RAF Displays Typhoon
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4103597.stm

:rolleyes:

If Parky says it's alright then I believe him. And he's a pilot. And I've not believed pilots very often in the last 20 years.

Fatbaldanddefinatelynotginger :8

Saw on BBC News 24 some Wg Cdr in a suit (couldn't remember his name).

When asked what this aircraft would be used for his reply was along the lines of:

"Well if you had ..say a country ....where you wanted to take out their nuclear reactor without damaging the population around it then this, with precision guided weapons, would be the platform for you.."

So Iran next then.....or maybe Korea.....can't wait.
I'll just put it in my diary now...when is the order due to be completed????;)

On the BBC news this morning they stated that the Typhoon could cover the distance from Warton to Paris in 8 mins, seems very quick to me,must be true though it's the BBC.

I wonder how the Typhoon compares to the F22 Raptor?

It would be nice to see them up against one another at Red Flag

Just seen Channel 5's report and after the compulsory "....its late and over budget" crap, the reporter actually questioned Typhoon's ability to replace the GR.4 and F.3!:ooh: All this while being shown library footage of a Gripen display!:hmm: :yuk:

Regards, RP.

Mr Hoon said it has an Air To Gnd capability. Fantastic. When does it deploy to the sand & Afghanistan....



or.


Can the LDPs be borrowed and be used on the platforms that currently do have an A-G capability (as an interim measure temporarily for a short time of course.........). While Typhoon prepares for the massive air superiority role that is deemed necessary for RIGHT NOW.


gotta make the most of current hardware.....

£19bn?..... Each?

I make joke!!

Beats the F15 hands down from some tests I'd heard about, love to see it up againt the raptor though, wonder if it would still be value for money?

Yeah, but who's going to have the capability of an ac like Raptor, other than the US?

And it's remarkable how many of those who claim that the Typhoon is designed for the Cold War advocate that it should be replaced by a type that was also designed for the Cold War...

I think we should be happy that for once we have a world class fighter (instead of political spin that a modified, performance compromised mud mover could have a chance against the Eastern Bloc designed "super fighters"). Typhoon was designed to compete and beat them, not to save money by building a bomber and trying to make it fly like a fighter later. If you want to buy the best, don't expect to get it for nothing.

I certainly don't object to my tax money going towards this - I look upon it as an investment for the future safety of my children.

IMHO, we live in far more unstable times than we did during much of the Cold War. Who knows what challenges we might have to face in coming years, in the lifetime of this aircraft?

So Merry Christmas, RAF - enjoy your new toys! :ok:

Sadly some of the new Russian exports are more recent than that.

But chaps, there is no air threat any more. Why do we need such an expensive fighter with little or no mud moving capability? Surely the money is better spent elsewhere? :O

Shy Torque has completely the right attitude - thank God we're going to have a decent bit of kit for once! Late and over budget it may be (like every other aircraft when it comes in to service) but it's just what the RAF needs from an operational point of view. Remember that we're still flogging around in jets like the Jaguar that was designed in the 1950s!

Navaleye - I haven't got a clue what you're talking about with respect to air-ground capability?? It can drop everything the RAF has and with a decent targeting pod (Litening 2 I think.) :cool:

You are probably right, but its not the rumour in circulation with the general public. It sees Tranche 2 as a half-way house until Tranche 3 which has full air-ground capability. Maybe the RAF should place more emphasis on this in its PR.

Are they going to get a working cannon or is it still going to be used as a ballast?

The optimism that tranche 3 will ever happen is touching!

I thought T3 is more Swing-Role than air-ground capability.

Just an observation re media coverage. Early evening news on ITV and Channel four was almost identical in terms of topics covered to the BBC,except for one item.......no mention of the Typhoon deal? or did I miss it?

Why not, maybe the MOD wants to avoid the massive penatlies it will incur if it breaks contract now?

The cannon works and will be fitted to all RAF aircraft. As I understand it we won't use/train with it but it has to be kept serviceable.

Casper
Where did you get that gen from? If the cannon is not going to be used but just kept serviceable, why not leave it out until it is required? The time needed to train pilots and armourers to use it will far exceed the time taken to stick the guns back in. And just think of the fuel you would save in the meantime.

Haven't we been there and laughed at that? Taking the cannon out means ballast has to go in, making it more expensive than taking the cannon out, taking the ammunition out means putting in ballast, costing more than leaving the ammunition in, or is that not the case?

My point was not that the RAF may not get tranche 3 aircraft, but that tranche 3 may never happen at all . I think all four governments are snurgling around trying to get out of tranche 3 but that no-one wants to be first to say "We don't want it/won't pay for it" I fully expect a group announcement at some point.

dmanton

The problem with your analysis is that the Germans (having got rid of everything else) will need a fair chunk of their Tranche 3 order, while the Italians may also be pretty firm on theirs.

At Farnborough 'Ice' Rauen expressed his confidence that the Luftwaffe would need every single one of its T3 aircraft, and might even need to exercise some of its options. A Luftwaffe Colonel from JG73 said the same thing, and at Singapore the box-headed MinDef also expressed his support for a full buy.

They could be lying through their teeth, but as long as they maintain this attitude, anyone else who wants to cut back on Tranche 3 will find themselves paying penalties that amount to more than the marginal production cost of the aircraft.

I suspect that the RAF no longer needs 232 Typhoons (to support the 137 aircraft required to man the 7 squadrons, OCU and OEU across the planned lifespan of the aircraft), since I suspect that we will reduce to six, or even five squadrons.

Unless T3 Typhoon becomes part of the solution for FOAS.

Re the gun or lack of, I must have missed the previous debate so humour me please. Surely there should be no need for ballast vice the gun as the fly-by-wire should take care of any additional instability, as it does with the existing instability, assuming that the aircraft is unstable - as it should be to take best advantage of the FBW. If you see what I mean.

But you need a 'balanced' starting point, for the fbw to work from. You cannot fit everything aft of c of g and expect it to work properly.

zoom - i think the basic idea is that with too much weight at one end the flying controls simply wont have enough travel or be able to provide enough force to manoeuvre the aircraft.

Who said it can drop everything the RAF has TODAY (So can the current RAF TODAY I thought).

Pity that doesn't include tomorrows weapons. Who said todays RAF bombs, fuses, tails, suspension equipment, mace lugs and hard backs were any good in the first place.

.