Sea Jet
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye
Jacko may have been alluding to the fact that yesterday marked the last ever RN Sea Harrier tactical mission. The last 5 801NAS pilots flew a DCA mission in south Wales against RAF mudmovers (2x Jag, 4x Tornado GR4s) and OCA (8x F-15Cs from Lakenheath). During this the Shars 'splashed' all of the muds and 'killed' all of the F-15s....twice. For the loss of one Shar.
Jacko may have been alluding to the fact that yesterday marked the last ever RN Sea Harrier tactical mission. The last 5 801NAS pilots flew a DCA mission in south Wales against RAF mudmovers (2x Jag, 4x Tornado GR4s) and OCA (8x F-15Cs from Lakenheath). During this the Shars 'splashed' all of the muds and 'killed' all of the F-15s....twice. For the loss of one Shar.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tim McClelland really does come out with some jingoistic bollix. If export sales of Typhoon 'prove' it's better than Rafale, then Mirage III/V must have been dozens of times better than Lightning and Mirage 2000 several times better than Tornado.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Jacko may have been alluding to the fact that yesterday marked the last ever RN Sea Harrier tactical mission. The last 5 801NAS pilots flew a DCA mission in south Wales against RAF mudmovers (2x Jag, 4x Tornado GR4s) and OCA (8x F-15Cs from Lakenheath). During this the Shars 'splashed' all of the muds and 'killed' all of the F-15s....twice. For the loss of one Shar.
Tim,
What's next? "Let's find a name for the Belgians"?
The early pre-Rafale, pre-Eurofighter history isn't that hard to find, although it was obscured at the time by secrecy in Germany and the UK and by a shower of zounds-you-dastardly-Frogs rhetoric out of the UK. The fact is that the requirements were significantly different, for several reasons - including carrier compatibility, the fact that UK and Germany had Tornado, and a unique view of how to prevail in the air battle.
The French claim (and please go ahead and disprove it) that they expect 294 Rafales to cost about as much as Germany's share of Typhoon.
What's next? "Let's find a name for the Belgians"?
The early pre-Rafale, pre-Eurofighter history isn't that hard to find, although it was obscured at the time by secrecy in Germany and the UK and by a shower of zounds-you-dastardly-Frogs rhetoric out of the UK. The fact is that the requirements were significantly different, for several reasons - including carrier compatibility, the fact that UK and Germany had Tornado, and a unique view of how to prevail in the air battle.
The French claim (and please go ahead and disprove it) that they expect 294 Rafales to cost about as much as Germany's share of Typhoon.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Delv,
I suspect at least two contributors on this board were present at the event, perhaps your point is best directed to them.
Best rgds
I suspect at least two contributors on this board were present at the event, perhaps your point is best directed to them.
Best rgds
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Racedo blows goats
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The French claim (and please go ahead and disprove it) that they expect 294 Rafales to cost about as much as Germany's share of Typhoon."
LO
It might be true but it is also meaningless, as the reverse could be true, the x billion euros spent on Rafale development could have bought n hundred Typhooons for Germany. A good bit of spin but you are comparing apples and oranges.
Typically a project is costed in 2 chunks, non-recurring and recurring. Non-recurring hoovers up all the development and certification costs and as the name suggests is a single spend. The recurring element is how much it subsequently costs to build the fleet and can be broken down into total or unit cost.
A more meaningfull comparison would be to add each individual countries recurriing and non-recurring cost and divide that by the number of airframes. It is possible that with a bigger buy the UK cost per airframe could be more or less than other member nations in Typhoon alone.
Beware the beancounters.
regards
retard
LO
It might be true but it is also meaningless, as the reverse could be true, the x billion euros spent on Rafale development could have bought n hundred Typhooons for Germany. A good bit of spin but you are comparing apples and oranges.
Typically a project is costed in 2 chunks, non-recurring and recurring. Non-recurring hoovers up all the development and certification costs and as the name suggests is a single spend. The recurring element is how much it subsequently costs to build the fleet and can be broken down into total or unit cost.
A more meaningfull comparison would be to add each individual countries recurriing and non-recurring cost and divide that by the number of airframes. It is possible that with a bigger buy the UK cost per airframe could be more or less than other member nations in Typhoon alone.
Beware the beancounters.
regards
retard
Not going to engage in a discussion of Anglo-French history here, or rise to the bait of who is more qualified. Gets long and involved and (in this case) I suspect it would be un-enlightening.
My point about the Rafale cost - and as I implied it is a French claim, not meant to be definitive in any way - is that there can be extra cost to international collaboration, particularly in the Concorde/Tornado/Typhoon model where everyone is brought to consensus before anything happens. This is why Airbus is not run like Concorde. Certainly Sweden's model gets results cheaper than most people; and France's national model, although not as cheap as that, may have advantages in that it doesn't run into the sort of wrangling that has bedevilled Typhoon. I would also argue that Dassault are in fact no slouches when it comes to R&D.
