD changed the specifications during the construction phase. As I have said before, this, together with poor management, is what I think is the source of the UK's procurement woes.
"......The MOD, who have not only moved the goalposts, but also changed the rules of the game and threw in an hour on injury time as well."
The MOD changed the specifications during the construction phase. As I have said before, this, together with poor management, is what I think is the source of the UK's procurement woes.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: No idea, I can't use a map
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like a typical RAF procurement f@(|< up to me. Announce an aircraft that is due to come into service, collaborate with our European 'cousins', slag the Army off over it's perceived problems then hide behind the smokescreen of hurt indignation when their baby fails to come online as expected.
Crabs, wind your necks in.
Who's for a poll?
Eurofighter .... should it be an Empire-builder's asset?
Crabs, wind your necks in.
Who's for a poll?
Eurofighter .... should it be an Empire-builder's asset?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Bit nosey aren't you
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With EF, the spec hasn't changed that much really. The company just can't deliver what they promised and have been restructuring the way they want the functionality bought into service so they can afford the programme.
All DPA ever do is down spec the procurement programmes to meet the shallow promises of the contractors. And the money to buy is reduced at every turn, creating an even bigger cash crunch.
Ghost.
All DPA ever do is down spec the procurement programmes to meet the shallow promises of the contractors. And the money to buy is reduced at every turn, creating an even bigger cash crunch.
Ghost.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest from the BBC
Looks like the BBC(11/12) have just caught up on the post Newshound made.
"The Eurofighter project has been hit by further delays after a development craft crashed in Spain. The first craft was due to be delivered to the RAF this week - 16 years after designers first started work. But the crashing of the DA6 craft in Spain in November has prompted fresh concerns at the Ministry of Defence about the Eurofighter's design.
The project affects 16,000 jobs in the UK and is regarded by analysts as crucial to the aerospace industry.
The Eurofighter Typhoon will be assembled at BAE Systems plants in Wharton and Samlesbury, Lancashire, and also affects smaller firms contracted to work on the project. But the first craft is now only expected to be delivered to the RAF by June 2003 at the earliest. Unions have told the BBC they are worried more delays on the project could result in job losses.
The MoD is understood to have concerns about a number of design issues, data on flight safety and performance and has said it cannot rule out more delays.
Dennis Mendoros, of the North West Aerospace Alliance which represents smaller manufacturers, said the industry needed the project to succeed.
"Undoubtedly the economy of the North West would be the major beneficiary of this project.
"The industry is desperate for a major contract - we cannot afford not to have the Eurofighter."
Michael Jack MP (Con), whose Fylde constituency is home to many BAE Systems workers, said the delay was regrettable but understandable. He added: "I think it's always worrying when a fighter plane doesn't stick to its agreed timetable for its in-service date.
"But it's a complex project and, given what happened to one of the project's prototypes crashing in Spain, I think the message is better safe than sorry."
The current delay is the latest in a long series of setbacks to the project since designers first began work."
"The Eurofighter project has been hit by further delays after a development craft crashed in Spain. The first craft was due to be delivered to the RAF this week - 16 years after designers first started work. But the crashing of the DA6 craft in Spain in November has prompted fresh concerns at the Ministry of Defence about the Eurofighter's design.
The project affects 16,000 jobs in the UK and is regarded by analysts as crucial to the aerospace industry.
The Eurofighter Typhoon will be assembled at BAE Systems plants in Wharton and Samlesbury, Lancashire, and also affects smaller firms contracted to work on the project. But the first craft is now only expected to be delivered to the RAF by June 2003 at the earliest. Unions have told the BBC they are worried more delays on the project could result in job losses.
The MoD is understood to have concerns about a number of design issues, data on flight safety and performance and has said it cannot rule out more delays.
Dennis Mendoros, of the North West Aerospace Alliance which represents smaller manufacturers, said the industry needed the project to succeed.
"Undoubtedly the economy of the North West would be the major beneficiary of this project.
"The industry is desperate for a major contract - we cannot afford not to have the Eurofighter."
Michael Jack MP (Con), whose Fylde constituency is home to many BAE Systems workers, said the delay was regrettable but understandable. He added: "I think it's always worrying when a fighter plane doesn't stick to its agreed timetable for its in-service date.
"But it's a complex project and, given what happened to one of the project's prototypes crashing in Spain, I think the message is better safe than sorry."
The current delay is the latest in a long series of setbacks to the project since designers first began work."
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Overlooking the beach, NZ
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The project affects 16,000 jobs in the UK and is regarded by analysts as crucial to the aerospace industry.
Undoubtedly the economy of the North West would be the major beneficiary of this project.
"The industry is desperate for a major contract - we cannot afford not to have the Eurofighter."
Glad to see that everyone ones got their priorities right:
priority 1: BAe Systems
priority 2: jobs
Priority 312445: good kit for the forces