My point about the Rafale cost - and as I implied it is a French claim, not meant to be definitive in any way - is that there can be extra cost to international collaboration, particularly in the Concorde/Tornado/Typhoon model where everyone is brought to consensus before anything happens. This is why Airbus is not run like Concorde. Certainly Sweden's model gets results cheaper than most people; and France's national model, although not as cheap as that, may have advantages in that it doesn't run into the sort of wrangling that has bedevilled Typhoon. I would also argue that Dassault are in fact no slouches when it comes to R&D.
The last 5 801NAS pilots flew a DCA mission in south Wales against RAF mudmovers (2x Jag, 4x Tornado GR4s) and OCA (8x F-15Cs from Lakenheath). During this the Shars 'splashed' all of the muds and 'killed' all of the F-15s....twice.
Most probably they were playing Red Air! It does make a difference.
Were they pretending to be MiGs? Can you think of any non landlocked nations who don't get on too well with the UK/West and operate Russian and Chinese aircraft?
Most probably they were playing Red Air! It does make a difference.
Were they pretending to be MiGs? Can you think of any non landlocked nations who don't get on too well with the UK/West and operate Russian and Chinese aircraft?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WEBF,
Err, yes, just a few!! How about Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, Yemen, Cuba, Indonesia, Algeria, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe (the last 2 admittedly landlocked), Serbia/Montenegro and Peru to name a few!!!!
However, red air doesn't necessarily mean they were simulating Russian or Chinese types.
Regards,
MM
Were they pretending to be MiGs? Can you think of any non landlocked nations who don't get on too well with the UK/West and operate Russian and Chinese aircraft?
However, red air doesn't necessarily mean they were simulating Russian or Chinese types.
Regards,
MM
Having taken Tim's advice to heart and read up on the dastardly no-talent French, here's a potted history of aerospace in Europe....
Military aircraft
The Mirage delta was obviously a copy of the FD.2, I'm sure. Quick work guys! It flew only eight months later. Actually, for those who have eyes to see, a Mirage looks more like an F-102/F-106 on SlimFast than it looks like an FD.2. (Wing location... landing gear... ) Meanwhile, the UK produces the world-beating Frightening and the Frogs do the Mirage III.
Next generation comes around. The UK gets a fixation on low-level jets with tiny engines. Cool idea for strike but do they do anything else all that well? The Frogs do the Mirage 2000. Just went out of production last year.
Commercial aircraft
After 15 years of getting slapped around by Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed, the UK devises a superb strategy for commercial aviation - bet the farm on carbonfibre fans for the TriStar. Way to go there, Sparky. Of course they do the magnificent 146 and ATP as well.
Amid much bitching from across La Manche, the French take control of Airbus (with much more help from British people than their companies - the boss of HSA stomped out of the Airbus cafeteria because he realised he was eating in the presence of workers) and achieve parity with Boeing, thanks in large part to fly-by-wire tech pioneered on the Mirage 2000.
Business jets
After years of Basil Fawlty-like moaning ("Bloody customers, can't they tell that the Viper's good enough?) a fan engine finally appears on the 125. Too little, too late, and now it's a Raytheon product.
The inept, unoriginal Frogs build a full line of business jets and sell them successfully into the US market.
And then there's Eurocopter, space and of course that world-beating British cruise missile, Storm Shadow...
Conclusion: Europe's industry would be in far better shape without the French as any fule kno.
Military aircraft
The Mirage delta was obviously a copy of the FD.2, I'm sure. Quick work guys! It flew only eight months later. Actually, for those who have eyes to see, a Mirage looks more like an F-102/F-106 on SlimFast than it looks like an FD.2. (Wing location... landing gear... ) Meanwhile, the UK produces the world-beating Frightening and the Frogs do the Mirage III.
Next generation comes around. The UK gets a fixation on low-level jets with tiny engines. Cool idea for strike but do they do anything else all that well? The Frogs do the Mirage 2000. Just went out of production last year.
Commercial aircraft
After 15 years of getting slapped around by Boeing, Douglas and Lockheed, the UK devises a superb strategy for commercial aviation - bet the farm on carbonfibre fans for the TriStar. Way to go there, Sparky. Of course they do the magnificent 146 and ATP as well.
Amid much bitching from across La Manche, the French take control of Airbus (with much more help from British people than their companies - the boss of HSA stomped out of the Airbus cafeteria because he realised he was eating in the presence of workers) and achieve parity with Boeing, thanks in large part to fly-by-wire tech pioneered on the Mirage 2000.
Business jets
After years of Basil Fawlty-like moaning ("Bloody customers, can't they tell that the Viper's good enough?) a fan engine finally appears on the 125. Too little, too late, and now it's a Raytheon product.
The inept, unoriginal Frogs build a full line of business jets and sell them successfully into the US market.
And then there's Eurocopter, space and of course that world-beating British cruise missile, Storm Shadow...
Conclusion: Europe's industry would be in far better shape without the French as any fule kno.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: As far from the sea as possible
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im just coming into this thread, and im not in the mil, so i may be way off, or it may have already been covered, but right at the beginning wasnt the idea for Eurofighter that it would solve all the air defence needs for UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain + exports?
I'm sure i vaguely remember reading somewhere that the reason the French pulled out was because they wanted a Steam Catapult Carrier version (for their carriers) and the UK wanted a STOL/STOVL aircraft to replace the sea harrier (a requirement that was dropped when it became apparant that it would complicate matters (think Hawker P1154).
Still, in my eyes the plastic tiffie is a world beater. Shame it is designed for a world vanished with the fall of the Berlin Wall... and the two seater is ugly
Matt (dropping below the parapet again)
I'm sure i vaguely remember reading somewhere that the reason the French pulled out was because they wanted a Steam Catapult Carrier version (for their carriers) and the UK wanted a STOL/STOVL aircraft to replace the sea harrier (a requirement that was dropped when it became apparant that it would complicate matters (think Hawker P1154).
Still, in my eyes the plastic tiffie is a world beater. Shame it is designed for a world vanished with the fall of the Berlin Wall... and the two seater is ugly
Matt (dropping below the parapet again)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tim
I understand and accept your points reference the comparison of Typhoon and Rafael. I actually recommend a stance of abstainee from that debate until either aircraft has achieved something along Red Flag lines in the public eye. Until then we'll just have to make do with 'aircraft Top Trumps' and assume the sales pamphlets are telling the truth.....
As for a present day comparison, the Mirage 2000 with the RDY and Mica is an awesome aircraft. Nothing we have (until the Typhoon stands up)compares to it. I do not for one second under-estimate the skills of our own AD chaps - or over-estimate the skills or capability of others.
I understand and accept your points reference the comparison of Typhoon and Rafael. I actually recommend a stance of abstainee from that debate until either aircraft has achieved something along Red Flag lines in the public eye. Until then we'll just have to make do with 'aircraft Top Trumps' and assume the sales pamphlets are telling the truth.....
As for a present day comparison, the Mirage 2000 with the RDY and Mica is an awesome aircraft. Nothing we have (until the Typhoon stands up)compares to it. I do not for one second under-estimate the skills of our own AD chaps - or over-estimate the skills or capability of others.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: fife
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye
Ha Ha Ha. Never laughed so much at the concept of 5 SHARs shooting down all 6 strikers and the 8 OCA twice.
Firstly, I make that 22 missiles!
Secondly, if you believe SHAR could actually hack this threat for real you are living in the land of Swiss cuckoo clocks.
As has been explained to you on an much earlier part of this thread in response to an appalling post by you....which you subsequently, quite rightly removed due its lack of credibilty. There is a massive difference between blue and red air.....but if one was Blue air and tied the hands of Red air so hard they walked into every missile shot one took including the additional two fictious ones, I would probably be mostly enjoying myself and taking the piss cos its the SHARS last tactical sortie and it would be quite a giggle. Then one might enjoy supplying some excellent morale-enhancing propaganda for the inhabitants of Swiss cuckoo clock land to swallow hook, line and sinker and watch them look like prats on Pprune.
Regards
Ha Ha Ha. Never laughed so much at the concept of 5 SHARs shooting down all 6 strikers and the 8 OCA twice.
Firstly, I make that 22 missiles!
Secondly, if you believe SHAR could actually hack this threat for real you are living in the land of Swiss cuckoo clocks.
As has been explained to you on an much earlier part of this thread in response to an appalling post by you....which you subsequently, quite rightly removed due its lack of credibilty. There is a massive difference between blue and red air.....but if one was Blue air and tied the hands of Red air so hard they walked into every missile shot one took including the additional two fictious ones, I would probably be mostly enjoying myself and taking the piss cos its the SHARS last tactical sortie and it would be quite a giggle. Then one might enjoy supplying some excellent morale-enhancing propaganda for the inhabitants of Swiss cuckoo clock land to swallow hook, line and sinker and watch them look like prats on Pprune.
Regards
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
fidae, I was going to do that maths too but held back.. have the rules changed?
In days of yore when men where men and fighter pilots were men too . . . The F4 loaded for Bear with 8 missiles and a gun could only claim a maximum of 5 kills. Using the same system the 5 SHAR would surely be unable to lift off carrying 8 missiles and a gun pack each
In days of yore when men where men and fighter pilots were men too . . . The F4 loaded for Bear with 8 missiles and a gun could only claim a maximum of 5 kills. Using the same system the 5 SHAR would surely be unable to lift off carrying 8 missiles and a gun pack each
Join Date: May 2002
Location: fife
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontious...rules haven't changed that much!!!
Sorry, forgot to mention that as curteous red-air on a platform's last mission one would politely fly their requested game-plan, claim no airborne kills, while quietly conducting our own training objectives with new helmet and Aim-9X combo, pass over the debrief because everyone wants to hit the bar, congratulate Blue-air on a job and then look at that Aim 9X tape!!
Regards
Sorry, forgot to mention that as curteous red-air on a platform's last mission one would politely fly their requested game-plan, claim no airborne kills, while quietly conducting our own training objectives with new helmet and Aim-9X combo, pass over the debrief because everyone wants to hit the bar, congratulate Blue-air on a job and then look at that Aim 9X tape!!
Regards
